User talk:Philg88/Archive 46

Three years ago ...
Giving Victims a Voice
	... you were recipient; no. 917 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

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

Archive 40

←

→

contributor with a severe civility problem keeps editing the same article with obscenities in edit summary

Not designated as a terrorist organization by the US or EY or Kazakh or Uzbek. Uyghuristan is under occupation by ecscreta-born han monkeys. If they have still managed to get them designated them as terrorists adeq refs should be provided.

Rm unreferenced Ecscreta-born fugly han monkeys call Uyghur freedom-fighters "terrorists" they can shove that down their han monkey-mommas' Only diff is that in Occupied-Tibet they self-immolate whilst Uyghurs know to treat ecscreta-sucking han occupiers.

EU does not designate the ETIM as terrorists. Nor does the US. AND listing Afghanistan/Iran or even pukeistan is senseless. han/chinese scum think lashkar-e-taiba and other such terrorist-pigs in pukeistan are not terrorists and keep blocking India's moves. And here you add countries who do not care even of the Uyghurs wiped out the han/chinese monkeys. You added a ref about something in Syria as a ref for that Afghanistan/Iran and others are opponents of the ETIM which is BS. They do NOT even mention ETIM or Uyghurs or anything alluding to them. The ref HAS to contain some info directly or even indirectly stating the same. DO NOT ADD that again, for any Admin once he were to see that, would have enough reason to block you if repeated. That is dishonesty of the lowest kind (certainly comes with han/chinese DNA but this is WIKIPEDIA.

Further, and this comes form an INDIAN rather than a Wikipedian, han/chinese scum should better FORGET the so-called cpec. Balcohs will decide who their oil and gas is sold to. nawaz sharif and pukeistan and han/chinese scum had egg on their faces when sharif was making a speech last month in NY and a Baloch activist shouted that pukeis and han/chinese should get lost from Balochistan. Still no shame! Anyway Balochs will again be independent pretty soon. The cpec goes over INDIAN territory in POK and into the country of BALOCHISTAN. AND both Balochs and Indians consider the pukeis and the hans/chinese as fecal matter that is to be flushed out. After the way in which han/chinese have shielded pukeistani terrorists they dream of stealing the oil and gas of the Balochs and using Indian territory that too! However it is not like stealing Tibetans' and Uyghurs' and Mongols' lands. Not only that NEVER AGAIN will han/chines steal, they stand to lose everything they have stolen till date from the others - Tibet/Uyghuristan/Inner-Mngolia.

Removed some unreferenced claims. The Uyghur freedom-fighters are the han/chinese monkey's problem. Many countries appearing here as "opponents" is just BS.

Rajmaan (talk) 06:21, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Rajmaan: I'll keep an eye on whether this continues but it's better to report such things at the incident noticeboard. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 06:59, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Island mess

Dear Phil. Please help. I need your brain.

I started Nanhai Pearl Artificial Island based on this which has a clear photo of what I will call "peanut island". It is located here just off Evergreen Park. It doesn't show on that old FlashEarth map, but http://ditu.baidu.com/ has it. There is also this source that shows a peanut-shaped island.

Now, there is a second island under construction off Holiday Beach. It is listed at the bottom of List of islands of Hainan as "Unidentified artificial island". It is approximately here. I went there yesterday and the engineer man at the foot of the new bridge there said it is called "Nanhai Pearl Artificial Island". I could see a huge HNA sign on the island itself.

Unhelpful are two other refs I added to the peanut article: [1] and [2]. They show a round island and the coords they cite are completely wrong. Also, peanut island construction has been abandoned since the typhoon a couple of years back so there is nobody to ask there.

Would you please consider doing a bit of clicking and reading to shed some light? I am mystified.

BRA Braathens Regional Airlines

Hi,

I noticed you renamed the Braathens Regional article into BRA Braathens Regional Airlines. I am afraid this is not correct. When Malmö Aviation and Sverigeflyg combined their networks on 29 February 2016 to form BRA Braathens Regional Airlines the following happened:

- The brand Sverigeflyg, which was just a virtual airline without any aircraft of its own, ceased to exist - A new virtual airline, BRA Braathens Regional Airlines, was created, again with no owned aircraft - Malmö Aviation was renamed Braathens Regional Aviation, ceasing its own network and now flying ACMI for BRA Braathens Regional Airlines - Braathens Regional, the ACMI provider for Sverigeflyg, was renamed Braathens Regional Airways.

So on that day this line-up:

- Sverigeflyg - Malmö Aviation - Braathens Regional

became:

- BRA Braathens Regional Airlines (not the succesor of Sverigeflyg) - Braathens Regional Aviation - Braathens Regional Airways

Hence your transformation of the original Braathens Regional article to BRA Braathens Regional Airlines is not correct. Instead it should have been renamed Braathens Regional Airways with much of the information staying the same. Then a new article for BRA Braathens Regional Airlines needs to be created. I have already transformed the Malmö Aviation article into Braathens Regional Aviation.

Confusing I know, but I hope I explained it well enough.

Best regards,

Max — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxG.P.Hol (talk • contribs) 08:57, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@MaxG.P.Hol: Hi there Max. This was an uncontroversial technical request made at WP:RMT (diff here) by 46.244.138.166 so I suggest you discuss it with them. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 17:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

A Street Car named Desire

Hi Phil, first of all thanks for closing the discussion at Talk:A_Streetcar_Named_Desire_(play)#Requested_move_18_April_2016 and performing the move, but I think there may be some unfinished buisness. You moved A Streetcar Named Desire and its talk page to A Streetcar Named Desire (disambiguation), and you subsequently moved A Streetcar Named Desire (play) to A Streetcar Named Desire per consensus. However, the talk page for A Streetcar Named Desire (play) is still at Talk:A Streetcar Named Desire (play) and probably should be moved to Talk:A Streetcar Named Desire. Is this an oversight or is there some reason for not moving the talk page as well? Betty Logan (talk) 09:31, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Betty and thanks for the message. Talk pages aren't automatically moved as part of the RMT process if the target exists, and sometimes I forget to do it manually. In this case someone else already spotted the issue and has moved the talk page to the correct location. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 04:55, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Your move of a draft

re: [5]. - Please review the tags of the article (Azimo) you moved from draft space. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:49, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

@Staszek Lem:

Done. Thanks for the heads up. Philg88 ^♦talk 04:58, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Copy edit request

Hi, it's been a while since I had to make a c/e requests from you, hope it's ok. This one is a bit odd since it's not for an article that I started. The article is Sydney punchbowls. I first came in contact with it while I was working on my SOIC stuff, later I learned that it is now a GAN. Now, the editor who nominated it have not done any edits on it and the original writer has only made this one article and hasn't been active here in a while but is apparently willing to assist with facts. The article is sort of next in line at the GAN and since a review can happen at any time now I got in touch with the GAN nominator and fixed up the article as much as I could. Since the whole nomination is a bit unusual, it would be great to smooth out as much as possible for an easier review. Most of the article is written by an Australian librarian so not so much a problem with the language as with proper encyclopedic style and so on. Do you think you could lend us a hand and do a c/e for the article? Cheers, w.carter-Talk 19:16, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Done, although frankly there wasn't much to do as the article looks to be in pretty good shape already. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 04:42, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much!

Good to hear that the article was sort of ok, but it's always best to have an expert taking a look at it before the whole thing begins. w.carter-Talk 08:30, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Tech moves

Hey thanks a ton for those moves. I know it's tedious as hell, and there are so many funner things you could be doing. Sadly, we're far from done, and the plan is to slow down a bit to avoid becoming a nuisance (the issue is politically charged). Might as well keep the subheading even when it's empty, so we don't have to remember to re-add it when we're ready for more. I'd call it "WP:JR moves" rather than "Jr/Sr moves". ―Mandruss ☎ 06:07, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome Mandruss, it must have been pretty tedious putting the list together in the first place! I did them all in one go as otherwise there's a danger that one or two will be missed if it's done on an ad hoc basis. I'm aware of the two sides in the jr/sr comma argument but it seems that there is now a consensus based guideline, which is good. Posting fewer requests in one go would also be good. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 10:29, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

@Philg88, Mandruss, and Dicklyon: Wouldn't it be a better idea to mass delete the redirects with titles of the form Name, Jr. to make way for the moves? The mass deletion can be easily accomplished with the use of Twinkle's batch delete module. After that, any registered user would be able to perform the moves. 103.6.159.85 (talk) 08:20, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Well two problems I can think of: 1. There are a few exception cases that I agree with, and more that others would assert against my objection. 2. Links would be broken until the moves are done. Side note: You don't have to ping a registered user when you post on their talk page, they automatically get a ping.) ―Mandruss ☎ 08:29, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

I think that by "mass deletion" he means from a list we provide, not an automatic everything. I agree it's a good idea (avoiding all the messing around with technical move templates and such), and can provide a list of a few dozen that I've been accumulating. Philg88, what's the format for making this easy for you with Twinkle? Dicklyon (talk) 15:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: Ok, but you're still breaking links to redirects until the moves are done. Even if that's only a few days, it doesn't sound very kosher to me. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:57, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Good point. Either submit lists short enough that you'll act to fix them all within a few hours, or use technical moves. Dicklyon (talk) 00:28, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Also, Phil, a question about admins and moves. Why are so few admins willing to help close RM discussions? For example, at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Backlog you see Talk:Joseph_P._Kennedy,_Sr.#Requested_move_6_April_2016 stuck at the bottom, 5 weeks old. It's not that complicated. I know you do plenty of service for moves, but how does one provoke more work out of other admins? Or what is keeping them from jumping in? Dicklyon (talk) 15:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

RM is a bit of an unfashionable area of adminship for some reason, which is odd because I find it a lot more manageable than things like AfD - the sheer volume of entries there, with whole subpages for every day, is a bit daunting. But then again, many more admins work over there and they seem to get through it all. It would be nice to get a few more admins interested in RM. — Amakuru (talk) 15:25, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Are either of you up for closing that Kennedy one? Dicklyon (talk) 00:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

@Mandruss, Dicklyon, 103.6.159.85, and Amakuru: I don't think the mass delete of redirects is a good idea based on the links then being broken for an indeterminate period. It's much better here to use a rifle rather than a shotgun approach and deal with moves on a case by case basis. The current RMT approach seems to work fine given that there is no backlog.

Why aren't more admins interested in RM? Dicklyon's flagging of the Kennedy move is an example of why not. It is impossible to close something like that without alienating one side of the discussion and an admin who does anything other than close with "no consensus" is going to be mired in discussions for weeks. In that specific case, a !voter has asked for a long standing admin to close it and I don't think that I qualify. Philg88 ^♦talk 05:32, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Move revert request

Hi, I saw that you moved Egyptian Revolution of 1919, Egyptian Revolution of 1952, and Egyptian Revolution of 2011. I would like to request a reversion until a discussion settles the titles. While historical events aren't necessarily capitalized, they can be once established. For example, Egyptian Revolution of 2011 was located at 2011 Egyptian revolution until July 7, 2013. Thanks. --Article editor (talk) 05:22, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi there Article editor and thanks for the message. Pinging Dicklyon as the original requester of theses moves for a comment as they appear legitimate per guidelines. Philg88 ^♦talk 05:41, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I just commented at the revert request. I didn't think the moves would be controversial, per WP:NCCAPS. I see no suggestion of proper name status anywhere. Not in sources, either. Dicklyon (talk) 05:46, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Nice maps you have there...

...would it be a breach of etiquette to ask what (if any) software you utilised? Apologies in advance if it is an industrial secret! All the best, _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 15:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Why thank you, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi. It depends which particularly map you are talking about, some are made using OpenStreetMap data and a piece of software called Maperative that produces an SVG file. Some are drawn/traced using Adobe Illustrator, which IMHO is one of the greatest pieces of software known to man. Has a steep learning curve but worth the effort in the long run. I'm happy to share any further details. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 17:25, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

So, how do I link this?

Just finished another of the Gotlandic treasure articles, Havor hoard. I'm a bit at a loss about how, or indeed if, I should link it with the sv-wiki. The hoard itself is just a section in the article about the location sv:Havor but the torc from the hoard sv:Havorringen has its own article which doesn't mention the hoard at all. Lost! Further: Is it possible to "loop-hole" the rules about non-free pics here? The torc is stolen and gone since 1986 and no free pics of it can be found and non can be taken as long as it's gone. There are two copies of it in two museums and they can be photographed, but they are not the "real" thing. Taking all this into account, is it possible to use one of the museum pics under the fair use criteria? When I wrote Lesedi La Rona I used a fair use pic under similar circumstances and no one has objected yet (and that article was ITN and thus very well scrutinized). Also, would you mind doing a small c/e on the article as well? Please. :) Grateful for your help as usual, w.carter-Talk 21:34, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Hey Kompis thanks for the message. If you plan a separate article on English WP for the torc then link that through see also from the hoard article - I can't see any other way of doing it. No pic loop holes as far as I am aware but there is AFAICS a valid fair use claim. You could always confirm at the copyright board. Meanwhile I have run my CE wand over the hoard article and made a few changes. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 06:28, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot!

How I envy you that CE wand <sigh!> but for now I'll try to stay in your good graces so you'll use it on things I write. I'll get right on the pic. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 08:13, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Removing homologation from my List_of_solar_cars_(with_homologation)

Hi

Makes me not happy what you did 17th October 2015. Removing homologation from my List title destroying the sense. My intention was to show that already solar cars are driving on public streets

Can you please remove your change to something similar like I had the title before with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cars_(with_homologation) ?

Greetings

Alexander — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexander Nitica (talk • contribs) 19:11, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Alexander and thanks for the message. That article was moved to List of prototype solar-powered cars following an uncontroversial technical request because admin permission was required to overwrite the previous redirect. Unfortunately your title does not fit with the Wikipedia article naming guidelines, which is why the move was requested. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 04:56, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I learned new word today. Cool, but not very appropriate. Dicklyon (talk) 05:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

OK. I give up ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexander Nitica (talk • contribs) 07:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

OK. Understood. Can we anyhow bring the word "homologation" in the title back? Greetings Alexander — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexander Nitica (talk • contribs) 16:19, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi again Alexander. I don't think you can, but you could always start a discussion at the article's talk page and see if you get any suggestions that fit within Wikipedia guidelines. Philg88 ^♦talk 04:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Cleaning up as I go along...

In January this year, a new subdivision of Sweden came into effect. All the sockens as well as some other areas are now districts. <sigh!> A change so silent and unnoticed that the first I heard of it was when I noticed that the Gotland categories on Commons had new names. No info for the people, oh no... Anyway, all the Gotland articles have to be adjusted accordingly. And while I'm doing that, I'm trying to clean up some of the messes I find along the way. Most of it I'm fairly certain I can handle, I'm even finding more asteroids (still!) if you remember from my newbie-days: Seach for a place on Gotland – end up in the asteroid belt. But there are also a number of disambiguations that need to be resolved, and since I totally botched it the last time I tried, it might be best if I asked you for advice and some help as I encounter them. If that's ok with you.

First up is "Dalhem". There are Dalhem and Dalhem, Gotland. The Belgium place is larger so I guess it's ok for that one to be the primary topic, but the top of that article looks a bit messy now with all the hat notes, should this be done a different way? Should a disamb page be created instead?

Second is "Tofta". There are Tofta, Tofta, Gotland, Tofta, Varberg Municipality and Tofta Leikvøllur. The last one is only a redirect, but still. The first article created was Tofta so it got the short name, but it is also the least significant of the places. IMO Tofta, Gotland with an international endure race, world renowned beach and military facilities, should be primary and Tofta moved to Tofta, Adelsö (That's the best description since if corresponds with sv-wiki and Tofta manor would be this place). Or should "Tofta" be a disamb page since there are several types of subjects with "Tofta"? Like Bro. Be advised there are many more Swedish Tofta's waiting in the wings should someone feel inclined to translate any of those. Come to think of it, same goes for Dalhem... Hmm.

There will be more, but let's start with these. I can probably use them as "templates" for the following messes. Best, w.carter-Talk 15:21, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Hey kompis. I simplified the hatnote for Dalhem and that one is OK. As for Tofta, some people are sensitive to primary topic grabs so I would start a requested move discussion at Tofta outlining your arguments for the Gotland one being the primary topic with a hatnote for the DAB page. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 15:34, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Sage words as always. I would actually prefer if there wasn't a primary at all, just Tofta as a DAB page with all the articles branching from it. Guess I could propose that at Tofta's talk page. I'll get on it right away. And thanks for fixing Dalhem. :) Cheers, w.carter-Talk 15:54, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

The !voting at Talk:Tofta is ongoing. Seems like they agree with me. When/If the voting is done after a week or so, can I move Tofta myself to Tofta, Adelsö and set up "Tofta" as a DAB page, or should I request this in a more official way or must an admin do this?

Next problem. Before they made a new interface et al with Wikidata, I had no problem correcting wrong links, now I'm totally lost! I accidentally linked Kräklingbo to sv:Kräklingbo when it should have been linked to sv:Kräklingbo socken. Do you know how to fix this and can you help me with it?

+ Same mistake with Bro, Gotland (these were some of my first articles). It's linked to sv:Bro, Gotlands kommun but should be linked to sv:Bro socken, Gotland. Sorry about this mess and bothering you, but I learn as I go along.

Strike that! After a couple of hours reading at Wikidata + some trial and error + enabling the "Move" gadget there, I got it!

All these places have had different designations as they grew and bureaucracy changed how they should be defined, while keeping the same name all the time. It goes sort of like this: settlement/Ting → church village → socken → parish and county municipality → (and now) district. So you get perfectly valid descriptions for places like this one: Kräklingbo (church village) formerly of Kräklingbo (ting) in Kräklingbo (socken) previously Kräklingbo (parish) and Kräklingbo (county municipality) now Kräklingbo (district). (Is your head spinning yet?) The sv-wiki has an article for each of these stages (no wonder they now sport +3M articles...) but I try to contain it all in one article and link that one to the "socken" part per WP:COMMONNAME since that is the most used and also where most of the info is. The articles for the new districts are in effect just redirects to the old socken-articles. All these changes are a plague on us dealing with Swe geography articles. I have nothing but the highest admiration for the poor sod who has so far made 335(!) regional maps for all the new districts. w.carter-Talk 17:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

To make the move "official" you should really use the {{Requested move}} template. That way more people will be aware of the discussion and an uninvolved third party will close the request and move the article. You can of course ignore this advice but in the future someone may revert the move on the basis that it wasn't discussed properly ... Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 04:25, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Template it is then. Sometimes it's better to be 'by the book' than bold or use common sense. For future references, it is good to know that I can technically do such move should need ever arise. Thanks for clarifying. Until the next <bleep>-up I find: Cheers, w.carter-Talk 09:08, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Help please...

I was asked by the reviewer to write a Sydney punchbowls#Background section. This is now done, but there are some places where I just can't get the text to flow as elegantly as I would like to. Do you think you could take a look at that new section and see if you can do something about it? It also contains something called the 'Country Trade', all new to me but you may have heard of it. It is not mentioned any place else (that I can find) in the usual articles about the East India trade. Only in the Austrian East India Company#Colonisation of Delagoa Bay. Always interesting to learn about new angles. Apparently there is also a curry dish involved. (!) Will get on fixing the lead tomorrow. Also per request. I may get back to you on that. Night night! w.carter-Talk 20:42, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Hey kompis, I've clarified what the "Country Trade" was (from my creation of History of Jardine, Matheson & Co. some time ago - still my most edited article!) and tidied up the text a bit. Let me know if that's sufficient. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 05:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks! You da Man!

w.carter-Talk 07:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Final request on the Sydney punchbowls. A new lead is installed, would be so kind as to give it a whack with your Wikiwand™, please? w.carter-Talk 10:57, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Excellent lead @W.carter: which very succinctly encapsulates the article and intrigues the reader, and @Philg88:, thank you for very helpful input! JamesMcArdle 12:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@W.carter: Nothing wrong with the lead that needs my attention. Well done! Philg88 ^♦talk 07:14, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Really? I'll have to mark this day in my calendar as The Day I Did Something Right. Thanks for checking anyway! Cheers, w.carter-Talk 07:39, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

William Latimer

Hello Phil! Can you tell me if there are deleted edits under William Latimer? The article is about a living epidemiologist, but the disambiguation page at William Latimer (disambiguation), most of the incoming links, and the other language Wikipedias are looking for a clergyman and scholar that lived from the 1460s to 1545. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!}

Hi Niceguyedc and thanks for the message. There was a (short) article for the clergyman. It was deleted here. Let me know where you want it restored to. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 04:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Let's go with William Latimer (clergyman). -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 05:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

@Niceguyedc:

Done. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 05:51, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Sinosphere(redirect) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sinosphere(redirect). Since you had some involvement with the Sinosphere(redirect) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Stefan2 (talk) 23:53, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Stefan2: Thanks for the heads up. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:21, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Khalifa (album)

Hi, you moved the page Khalifa (album), but there is no article anymore, it somehow redirects to itself. Can you fix that? Thanks. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 13:34, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi there Tbhotch/EN. It's fixed now thanks to Anthony. Looks like we both moved the article more or less simultaneously. Philg88 ^♦talk 17:47, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

All dressed up and nowhere to go

Well, I got me this here brand new article in my sandbox and now that it's ready to inflict on the ol' WP, I don't know what to call it. I'm stuck! Do you think you could help me out, please? w.carter-Talk 10:56, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hey kompis, how about "List of Gotland related asteroids"? Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 04:32, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I was thinking about that phrasing myself, but not quite sure the semantics were right for the list. But since you've given it the ok, I'll go for that. Cheers, w.carter-Talk 08:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Leroy Homer

I have just removed speclucation and unsourced information from Leroy Homer's page and replaced it with more realible sources, particully from his wife. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.99.28 (talk) 11:20, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Good. Philg88 ^♦talk 14:56, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Basically, I am modifying the section about Homer's fate when United 93 was hijacked. The original article contains unsourced or unreliable facts on Homer's actions that day, while the people who use these keep ignoring all the more reliable evidence from observations- including the testimony of Homer's wife Melodie, not one of the thousands of far-fetched accounts given by some people- that Homer was the person who shouted "mayday" on the cockpit voice recorder, and possibly was even alive after the hijacking (notice: I say possibly, and indeed I wrote in the article that Homer's actions are just what his wife believes, while these people use speculation and fictional books as facts).

2013 Arab League Summit

Just curious, would you have accepted as uncontroversial moves of the remaining dozen or so in Category:Arab League summits to upper case Summit?Naraht (talk) 13:57, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@Naraht: Yes. According to the rules of English grammar, a single event is a proper noun (i.e. there is only one and it describes a finite occasion). By this rule we don't have 1948 summer olympics but 1948 Summer Olympics with no redirect. The associated category for Arab summits is quite correctly lower case because there "summits" is a collective, not a proper noun. Am I that bothered that people choose to ignore basic rules like this? No, I have a life. Philg88 ^♦talk 15:19, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

OK, that all makes sense except the last sentence. You've got more edits than I do, so I wonder. :)Naraht (talk) 16:54, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Thank you for this very timely discussion! I was just about to ask Philg88 how I could best make the distinction between Ajvide, a small settlement and the Ajvide Settlement, both realted to the Eksta article I was starting. No need to ask now, having read this I could sort it all out myself. Thanks both of you!

w.carter-Talk 20:10, 3 July 2016 (UTC) - S-word rules!

@Naraht: That last comment wasn't aimed at you specifically and I'm sorry if you thought it was. What I meant was that I'm not going to get excited about a minor grammar "error" when there are more important issues to address. Philg88 ^♦talk 05:16, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

It's fine. Now I just have to figure out how to get them all changed to Capital S.Naraht (talk) 12:10, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

@Naraht:. My advice is to post a multiple move request as explained here with a suitable rationale. I'll certainly be happy to !vote support but I won't do the moves as I am arguably now involved. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 14:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:26, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Philg88. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey can you help me create two kits for my football team? — Preceding unsigned comment added by UTA ARAD 1945 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

It's been two years, today.

Wishing Philg88 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 03:08, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Chris, much appreciated. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:39, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Misinterpretation or abuse of policies

A user is calling an RS source's views as "fringe", POV and claiming it can't be added to the article because nobody else talks about it. Talk:Ürümqi#Demographics Then is borderline attempt at trolling occurred, with the user suggesting to reverse the entire POV of the original source. I need third party arbitration to discuss the source and its views.Rajmaan (talk) 16:35, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there Rajmaan. I suggest you post a request at Wikipedia:Third opinion. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 07:01, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, Philg88. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Chatterton baronets has been nominated for discussion

Category:Chatterton baronets, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. HandsomeFella (talk) 19:00, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:15, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

2008–11 Icelandic financial crisis

Hallo. You moved 2008–11 Icelandic financial crisis to 2008–2011 Icelandic financial crisis. Please, move the talk page too. Thanks. Christian75 (talk) 08:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

@Christian75:

Done. No problem. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:33, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Question from Germany about Montreal

Hello @Philg88:, maybe my english is not perfect to understand this phrase correctly: Montreal (Listeni/ˌmʌntriːˈɒl/);[11] (pronounced: [mɔ̃ʁeal] ( listen)) officially Montréal in both Canadian English and French, ... [citation needed] I did this.

This part I read - die offiziele (richtige) Schreibweise für Montreal ist Montréal in both Canadian English and French. Is my interpretation Ok or wrong? I am asking because of a chance in wp:de. The new text: ... offizieller Name ist auch auf Englisch "Montréal" Quelle: englisches Lemma). Best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 13:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)--Maxim Pouska (talk) 13:46, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey Maxim, long time no hear. As far as I know the common name in English is without diacritics, i.e. "Montreal". It always appears in British newspapers and books that way. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 15:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Merging pages

Hello. Good morning. I hope that you arew doing fine. You have to help me. Long back, I had created a new page named Kunwar Singh in 2005. I find that it was deleted to make way for another similar page name of the same person. I request you to restore the deleted page and merge both the pages to preserve history of the page - to ensure fair dealings. I do not know How it can be done. You may move the presently existing page to Babu Kunwar Singh and then restore the old page as Kunwar Singh and then merge both the pages as Kunwar Singh. Thank you. I am giving the links: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&target=Kunwar_Singh

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kunwar_Singh&dir=prev&action=history

--Bhadani (talk) 03:00, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Bhadani and thanks for the message. I don't have a lot of experience in history merges so I'll ping an expert. Perhaps Anthony Appleyard will help you. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 09:48, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you. --Bhadani (talk) 01:57, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Request for deleted article on George Lakey

Hello, I was in the process of writing a Wikipedia article on George Lakey, one of, if not the, main creators of modern non-violent action theory and practice when I noticed that there had already been an article on him that had been taken down. The given reason for the removal was that it did "not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant". ^[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mgifford/George_Lakey

This seems odd to me, given that he is very well known in the peace and resistance movements. In fact a book trying to discredit non-violent politics, "Critique of Nonviolent Politics From Mahatma Gandhi to the Anti-Nuclear Movement" by Howard Ryan^[2] mentions George Lakey nine times in the first 40 pages.

His notability is clear to me and I hope now to you. The text of the original with its references could be of great value to me in creating a new article worthy of both George Lakey and Wikipedia, so I am requesting the original George Lakey article text. Alternatively if you consider it appropriate or, perhaps you could reinstate the original.

Thank you so much for your attention. David Blake — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidsBlake (talk • contribs) 18:40, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

References

@DavidsBlake: Hi there and thanks for the message. The George Lakey article was moved from the main article space to a user subpage for the simple reason that it shows no evidence of notability according to Wikipedia criteria. There are no references given and very little content so for now it has to stay where it is. If you wish to create a new version, suitably referenced, please do so and submit via the article wizard. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 09:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Philg88, If it has no references, it is probably not of much use to me. Thank you so much for looking into this, and I suspect with references a George Lakey story will be a fine addition to Wikipedia. Thanks again David Blake — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidsBlake (talk • contribs) 15:15, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2017!

Hello Philg88, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2017.
Happy editing,
Ceannlann gorm (talk) 16:49, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Big Problem

Hi Philg88, I have never talked with you but I've heard that you can redirect accounts (Including the contributions), the problem is that I lost my old account and I need your help, please. --Bleckter23 (talk) 23:08, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

@Bleckter23: As far as I know, if you did not register an email address when you created your account then there is no way to recover it. That said, I an not an expert in this area so I suggest that you post the same question at the help desk. Good luck! Philg88 ^♦talk 07:55, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

EC Page Move

Sorry for the edit conflict, I think we attempted the move of Earl Washington Jr. right at the same moment! Rechecked and it appears to be good now. -- Dane ^talk 23:06, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

@Dane: No Problem.

Philg88 ^♦talk 06:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Articles with text copied from the DNB

Thank you for this expansion of the article Maurice Abbot with text from the DNB, however such additions also need to have inline citations referencesing the {{DNB}} template. To help facilitate this with this the template comes with the ref=harv parameter alread set so that {{harvnb}} and {{sfn}} content will automatically link to the {{DNB}} template. -- PBS (talk) 10:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

@PBS: Thanks for the heads up. I thought that the DNB attribution at the foot of the article was sufficient but I will add sfn tags as appropriate. Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 06:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Page moves

Phil, when renaming Telepathy (song) and John Wayne (song), you forgot to move their talk pages to "Talk:Telepathy (song)" and "Talk:John Wayne (song)" respectively. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: Hi. Looks like John Wayne has been done and Telepathy (song) just needs blanking as it is a redirect to the previous disambiguation talk. Let me know if you see it differently. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 06:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I see that now, and "Talk:Telepathy (Christina Aguilera song)" should be moved to "Talk:Telepathy (song)"; talk pages need to be renamed as well when their main articles are renamed. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: OK,

Done. Philg88 ^♦talk 15:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for that :) Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

a new theory ?

Hello Philg88, in en.wp is an article about Martin Krampen. A new part of his work is writen - but nothing about this you can find in the German WP article. The new name is : Phytosemiotics , also a new category.

I don't know? but the intro to the text bei Krampen. best.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 14:40, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Maxim and thanks for the message. I'm not clear on what it is that you want me to do. Please could you explain a bit more? Best, Philg88 ^♦talk 08:07, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello Philg88, I'm not sure if this a correct stub or not. Also whether one can make a new category directly from it. If I use this for de: wp, rewritten and with references from me, then I will receive contra. So my question: is it so for en: wp correct? I do not ask more.

Hi Maxim The article and category for en:wp look OK to me - I can't comment on the de: version as I am unfamiliar with their policies and guidelines. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 07:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello Philg88 - OK - I looked at the Phytosemiotics: Revision history - and it was published in 2008 - now I know that I have to look bevor I ask, what is in the Revision history. Thanks.--Maxim Pouska (talk) 09:54, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Stephen Moore (economist) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Stephen Moore (economist). Since you had some involvement with the Stephen Moore (economist) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Calton | Talk 06:11, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Paris - could you please?

Hello. I came across your name in the list of 'Copyeditors' willing to lend a hand: could you please have a look over the Paris article? Thank you! THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 08:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, ThePromenader, and thanks for the message. I'll take a look at the article at some point over the next few days. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 05:34, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Great, thank you ; ) THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 07:19, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Merger between Loharu and Loharu fort

Hello. I see that you have contributed much to the article Loharu. I have recently discussed merging that article and the article Loharu fort, for reasons you can find here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Loharu#Merger_Proposal. It would be helpful if you could discuss this with other frequent contributors to Loharu and Loharu fort. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZachAttrax (talk • contribs) 22:48, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi ZachAttrax and thanks for the message. I have no problem with your proposal but you might want to add a {{merge}} template to the two articles. Cheers, Philg88 ^♦talk 05:15, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Consultation on possible limitations in role as article-creator

Hrdap (talk) 08:50, 27 April 2017 (UTC)Hi Philg88. For about two years ago you helped with guidance in the article "Swedish Doctors for Human Rights (SWEDHR)" that I was then creating [6]. May I bother you with yet another consultation: About two weeks or so, around an investigative report of SWEDHR doctors on malpractice shown in a 'White Helmets' video (the report was wide-spread in media and eventually cited in the UN Security Council session of April 12, 2017 by the Syrian ambassador), one user proposed the SWEDHR article for deletion based on poor 'notability' and also claiming that Swedish Doctors for Human Rights would be just "Russian propaganda". But administrator decided Keep. As a result of this Keep-decision, the users proceeded to redo the entirely SWEDHR article and at the same time asked for the deletion of the bio article about the SWEDHR founder [7]. My consultation is: a) As the creator of the SWEDHR page, am I inhibited to vote in the discussion on the SWEDHR founder, (or to do edits in that article)? One user wonders if it is a conflict of interest, and honestly, I do not know. b) Am I inhibited to do edits in the SWEDHR article because I was the creator of the article? The deletion-discussion is found here: [8] Kind regards, User Hrdap.

Hi Hrdap and thanks for the message. As long as you are not associated with SWEDHR (see the COI guidelines), you do not have a conflict of interest and are free to edit any associated article and to !vote in any deletion or other discussion. Hope that helps, best Philg88 ^♦talk 10:07, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

    I thank you kindly. Hrdap (talk) 11:31, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

[1] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mgifford

[2] ttp://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/peace/10Ryan.pdf

[1]

[2]