User talk:SMcCandlish/Archive 201
 | 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 195 | ← | Archive 199 | Archive 200 | Archive 201 | Archive 202 | Archive 203 | → | Archive 205 |
August 2023
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Disregard
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Theft on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Dash question
DoneCould you please take a look at my comment at Talk:Gaya–Mughalsarai section#Requested move 16 July 2023? — BarrelProof (talk) 17:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. And the follow-up question? — BarrelProof (talk) 02:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
 | Happy First Edit Day! Hi SMcCandlish! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:22, 11 August 2023 (UTC) |  |
- Indeed! Best regards, Thinker78 (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thankee. :-) — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 01:22, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment
Disregard
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia style and naming request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Polyvagal theory on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Steele dossier on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
August thanks
 | |
| my story today |
|---|
Thank you for improving articles in August! - Today, my focus is on Renata Scotto, after days of updating. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:44, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Today is Debussy's birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
This too shall pass. - Ten years ago on 28 August, I heard a symphony, with a heavy heart because of the pending decision in WP:ARBINFOBOX, and not worried about my future here but Andy's. - It passed, and I could write the DYK about calling to dance, not battle, and Andy could write the DYK mentioning about peace and reconciliation, - look. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- Glad the infobox squabbling has died down, that's for sure. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- It looked like died down in 2018, but check out Cosima Wagner for a renewal ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:11, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Pound sterling on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Puebloan?
Hello,
Very good info about Mirasol (and well documented on the article, in fact, I myself added most of the information there on Mirasol), but I think the purpose of the edit went completely over your head. The purpose was to disambiguate a member of the Pueblo Indigenous American community (a "Peubloan") from someone who simply resides in the city of Pueblo, Colorado (also called a "Puebloan"); sometimes people confuse us with them. I admit I could have made that clearer when I wrote that section, but I'll let someone else fix it.
Cheers, Kehkou (talk) 02:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- The edits I was seeing kept trying to distinguish so. CO chiles from NM chiles (despite them being variants of the same cultivar), instead of distinguishing the CO chiles from Pueblo from the ancient chiles of the Puebloan people. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 05:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- The question of the varieties is not under investigation here (that is explained quite well in the article in three separate sections); the latter is indeed the correct interpretation of the passage, but hope is given that it is not read as "these chiles should not be confused with ancient varieties grown by [residents of the city of Pueblo, CO]." It is an anchor; Pueblo chile redirects there, so lay readers will not see the previous information on the chile or even know what a "Pueblo" is. Therefore "Puebloan peoples" or "Pueblo communities (of New Mexico)" would be the preferred term so that my people and our chiles are not confused with residents and crops from CO. Kehkou (talk) 16:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- I'll take a look at it again, but "Pueblo communities of New Mexico" isn't right, since the Puebloan peoples were all over the southwest; the modern state borders don't mean anything in relation to them. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 16:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- The current text says:
In Colorado, 'Numex Mirasol' chile peppers are grown near the city of Pueblo, where they are known as "Pueblo chile". These should not be confused with the ancient chile varieties grown by the Puebloan peoples.
Is there some kind of problem with it? — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 16:52, 23 August 2023 (UTC)- The current text is correct and acceptable. Before, it just said "by Puebloans." It seems we just confused each other there.
- The Pueblos were (are) all over the SW, but only those communities in NM still grow chile.
- You may consider this matter cleared and closed. Happy editing!Kehkou (talk) 23:46, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Right arm. :-) — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 00:40, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- The question of the varieties is not under investigation here (that is explained quite well in the article in three separate sections); the latter is indeed the correct interpretation of the passage, but hope is given that it is not read as "these chiles should not be confused with ancient varieties grown by [residents of the city of Pueblo, CO]." It is an anchor; Pueblo chile redirects there, so lay readers will not see the previous information on the chile or even know what a "Pueblo" is. Therefore "Puebloan peoples" or "Pueblo communities (of New Mexico)" would be the preferred term so that my people and our chiles are not confused with residents and crops from CO. Kehkou (talk) 16:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Notability on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for posting this. I don't get involved in MOS things that often, but as a reader that would have annoyed me greatly. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:52, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: YW. Any time an MoS (or other guideline) proposal would affect a large number of articles across a wide swath of topics, it seems like a good idea to post a VPPOL pointer to it. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Cartoon portraits
Hi there. Yesterday I removed the image on the right from Lucette Taero, a BLP. I did some digging and found this discussion where you said that at this discussion there was "a clear consensus to not use such cartoons". I agree, and I'm going to delete some of these image. What do you think? Magnolia677 (talk) 11:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- I jumped the gun. That was the only cartoon image I was able to find, and User:Drmies has reverted many of the edits already. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- I would carry on, and point people to Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard/Archive 49#Cartoon portraits as the consensus against addition of such pseudo-portraits. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 13:18, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
ECs
Sorry about lousing up the ECs. I was using the edit-conflict function in Visual Editor for the first time, and was really impressed with it! Until I saw your note, that is. I'm not going to bother figuring out what I did wrong. I'm just going to use the old manual, copy-and-paste method for dealing with ECs going forward. As for "en," that is true, and again I must humbly shift blame, this time to the template, but your point is well taken and I will manually take those out as well. Coretheapple (talk) 16:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Coretheapple: I also find the newish edit-conflict tool confusing, so don't feel bad. :-) — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 17:26, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- The strange part is that I am positive I clicked off the right boxes so that your cleanup would remain intact. I may investigate this further with the Visual Editor people. It is the only real issue I've had with the Visual Editor, and I am quite a fan of it otherwise. Coretheapple (talk) 22:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Coretheapple: Maybe try some test edits and screenshot them or something. You could be logged in as you in one browser and be an anon in another cross-editing the same user sandbox page. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 22:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- The strange part is that I am positive I clicked off the right boxes so that your cleanup would remain intact. I may investigate this further with the Visual Editor people. It is the only real issue I've had with the Visual Editor, and I am quite a fan of it otherwise. Coretheapple (talk) 22:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment
Done
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
PARABR thanks
Hi SMcCandlish,
You are absolutely correct that MOS:PARABR is the correct shortcut for the shortcut I attempted to make. Thank you for fixing that for me, sincerely. I am fine with deletion of Wikipedia:PARABR (to reduce the using-up of easily parseable "WP:" shortcuts), but given that you did edit it I wanted to be absolutely sure you are fine if I tag it for WP:G7. Best, HouseBlastertalk 19:19, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- @HouseBlaster: No biggie. "PARABR" is probably obscure enough that a "WP:" usage of it isn't likely to be something someone wants to usurp for some other purpose. But you could also delete it if you like. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 19:54, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- Ok done. - jc37 01:41, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Dashes for mergers
The RM at Talk:Famous Players–Lasky#Requested move 23 August 2023 has been closed. However, I asked a question in that discussion about the convention of using dashes to indicate mergers, and that was not yet answered. It was not a rhetorical question. If you have time, I would be interested in your response. — BarrelProof (talk) 18:06, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- @BarrelProof: I think you're referring to
"Can you point to specific evidence supporting this theory of using an en dash to indicate a merger of two formerly independent entities (e.g. in MOS:DASH or in externally produced style guides)?"
This has become less clear than it should be, because people have been slowly futzing around with the text at MOS:DASH over the years. But it's still here:
Use an en dash for the names of two or more entities in an attributive compound.
- the Seifert–van Kampen theorem; the Alpher–Bethe–Gamow theory
- the Seeliger–Donker-Voet scheme (developed by Seeliger and Donker-Voet)
- Comet Hale–Bopp or just Hale–Bopp (discovered by Hale and Bopp)
- A compay name produced through merger like that is a short form of a longer official name (the exact form of which varies widely by jursidiction: "Foo–Bar Corporation", "Foo–Bar Inc.", "Foo–Bar Ltd", "Foo–Bar GmbH", etc., etc.), so it is in fact an attributive in structure, and the "or just Hale–Bopp" example in the guideline text makes it clear that the dash it not converted into a hyphen if the name is shortened and no longer looks attributive. However, we should just clarify the guideline that it means to use dashes not hyphens between names that indicate or are the product of a merger of the names of two+ entities (unless the style doesn't call for a horizontal line at all, e.g. DaimlerChrysler, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, etc.; this is only about when a horizontal line is used). Twenty-odd years of RM results (the weird outlier of the recent "SAF-AFTRA" move notwithstanding) demonstrate that this is the intended interpretation, and so does the fact that the editors who mostly crafted that guideline – like me, Dicklyon, Tony1, probably also EEng – are all still around and as far as I know all consistently say this is the intended meaning. That the guideline wording has become confused over time is a reason to fix it to stop being confusing, not to let confusion reign and spread. The guideline never should have included wording about attributives in it in the first place. In short, there is absolutely no style difference between Hale–Bopp and SAG–AFTRA. The latter still needs to go to WP:MR, though I'm not sure I have the patience for it. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:31, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. At this point, SAG-AFTRA has become the precedent for AFL-CIO, and enough time has passed by that it looks like there may not be an MR. As you note, the asserted equivalence between "Hale–Bopp" (which seems uncontroversial) and a merger that forms "Foo–Bar Inc." does not seem clear in the current MoS. And if Frederick Foo and Bernard Bar simply co-founded a company together (without a merger taking place), would that be "Foo-Bar Inc." or "Foo–Bar Inc."? If not clear in Wikipedia, is the approach described in any external style guides? — BarrelProof (talk) 18:56, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- If they used a horizontal line in the name, it would be Foo–Bar Inc.; it's precisely analogous to Dunning–Kruger effect, etc. (something named after two originators). [It's different from Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, which had nothing to do with either the Wilkes or the Barre namesakes, and which was not a merger between two former separate municipalities, either. It was just named "Wilkes-Barre" kind of out of nowhere. A bit like naming your cat "Socrates Bonaparte".] I no longer have a thick bookshelf of off-site style guides, so it would be difficult for me to re-research what they all say now; but our MoS is based heavily on the leading academic style guides (Chicago, New Hart's/Oxford, Fowler's, Garner's, Scientific Style and Format), and we did not get the idea out of nowhere. It's very unlikely that the other style guides have changed on a matter like this, but someone with current editions can check again. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 19:22, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: History and geography request for comment
Disregard
Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of African countries by population on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 31 August 2023 (UTC)