User talk:WikiWikiWayne/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Help Needed For Article On The Most Feared Writer In The World Today

Introduction

Hello Checkingfax, I am writing to you in order to enlist your help in creating an article for what I believe is one of the world’s most consequential, and feared, writers of the past decade‍—‌but whom no one knows who they are, if they are even a human being, and who may, or may not, be an intelligence agency, or even a computer program.

In searching for hours through Wikipedia’s Teahouse, and extensively studying the profiles and information relating to everyone there, I’ve come to the conclusion that you may very well be the only person in the world that can accomplish this feat.

The subject needing your article creation and editing abilities is Sorcha Faal (http://www.whatdoesitmean.com ), who since 2004 has written thousands of articles that have been republished in nearly every language and country in the world.

[Just go to Google Advanced Search (https://www.google.com/advanced_search ), type in Sorcha Faal as your search query, and then start picking languages to see this for your self.]

About fours years ago I did attempt to create a Sorcha Faal article on Wikipedia (US), but it was eventually delisted due to what I believe was a deliberate campaign of disinformation as exactly described by Glen Greenwald last year using secret documents provided to him by Edward Snowden…but which at the time I tried to create a Sorcha Faal article neither I, nor anyone else, knew about.

Hi Picomtn. Your username for the original article was Kmt885. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 21:57, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorcha Faal (whatdoesitmean)

How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations https://theintercept.com/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

The value to society of conspiracy writers, such as Sorcha Faal, cannot be dismissed either, and as a major university research paper published last month by the PLOS (for Public Library of Science) attests to:

"...it is worthwhile to take a considered Devil’s advocate approach—there are numerous historical examples of exposed conspiracies and scandals, from Watergate to the recent revelations on the sheer scale of spying on the online activity of citizens by their own governments. It would be unfair then to simply dismiss all allegation of conspiracy as paranoid where in some instances it is demonstrably not so. There is also merit to charges that vested interests can distort and confuse public perception..."

Maths Study Shows Conspiracy Theories are Actually Tenable http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905

Simply put, the global consequence of Sorcha Faal cannot be denied—with even China’s official government newspaper People's Daily in 2011 naming one of Sorcha Faal’s articles as being in their top 10 list of conspiracy stories for 2010.

http://scitech.people.com.cn/GB/25509/13684891.html

During the past few weeks too, a Sorcha Faal article has been consuming Russia to such an extent that nearly every major media publication, and television program, have been commenting and writing about it—including a Sputnik (news agency) reporter questioning the US Pentagon about it.

http://svpressa.ru/war21/article/140731/

http://ren.tv/novosti/2016-02-01/smi-turciya-sbila-dva-amerikanskih-voennyh-vertoleta-v-sirii-12-morpehov-pogibli 01 February 2016

http://de.sputniknews.com/militar/20160201/307523810/pentagon-hubschrauber-abschuss-dementi.html

http://www.trud.ru/index.php/article/04-02-2016/1333842_barbarossa_erdogana_mo_rf_obnaruzhilo_podgotovku_turtsii_k_napadeniju_na_siriju.html

Also just this past week, FactCheck.org wrote an extensive article debunking one of Sorcha Faal’s reports that went viral throughout the world, especially the Middle East:

Debunking Obama’s Dubai Domicile http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/debunking-obamas-dubai-domicile/

Back in 2010, a Sorcha Faal article ( http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1322.htm ) alleging that the Haiti earthquake was caused by an American earthquake weapon was even citied by Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez as evidence that this really happened.

From the Voltaire Network: Haiti and the seismic weapon http://www.voltairenet.org/article163729.html

From Iran government television Press TV: Chavez says US 'weapon' caused Haiti quake http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/116688.html

From the US Fox News Channel: Hugo Chavez Mouthpiece Says U.S. Hit Haiti With 'Earthquake Weapon' http://www.foxnews.com/story/2010/01/21/hugo-chavez-mouthpiece-says-us-hit-haiti-with-earthquake-weapon.html

In 2014, Iran’s Fars News Agency published another Sorcha Faal article ( http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1730.htm ) about Nazi-linked aliens who were in control of the US—and was then picked up and written about by The Washington Post and The Huffington Post among many other mainstream news organizations around the world.

Snowden Documents Proving “US-Alien-Hitler” Link Stun Russia http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13921021000393

Iranian news agency says the U.S. is secretly run by Nazi space aliens. Really https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/01/13/iranian-news-agency-says-the-u-s-is-secretly-run-by-nazi-space-aliens-really/

Tall White Nazi Space Aliens Are Not -- We Repeat NOT -- Invading http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/snowden-documents-us-alien-nazi-link_n_4592101.html

In 2009, WorldNetDaily even reported that the US Department of Homeland used Sorcha Faal articles when they created a “right wing” terror list—and Mother Jones (magazine) had their reporters contact the Russian embassy in Washington D.C. about a Sorcha Faal article too.

'Extremism' report based on Web chat http://www.wnd.com/2009/08/106695/

The Latest Right-Wing Conspiracy Theory: Obama Death Squads Targeting Gun Rights Activists http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/obama-sending-death-squads-after-gun-rights-activists

As of this moment, without Sorcha Faal having a Wikipedia article this very consequential, feared, and global author is being relegated to the nether regions of the internet with only the “snarky point of view” RationalWiki website having one written that is riddled with inaccuracies and discrepancies that are too many to list.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Sorcha_Faal

The value of anonymous writers, such as Sorcha Faal, to human society can never be underestimated, and when efforts are made to silence them those of us whom are able to defend them should…especially when they have proven to be predictive:

On 28 June 2007, the Sisters in their report titled US Banking Collapse ‘Imminent’ Warns French Banking Giant gave you a nearly one and a half years warning about the 2008 global market crash.

On 25 October 2008, the Sisters in their report titled Iranian Leader In Secret Meet With Obama At US Military Stronghold In Hawaii gave you a 7 year warning about the United States rapprochement with Iran this past week.

On 1 August 2014, the Sisters in their report titled India Shocks World, Joins Russia Against Obama Regime told you the truth that the Western invasion of Libya was related to the planned Gold Dinar, and which only this week a US State Department email released under court order confirmed was true. http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1988.htm

I believe you are one such defender and hope that you are able to achieve the goal of Wikipedia having a Sorcha Faal article included in it—after all, if this Sorcha Faal isn’t “notable” under Wikipedia standards, who else can possibly be?

And please remember…though no one knows how writers such as this Sorcha Faal do what they do, their predictive results are littered throughout our history and include:

The 1898 book Futility, or the Wreck of the Titan that was a near mirror image describing the actual sinking of the RMS Titanic 14 years later in 1912.

[ There's a crazy conspiracy theory that the Rothschilds sank the Titanic to set up the Federal Reserve http://www.businessinsider.com/conspiracy-theory-that-the-rothschilds-and-federal-reserve-proponents-sank-the-titanic-2015-10?r=UK&IR=T ]

The 2001 short lived US television program The Lone Gunmen (TV series) whose 4 March 2001 premier was about a plot to crash planes into the World Trade Center in New York…which happened for real 6 months later on 11 September 2001.

Conclusion

Is there “something” or “someone” who through the art of writing is able to pre-warn us about what is to come? Has a computer algorithm been created that can predict with a high percentage of accuracy what is to come? Is there now, and has there always been, some “secret” entity that always seeks to warn us about what is going to happen?

I don’t know the answer to these questions…but I do feel that this Sorcha Faal is maybe one of them.

Thank you, Diane picomtn@gmail.com — 68.47.165.51 (talk) 15:34, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

68.47.165.51. Sure I will help you. Do you have a username? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 01:46, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! And no, I don’t have an account here. I used to have one but I’ve long forgotten my username and password. So, where do we start???68.47.165.51 (talk) 14:07, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi 68.47.165.51. Well, for starters you need to click here to create a user account now to register a username so you can make ten edits so you then can create a draft article. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 14:17, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Picomtn (talk) 15:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Picomtn. Go forth and make 10 edits so your account gets auto-confirmed. Then check back with me. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 16:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I’ve gone forth and made 10 edits, that include 2 that need approval as they are on protected pages. So, what now?!Picomtn (talk) 17:44, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Picomtn. It takes precisely 4 days to the second for your auto-confirmed status to gel.

Your semi-protected-edit-requests, even if not put in to the article, should still count towards your 10 edits AFAIK.

I notice you use crooked quote marks. Wikipedia prefers straight quote marks (and straight apostrophes). Can you do that going forward? I do not have a script to fix them retroactively and it is a PITA to replace them manually.

As soon as your account gels you can create a Draft article in the Draft namespace. Be sure not to junk it up because there are page watchers who will delete your Draft if it contains copyrighted material or unsourced material. The draft name should be: Draft:Sorcha Faal

You can click on the red link above when you are ready to create the Draft. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 21:37, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Picomtn. Maybe I misspoke. You can probably start the Draft now just by logging in and clicking on the redlink above.

Some hints: Titles and sections do not go in Title Case (unless they are proper nouns). The King is an exception. Put the draft into your own words. Copy/paste or close paraphrasing is not permitted on Wikipedia. Also, use a Wiki voice. Sources must be reliable, not Blogs, other Wikis, Wikipedia, vanity press books, IMDB, FaceBook, etc. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:02, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

OK, I've started on the draft and you can view it here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sorcha_Faal When you read through what I've done so far you'll notice that I don't know how to link in PDF documents, your help would be appreciated with this. Please make any and all changes you need to make and let me know what else I can do as I work on this project. And the exact structure of how to do this article would be helpful for me to know too if you'd be so kind. Thank youPicomtn (talk) 14:12, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

I tried doing the notification thing you told me to do but I guess I did it wrong. Sorry. Anyway, I've done more work on the page and left you a message on the talk page. ThanksPicomtn (talk) 12:46, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Picomtn: Assuming that you mean this edit, the problem is that you began every template with {{tlx| instead of {{ - the {{tlx}} template creates a link to a template, it does not invoke the template that you are linking. It's used for demonstrations of template usage, not to activate a template. Click the "edit" link for this section, and have a look at how I formatted this post, particularly the bit before the word "Assuming" near the start. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:23, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for trying to clear things up @Redrose64: but I can't stress enough to you that for people like me that are new to this process you might as well be speaking a foreign language as none of it is understandable to me.Picomtn (talk) 12:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Picomtn. Well somehow you found the template of "replyto" which is an alias to the master template of "reply to". Click here to see the other aliases for "reply to": Template:Reply to#Redirects

All "reply to" aliases, or the "reply to" template itself perform the same exact ping. In fact ones of its aliases is "ping".

In your previous ping attempts you added "tlx" before the ping template name. "tlx" is a demonstration template that allows us to show you templates without making the curly braces disappear during the demonstration. Click here to see what the "tlx" template does: {{tlx}}

Stylistically I do not like the "reply to" template (or its aliases) because they put an "@" sign in front of each ping. I find these distracting when they are inline. I find the "u" template and its aliases to be cleaner looking. But, you can only ping one user with the "u" series while you can ping up to seven users in one template using the "reply to" template series. "u" is an alias for the master template which is actually "user link". So, you could use {{user link|Checkingfax}} to ping me or you could use {{u|Checkingfax}} and they do the exact same thing. Read about it here: Template:User link#Example

You can also ping a single user just by doing this: [[User:Redrose64]] (with the four square brackets and the colon). I never do this for some reason. I always use the "u" template when I can, but knowing it is limited to a one user ping. You can use multiple "u" templates to ping multiple users at once.

You MUST sign your post with tildes to make your ping go live. You CANNOT sign it after the fact if you forget. You have to create a subsequent ping/sign to create a new ping in that case. Also, if you make a typo in the ping, and save the typo, you CANNOT fix the typo and save it to fix the ping. You have to set a new ping and sign it. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:53, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Hatting a template

I just finished copy-editing Sweden Democrats. (I left several comments at User talk:BabbaQ#Sweden Democrats if you're interested.) I want to put the GOCE template saying that the article was copy-edited by me and the date, but this time I want to hide it so it's visible only if one clicks on the word "show". However, I don't know how to hat a template. Is that possible? I thought it should go above the two statements about controversies, just below the list of WikiProjects, at Talk:Sweden Democrats. Corinne (talk) 03:10, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. The easiest way is with:

{{collapse top|top title goes here|bg=}}

{{template goes here}}

{{collapse bottom}}

bg= is to give it a background color. Use any color you like, or you can omit that parameter. If you do a view source, don't be confused by the curly braces around the equal-sign‍—‌that is done so the template displays properly for you in this example. Ping me back with any questions. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:00, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I was about to add the GOCE template with the "collapse top", etc., but I didn't know how to add a color. I searched and searched and found Web colors. There are lots of colors there, but I don't know which type to use, which table to pick from, or whether to use a color name or a number (after the "bg="). Corinne (talk) 22:29, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. You can omit the |bg= part of the template and it will show the "stock" color scheme, or you can do any web color by name or by number. Do a Preview to see how your color works as some colors do not work well to show up the hat title text. So you could do bg=orange and the background would be orange, or you could do bg=#880011 and it would be a different color. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 01:35, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I did it! What do you think? Corinne (talk) 02:04, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. I checked it out several hours ago and even though I knew it was there I did not see it at first glace. Kudos. You picked a very close color too. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:41, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I just finished copy-editing an article for GOCE. It's Al-Shaykh Al-Mufid. (I left a few questions for the requester on his/her talk page in case you read the article. There were some things I couldn't figure out.) I wanted to use the template you gave me, actually the same one I put at Sweden Democrats, but I wanted it to be the same width as the other things at the top of the article's talk page (see Talk:Al-Shaykh Al-Mufid), but it came out much wider. How can I make it the same width? Corinne (talk) 03:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. Happy day for you. That template includes a width= parameter. Use % (percent) or px (pixels). Try:

|width=900px

Caveat: The 'w' in 'width' has to be lower case or the parameter will fail. PS: If you want to darken that bg= color a tad you can try "numbered" colors instead (hexidecimal colors). Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. Here is a setup to try:

{{collapse top|GOCE Copy-edits|bg=#F8EABA|border=.5px|bg2=#F8EABA|width=901px}}

bg= (the background color of the title bar)

#F8EABA (the hexadecimal color number closer to the adjacent templates)

border=.5px (the title box border in pixels)

bg2= (the background color of the collapsed box when uncollapsed)

width= (the width of the outer box)

It is imperfect but not bad. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for finding the right color. I tried that, then looked at it in preview, and it was way wider than the other sections, and way too wide for the page, so I reduced the width and saved. Then I looked at it in 110% screen resolution, and it was again too wide (left-to-right), so I reduced it again. (It changes width when I change the screen resolution.) But now, when I click "Show", the actual rectangle with the message is kind of "fat", that is, narrow, or short, left-to-right width and deep (top-to-bottom width). I couldn't see a way to make it more stretched out left-to-right. Corinne (talk) 03:50, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. Width=564px makes the hat really narrow on my screen, and makes the hatted template narrow and tall. Maybe try a % width? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. Jonesy unhatted it so I hatted it with this: {{WikiProject banner shell}} How does it look? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 11:45, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

It looks great! I see you put it inside the final pair of curly brackets so the "box" matches the other "boxes". But it doesn't show the hatting templating you gave me at the beginning of this section, above. Is the hatting an integral part of the GOCE WikiProject banner shell template? Corinne (talk) 16:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. Yep. The hatting is integral to the WikiProject banner shell template. The GOCE template is based on a master template that is harmonious with the WikiProject banner shell template. I am glad you are happy. Have fun. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 17:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Sigh... I saw the change that Redrose64 made at Talk:Al-Shaykh Al-Mufid so that the DYK information is not included in the banner shell with the WikiProjects, and, after having just completed a copy-edit, I thought I could add the same kind of thing, but with today's date, to Talk:Oran fatwa, but, though I tried different locations and combinations, in preview it didn't look right, so I didn't save. Can someone add it so that I can see how it is supposed to be done? Corinne (talk) 23:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. Sigh indeed. The basic template for the banner shell is {{WikiProject banner shell}}. You use the template to surround all the WikiProject templates you want to collapse. So you have to start with the first part of the template like this: {{WikiProject banner shell|

Then leave all the WikiProjects in the middle of the template right after the pipe ( "|" } then close it all up with two curly braces like this: }} to complete the WikiProject banner shell template.

It looks about like this:

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{WikiProject template1}}

{{WikiProject template2}}

{{GOCE template}}

}}

Sometimes the WikiProject templates have multiple parameters separated by pipes or even multiple parameters separated by pipes and on separate lines, but as long as you put the first part of the banner shell template at the beginning (with a pipe after it but without the two curly braces) and the two curly braces at the end, you'll be fine. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 03:08, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I think I got it right. Thank you! Corinne (talk) 03:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I added this to the GOCE templates section on my talk page and I added the collapse top and bottom templates to the Templates section on my talk page, but in the process of moving things around I seem to have narrowed the width of the entire group of boxes for all the Useful things. I had been meaning to ask you anyway if there was a way to widen the boxes a bit so they are not in such a narrow column, but now the boxes are even narrower than they were just a few minutes ago. Corinne (talk) 03:49, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. I played with it a bit. Does it look better now? If not, just do an undo. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Just noticed that I was mentioned here - I got to Talk:Al-Shaykh Al-Mufid via the thread at User talk:Frietjes#Template bg color, didn't realise this thread existed as well - this is why we have WP:MULTI. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:56, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. Sweden Democrats has 26 dead links as references. I do not think I will be able to find them all in the archives. It is on my to-do list. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 10:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. There are a series of edits on oran fatwa starting here. The editor says to put CE before the date number but then proceeds to put the CE after the date number. In a later edit the editor removes the CE and says it is not needed. I think CE is needed because it is comparing one datestyle to another datestyle. What about this series of edits? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I looked at the edits starting from the most recent and going back, and I saw the edits you are referring to. I think the editor meant that a CE date should come before an AH date in the article, that the AH date shouldn't come first. I don't think s/he meant that "CE" should come before the year (as some people feel "AD" should come before the year; regarding AD, MoS says either before or after the year is acceptable; but "CE" should always follow the year). I guess that makes sense since this is English Wikipedia. I also think it makes sense to remove "CE" in this case because Islam did not even exist in BC or BCE times, but a reader would have to know that in order to know that 1502 (or whatever year it was) was CE and not BCE. I guess if there are no BC/BCE dates in the article, the reader can assume it is AD/CE, and if they click on the link to AH, they will certainly see that it is in AD/CE. (I suppose one could argue that for the utmost clarity, CE be used for the first date in the article.) I don't know if it is necessary to add "in the Islamic calendar" after "AH" since "AH" is linked. Corinne (talk) 01:55, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Page or p.?

In Hadrian, I had seen a lot of instances of "page" in the references, but some were "p." (and "pp." for plural), so I started changing them to the abbreviations. Then I thought I'd ask him/her which s/he preferred, and s/he said "page". Before I go in and change them all to "page" and "pages", I thought I'd ask if you know whether there is a preferred style, one that would be looked at in a GA or FA review. Corinne (talk) 15:13, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. In references, if editing within a {{cite book}} template use: page=, at=, or pages=. I have never used at=

• page= will display as p. and pages= will display as pp.
• there is a parameter you can add called nopp=
• if used, set nopp= to "yes" to suppress the "p." or "pp." that is displayed before page numbers (e.g.- nopp=yes)
• be sure to put a vertical bar ("|") before and after the nopp= parameter (my legacy jargon for the vertical bar is "pipe")
• when working with citation templates, any parameter within a reference (the part preceding the equal sign) must be in lower case (e.g.- use nopp=, not Nopp=‍—‌use page=, not Page=)
• if you are working within plain text references (references that do not use the cite book template) then go straight to p. or pp.

I hope this helps. Keep me posted. Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:24, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

UPDATE: Hi Corinne. I wanted to know what the at= parameter did within the cite book template so I created a test here: User:Checkingfax/sandbox#Testing cite book template. I also tested page= and pages=. By the way, a citation template can only include one of the page type parameters; using more than one will create a red error down in the references section. For instance, if you use at=, then you cannot also use page= or pages=, and if you use page= you cannot also use pages= or at=. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:09, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Checkingfax. This is interesting and helpful. Though you did not say it directly, I gather that "p." or "pp." is preferable to "page" or "pages" when "working with plain text references". Corinne (talk) 00:41, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

It is not true that "if you use at=, then you cannot also use page= or pages=, and if you use page= you cannot also use pages= or at=". Assuming that you mean error messages containing "defined multiple times with different content", this error is thrown if you use named references, and there are two with the same name but their contents differ in any way at all. For example, if a page has

Some text.<ref name=AboutEverything>{{cite book |title=A Book About Everything ... |page=12 }}</ref> Some more text.<ref name=AboutEverything>{{cite book |title=A Book About Everything ... |pages=34-56 }}</ref>

that's a problem because you have given two different references the same name. They differ only in the page numbers, but that's unimportant - they could have differed in something as small as the inclusion or omission of a comma. To avoid this when the text of the refs needs to differ, either omit the ref names entirely:

Some text.<ref>{{cite book |title=A Book About Everything ... |page=12 }}</ref> Some more text.<ref>{{cite book |title=A Book About Everything ... |pages=34-56 }}</ref>

or make sure that ref names are distinct - use a different one for each different ref:

Some text.<ref name=AboutEverything12>{{cite book |title=A Book About Everything ... |page=12 }}</ref> Some more text.<ref name=AboutEverything3456>{{cite book |title=A Book About Everything ... |pages=34-56 }}</ref>

It is rarely necessary to use |nopp=. I have a number of books without page numbers, but which do have other means of identifying a place within the book, such as this one:

• Mitchell, Victor E.; Smith, Keith (January 2000). Paddington to Ealing. Western Main Lines. Midhurst: Middleton Press. ISBN 1-901706-37-0.

Instead of page numbers, it has captioned photographs, with Arabic numbers; and maps, with Roman numbers. Since I need to omit the "p." or "pp." prefix in both cases, I wouldn't use |page= at all - I would use |at= for this work, as in |at=fig. 12 or |at=map III

There is nothing in the FA or GA criteria that prefers the use of "page"/"pages" over "p."/"pp." or vice versa. The FA criteria require that references be consistent - that is, if an article uses "page"/"pages" throughout, any new reference must use either "page" or "pages" and not "p." or "pp.". The GA criteria are more lenient - consistency is not required.

Case-sensitivity of parameter names is not peculiar to the cite templates - it's a characteristic of all Wikipedia templates. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. I intended for this: "...go straight to p. or pp." to mean that in plain text references there is no rendering of your input so you should therefore "go straight to p. or pp.", as plain text references are WYSIWYG; the system will not alter their appearance.

Since cite book renders page and pages to p. or pp., I assume it is an accepted Wikipedia MoS. Cheers! PS: I think you're missing one double quote mark in your reply above. {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 00:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Er, where? --Redrose64 (talk) 01:11, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Redrose64. What I am trying to convey is that with the templated references instances of page= or pages= will render in the references section as p. or pp. as seen here: User:Checkingfax/sandbox#Testing cite book template. You can also see some at= and page= errors there. Add some samples and commentary over there to assist. Also, I am trying to convey that plain text references render in the references section as WYSIWYG. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 01:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Yes, these three parameters are mutually exclusive in the same instance of a template, and intentionally so - their purpose is to identify a point in a work, and to say |page=12 as well as |pages=34-35 leaves the reader wondering "well, is it on page 12, or on pages 34 to 35?". --Redrose64 (talk) 01:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both for all the information. Checkingfax, I saw that sentence, the one of which you repeated part, just above, and I understood what you meant (but thank you anyway for the further explanation); I had just wondered if "page" and "pages" were preferred over the abbreviations. Redrose64 said neither is preferred; they've just got to be consistent. So, since Cerme prefers the words, that means I should go back to Hadrian and change the "p." and "pp." I had put in back to "page" and "pages". Corinne (talk) 01:21, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

There is a guideline, WP:CITEVAR, which basically says that if an article is already consistent (such as in the use of "page"/"pages") it should be discussed before altering to another form (such as "p."/"pp."). --Redrose64 (talk) 01:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. If the article contains cite book templates, the cite book template will convert page= and pages= in the template, to p. or pp. in the reference section as seen here: User:Checkingfax/sandbox#Testing cite book template. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 01:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if an article can use both the cite book templates and the regular references. If so, and all the "page" and "pages" in the "cite book" templates render as the abbreviations, then, if the full words are used in the regular references, won't there necessarily be inconsistency? Corinne (talk) 01:44, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Dear Corinne. Yep. You are correct. I just double checked and Hadrian uses both citation templates (e.g.- cite book) and plain text templates, so since cite book is used then there will be inconsistency in the references section if the plain text refs spell out page and pages instead of using p. and pp. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 01:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Redrose64 Thank you, but when I copy-edit articles, one of the things I look for is consistency. If I see inconsistency, I try to determine the best style to use and make them all consistent. In this case, I saw both "page"/"pages" and "p."/"pp.", so I had started to change them all to the abbreviations. When I began seeing more instances of "page"/"pages", I stopped changing them to ask the main editor which style s/he preferred; s/he responded that s/he preferred the words written out. Before I changed the few instances of "p."/"pp." back to "page"/"pages", I thought I'd make sure the abbreviations were not the preferred style in the eyes of reviewers, and I just learned from you that both are acceptable. Corinne (talk) 01:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you may mix templates and plain-text refs in the same article - unless you're trying for FA, in which case consistency means that you should template all of them or none. But it's good practice before making any major changes to discuss it first. --Redrose64 (talk) 01:51, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Help with Walmart

Hello Checkingfax. I see that you made constructive general edits to the Walmart article last month. I also noticed you're a host at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. As one of Walmart's representatives on Wikipedia, I'm wondering if you could take a look at a few suggested updates I've proposed. My original request was posted on the Walmart article Talk page. An editor fulfilled some of the requests, but not all. I also posted an updated request on the WikiProject Companies Talk page, but as no one has been able to get to these yet, I thought I might reach out. Here are the edits remaining:

Extended content

Introduction  Done The sentence: "It has over 11,000 stores in 28 countries, under a total of 65 banners" is no longer accurate. Walmart has over 11,000 stores in 27 countries, under a total of 72 banners.  Done If two inline citations are needed at the end of the first paragraph saying Walmart owns and operates Sam's Club, can we replace the 2010 annual report with the 2015 annual report to make the references more current? Retail rise to multinational status (1990–2005)  Done The first sentence in this section has a "Citation needed" tag. To address this, I propose rewriting that sentence: While it was the No. 3 retailer in the U.S., Walmart was more profitable than rivals Kmart and Sears by the late 1980s. By 1990, it became the largest U.S. retailer by revenue.  Done At the end of that paragraph, there is another "Citation needed" tag. We can rewrite the following sentence to eliminate redundancy and add a proper inline citation. Perhaps this would work: Walmart stores opened throughout the rest of the country, with Vermont being the last state to get a store in 1995.  Done Operating divisions The opening paragraph relies on the 2010 annual report, so is now outdated by five years. The following is the most accurate current description, based on the 2015 annual report: The company offers various retail formats throughout these divisions, including supercenters, supermarkets, hypermarkets, warehouse clubs, cash-and-carry stores, home improvement, specialty electronics, restaurants, apparel stores, drugstores, convenience stores and digital retail.  Done Walmart U.S. Revenue figures are five years old. To bring this up to date, the figures should say $288 billion, or 59.8 percent of total sales, for fiscal 2015.  Done Sam's Club Again, the revenue figures are outdated. They should say Sam's Club's sales were $58 billion, or 12 percent, during fiscal 2015.  Done Corporate affairs The reference to the 2010 annual report can be switched to the 2015 annual report, which echoes the earlier report's business model.  Done I propose adding mention of current CEO Doug McMillon after the second sentence of the Corporate affairs section: Doug McMillon became Walmart's CEO on February 1, 2014. McMillon began his Walmart career in warehouses while in high school. He has also worked as the head of Sam's Club and Walmart International. Citation details References

Since I have a financial conflict of interest, I will not edit the entry directly. Can you take a look and implement any changes you see fit? I do think my suggestions are fairly straightforward and uncontroversial, but I'm happy to discuss any issues you see. Thanks, JLD at Walmart (talk) 16:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi JLD at Walmart. Sure I can help you. Can you get me some more citations for McMillon? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 16:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi JLD at Walmart. All done. A couple of suggestions for next time:

1. Put the edits in the form of: replace-X with Y. The commentary attached directly to the edit is confusing. Put the commentary in a line above the proposed X → Y edit request. Make X and Y verbatim to your request. If you want to discuss the edit, make a separate section for the discussion. Use this template: {{NeedsDiscussion}} which will render this:  Needs discussion
2. Put double quote marks around reference names.
3. Name all references (you did this: Bravo).
4. Once a ref has double quote marks you can put spaces in it. Helps with reading it. Like name=annrep looks weird, but name="annual report" is easier to assimilate. To include spaces you must use double quote marks.
5. Add wikilinks if possible, but only for the first utterance in the body.

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:06, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Checkingfax. Thank you for updating the Walmart page. Also, I appreciate the tips for future edit requests. I noticed you requested more citations for Doug McMillon. Is there anything missing from the Walmart article that needs a reference? Or is this in reference to the Doug McMillon entry? Thanks, JLD at Walmart (talk) 22:12, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jenny, I thought McMillon deserved more than a passing mention but now realize he has a dedicated article to cover that. It seems like the Walmart article needs a lot more updating of minutia but as an outsider I do not know the details. Can you please verify my edits and suggest new ones that you feel are needed? Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Checkingfax. Thank you for all your constructive edits and improvements to the Walmart page. I aim to make this Walmart article, in addition to other articles about the company, its brands and its people, among the best on Wikipedia by ensuring the articles are encyclopedic, neutral and verifiable. In doing so, I have been looking at areas of this article I think need work. Currently, I am working on drafting suggestions to address areas where the article's neutral point of view is compromised and where there is a lack of sourcing. There could also be a slight reorganization of some of the article's subheadings and added context surrounding issues. I will be posting details on the Walmart Talk page and I will be glad to ping you when those are ready. Thanks, JLD at Walmart (talk) 14:27, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jenny. OK. I'll be here when y'all are ready. If we change section names I like to keep the old ones on file with an {{anchor}} template or with an HTML

== <span id="Old section title name"></span> New section title name ==

tag string to avoid breaking any incoming parachute links. With over 6000 page views a day there is likely some parachuting. With the anchor template you can separate many alternate section title name versions with the pipe (the vertical bar) within one anchor template.

Remember to put the requests in a replace X with Y format. Assume I am going to do a copy/paste, then I will edit as needed. Don't ask me to edit up front as it gets too complicated. Although, we can discuss edits to the proposed copy after you put up a copy/paste version. But we will discuss in a separate section from the proposed edit section. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Checkingfax. Your recommendations make a lot of sense. I will be sure to structure future requests like that. Speaking of which, I should have some additional proposed edits here soon. Thanks, JLD at Walmart (talk) 23:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi

I am trying to improve the article about Molly Sandén. If you have any suggestions or edits that can be done please do :) Thanks.BabbaQ (talk) 21:43, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi BabbaQ. I gave a quick once-over. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 16:13, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

History of Baden-Württemberg

I copy-edited History of Baden-Württemberg a few months ago, and I was just looking at this edit. After seeing several instances of "recognise" and "favourable" I was about to change it back (to "favour") with an edit summary saying the article was written in British English when I decided to look at the date style format used in the article, and to my dismay I found quite a few instances of both British and American dates (don't know how I missed that earlier). I'm wondering if you could help determine which style of English should be used in this article. Corinne (talk) 01:12, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. The original author (an I.P.) picked British style English here, including neighbourhood, favours, quarrelled, centred, favourite, succeesor, illustre, connexion, and modelled. You can paste that permalink in to your edit summary (use edit-source to capture it). Or you can just reference the version which is 395680. Wow, that article was transcribed from the online version of a 1911 encyclopedia way back in 2002, shortly after Wikipedia launched.

As for datestyle, go with dmy since that is the British convention. Run MOSNUM dates to do it in a jiffy. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. I figured you were swamped with GOCE stuff so I went over and fixed the dates to dmy and set a British English template for you. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 15:51, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Checkingfax! Corinne (talk) 19:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I was just looking at this edit to History of Baden-Württemberg, and I wondered why the editor removed the link to Baden-Württemberg, which I believe is another article on the city or area (whatever it is). Are links permitted in the bold text at the beginning of an article? I'm just curious: why is the phrase "history of Baden-Württemberg" in bold? Is the subject of an article always put in boldface type like this? Corinne (talk) 20:04, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. What the redlinked editor did here is totally correct. However, the next use of Baden-Württemberg should be wikilinked. Wikiinks are not permitted in the bold text at the beginning of the article. The subject of an article is always supposed to be in bold, but only in a lead sentence.

1. The title of the article is supposed to be bolded in its first use
2. It is best if the bolding is early and verbatim
3. If a verbatim utterance of the title is not possible in the lead then you have to get creative and bold the essence, or in worst case bold some disjointed words that complete the title
4. Better, yet, rewrite the lead sentence so you can bold the page title verbatim (not always possible)
5. The bolding cannot be wikilinked
6. The next use of the title should be wikilinked or it should be wikilinked in snippets
   1. For instance, if you have the page title of New flamenco, you bold the first use as New flamenco if it leads the the lead sentence, or as new flamenco if it is used inline (but do not wikilink it). Then later in the article, or even in the lead, you want to wikilink new flamenco. If wikilinked in the lead, then you are again allowed to wikilink it in the body of the article (but you do not bold it again).
7. Synonyms for the title are also bolded in the lead. Sometimes editors also bold title synonyms in the body that did not appear in the lead.

If I recall correctly (IIRC), this article: Umpqua Community College shooting had the lead sentence of: A shooting occurred on October 15,20015 at the Umpqua Community College {without any of the required bolding}. There was no decent way to bold the title, and it was completely unbolded, so I changed it to: The Umpqua Community College shooting occurred on October 1, 2015, at the UCC campus near Roseburg, Oregon, United States. This was an imperfect solution but bolding it made the lead pop better and put it in to compliance with the Wikipedia house standard. My effort was reverted several times until finally the reversions stopped. That page is/was controversial and has some serious hall monitors. On its first day, the article got like 90,000 page hits. Now it is down to a few a day. The page nannies acted like every change on the page was like on hallowed ground Even with citations it was hard to get the smallest detail to pass by the gauntlet of hall monitors. Some editors were wikilinking the spelled out version of the college so that is why I also added the wikilinked UCC version.

My explanation here is imperfect and incomplete but hopefully is of help to you. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

In case you're interested, it's MOS:BOLDTITLE. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Why do I still have this watchlisted? I don't know. Things tend to hang around for awhile. But, since I happened to notice this after satisfying my curiosity about what wisdom Rose would be offering here, I'll comment as one of the more active participants to the named article.
Checkingfax, I don't think I was one of those reverting your bolding change, but if people were repeatedly reverting you that means that you were a combatant in an edit war, which violates policy as you know. It means you could never be bothered to start a talk page discussion on the question. Reviewing the article's history, I see you doing a lot of that there, and it seems reasonable to presume that's commonplace for you. I'd suggest you review WP:EW and in particular the last sentence of the first paragraph, before you point critical fingers at others for being "hall monitors" on an article. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:41, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

English language

I was looking at the latest edit to English language and I saw this edit. I wonder whether the editor should be told about the templates for en- and em-dashes that you've told me about ({{ndash}}, {{snds}}, etc.). I also noticed (in the edit summary) that the editor was using a script or some kind of automatic editing tool. If that tool is adding the old code for a no-break space, etc., perhaps the tool should be updated. Corinne (talk) 00:42, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. Yes, the editor is using a script called advisor.js that was built by User:Cameltrader (Bulgarian), an editor who has not edited in nearly 8 years. One would have to assume the script has not been updated since then either nor will it ever be. I'll go look.

I doubt if the editor who is using that script wants to insert templates by hand. It is tedious.

I noticed the advisor script in one instance changed a spaced-hyphen to a space/em-dash/space:

A deictic pronoun points to some person or object by identifying it relative to the speech situation&nbsp;— for example the pronoun I identifies the speaker, and the pronoun you, the addressee.

I had a long talk page dust-up with editor Walter Görlitz once over the use of this script and its insertion of spaces around the em dash.

Check out MOS:DASH, quoted here in part:

There are two options. Use either unspaced em dashes or spaced en dashes consistently in an article.

furthermore:

Do not use spaces with em dashes.

For spaced ndash space, my template {{snds}} (that's an alias to a much longer template name) is, IMHO, superior to advisor.js's edit as my template does not allow the space to disappear that follows the en dash. The snds template also incorporates three HTML escape sequence codes into one tidy mnemonic template.

When I read the documentation for advisor.js it seems that it does not do mass changes like MOSNUM dates does; it is more of an auto-correct fix-as-you-go script. I do not feel advisor.js is worth using since it is buggy and apparently unmaintained. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 03:29, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, don't you think it would be a good idea to tell the editor all of this? Regarding your statement above about the "snds" template, that your template "does not allow the space to disappear that follows the en dash", if the en-dash appears at the end of a line, there won't be a space at the beginning of the next line, will there? In that case, wouldn't you want the space after the en-dash to disappear? I haven't seen it, but I thought I'd ask. Corinne (talk) 15:17, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. I think an editor who has not edited in eight years is probably MIA. The space after the snds template will stay on the line above and will not create a hanging indent on the next line. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 15:24, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad to learn about the space. What I meant by "the editor" was the one who used the script in the English language article. Corinne (talk) 15:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Saxon

I just made a few minor copy-edits to Saxon, but I saw that there was some inconsistency in the placement of "AD" – sometimes before the year(s) and sometimes after. MoS says either is acceptable, but the style should be consistent within an article. There are some editors who feel strongly that it should come before the year (because of what it means, "the year of our Lord..."), but I had always heard it with the year first, followed by "AD". I'm wondering whether I should just go ahead and make them consistent one way or the other, or try to gain a consensus on the article's talk page. Corinne (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne.I always put AD and BC after the date. Use your best judgment, make the edits then go to the talk page if necessary. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 16:15, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Corinne {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 23:00, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

En-dashes

Should I be changing all en-dashes (and em-dashes) that I see in articles, including those in date ranges, to the templates you have given me?  – Corinne (talk) 02:57, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. I change them, but it is your call. I used to worry about polluting citation templates like cite book because of possible Wikipedia:COinS pollution but recently that issue was proved to not be a valid concern. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 03:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

O.K. Thanks!  – Corinne (talk) 03:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@Corinne: If you are changing the wrong dash (such as a hyphen or em-dash) to an en-dash, and an en-dash is correct in context (where the previous one was not), then OK. There are many ways of making dashes, and none of them are preferred over the others, so if you are merely changing one way of producing an en-dash into another way of representing the same dash, then please don't. Such edits are controversial, and persistence has led to sanctions. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. When I am doing other edits to a page I like to confirm that the en dashes, spaced en dashes, unspaced em dashes, and non-breaking spaces are in the appropriate places per MOS:DASH. I cannot tell the difference between a hyphen and an en dash easily so I like to call them out with named templates. I prefer the templates over the HTML escape sequences because with the templates I can use four curly braces instead of an ampersand and a semi-colon. Also, with a template I can call up several HTML escape sequences at once with one tight template name. There are not usually a lot of them to verify in an article and nobody has complained much about my using templates to proof and harmonize them. Also, the templates add a space at the end of a spaced en dash so that way you know it will not get contracted by a future editor who does not know the spaced en dash MOS guidelines. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both, Redrose64 and Checkingfax, for your comments. However, I feel that you are to some extent contradicting each other, and I'd really like to be clear on this. Redrose64, I'm going to say something that I have never said to anyone before: I feel that you are being, here and earlier, a bit bossy with me, and I am starting not to appreciate your intruding in my discussions with Checkingfax. It's your tone that bothers me the most. I have nearly 20,000 edits, all copy-editing, and have had no problems with admins and virtually no problems with any editors regarding my copy-editing. If you think Checkingfax is guiding me incorrectly, please direct your corrections, criticisms, and warnings to him. Checkingfax, you had told me earlier, perhaps on my talk page, that one type of en-dash (I can't remember now if you were referring to the HTML way with the ampersand and semi-colon or the one that actually looks like an en-dash from the choices just below the edit window) gets "swallowed up" or "wiped out" in certain situations and that that was why you recommended using the templates. I have only recently started to use the templates, and only at Checkingfax's urging. I had used the ampersand-semi-colon no break space and then the en-dash that looks like an en-dash (in edit mode) for a long time (mainly just adding the no-break space before existing en-dashes and changing hyphens to en-dashes), and my impression/recollection is that you (Checkingfax) recommended changing these to the templates you have given me (and which I've saved in the Templates section of my useful things on my talk page). I'm trying to do the right thing as I edit, and now Redrose64 is telling me not to change them, and Checkingfax has been recommending that I change them to the templates with the curly brackets. Please tell me clearly what you recommend that I do as I edit articles. Personally, the templates make a lot of sense to me, but I await your instructions.

• I know hyphens that should be spaced en-dashes have to be changed. Which format shall I use for the spaced en-dash (to make sure it breaks after the en-dash at the end of a line and not before the en-dash)?

• Which format should I use if I see a hyphen that should be a non-spaced en-dash (such as between two years)?

• If I see a spaced en-dash that should be an en-dash that has no "no-break space" before it, can I add the ampersand-semi-colon no-break space before it, or should I change it to the template that contains the no-break space?  – Corinne (talk) 02:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Corinne. I have been percolating on a reply and promise you I will reply soon to your questions. {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 18:58, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Redrose64 I would like to apologize for my unnecessarily harsh comments to you, above. I think I was having a bad day. I realize all your comments are meant to be helpful. I just felt that you have not been very friendly to me; you've just been interjecting statements in my conversations with Checkingfax, with whom I have been having friendly discussions on various topics, and from whom I have been learning a lot. Normally, I don't mind someone joining in on a conversation, but your comments seem directed mainly to me, and seem mainly to be warning or correcting me, so not the most pleasant thing to read. I don't think you know me very well, and you seem not to realize that I often ask more experienced and/or knowledgeable editors for advice on various things that come up when I am editing. I feel I am a most conscientious copy-editor. My goal is to do the best copy-editing I can, follow MoS style guidelines, use the right formatting, templates, etc., learn what GA and FA reviewers look for, etc. I don't need to be warned about the consequences of doing something that I have not been doing, and you have done that twice recently, which is why, on a bad day, I got upset. Perhaps you didn't realize that Checkingfax has been a kind of mentor/teacher to me regarding templates (and many other things), and that I had just recently begun using those templates, but that is the case. If my use of the templates is wrong, then I believe Checkingfax's would be, too, but I was in the process of clarifying all this with Checkingfax when you issued your warning about sanctions – to me, when I believe it should have been expressed as advice to Checkingfax, or to both of us. A lot of times in discussions on talk pages, I have seen comments taken the wrong way because of the manner in which something was expressed. I think that has happened here. So, I should not have reacted so strongly to you, but you could also learn some thing from this. You are obviously extremely knowledgeable, especially about technical aspects of WP, but you come across (at least to me) as "the instructor" rather than as a friendly fellow editor, and I don't think you gave me credit (in your own mind, which was then conveyed in your tone/manner) for being a conscientious and experienced copy-editor who is always making an effort to learn (in this case from Checkingfax) in order to do an even better job.  – Corinne (talk) 03:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Jesse Cook

(original thread copied from: User talk:Paul Magnussen#Jesse Cook)

Hi Paul Magnussen. According to our article on Jesse Cook:

Jesse Arnaud Cook is a Canadian guitarist, composer, and producer. Widely considered one of the most influential figures in nuevo flamenco music, he incorporates elements of flamenco rumba, jazz and many forms of world music into his work. He is a Juno Award winner, Acoustic Guitar Player's Choice Award silver winner in the Flamenco Category, and a three-time winner of the Canadian Smooth Jazz award for Guitarist of the Year.

I noticed this edit of yours. Is the Jesse Cook article in error? Ping me back. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 09:58, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Checking,

Before I go any further, perhaps I should say that I've been flamenco correspondent for Classical Guitar magazine for 24 years, and for Guitar International for 12 years before that.

I know many people regard Jesse as as flamenco guitarist, but that's because they only have a vague idea as to what Flamenco is. The blame lies mostly with Ottmar Liebert.

Briefly, Flamenco is the folk music of the Andalusian Gypsies, with a substantial non-Gypsy contribution also, and a less-substantial contribution from Latin America (estilos de ida y vuelta). All Flamenco may be classified by traditional styles, as the movements of Bach suites may be classified as minuets, sarabandes, courantes etc.

The Gypsy styles all fall broadly into the following forms: soleares, tientos, or seguiriyas; and the non-Gypsy styles are usually some form of fandango (with a few exceptions such as farruca). The rumba is only considered a flamenco form tangentially, and falls into the estilos de ida y vuelta category.

Corollary: albums consisting entirely of rumbas and/or vaguely-Spanish-sounding pieces are not Flamenco. Please note that I'm NOT saying they aren't good music. This includes all albums I've heard by Jesse Cook, and many others.

To those who disagree with me I say: listen to the album that started the whole thing, Fuente y caudal, which contains Paco de Lucía's big hit, the rumba Entre dos Aguas. The OTHER tracks are Flamenco!

You probably know Jesse's music better than I do: how many seguiriyas does he play? How many verdiales? And so on. That's what the originators of (Spanish) Nuevo Flamenco play, and it's what the second paragraph of the article defines. The critical sentence is "Although fused with other music, it was still based on the classic flamenco the artists had grown up with, a new form of the old."

Again, I'm not saying Jesse isn't a good musician.

Hope this helps clarify matters.

Paul Magnussen (talk) 03:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Paul Magnussen (with cc to Natalie.Desautels). Thank you for your reply. Nice to meet you. Do we need to edit Jesse Cook's article? If so, how?

As an aside, Natalie is working on a list of flamenco guitarists here to try and turn the redlinks blue. Are there any redlinked artists on that list that you consider non-notable as flamenco guitarists? The list is already trimmed of redlinks here but Natalie is hoping to expand the list by turning the redlinked ones blue. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 05:59, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

The following certainly do not belong:

• Robby Krieger
• Ottmar Liebert
• Robert Michaels
• Jonathan Richman
• Lawson Rollins
• Edward Stephenson
• Teye

and I'm dubious about several others, particularly

• Ronald Radford
• Val Ramos
• Estas Tonne

Most of them aren't primarily flamenco guitarists. Teye and Val Ramos can certainly play Flamenco, but do they really belong in a list that includes Sabicas and Paco de Lucía?

Paul Magnussen (talk) 20:49, 6 March 2016 (UTC)