Hi Art and Happy new year! After a long time of having duties with a baby I've added an article here and tried to apply for Did you know... Can you please give a check-peep on it? Thank you.
Thank you for Adolf Dobrovolný correction. It experienced some trouble with the photo but eventually got to DYK. This month I discovered the 150th anniversary of a Czech poet so I have tried to hook it for DYK like this: Did you know that Czech poetAntonín Sova gained national fame having answered in verse to Theodor Mommsen's letter calling the German historian "covetous dotard" or "arrogant spokesmen of slavery"? Thanks for wading through my muddy English.Aloysius (talk) 20:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do the DYK hook first: "Did you know that Czech poet Antonin Sova gained national fame for answering Theodor Mommsen's letter in verse, calling the German historian a "covetous dotard" and an "arrogant spokesman of slavery"?
"having answered" sounds OK in English (if it were "having answered Theodor Mommsen's letter in verse"), but it left me wondering why Sova gained national fame. Did he call Mommsen names, and then become famous for something else? But the article makes it clear that Sova became famous because of his poem.
I didn't know what a "dotard" was until I looked it up. At first I changed it to the more familiar-sounding "covetous and senile", but then I realized you were citing someone else's translation, so I changed it back.
"spokesman" not "spokesmen" because Mommsen is singular, not plural. Your article says "spokesmen" but its reference says "spokesman". If there is some reason the reference translation is wrong, then we need to rewrite the sentence somehow, because Mommsen was only one person.
"and" not "or", because Sova used both phrases, not just one.
Hi Art, thank you for your detailed inspection of the Sova article and I would like to ask for another one. Can you check the correctness of my new hook and article, please?
The hook looks OK, and I edited the article. I didn't edit this puzzling phrase: "... secretary of German expedition of the Bohemian Court Chancery, the highest office in Bohemia." Some websurfing showed that Bohemian Court Chancery is apparently the same as the German name Böhmische Hofkanzlei. So I made a redirect from Bohemian Court Chancery (and Chancellery) to Judenplatz#Bohemian Court Chancellery, the best description I could find in English Wikipedia. So it's in Vienna.
So what is a German expedition of the Bohemian Court Chancery? Here's a definition of "expedition". It made me think Germans were going someplace dangerous, like the South Pole. Perhaps you were calling the trip from Bohemia to Vienna an expedition, but then why is it German? Did you mean Austrian? I had a similar geographical problem with something in Vienna being "the highest office in Bohemia". My geographical knowledge of the area before modern times, is mostly limited to the map of the game called Diplomacy, but I don't think Vienna was ever considered part of Bohemia. So did you mean "the highest office OF Bohemia"? Art LaPella (talk) 04:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
.
Thank you for that. The point in case of the Chancery is that it had been in Prague before the Thirty Years' War in which Czech Protestant rebellion was defeated and with it also the Czech national culture which was since then more and more germanized and politicaly centralized in Habsburg capital Vienna. The word expedition here is in the second Swedish:-) meaning according to http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/expedition and so I put it in brackets in the article because it is a Czech historical administrative term which we do not use in modern Czech either Aloysius (talk) 22:26, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think I got this. Bohemia had a German minority (which Americans remember mainly because of how we use the word appeasement), so this boils down to "secretary of the office for the German minority at a Bohemian court". I'm adding "the". Art LaPella (talk) 17:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hatnotes
Hi,
Please don't confuse "see also" with "see instead". That is, when you are disambiguating between similarly named but otherwise unconnected articles, you don't want to offer a "see also" - you want to say "did you perhaps mean..."
I agree that {{see instead}} would be better than {{see also}}, if it existed, and I have often reviewed WP:HAT. Is there a specific template that is better for "similarly named but otherwise unconnected articles"? I've also used {{distinguish}}. Art LaPella (talk) 14:17, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also again, thanks for catching the errors I occasionally make when expanding the lists. With so much to do in each edit without any automation on my part, it would certainly be hard to do it error-free, so your software really helps matters here. StringTheory11 (t • c) 04:57, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One solution would be that perhaps you could tell me when you make such an edit. I watchlisted Scorpius only because I edited it. Art LaPella (talk) 05:05, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea; I'll do that. I generally work on the larger ones such as Scorpius and the upcoming Vela over a few days, so it may be a while before I actually save the edit. StringTheory11 (t • c) 05:41, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done the first part of the edit on Vela's list: removing the Gould column, linking all the notable stars, and adding variability to the notes column. Still have to add the missing notable stars and check for naming of variable stars. StringTheory11 (t • c) 02:56, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Should CPD -57 2874 be in Carina? The coordinates in the list and in SIMBAD are in Carina, a degree south of the constellation boundary. But the article shows question marks instead of coordinates. Art LaPella (talk) 01:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done. My software pointed out 6 stars, including TW and TX Cancri which are slightly brighter than their maxima, but the only actual edit I made was to re-sort. Art LaPella (talk) 17:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I found "pairs of figures" in the BBC article. If the question is whether the BBC article is good enough to use, well, that's pretty much the same question I asked (I'm not an astronomer either). If we remove the end of the table which comes from the BBC article, then that would resolve my contradiction except for Kepler-186 f 0.64. Art LaPella (talk) 23:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. I can't help on this. I was kind of waiting for Vsmith (or you) to answer my question or edit the article. CorinneSD (talk) 00:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ebola outbreak Thanks
Thanks Art for correcting my grammar and spelling errors. I am partially sighted due to Multiple sclerosis and tends to miss spaces. My first language is not English as well.
Art, For the love of god, please feel perfectly free to copy edit anything I write! I try hard but I have no natural or otherwise ability when it comes to writing. Commas worry me to no end. I know good writing when I see it, but as for producing it myself, that's another thing! Best, Gandy Gandydancer (talk) 14:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Did you mean this and this? Not your comma. My writing gets removed or rewritten often enough so that I pretty much limit myself to spelling, grammar, and clear-cut errors; Wikipedia has plenty of those to be fixed. Art LaPella (talk) 16:12, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Art, would you be interested in doing the Resources split for the Ebola article? Jytdog was set to do it but he has decided to take a few days away from the article. Let me know. Gandydancer (talk) 13:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What resources? I think you mean Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa#Responses. I studied the splitting instructions more carefully this time (I do computer programming, but I'm not a writer), and the least mechanical part of the process is composing a summary to be left in the main article where the responses section was removed. That's a lot more text than I usually write, so maybe you should do that part. Art LaPella (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well Art, yes I meant Responses. If the truth be known, I was madder than a hornet yesterday and even more prone than usual to make mistakes. :) I have prepared an intro and placed it in the article, so it's ready to be split. Thanks for doing it. I guess that if my life depended on it I could manage, but it would take many hours and possibly even many days to get it done. Gandydancer (talk) 16:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and be sure to write those split directions down for further use. :) (Art, I don't know why it is, but I always feel I want to joke around with you - is that OK?) Gandydancer (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No. My edit summary: " The reference was simply a repetition of the quote, without attribution. I tried to substitute a real reference." was an invitation to fix it. :) Art LaPella (talk) 15:59, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that will work, but I think most people searching for "Ebola epidemic" or "Ebola outbreak" are thinking of the current epidemic, now and in the future. If they were thinking of something obscure like Kikwit, they would have recognized the need to specify which epidemic. So I provided a more direct, obvious way to get to the West African article. Art LaPella (talk) 14:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Epidemic" and "outbreak" are so close that that logic may apply to both terms. Epidemic is slightly stronger as a candidate to redirect to the current African epidemic article but that may be RECENTISM. As a dab page it may have a primary topic of the list article (rather than the current African outbreak article, or some regional spread article), and examples of that primary topic which shouldn't be listed per WP:DABCONCEPT / WP:PTM. As such, 1 or possibly 2 valid entries. We seem to be specifically set up against WP:NEWSPAPER / WP:RECENTISM / WP:10YT. That's tempting to resist with such current popular topics. Navigation: for readers, they now get redirected to the more general list article which has a hatnote (I think the hatnote isn't technically meant to be either per WP:RELATED but I'm not going to remove it), so it's still only 1 click away, and it's now 0 clicks for the minority of readers wanting any of the epidemics. Widefox; talk10:03, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You've studied guidelines more than I have. So first, some non-guideline common-sense observations: Nobody else is in the house now, but if I asked "where's the Ebola epidemic", I'm sure they wouldn't say "which one". I Googled "Ebola epidemic", and I didn't find anything in the first 50 that wasn't mainly about the current epidemic. "Ebola epidemic" means the current one. Both those tests suffer from recentism because I don't have a time machine, but the statistics surely put the current epidemic in a class by itself, until something comparable occurs in the future.
DABCONCEPT would be more applicable if there were an article called "Ebola epidemics". But it's called a list, although it does have a paragraph about Ebola epidemics in general.
PTM? "Zoo" doesn't mean "Baltimore Zoo" if you're not in Baltimore, but "lawyer" means "human lawyer", as we can only speculate how aliens handle the problem, and "Ebola epidemic" means the big one.
Navigation: It's the same number of clicks to get to the West African article, but there's more other material on the page to distract from the intended path.
I heard a projection of >1M cases in months, so yes it may dwarf the other epidemics put together by orders of magnitude, but there's still several of them (and no pandemic yet). We could redirect to the Africa outbreak article as a primary topic, and use a redirect hatnote there to the list. There's already several 2013-2014 outbreak articles, and the list has them now. I notice Influenza A virus subtype H1N1 has a hatnote to that pandemic, so I really don't understand if we're meant to abandon WP:RELATED which would be the easiest for readers to find the outbreak article with "Ebola". Widefox; talk00:59, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it doesn't reach 1M, the list article says 4,555 for West Africa and 1624 for all the others combined. 4,555 is widely agreed to be significantly undercounted, and it's hard to imagine that there won't be at least a few thousand more before it's over. The 2013-2014 outbreak articles are all subarticles of the main article (outbreak in Liberia, outbreak in the U.S., responses to the outbreak, etc.), not separate epidemics, except for the unrelated Congo outbreak. So if a reader types "Ebola epidemic", he won't be surprised it doesn't take him directly to Sierra Leone. The African article's infobox will take him there, if that's what he really wanted.
Redirecting to the Africa outbreak with a hatnote to the list would give me at least most of what I want, and I'm not sure that isn't better. :) Art LaPella (talk) 02:11, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is tempting yes, but my understanding is that we shouldn't do it RECENTISM NEWSPAPER, and the "outbreak" or "epidemic" seem to have consensus to target the list. Widefox; talk09:25, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Liberia" fix
Hi Art, an IP added that back [1]. Thanks for catching that. That is one of those stealth IP edits that editors always miss and hence they remain in an article for ages. SW3 5DL (talk) 22:17, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Would You Consider Overturning my Ban?
Hi Art_LaPella, excuse me for ban-evading via an IP address to ask you to consider unbanning me, but I don't see any other choice. I was permanently blocked more than two years ago on charge of sockpuppetry, which I deny. I am asking you and three other administrators to look at it. I just picked you off the list, checking only that you were recently active.
I need to keep this invitation neutral, so the best thing is just to point you to my RFC/U (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Colton_Cosmic#Statement_of_the_dispute). I can't restrain myself from saying that the RFC/U was kidnapped by my long-term hounders, and that I was denied the ability to speak in my own defense (unheard of in RFC/Us and against their clear instructions.
I'll also risk saying, but judge for yourself, that I never socked Wikipedia, and that an injustice has been perpetrated against me.
I would answer your questions if I could but you'll have to unblock my talkpage, presumably a less-controversial act.
Colton Cosmic.
I was made administrator in 2006 with the understanding that I would fix typos on the Main Page, and I have never blocked anyone, much less unblock anyone someone else chose to block, and much, much less unblock someone who has already been turned down by a long list including Jimbo. I was about to point you towards instructions for a more conventional ban appeal, but it's apparent now that you're much more familiar with that level of Wikipolitics than I am. Art LaPella (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
John Singleton Copley
Hi, Art -- I've been reading the article on John Singleton Copley. It's pretty well written, and I've only made a few minor copy-edits, but I have come across something that doesn't look right and I don't know what to do about it. It's in the middle of the first paragraph in the section John Singleton Copley#Move to London and the European tour. There are two quotes, but they are back-to-back:
An early call was upon West, to "find in him those amiable qualitys that makes his friendship boath desireable as an artist and as a Gentleman." "In England, what [Benjamin] West and Copley did together was to create a new kind of history painting, one with modern, topical subjects, chiefly death scenes of heroes, in a historic manner, but with scrupulous attention to contemporary detail” (Johnson 441).
I don't normally see that on WP. If the quote is from the same source, but with words missing, then just an ellipsis would be enough, right, and if no words are missing, then the pair of quotation marks are not needed at all. Do you feel like looking into this? CorinneSD (talk) 16:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alas, looking into it would require finding Art: A New History in a library, and my financial career doesn't take me anywhere near a big academic library. However, the first quote must have been written centuries ago because it contains 4 mistakes by modern standards: "qualitys", "boath", "desireable", and capitalized "Gentleman". The second quote has none, and discusses West and Copley as historical figures. So a good guess is that the first quote is Johnson quoting Copley in his book, and the second quote is Johnson's commentary about Copley. In that case, neither an ellipsis nor simple combination would be appropriate. It could be clarified by attributing the first quote to Copley and the second to Johnson, if that is what happened. Art LaPella (talk) 17:08, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes and no. Is there a better adjective to describe what makes people choose to be scared by Halloween, or by ghost stories or roller coasters? "Thrilling Halloween"? Art LaPella (talk) 14:04, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You edited the comma from the date just as I was attempting to save my edit. I copied my edit and got out of the edit conflict, then went back and put in my edit. That's why the comma was back. That's happened before. So if you see something like that again, that could be the reason. [2]. SW3 5DL (talk) 23:09, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Danke für das Korrigieren meiner Fehler im Englischen! I'm not a native speaker and apologize for the work I cause on editing my flaws. I just saw, that my work and your corrections of it improved this article's rating from start class to C. I do not want to be insolent, but of course I strive for a B rating, so please, let me ask you, if you have any hints for me to reach this target. Thanks in any case! Purgy (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Art LaPella, 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 2015.
Happy editing, Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lady of Elche, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phoenician. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I was wondering if you might have the time to look atDyslexia I have it for a GA nomination i know this is short notice, but I put a request for one ce on that list (the guild) they have and I have a feeling the GA nomination reviewer might beat them to the article, thanks either way--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:48, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Regards La pella
I was looking for active administrators who can help me with this draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cirex Has been several weeks backlogged, I took my chances if it get not approved. Same article is on other 5 wikipedias... Please, hope you can help! :) Thanks in advacne
Bnotepr (talk) 04:09, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks...I was noticing it a couple of times earlier this week, but then it disappeared before I had a chance to mention it, so I didn't think more of it. (I think it's already been repaired, as it didn't come up when I used Reflinks yesterday, and the redlinks of which you speak appeared to have been a couple of days old.) I'll keep an eye on future Reflinks edits and see if it reoccurs.
Hello! Can I request for you to include an "Education" parameter to Sophie Hunter's infobox. Her school, St. Paul's Girls' School is a notable educational institution in the UK. I hope you can fulfill my request. Thank you very much! And keep up the good work here on Wiki. 109.161.219.248 (talk) 07:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Art LaPella, I would be careful, this is a sock of Fairyspit. They ask editors to do their editing for them since they have been banned and continue to have their socks blocked. LADY LOTUS • TALK12:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please [feel free to] see the changes made today, at User talk:Guettarda#Hello.21...before I noticed that those changes probably "should have" gone here, instead. ((PS: This "revert" (deletion) edit might be of interest, too.))
Art LaPella A belated Happy Easter , just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedian a Happy Easter Day! (though I know my grammar, typos,etc., are never a happy thing)...Sincerely, --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I see you make edits from time to time to TFA text; do you look at most of them? Any suggestions, or anything you'd like to do more of? - Dank (push to talk) 20:27, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No. I look at every featured article blurb, and everything else on the Main Page, and I have done so for years. But not the featured article itself (to me, the readers' priority is the Main Page). However, if I do find a mistake in the featured article blurb, I check the article, partly to see if something there will persuade me it isn't really a mistake, and also because while I'm there, I can fix the same mistake in the article if it occurs both places. Art LaPella (talk) 02:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Impressive. You hadn't made many edits to the TFAs lately, and I wasn't sure if you were content or just sporadic. Glad to hear it. Carry on. - Dank (push to talk) 03:04, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't find anything. Gliese 581 is 0.01 brighter than its maximum, but I haven't been fixing that (different references). The hardest part was finding my software again, so note to myself: misc menu of my stock program. Art LaPella (talk) 01:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Email
I'm copying this email to document a big series of corrections to the spelling of Mr. Marriott's name:
Marriott spelling
People
Leo Marriott
Today at 2:24 PM
To
[email address redacted]
Thanks for query. As you can see it is spelt with 2 x R and 2 x T as well as a dot over the i. Also the same as the well known hotel chain. As you mention, some publishers misspell it but by the time the book is published it is too late to change.
Regards
Leo Marriott
Sent from my iPad
Happy 4th
July 4 celebration
To Art LaPella, Happy 4th of July (actually this year it starts July 3rd/Friday) , wishing you the
Art, are you interested in writing any of these TFA columns? The 5th has already been taken; I haven't looked at the others yet. - Dank (push to talk) 17:49, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what a Today's Featured Article column is, but presumably no. When I write more than a few words of text, it gets rewritten or removed, and thus my experience is strictly with copyediting. Art LaPella (talk) 22:33, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's what some call the TFA blurb. (I don't call it a blurb because it's the opposite of a blurb, it's a summary). Whatever you want to do is fine, of course ... but obviously I'm going to respect your style and choices, or I wouldn't be asking. I'll make lightweight edits if necessary to comply with FAC standards. If you're worried that others will heavily edit your stuff, that hasn't happened for me at TFA. - Dank (push to talk) 00:00, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
hi, art...yes that's the edit I meant,(BTW thanks for the archive reference),...in regards to this,[3] it probably is a contradiction.... thanks as always--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:16, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Was wondering i spent considerable time on improving the Ebola virus epidemic in Liberia article.. Do you think i can remove the cleanup tag. BTW thanks for checking my edits i really appreciate it. English is not my first language and i am partilay sighted as well.
The cleanup tag says we are mixing U.S. English with British English. I don't care if you remove it, but the tag is certainly accurate. Complying would be a major project, starting with getting a consensus for which English to use. The other Ebola articles are British, but Liberia has a historical connection to the U.S., which may explain why the U.S. military went there.
Most of the dates have the day before the month, which is much more typical of British English, although I found 11 dates with the day after the month. But the spelling is more U.S. than British; my U.S. spell checker found 4 British spellings, and I found at least 10 U.S. spellings. U.S. spellings are harder to find, because both my spell checker and my experience as an American make them look normal. Art LaPella (talk) 16:19, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The dates to me although British is more in line with all the other articles.. hence i did change the confusing to British.. I have clean up a bit more and will remove the tag for now.. I want to seriously haul that editor over the coals but whats done is done. I put in hours of work.
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Talk: Main page, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Art, wishing you, the best in this holiday season, as always (BTW [4] I was looking at ref #243 error, but am not sure how to fix, any ideas?)...your colleague --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 19:33, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
DoneHere's my edit. The red error message said there was a link in the work= parameter, but actually it was in the website= parameter, and clicking the help link didn't help. So I'll go to that help page's talk page, and tell them that their error message wasn't helpful. Art LaPella (talk) 21:13, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings. With regards to this; I noticed that JG senior did have an article, but it seems to me that in that case, a redlink is more appropriate than a redirect, because JG Sr. is not a reasonable destination for somebody searching for "he leadeth me." This is why I speedied, rather than replacing the redirect. Thoughts? Vanamonde93 (talk) 06:43, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To me a reasonable destination is one that gives the reader what information we have, which is one sentence. So looking again, Joseph A. Gilmore#Family is what would get him there. Perhaps Wikipedia has some conventions I'm unfamiliar with, but to me it's what the reader is looking for that counts. Art LaPella (talk) 06:49, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I read through WP:R#DELETE and WP:R#KEEP again. It seems like this is a borderline case, because #10 of the delete criteria suggests delete, and #3 of the keep criteria suggest keep. I'm not hung up over it, so I'll let it be. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 07:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
please help translate this message into the local language
The Cure Award
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further.
You're always welcome to fix these, Art, but just FYI I do nothing with the images; David Levy looks at them, generally in the last day or two before they hit the Main Page. It's not really a failure of the system, more like different people on different timetables. - Dank (push to talk) 03:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I award you this CopyEditor's BarnStar for insisting on clear, comprehensible, and grammatically correct articles. Art, as the West African Ebola virus epidemic, draws to an end[5] in regards to flare-ups, I wanted to say its been a pleasure working with you (lets hope it doesn't come back)...ozzie...-Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:10, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, although I used English more than Spanish trying to make sense of it. What Spanish I know was absorbed from my daughter's Spanish homework. Art LaPella (talk) 18:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Recents at TFA
What you're doing is great. The even-numbered months have generally been fine; the odd months, not so much ... formatting may be off, or the list of recents may be wrong. I had been double-checking them the last couple of months, but if you want to do it, it's much appreciated. - Dank (push to talk) 11:01, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Extended confirmed protection
Hello, Art LaPella. 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.
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. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
FACBot
Got a job for you if you're interested, in line with your work on TFAs (which is much appreciated). User:Hawkeye7 has assigned a new job to FACBot, to automate the recentlist at the bottom of TFAs. It's still not getting styling right, but we're getting close. Would you be willing to keep him informed about when the styling isn't working, and to keep things fixed manually until the bot gets it right? - Dank (push to talk) 16:16, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi Art LaPella.
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
Hello, Art LaPella. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hello, Art LaPella. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
No, I don't want to challenge that. I reasoned that whatever its evils may be, it's better than an unreferenced, unexplained IP edit. If that is wrong, I suppose you will revert. Art LaPella (talk) 04:06, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Luna Park, Scranton
I timelined the complete history of the park. The historical record as previously written was completely incorrect.
I admit it was an ambitious project but I had no guidance and couldn't figure out how to communicate with others.
I was about to remove the incorrect portions which will draw down the size of the file.
Dave Sienkiewicz
Based on what you're telling me, it appears a team of editors don't appreciate large articles and I'll have strip information out of mine to reduce it's size significantly. I was surprised. When offloaded, the article becomes a somewhat small text file. I did have have a notion of breaking the article down into subfiles by timeline year and linking to them from a main article but don't know if that is supported. Meanwhile, I will begin editing for brevity. Do you know how I can determine size and what is the critical threshold to stay under?
Dave Sienkiewicz Daves1 (talk) 13:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Art. Thanks for the update. I had rewritten the park's history as a summary and was beginning to add references when I quit for the evening. The "popular history" in the "backout" copy suggests the park failed due to a lack of patrons. I was trying to demonstrate the problem was mismanagement of its financials in an orderly logical fashion. The citations used in the "backout" copy are third and fourth sources and led to the notion a lack of patrons and the fire cause its failure... I was using second source material and planned to cite each conclusion. Not knowing the exact capacity and nature of articles, and drawing upon an example I found that used a timeline, I evidently violated a standard. Actually, I found the discussion interesting although I was surprised by the deletions. I am willing to work material into an acceptable form. I suppose I should have all citations in place before moving article from sandbox? I believe I may be able to cut additional material if that is an issue as well. Is there a way to pass an article to editors for preview and comment?
Dave SienkiewiczDaves1 (talk) 16:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Art. That helps. I'm determined to get the article into an acceptable form. It's a learning experience for me.
Dave SienkiewiczDaves1 (talk) 16:54, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Art. Regarding your comment/question about any more changes to the Luna Park sandbox article, I have stopped updating. My point of the updated article in the sandbox is that management failings are more important to highlight and less misleading than the former article indicating lost patronage. Plus, park is unique in many respects especially in regard to standardization. Yes, I did cut out the "a's" and "the's" deliberately as I was concerned about storage and trying to keep the article as small as possible. I was torn about past/present tense as I was trying to avoid anecdotal story telling, yet it's history. I will review style guide. Should I do anything or can you take the article and work on edits from here? I can work with you if you like.
Dave SienkiewiczDaves1 (talk) 01:30, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Art. I moved the Daves1/Sandbox article to the Luna Park article as discussed. I don't have any objections regarding modifications.
Dave SienkiewiczDaves1 (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Art. Yes, I should have used the complete headline title as you showed in your example. There is a specific example (Number 71-Newspaper article, historical, in an archive or personal collection) matching yours on page 214 of the APA 6 reference manual. I had been trying to keep everything as brief as possible as I had been admonished for taking up too much space. I don't have an issue with you making changes or use of the template. Thanks for making those corrections.
Dave SienkiewiczDaves1 (talk) 20:43, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.
Technical news
When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.
JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Hmm, you didn't say why so I'm not sure I'm the guy. Even on English Wikipedia, my editing is basic copyediting, although they let me fix typos and such on the Main Page. French Wikipedia? Well, I've fixed the spelling of some American things like Marriott. I recognize half the words and I know where to find Google Translate. Art LaPella (talk) 05:49, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I did my usual proofreading, but by the time I was ready to make my changes, your edit war had reverted to the other person's version, and most of my changes became unnecessary (why did you italicize "individuals" for instance? "milliom" is a typo, a period is missing ...). So does "taking a look" mean my usual proofreading, or my opinion on your edit war? I didn't understand "the access date on visual editor(or regular editing) will be 17 May" for instance; the issue is the date visible in the article text, not the access date that appears only in the references. Art LaPella (talk) 06:26, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
ill take your advice, {as for the other editor their talk page is full of warning notices[6][7] from other articles not just this one), thanks as always--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:19, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a proofreader. From that perspective, it's fine after removing the "and". I haven't seen the documentary, so I don't know how well it represents it. As for Trump himself, well, I voted for Johnson. Art LaPella (talk) 00:04, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
.jpg)
