en User talk:Omnis Scientia

This is Omnis Scientia's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3: 30 days

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Omnis Scientia. Thank you for your work on Sinking of the RMS Empress of Ireland. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating the article! May you have a blessed day on the beginning of this year!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your WP:DETAG of the Titanic book

With all due respect, I wish you'd messaged me before removing the tag. I searched during new page review and did not find sufficient independent, reliable source reviews of the book to meet WP:NBOOK. Given your prolific contributions, I simply left a tag rather than draftifying or immediately AfDing, but it would have been good form to have a conversation first. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971, my sincere apologies for not leaving a note to you. I wasn't aware that was a requirement. Will definitely keep it in mind next time I come across a similar situation Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not sure it is a requirement (I think the only requirement is for users with a COI not to remove the tag) but it is good form. Do you have additional sources/reviews to add on that book? If not I'll go ahead and file the AfD. (I did a WP:BEFORE prior to leaving the tag but it's possible I missed something.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971, if I may explain now to make up for before, I did find it odd that this particular book did not have a wikipedia page so took the intiative. Its considered the definitive book about the ship, released to coincide with the 100th anniversary. If you ask a Titanic or Ocean liner enthusiast they will call this very much notable.

However, I am looking for reviews as you asked and there a very few to be found, despite it being a revered book. Given what I've told you, if you still think that doesn't meet WP:NBOOK then I'll be happy to speedy delete as the author rather than go through an AfD. Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know enough to know one way or the other if it's revered (not a Titanic expert and I'll take your word for it); I just couldn't find any reviews beyond blogs and the user-generated Encyclopedia Titanica. What about merging the content you have into Titanic_in_popular_culture#Post-discovery_books and redirecting there? Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dclemens1971, that's definitely a better idea! I'll do so straight away. :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's that done. Thank you very much for the suggestion. :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 22:59, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! I do appreciate your prolific contributions! Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! 😊 Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:On a Sea of Glass - 1st edition cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:On a Sea of Glass - 1st edition cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:53, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy Koufax article revert and MLB pages

Hello and happy new year. About your revert of my addition on 1/4/2025 at 7:54, I have an alternative. How about a table with Koufax's record against all NL teams starting with the most wins and work down and use 12 statistical parameters (Wins, Losses, ERA etc.) in the process? Statmuse would be my source as Baseball Reference and Retrosheet dont supply that information. Would put the table below his statsline.

Also, in terms of that user who was messing up the individual team pages, it seems like there has been no actions yet to clean them up. I can help by doing that, deleting section by section if you give me approval to do so. There was a list on your talk page from another user about which teams need cleaning up, but cant find them now, will go to the users IP address and figure it out.

Thank you for your time and have a good day. Theairportman33531 (talk) 20:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good idea but, when I was a new user, I did add a table but it was removed as being too confusing for casual readers who are, ultimately, the target readers. I think the section, as it is, the information is good enough. It's to the point, gives an overview of his achievements and highlights, etc. The page itself is verging on going over the word limit too so its best to refrain from extra additions.

Also, my issue with the two expansion teams records is that its not unique to Koufax and it doesn't do him justise given, o. His overall performance against winning teams is better than against losing teams, for example (and I won't let my views on win-loss records be known either lol).

With regards to the team pages, of course you can go ahead and do so if you wish! No need for my permission! :) Here's the (incomplete) list from Spanneroal's page: [1] I'm afraid I started another project which has proven lenghty and, on top of that, I now have my job to focus on now as well. So I haven't found the time to get on with doing so. Would be much appreciated if you get a head start. I'll help out where I can. :)

Best regards, Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise that you go back to the last edit before the IP address did their work and copy-paste the page back to that. It will save you some time. Omnis Scientia (talk) 20:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I agree with you, I will let the article be. However, I dont know how to copy-paste the MLB pages to save time. Can you tell me how to do that? Thanks for your help.Theairportman33531 (talk) 21:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that will be tricky because it sometimes doesn't show the full page. What you can do is use it as a guide. Go to the page history and scroll back to the last edit before the IP address. Click preview and you'll see the before and after versions. You can use the before version as a guide to see what needs to be removed what doesn't. Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did the pages today, cleaned them up, also 1965 LA Dodgers I cleaned up, wasn't on the list from other user. Had to do individual sections, though. Check on them when you have a chance. Thanks.Theairportman33531 (talk) 17:15, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems good! Thank you! :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 08:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. There were more team articles that I cleaned up. Just want to go through something again. So lets go to 1983 Chicago White Sox season. I go to edit history, scroll down to 8/26/2024 at 2:45, click on that, article appears, then go into the edit window, and then click on publish changes, correct? Just want to verify. Thanks and have a good day.Theairportman33531 (talk) 13:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just about it. Basically check what the IP user removed/added. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. An update. Have cleaned up many more team pages, nearly done, must have done 80 team pages or so. There are 3 different IP addresses that did much damage to those articles which were clean at one time. Their blocks end at the end of March 2025. They will probably go back to it again. I did my due diligence here. You can check the teams I have done since January 9th in my edit history if you like to. Have a good day.Theairportman33531 (talk) 14:50, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure you don't delete completed gamelogs though... It looked like you removed some that were incomplete which is fine but the gamelogs themselves are acceptable and are on most recent season pages. Spanneraol (talk) 16:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good! I would second what Sapnneraol said too. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:31, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those gamelogs completed I absolutely left intact. It was the ones mostly incomplete that I deleted. The most recent I went up to is around 2000. Have a good day.Theairportman33531 (talk) 17:20, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for cleaning all of it up! :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

I've reverted a couple of categories you've added that were container categories. All of the men by nationality and century categories are container categories. So I've removed everyone from Category:20th-century English men etc. Categories like it exist only as a container for other categories of English men. Articles on individual men should not be added directly to this category, but may be added to an appropriate sub-category if it exists. ^SMason_Garrison 02:16, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! No worries at all, I didn't realize it was a container. Thank you! :) Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing!! I figured as much. :) ^SMason_Garrison 14:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Bob Veale

On 13 January 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Bob Veale, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 00:38, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Union Field Cemetery moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Union Field Cemetery. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. Sure thing! Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Straus couple

Perhaps Ida Straus|Ida]] and Isidor Straus could be merged into one single article? Most of the other article is overlap anyway 92.40.218.188 (talk) 14:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't think so. They are far too distinct in their own rights to be merged into one. Ida was her own person, a prominent socialite, and is remembered for her decision to stay behind the night of the sinking. Isidor, beyond the sinking, was the founder of Macy's and a U.S. Congressman. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Ackman

Hello Omnis Scientia, nice to meet you. I noticed you list yourself as a participant in WP:BIOGRAPHY - would you mind assisting at Bill Ackman? (My COI keeps me from editing directly.) I posted my proposed changes here: Talk:Bill Ackman#Philanthropy section. As you'll see, the Philanthropy section of the article gives too much attention and weight to an arbitrary selection of organizations, giving an inaccurate picture of Ackman's giving history and misleadingly suggesting that these groups benefited disproportionately from Ackman's philanthropy. So instead of dedicating a paragraph to every organization that Ackman gave to and is documented in RS - which would make the Philanthropy section inordinately long - I am proposing dedicated sentences or paragraphs only for philanthropy that was particularly significant in the larger context of Ackman's years of involvement in philanthropy. The consolidated list I proposed includes some of the more prominent grantees and removes the less noteworthy details, e.g. that Ackman was honored at a gala one time for an organization he supported.

I had an initial discussion with a different editor, but he went on a wikibreak before we got a chance to reach conclusions or implement changes. I look forward to hearing from you - thank you for your time and help. 69.64.221.162 (talk) 14:52, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I'm afraid I can't help out here - I mostly handle sports, political biographies, etc. I'm certainly not familiary with Mr. Ackman. I would suggest you take this to Talk:Bill Ackman. There is a user active there name "Patar knight" who can help you out more than I could. Best regards, Omnis Scientia (talk) 15:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]