User talk:Ravenswing/Archive9

This is an archive of former discussions. Please do not edit it, or Koschei the Deathless, God of Evil, will kill a puppy.

request for clarification

Dear Ravenswing - thanks for reading and commenting on the page on the Society for the History of Alchemy and Chemistry. I understand your concern, but wish to clarify something. Compared to Society for Historical Archaeology, Society for the History of Natural History, society for historians, society for the history, society for art history, society for historians, and many more articles on historical societies; why are this page's references insufficient? I will nonetheless try and improve the article following your suggestions: it's just that information on historical societies is scarce yet relevant. Historical societies such as SHAC organise activities about and publish peer-reviewed articles on historical figures, matters, debates, etc.. Other societies and journals may organise debates or publish articles on topics covered by SHAC and thereby relying on SHAC's contributions - but SHAC itself is rarely the topic of discussion: It is a medium, not the message, but as medium highly relevant. I understand that reliable sources are required, but, to be honest, SHAC is a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeV18 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks

Many thanks for clarifying that the reference given to the article on Barbara London is not her website, but a reference to the Internet Movie Database. It looks as if this article is probably going to be deleted. Vorbee (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Improvements to article KH Coder

Hi Ravenswing, I made some improvements to the article KH Coder according to your suggestions. Please have a look at it whether it addresses your concerns. Thanks. GrryT (talk) 07:56, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Enough to warrant keeping it; good work there. Ravenswing 09:07, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Center School (Connecticut)

The above is so nn viz schools, I think a better redirect target would be the historic district. Thoughts? John from Idegon (talk) 16:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd probably go with that, honestly; I'm sure more people will be seeking the historic tie-in than the educational one. Ravenswing 17:03, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Philadelphia Firebirds

When you have some free time, please review Philadelphia Firebirds (ice hockey). I did a major overhaul. If you can think of any suggestions, please comment. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 17:40, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for 2017 America East Men's Soccer Tournament

An editor has asked for a deletion review of 2017 America East Men's Soccer Tournament. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Quidster4040 (talk) 23:51, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Fhsig13 (talk) 19:26, 4 December 2017 (UTC) (I didn't report you, I just included you name in the report, and thought you'd like to know. I have no hard feelings against you, it was only that you took part in the conflict).[reply]

(talk page stalker) @Fhsig13: Just an FYI that new Talk page messages should typically be placed at the bottom of the page. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 21:14, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Miracle on 34th street, 1947 movie.

In the 1947 movie Miracle on 34th Street. Kringle says that Daniel D. Tompkins is John Q. Adams' vice president. I've seen the movie several times in black/white & colorized. GoodDay (talk) 04:19, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You changed my AfD comment

You've been around here far too long to need this, but:

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David R. Liu, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

—David Eppstein (talk) 05:46, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• And you've been around far too long to advocate a "snow" Keep before anyone else has advocated keeping. I don't imagine you're any more psychic than the next editor, nor have failed to encounter debates where you were certain one side was self-evidently right go the other way. A "snow Keep" is for when the previous ten commenters have advocated Keeping, with "What the hell?" verbiage thrown in. Ravenswing 16:52, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Snow" means "there's no way this is going to close as a delete so let's finish this process early". One possible reason for that is a massive pile-on of keeps, but it's not the only reason. In this case, my reason for suggesting a snow keep was that the pass of WP:PROF was massive and obvious, so that (as I imagined, and turned out to be true) everyone else who participated and used WP:PROF as the basis of their comment would have no choice but to agree that it was a keep. It had nothing to do with psychic abilities. And of course, if others disagreed there would be nothing wrong from them saying so — a snow keep comment doesn't prevent others from disagreeing or insult them when they do — but in this case none did. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:24, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Massive and obvious to you, anyway. I've certainly seen dozens of AfDs where the decision (per policy) was just plain a slam dunk, for which no one with any pretense to following Wikipedia policies could disagree, and they went the other way all the same. WP:SNOW is just plain not for how one expects a debate will go, but to reflect how it already has gone. Ravenswing 22:13, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Springfield Indians

When you have time, I think you might be interested in reading these. They would be good references for the Springfield Indians article.

• Eddie Shore and That Old-Time Hockey[1]
• Hockey in Springfield[2]

Cheers. Flibirigit (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• (grins) Own them both, actually, but thank you for the heads up! (The latter, in particular, is one of those old photo compilations.) Ravenswing 00:46, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• • Excellent. I had fun researching Doug McMurdy. I notice that the Eddie Shore article could use more references. Flibirigit (talk) 01:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1. Hiam, C. Michael (2010). Eddie Shore and That Old-Time Hockey. Toronto, Ontario: McClelland & Stewart Ltd. pp. 291–293. ISBN 978-0-7710-4129-7.
2. Mancuso, Jim (2005). Hockey in Springfield. Great Britain: Arcadia Publishing. pp. 119–121. ISBN 0-7385-3927-9.

Deadlinks

Hello! I wanted to address your comment on Craig MacTavish. The reason I didn't delete the deadlinks was because of WP:KDL, which says "A dead, unarchived source URL may still be useful.... It could also return from the dead." It also says, "do not delete a URL just because it has been tagged with ^[dead link‍] for a long time." That is why I added citations, to make up for the dead links. I didn't do it because it was a controversial claim but it is an unusual claim, that he is the last NHL player to not wear a helmet during games, so I wanted to make sure it was properly cited. I totally see your point of view however, it was a little ridiculous to have about 7 citations HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 03:44, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• It is not merely a little ridiculous, but completely absurd to have six cites. TWO cites would be enough; this is an uncontroversial, unchallenged fact. Furthermore, the cites that remain are scarcely to blogs: the Toronto Star and sportsnet.ca are high quality sources. Anything more is citation overkill with a vengeance. Ravenswing 05:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I don't mind the deadlinks being deleted, I am just explaining my rationale for not. Is it still citation overkill if they are dead? Thanks, HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 05:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure it is. Citation overkill has to do with the number of cites, dead or alive. Six cites is what I'd expect to see for a highly controversial statement involving considerable edit warring and long debates on the talk page. Ravenswing 05:47, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you for explaining this. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 05:47, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Our mutual "friend"

Our mutual "friend" is causing a stir at List of British Columbia provincial highways. Cheers! Flibirigit (talk) 02:47, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you note

Hi Ravenswing. I just wanted to say thank you for the message you left on the talk page of Mendoza, Texas about demanding a source for the information I added to the Geography section of that article. I agree that it is so blandly uncontroversial, and it is very unnecessary. I also think that the warning that was left on my talk page about that was VERY unnecessary. I don't understand why those mileages caused that warning to be added to my talk page. I got those distances from Google Maps, and they were true, but when I added them, they were removed by another editor, and it said that there was a link to Google Maps and other maps at the top of the page. I checked my distances, and maybe that distance to Houston from Mendoza was also quite unnecessary, but either way, I find it quite stupid that those distances were removed. I just wanted to say thank you for writing that message on that talk page, and it really helped me. Happy editing! Colman2000 (talk) 17:46, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reginald McKenna

I have undone this edit of yours, as McKenna was not by any means the first untitled First Lord, as you will see from the list at First Lord of the Admiralty. DuncanHill (talk) 01:14, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 21:37:05, 7 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Buchananlab1

• Buchananlab1 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:The Mental Lexicon Group Canada (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, uur post was recently declined. We are hoping to model this after a page for a similar research cluster (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Planck_Institute_for_Psycholinguistics).

This is our first attempt at publishing a page on Wikipedia. Would you be able to provide some concrete examples of how to get the page into shape so that it could be accepted/published. Thank you, in advance.

Best,Buchananlab1 (talk) 21:37, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for writing me, @Buchananlab1:; I'll see what I can do to help ... especially if you can wait a few hours while I do some chores! Ravenswing 21:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you! No rush, any guidance you might have is much appreciated :) Cheers, Buchananlab1 (talk) 14:45, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Alright ... before anything else, the Planck Institute article is a poor example of a Wikipedia article, and thank you for bringing it to my attention: it has several issues which I've hung alerts off of for poor sourcing and an overly promotional tone, and if it had come up as a draft, I'd have declined it far faster than I did the Mental Lexicon draft.

  That being said, first off, the article reads like it's right off of the Group's brochure. "The Mental Lexicon Group addresses the profound complexity of the mental lexicon and attempts to bridge communicative gaps between professionals through integrating professionals across multiple disciplines into a collaborative network, and in turn facilitate purposeful dialogue across different fields of research" is fuzzy verbiage that WP:PEACOCK addresses directly (and the rest of that page is useful reading for you, generally). What concrete things does the Group do, and in terms an unimaginative sixth-grader could understand? Use as few words as possible to get these meanings across: using that sentence above, why "purposeful" dialogue? As opposed to jawing about the latest Spitfires game around the water cooler?

  Sourcing is the more damning bit, though. The notability criterion for organizations is WP:ORG, which holds "A company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. A single independent source is almost never sufficient for demonstrating the notability of an organization." In reading through your draft, you list research done by several scientists, but how does that connect directly to the Group? Wouldn't they be doing that research whether or not there was a formal "Group" to which they were reporting. The sources reference those particular scientists, but only one references the Journal, and none the Group. You would need to find reliable sources which give the Group itself significant coverage in order to get the draft passed.

  In any event, I hope this gives you a foundation to start. Good fortune. Ravenswing 18:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Sources/ Article Title Change

Thank you for helping me get this done the correct way. I am novice, but truly want to follow the guidelines here. The sources Ive cited are for "Caktuz" (Born Jerome-Adika Vincent Sator Jr.). I have found his name used in both cases in several reliable online newspapers, magazines, major radio websites, etc. As well as published books, TV, & movies. I'm unsure which sources you feel are unreliable. Can you please clarify just a little more.

Besides that, how do I change the draft title to "Caktuz (artist)" instead of the given name? Powerd By AMAS (talk) 04:29, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• First bit's the easy one; I moved the page to Draft:Caktuz for you. (There's no need for an "artist" tagged on; that sort of thing's only used when it's necessary to differentiate between more than one subject of the same name, and there aren't any other "Caktuz" articles on Wikipedia.) Ravenswing 17:46, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!!

Thank you for the title change Powerd By AMAS (talk) 04:52, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: YouTube help

Thank you and again sorry for being so easily lost navigating around the wiki functions. But as to the YouTube clip as valid for visual authentication. I'm assuming it wouldn't be sufficient to just put it somewhere between a pair of parentheses, eh? I'm not sure how you guys suggest the link best be provided? Or for that matter how references are added at all. I should maybe add a new entry from scratch and see how it works from a blank page to get an empty perspective on it.

Thanks for any help. I've only ever provided small corrections, so a lot of what seems like requiring coding is lost on me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehappypoet (talk • contribs) 08:23, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(National Telecommunications Regulatory Authority) Topic

Hello Ravenswing,

I hope your day is going well, about the article that was mentioned in the title, it was rejected today for its writing method as an advertisement.

Can you provide some parts from the article to prove your point more? If yes, what are your suggestions for some un-accepted written paragraphs?

Thank you Waiting for your reply, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.21.106.80 (talk) 09:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Select Survey Invite

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Your survey Link: https://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_0H8k26VJ64omjRP&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 12:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Imaginary Forces

Hi Ravenswing. I apologize for the multiple attempts at creating a page for Imaginary Forces, without making the proper edits. I am simply having trouble understanding exactly which references I included, were deemed insufficient in proving notability of Imaginary Forces, as well as why exactly they were rejected. I understand some may be rejectable because they are simply mentions in the referenced articles, however, some which I have double checked against Wikipedia's Notability guidelines seem to follow them. I am hoping to get a more detailed explanation overall of what is keeping this page from being published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MLinnett12 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• That the sources themselves are not considered reliable, independent, third-party sources with a reputation for accuracy and fact checking. Indeed, a couple of the sources you posted (the first two) discuss Imaginary Forces in the detail the GNG requires. But they're both blogs. We're not looking for a blog off of Animation World Network or promaxdba.org to meet the GNG: we're looking for an article in Variety, The Hollywood Reporter or the entertainment sections of major newspapers or magazines. Ravenswing 01:36, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Luka Zimmerman page - query

Hi Ravenswing, I just got the message that the page I created for Andrea Luka Zimmerman has been rejected due to references not being notable. What I don't understand is that I had updated this draft with at least ten references to avoid this - links to journals, papers, books, radio interviews. Someone else added more references after that. But none seem to have been on the page you reviewed. I'm not sure if there is a duplicate draft for Andrea Luka Zimmerman which has these and if so if I've made a mistake along the way. I am convinced of her notability when I look at what she's done and especially in comparison to other entries I see on Wikipedia, but struggling a bit to get this through. Would be grateful for any advice please. thanks JKHB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JKHBlair (talk • contribs) 08:44, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Actually, I didn't reject the Andrea Zimmerman draft for being not notable; I rejected the draft because there was another draft for the subject under the name of Andrea Luka Zimmerman. That draft is still pending a fresh review. Ravenswing 16:08, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah apologies, my mistake. Thank you!

Amethia Rajput

It would be better if you re check the article. You have mentioned that the sources aren't reliable, so does it mean only the writings of british historian are correct and others are false? I have provided the link to indian princely states, there you can find the mention of Amethia clan as Raja(king) of Kalinjar(earlier) and later as Raja of Amethi. Though I have removed the source you had mentioned as unreliable but I would like to tell you that it is the portal hosted by Rajput community (community of indian kings, landlords and warrior races). So, you can't just ignore the facts provided there. At last I would like to tell you that British historians never studied the history Kshatriya(rajput) of north-eastern and eastern India with the same depth as they did for western India. So, it's not really easy to get all the facts mentioned in their writings as it's common to find in an Indian writing. The same applies to the Insignia, there is no proper record of the symbols, insignia of Amethia rajput clan so, I had mentioned "undocumented" as there was no intention to mislead the people. I have edited my text after your comment, it would be better if you take a look once again and review it. Thanks Anony20 (talk) 03:17, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• If you're interested in more indepth information about the type and quality of sources Wikipedia requires, please review WP:RS. It certainly has nothing to do with being British -- India's been producing scholarly works in English for a century and a half. But non-English sources are also valid, as long as they meet the standards of reliablity and fact-checking as stated in RS. Ravenswing 04:35, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Care to explain...

... your unexplained revert at Northeastern Huskies men's ice hockey? The school unveiled new branding on August 13, 2018, which means athletics has now retired the "split N" logo as noted in the link. My edit reflected those changes. Corky 22:48, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Spiffy, except that you didn't actually put IN the new logo. Ravenswing 01:12, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I did put IN one of the new wordmarks that they are using. We can't use File:Northeastern Huskies primary logo.svg due to non-free guidelines. Corky 01:42, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Rasch

Hello Ravenswing, we've spoke in the past (several years prior) about the last World War One Veteran. While doing some research I understand there was a man named Andrew Rasch with whom the last world war one veteran community (if you can call it that) where debating his validity. I was wonder how that ended up turning out, was his real status ever uncovered?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_surviving_veterans_of_World_War_I/Archive_11#Andy_Rasch_2 heres some of the debate for a memory refresh. (I Dan tha Man I (talk) 20:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC))[reply]

• Truth be told, my opinion on the subject hasn't changed in the last seven years: that Rasch was either a con artist or senile, putting one over on a credulous local yokel TV station, that there wasn't a shred of credible, verifiable evidence that he was a veteran at all (let alone a WWI veteran), that such sites as hand out information indicated that the only Andy Rasch living in his state was decades younger that he claimed, and that Rasch's "candidacy" -- such as it was -- was being pushed solely by anon IPs who found the notion intolerable that a mere woman could be the last living WWI vet.

  While my further opinion is that we already wasted far too much time and breath on that BS seven years ago, I leave you with this final thought: I'd think it pretty obvious that there'd likely be chest-thumping he-man media outlets and agencies with a great deal more time, energy and incentive to discredit Florence Green than volunteer Wikipedia editors. That in the six years after Green's death no one's managed to do it suggests to me that there wasn't any smoking gun to find. Cheers, Ravenswing 23:10, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. I'm going to do some digging into the matter, if in the unlikely event I come up with anything to back up his claim I'll let you know, otherwise we can assume his claim to be bogus. (I Dan tha Man I (talk) 00:41, 8 September 2018 (UTC))[reply]

• According to the SSDI, his real birth date was October 8, 1930. He never was a veteran at all. Ravenswing 10:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Heres the final report on Andrew Rasch.

Andrew was born in October 1930. Even on his Obituary it says October 8, 1930 on the very top before switching in the text to 1901. Even while arrive there was descripency about his birthday. According to the FOX NEWS station it was October 5, 1901, according to the local TV Station it was October 8, 1901. According to the Obituary it was December 10, 1901. The local station had long since taken down their broadcast and attempts to find the reporter fell through. Another huge pieces of evidence come from the comments on his obituary.

"Todd Behrens

December 14, 2011

Andy was my friend and was always there with "words of advice". He was still driving the Grand Marquis I sold him in 1998. I appreciated his trust and confidence in me with the referrals of his friends. His knowledge overwhelmed me at times. NOT book knowledge...but experience. I am honored to have called him my friend. And as a Fellow Veteran" I SALUTE HIM! Todd Behrens"

whats significant about this is that A he is refered to as a veteran so people in his local life so it is true that they at at least thought of him as a veteran and there is nothing to say he isn't. But he wasn't in World War One or World War II. Another crucial thing from this comment is that it says Andrew was still driving at the age of 110. By this account he would blow out Guinness officially recognized record by a few years. So unless they recognize him as oldest driver I'd say he's not.

7 people commented on his obituary heres another one, it's completely circumstantial evidence but I thought I'd include it.

"Mr. Andy,

You know where my heart was and is in regards to you. The early childhood years with you always lending a helping hand to my parents and so many others. Over the last ten years I've especially enjoyed making our clinic visits, doctors, and road trips to Pine, Tucson, and Waddell. We've had many good times at Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Birthdays but especially lunches on Wednesdays. Tuesdays with Morrie had nothing on you! I'm truly confident that God is answering your questions and that you will truly now receive your reward. Thank You for all you've given through the ages!! Your "Princess" Leigh"

This thing thats noteworth about this is that the poster leaves her names as "Your princess Leigh" which would indicate Andy was keeping up with pop culutre at the age of 76 when the film came out. Which isn't impossible but I think more on the unlikely side.

Todd Behrens was the only poster I could locate at an adress in Louisiana. No word back from him.

So the final report? Andrew Rasch was 80 when he died not 110.

Oh and the unnamed middle eastern country should get its own page on the call of duty wikia. (I Dan tha Man I (talk) 15:30, 29 September 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Captives in American Indian Wars

Ravenswing - I am a complete newbie at Wikipedia editing, and I just made my first edit. I attempted to clarify and improve a sentence that you added to the above referenced article (your edit was 100% accurate, but I sought greater clarity and hope I have achieved it). Anyway, as an insecure newbie, I would appreciate your review of my edit!

Paul/fishing-oldster — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishing-oldster (talk • contribs) 04:54, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Eh, not to worry. Your reasoning about "captive" rather than "prisoner" is sound, and I certainly have no problems with the edit. Carry on! Ravenswing 07:22, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate draft

Hi, Ravenswing, can you please clarify your decline-note over here?∯WBG^converse 09:18, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• It's pretty self-explanatory, and I already explained it to the draft creator months ago. There was more than one submission for that subject, and I declined one and kept the other. Ravenswing 09:48, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in editor/contributers arena/group of Wikipedia

Hi. Hope I don't mess this up. Fact is I was looking into the state of Georgia contributions to wiki and IGN. Somehow I stumbled upon your username and read whatever I read that lead me to here. Thought you would be a great authority type figure to ask. About me? Realizing everyone can see my IP address, I was born and raised in state of GA. A veteran. Love writing on factual based fiction and history. If I seem weird, its because I suffered a massive stroke that almost killed me and have irreversible brain damage for life.My primary goal being a contributor to stroke related articles, history, and data on the Knights of Templar. Also any fanfare stuff on all things Star Trek. Hopefully you can assist me in some way. I don't know how this post will turn out once I submit it.Having recently become familiar with the internet again, I'll risk leaving my email address here - [e-mail]. I do not sync anything. Thank you if you read this. Have a great day!

PS. You may call me ED or TeflonGuy (TeflonGuy has recently been copyrighted via myself) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.222.64.223 (talk) 14:23, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nick

Please give my best to Nick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IndianRidge (talk • contribs) 12:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Fair enough. "Nick" whom? Ravenswing 23:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

؟؟؟؟؟؟

انا قابل بالمسائله بس البرامج الاعلانيه واختراق الجوال ماهو من حقك تفتش في خصوصياتي اذا شفت مني شي غلط تقدر تتصل اوتر سل رساله وتقول وضعك او اغلاطك او قذفك مانقبل فيه الله يستر عليك واختك في بيت ابوها لاكن انتا زعلت من الاستوديوا والصور اللي فيه اكثر من شهر وانا جالس ادور صور عشان وقدرت اجيب صور مقاربه فعلاً عشان اثبت انه موا من حقك تفتش في خصوصيات الناس زعلت على الصور بس مازعلت انتا تفتش الواتس الوسايل الاستوديوا كل شي تفتش فيه انتا نحنا نسكت ومانتكلم صح ؟

اذا شخص مبتلى المفروض تسوو باصلكم مو تستغلوه بالبرامج وتوهموه وتضحكوا عليه والتشبيه بااسماء .... اذا انتا دكتور امراض عقليه اقلك ممكن قدرت تطلع بنتائج حلوه واثبات السلوك مافيها شك بس. هذا اول لاكن الحين ماتمشي عليا الحاجات التفاهات ذي وللمعلوميه انا عارف من فتره وما تكلمت عشان الشيبان ماخذين فكره انكم ذهب ومافي مثلكم في الادب والاخلاق ...... لاكن استغلالكم في اوقات انا مريض وانتوا جالسين تضحكوا ومره جيت عندكم وقلت فهموني ايش هذا بحسن نيه وقلتوا مودليل بس دليلكم واضح وصريح اذا انتا تحذر وتقلي انتبه وانتا بكامل صحتك وعافيتك وكامل قواك العقليه انا اقلك مو من حقك تحذر ولا عندي لك شي اذا حاط عقلك بمريض وانتا عارف اتحمل مابدر منه لاكن اخر 3 شهور اذا طلع شي مني لك الحق تتكلم. وانا ابغاها حتى لو رافضين انا برضوا ابغاها

طبعاً كل شي سويتوا في حياتي عرفتوه كيف عرفتوا الله واعلم .... يمكن وحي نزلكم دام باقي حي في الدنيا بتكون ليا اذا طايش واتعاطى مخدرات ماتدري يمكن اليوم اوبعد سنه او 3 او 7 سنوات يهديني ربي لاكن اذا رافضين وتطالبوا بفصل انا بعدها اطلع حق 3 سنوات ضحك واستخفاف واستغلال طبعاً مو تهديد ولا تحذير دام ان الغلط طلع مني ومنكم انا اشوف افضل اني اكون ساكت وانتوا القرار ليكم والمناسب شوفوه وبيكون شخص واحد فقط بيننا واكيد بنقبل بحكمه — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.36.100.145 (talk) 12:55, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• My conversational Arabic is limited, I'm afraid. But thank you for playing! Ravenswing 23:40, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kratman

My user page has 418 words (ignoring bannas), my satire on Kratman takes up 94, or less then 25% (including the quote by him about me).Slatersteven (talk) 18:12, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Your point being? Are you claiming that you don't single out Kratman for derision on the ground that you didn't devote more of your userpage to doing so? Honestly? Ravenswing 21:41, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No i am saying two things, one it does not take up a huge amount of space, two much of it is not derision of him, but a quote of his derision of me (and in fact the only attack on him is about 4 words).Slatersteven (talk) 08:25, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

... ooookay? Ravenswing 13:54, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Claude Bourque

Hi, I'm wondering if you know how Bourque's death date was arrived at and if you know his city of death? There are a few such NHLers I'm trying to pin down. Any help appreciated. Cheers.Researchguy (talk) 11:50, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Hm. Worst comes to worst, you can ask User talk:Marc87, who put that edit into the article, who I already see you asked about another player, and who happily is still active on Wikipedia. hockey-reference.com also cites that date, and I believe that Dan Diamond and Total Hockey are the ultimate source of hockey-reference's historical stats. Ravenswing 12:39, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've asked Mark87 about a few players over the years and he has yet to respond to anything. Oh, well.Researchguy (talk) 17:29, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Hm twice. Check out [1], which names Ottawa as the city of death. It's a blog, true, but I've found Joe Pelletier's scholarship to be good over the years. Ravenswing 22:35, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joe is very good, but in this case, wrong, I believe. I applied for a copy of Bourque's death cert and got a message saying no one by that name has died in Ontario. Same for Quebec. My best guess is that Bourque lived in Ottawa and died somewhere else (vacation? work trip?).Researchguy (talk) 18:20, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Snakes

Poisonous snakes are common pretty much everywhere in the U.S. when hiking - except New England. Clearly you will fight for this edit. I would prefer it if you toned down your commentary, however. Thanks. --Ken Gallager (talk) 12:52, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sports notability

I opened a section in the talk page for WP:NSKATE to clarify my changes that were reverted if you want to take a look. There were no fundamental changes to the criteria, largely updating event names to their current ones, which I should have specified. Sunnyou31 (talk) 17:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good faith

You're not acting in good faith: for one, you don't tag obviously experienced users with newbie warnings because you're feeling passive aggressive.

Stop tagging articles that you have no intention of ever helpfully contributing to with tags that add nothing to the article and serve no purpose except to say "Ravenswing was here" so you can see your "work" marked on articles. These tags serve exactly the same function and rationale as someone graffiting a wall in real life, and they will be reverted. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:27, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They are not legitimate. The articles are completely fine as they are (one that you have repeatedly tagged has twelve sources) and adding another source would serve absolutely no useful purpose in improving the article except in an attempt to stop you re-adding "Ravenwing woz here" to the top of the article (which, as the 12 source article shows, you're probably likely to continue to do anyway). Vandalism is vandalism, even if you think pointless tags is a more subtle way of leaving your mark all over the encyclopedia. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:32, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• My, you're not very good at listening or at assuming good faith, are you? That article with allegedly "twelve" sources -- several which are duplicates of the others -- has one single source cited over twice as often as all the other sources combined, and is responsible for about 90% of the text of the article. That is the dictionary definition of overreliance on a single source. For another, if you're going to act like a butthurt newbie incensed that someone has "dissed" HER article, a tag warning is entirely appropriate; if you want to be considered an "obviously experienced" user, behave like one. For a third, the whole purpose of templated tag warnings on articles is to alert interested editors in the articles' shortcomings, and it's frankly bizarre for you to consider them egotripping (WTF?) or vandalism when they are a standard part of Wikipedia ... however much accusing editors of "marking their territory" (WTF? twice) appears to be one of your stocks in trade. Finally, this might come as a shock, but you do not own Australian articles. They are not my "territory to mark;" they are not your marked territory either. I've been on Wikipedia for nearly fifteen years with approaching fifty thousand edits, and have zero desire and even less burning need to count coup on articles (among other things, with several editors up over a million edits, that's an impossible arms race for anyone with a life). If you think differently, you're on Wikipedia for the wrong reasons. Ravenswing 05:09, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Georgian Mythology Intro Tag

Hello Ravenswing Sorry you're feeling stressed. Just read your 'Multiple issues' tag on the page 'Georgian Mythology', to which I contributed quite a bit a while back. 'The lead section of this article may need to be rewritten. (April 2020) This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic' - I don't think this is really justified. The introduction provides some good references - notably Bonnefoy and Charachidze - and contains very little in the way of original thought, apart, perhaps from drawing attention to the contrast between the all male Zoroastrian primordial conflict between Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu and the Georgian primordial conflict between Morige Ghmerti and his unnamed sister - which would surely tend to stand out in any comparison between the respective mythologies. I tried to be objective in my introduction and had hoped that the result had come across as quite pithy, particularly in relation to the various civilizations and mythologies that have contributed to the development of Georgian mythological thought. I can't see anything in it that is argumentative or controversial and don't understand why you take exception to this content and feel it should be rewritten. regards 15:44, 8 June 2020 (UTC)Flobbadob.

• Sure thing. Let's go through the problems with just the lead:

"Like many other rich and ancient body of myth, that of the Georgians has been coloured by the belief systems of the many cultures with which it has come into contact over the millennia."

NPOV violation. Who says that Georgian mythology is a "rich and ancient" body of myth? Beyond that, that a body of mythology is affected by the belief systems of interacting cultures borders on the trivial; it certainly isn't what I'd use as the first sentence of the lead.

"The bedrock upon which it is founded is, by definition, the indigenous mythology of the Kartvelian peoples themselves, whose first emergence from the darkness of prehistory is believed by many scholars to occur with the founding of the Kingdoms of Diauehi, Colchis and Iberia."

(1) This is pretty lurid, unencyclopedic language. (2) "By definition" according to whom? (3) Who are the "Kartvelian" peoples? There are neither links nor inline sources here.

"This said, the consensus of scholarly opinion is that the proto-Kartvelians (possibly to be identified with the Mushki) ..."

No inline sources for this. Further, NOR violation. Who is it who identifies the Mushki with the Kartvelians?

"...where their religious ideas would have come into contact with those of the Hattians, the Hittite empire, the Hurrians, Urartu, and the Armenians."

Says who?

"... which has left such an enduring legacy among the nations of the Caucasus."

No inline sources for something of a dubious assertion. What "enduring legacy" is there from pre-Christian/Islamic mythology that hasn't been generally worshipped for over a thousand years, and where the lead continues on to say that accounts of pagan practices are poorly preserved?

"... the highlanders of the mountain valleys in the Greater Caucasus range were converted only ten centuries later - and in a superficial way at that."

No inline sources for this. Further, NOR violation.

"It follows from this that accounts of pagan practices in the lowland Christian kingdom are poorly preserved in fragmentary form through brief passages in national chronicles and literary classics."

WP:SYNTH violation. Why does this necessary follow? Numerous cultures have preserved accounts and knowledge of their pagan religions.

It's not that the section is argumentative or (giving the benefit of the doubt) controversial. It's that it isn't encyclopedic, within Wikipedia's style, beyond the above specific violations. Ravenswing 00:44, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging of Zone Multicast Address

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Zone Multicast Address. I do not think that Zone Multicast Address fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because This is about a network concept. A7 is not in scope here. If you wish, you may try using the simple proposed deletion (PROD) process, or the full articles for deletion (AfD) process, instead. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:17, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a LOT of Paid editing in Venture Capital articles

I just tumbled into it by accident when someone used Summit as an example when I declined and speedied his AFC draft submission. AfD for one example, CSD for the other. So many of the articles are WP:ADMASQ. I shall have an occasional AfD therem I think. Fiddle Faddle 20:00, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Eh, go for it. Let's AfD early and often if that turns up. Ravenswing 02:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		This is for your valuable efforts on contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 09:29, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, thank you kindly! Ravenswing 12:53, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:Veronica Guardado

Greetings. You appear to have AfD'd the talk page rather than the article itself. I assume you can fix that? Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 23:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Did. Sorry about that; you and another editor caught that, just a mishit on my part. Ravenswing 00:30, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread link

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Hostility towards tag and prod removers from Ravenswing. Thank you. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 09:46, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

For filling your noticeboard with bickering. Boynamedsue (talk) 17:01, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MFD Tag on Draft:Dennis Michelon

You moved it to the top, which is where it belongs, but I had put it at the bottom for a reason. I had put it there on the chance that maybe that would reduce the likelihood of it being removed a fifth time. Okay. No problem. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:27, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ESPN

Thank you for helping me. But what you said to me wasn't clear. Did you mean that I could add ESPN to Wikipedia:Reliable/Perenial Sources Atlantis77177 (talk) 04:02, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• You're quite welcome. I said that I had no objection to you doing so myself, but I'm just one voice, of course. Ravenswing 05:27, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Today I learned...

I've been here on and off for thirteen years, and only today I learned the existence of the wonderful WP:BULLSHIT. Thanks for the laugh. StarM 20:48, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Heh, you're welcome. Ravenswing 03:06, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Fitzgerald (journalist)

I have posted a message at Talk:Elmer Ferguson Memorial Award, seeking input for Tom Fitzgerald (journalist). I thought you might be knowledgable on a journalist connected to the Boston Bruins. Cheers. Flibirigit (talk) 04:00, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Replied over there; thanks for asking! Ravenswing 12:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NFOOTY discussion

Regarding the Greece + Brazil discussion:

1. Only the top two tiers of Greek football are pro. The Football League Greece is pro only until 2019 - exactly when the league passed from being the 2nd division to the 3rd. Same concept for the Gamma Ethniki. While those 2 leagues currently are, respectively, the 3rd and 4th divisions, they used to be the 2nd at some point in time;
2. In Brazil state championships are a concept of their own, and cannot be directly translated to other countries' league systems. Effectively, in Brazil the top 3 divisions are pro. The state championships (e.g. Campeonato Carioca) are not comparable at all to, say, the Eccellenza in Italy. Teams in the first division of Brazil (e.g. Flamengo) play in BOTH the national division (Série A) and the state championship (Carioca).

Hope I've cleared up the issue. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 23:22, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Belarussian incidents

When you get time, recent edits at René Fasel have a strong resemblance to edits made at International Ice Hockey Federation, and need to be looked at for neutrality and relevance. Thanks in advance. Flibirigit (talk) 05:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Karina Flores draft

Dear Ravenswing, I am looking for a reviewer specialist in music to get the final approval for my draft, which was extensively reviewed and amended as requested by the previous reviewers; I will appreciate any help or suggestions. Kind regards LovingOperaForever (talk) 21:11, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you for asking me, but I just declined the new draft. To be frank, while you've made numerous tweaks to the draft since the raft of declines in January and the first week of February, it doesn't really look as if you've amended it as the previous reviewers determined. I commented extensively there, but at the least start with striking out remaining NPOV phrasing (such as "beloved country") and eliminating the Repertory and Performances sections entirely.

  Beyond that, you might enlist another editor to write the article, based on the information you've provided. I see that this draft is your sole Wikipedia activity to date, and wonder -- as no doubt other reviewers have -- whether there are WP:COI or WP:AUTO issues involved. Ravenswing 07:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ravenswing, I appreciated your comments, and I already amended the draft as you requested. I am improving daily with all the reviews comments, as I would like to write more pages on wiki about opera. Would you mind verifying if I can resubmit the draft now, please? Kind regards, LovingOperaForever (talk) 08:28, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Rawenswing, I resubmitted the draft applying what you asked. Is there any chance to get it approved now, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LovingOperaForever (talk • contribs) 08:48, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Rawenswing, regarding my experience with reviewers, I don't think it is excellent. I see different points of view every time, and it takes ages to get an answer; I was surprised by your quick response, and I hope you will continue on this path. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LovingOperaForever (talk • contribs) 13:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• And bombing us with questions is not the way around it. We are all volunteers here. We work at our own pace, putting in such time as we choose to spend on the project, and it's not outrageous for people to take the weekend off. A follow-up message was all that was necessary here. I'll look at the new draft -- when I get a chance to do so. Ravenswing 17:04, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Art Potter

Please see Talk:Art Potter and respond there. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 17:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wicked great comment

Your comment on Transformatix cracked me up. The Pru! Storyville! Passim! Psyched to cross paths and thank you, totally needed the laugh. JSFarman (talk) 01:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion

Hi. I just wanted to invite you to the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland (2nd nomination). Since you had previously participated in similar discussions, I thought you might be able to provide us with some insights regarding this article. Thank you. Keivan.f^Talk 16:16, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Fair enough, gave it. And if I might give you a bit of advice, cool your jets there a bit. Jumping in to rebut each and every Keep voter is just going to make you look strident. You've made your case, let's let it play out. Ravenswing 22:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You’re absolutely right. In fact, I had stayed quiet for a few days until a user started to target me and made me respond back. I’ll remain silent from now on, unless a person launches attacks against me again. :) Keivan.f^Talk 23:16, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question on sports notability

You appear to be very active over at WP:NSPORTS. I can't find anything regarding simply playing on a national team being an auto notability criteria for basketball players. Did I miss it? Onel5969 ^TT me 14:02, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• No, you didn't -- I just looked at the basketball criteria, and it's not there. Given the relative popularity of basketball worldwide, that's a fairly startling omission, seeing as playing on national teams is a fairly standard inclusion in the various NSPORTS criteria. I'd raise the subject on the NSPORTS talk page, honestly. Ravenswing 18:25, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks. Just raised the question there. Onel5969 ^TT me 19:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposal of PROD had been removed

Hi, just for your info - your PROD Proposal of Richard Laugs had been removed recently. CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maltese heraldry

Take a look who is listed in Maltese heraldry and this link:

https://weblog.heraldryaddict.uk/2021/05/so-called-chief-herald-shunned-by.html

• Oh my, that's rich. You'd have thought by now that Gauci/Said-Vassallo/Tancarville would've given up on his delusions and his lying cosplay, but seemingly not. Whomever you are, thank you for sharing that with me! Ravenswing 15:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maltese nobility

Hello! You deleted my recent contributions to this page, which I am editing for AfD, by citing the talk page - but I'm not seeing anything there? I have started a new discussion on the talk page. See you there, friend! Knightoften (talk) 03:44, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Answered on your own talk page! Ravenswing 03:49, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

International Ice Hockey Federation

I warn you Ravenswing. Gaining a sufficient consensus of users is not the only requisite of editing content in Wikipedia. The article is about the International Ice Hockey Federation and I have added well sourced material about said organisation. Please stop your sabotage. --Jabbi (talk) 21:15, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

You are hereby notified that I have requested arbitration --Jabbi (talk) 22:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

International Ice Hockey Federation case request declined

The case request about the International Ice Hockey Federation, which you were a party to, has been declined by the Arbitration Committee after a absolute majority of arbitrators voted to decline the case request. The case request has been removed from Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case, but a permanent link to the declined case request can be accessed here.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^talk to me | my contributions 08:03, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Playboy Playmates of 1967, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penthouse.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Man you don't miss a beat, bot. Indeed I did. Ravenswing 14:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

You have repeatedly made personal attacks against me.

1. On February 2 you accuse me of having a political agenda.
2. On May 31 you accuse me again of spreading information across as many articles as I can manage, forum shopping and filibustering

after which I clearly ask you to stick to talking about content (see here)

I am happy to defend my edits in general. Please stop making unsupported claims against me. If you have proof then you should go through the correct channels to have me topic banned.

You proceed however to accuse me yet again

3. On June 14th you accuse me yet again of editing with a political agenda. And you do not supply anything to substantiate your claims.

If you make any further such accusations I feel I have to report you. I have given you fair warning. From now on, it would be a recurring attack. You are of course free to criticise edits I have made, which I welcome. But please cease unsupported claims about me. --Jabbi (talk) 23:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Seriously? Let's take your worries one point at a time.

  "It is a matter of grave importance to Belarus, a country of ten million where there is a serious political situation."

  "this is a matter of grave importance because ice hockey is one of Lukashenka's well known pet hobbies (he built a bunch of stadiums around the 2014 tournament and has used many photo ops to show his interest), therefore this is a spotlight issue regarding his international standing."

  "The reason it is controversial is because Lukashenka is not seen to be the legitimate president of Belarus and rule by force and coercion, this was the same in 2014 and again now."

  "On a personal level, I have a strong opinion on Lukashenko."

  "IIHF's repeated collaboration with Lukashenko's regime is a controversial issue"

  There are many other such quotes from you, all absolutely indicating a political agenda. Neither Lukashenko's legitimacy, his methods of rule or the actions of his regime are issues of particular import to ice hockey.

  As to your second point, the information about these controversies have been splashed over six hockey articles that I know about. The accusation of forum shopping started from an ArbCom member, not me; you want to report him, be my guest. As far as filibustering goes? So far, on the IIHF talk page alone, you have instigated seven different sections over five months, in which the length of your rhetoric is over half again the size of the article. All these are strongly indicative of tendentious and objectionable behavior.

  You did indeed ask for talk about content alone. Unfortunately, that's not something you've stuck with yourself, and in any event I believe you're dealing in bad faith. You've ignored strong consensus against you, you tendentiously keep raising the same issue over and over, and frankly you should be topic banned ... especially since Eastern Europe-related articles and content are subject to discretionary sanctions. I have all the support I need for my words. Ravenswing 03:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RFD moved to AFD

The RFD you participated in regarding Mladost Stadium (Lučani) was transferred to AFD (where I should have sent it in the first place). Cheers Polyamorph (talk) 07:03, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sport Wikiproject

Hello @Ravenswing: thank you for responding to my message in the sports project. I have been working on a few stubs and starts in the sports project with my focus on sport science. Looking through many of the stubs and starts, I would say areas of sports science and the related professions have a higher importance to focus on when compared to stats of events that are 20+ years ago. Going through a list of 5000+ articles to find which articles to work on is tedious so I have saved the articles I want to work on on my user page, but noticed other projects have importance on articles which makes locating them much easier. (eg education project and psychology project) As sport science and sport coaching is applicable to every sport in some way, I think the sport project is the most appropriate for me to work in. I am not sure how to go about adding any sort of importance but I know it would make my editing life a little easier. DannyHatcher (talk) 11:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• To a degree, it doesn't matter. Wikipedia's entirely a volunteer effort, after all, and your best bet is to please yourself. Work in the areas you want to work, do the things you want to do, improve the articles you feel like improving, and put in as much effort as it suits you to put. And if you're around long enough for those to change, whatever works, eh?

  As far as some specifics go, consider the art of the possible. I just looked at your contributions list, and see 1897 All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship Final. Absolutely, that ought to be improved, and I see a bunch of info there that lack sources. The problem is that sporting events in the 19th century got pretty sparse coverage, and I wouldn't envy you trying to find a good source for it short of microfilm in the local Tipperary library. It would be a lot of work with no guarantee of useful payoff. Events taking place in the last few decades are much easier to source.

  Another caution is this: editing in your area of expertise. That's actually something I don't do; I've created exactly one legal article in sixteen years, on an obscure and peculiar British law. A lot of editors feel that because they're expert in this field or that (or fancy themselves to be, anyway), their work is above examination and Wikipedia policies/guidelines don't apply to them. I'm not saying "don't," especially if the umbrella topic of sports coaching has gaps in it, but tread conservatively and make sure you're using high quality sources. Ravenswing 11:40, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Hi, and thanks again for your comments. I am posting here because after the last comment it seems that ANI is not the right place for what is happening. I just noticed that User:Sainihånser has removed the Turkish names from the article on Kastellorizo too, adding a citation needed template on the remaining names (Greek , Italian, etc.). I have restored the deleted content and added the sources leaving the "citation needed" template where it is still needed. But isn't this behavior disruptive editing? Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 08:12, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Oh, it certainly is, and I expect Sainihånser will be blocked soon. Ravenswing 08:26, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Respectful disagreements

Cheers to respectful disagreements.

That's all.

-- Bob drobbs (talk) 00:22, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Yep. Obviously I disagree with you on that AfD, but I also see no reason to believe that you're a troll or an agent of destruction. (shakes his head) Ravenswing 00:42, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see shades of gray. I just put more weight towards his work counting toward his notability than you do. I don't think either of us is right or wrong.

If it does end up being deleted, I don't know what I'm going to do. I might spin off a new article for his reports/research as that does seem notable. One person did suggest that as a move. Or I might just draftify the whole thing. Much of his coverage seems to have been in the past year. A year from now, he might clearly pass if he doesn't now. -- Bob drobbs (talk) 02:00, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure to draftify it now, then; a closing admin might not give time for that. And I certainly would, in your boots. All it would take would be for a couple sources to give some salient biographical details. Ravenswing 02:58, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I already quietly tucked away a copy in a sandbox.  :-) -- Bob drobbs (talk) 03:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: You might be interested in this text which Selfstudier deleted. [2] -- Bob drobbs (talk) 23:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NSTADIUM

Hello, why did you change the redirects for NSTADIUM and NVENUE? Paul Vaurie (talk) 17:34, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas, Ravenswing! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 ^TT me 22:59, 21 December 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Roy Crewdson

Hi @Ravenswing: Fancy taking a look at Roy Crewdson. Its a similar gig to Victor Moulton. Thanks. scope_creep ^Talk 10:32, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Mm, I agree that he doesn't seem to have independent notability from the group, and I'd comment, but did you alert anyone else? I wouldn't want the AfD derailed by a WP:CANVASS situation. Ravenswing 12:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravenswing: No, I'm not into canvassing. It gets right up my hooter, its one of my life's bane, but you seem to know about these old singers. I don't really known much except its an article lacking sources and the editor who created it, is desperate to keep it in existance. scope_creep^Talk 15:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, not really; I grew up in the Sixties and Seventies, so I know the bands, but I wouldn't be able to identify the band members if I was offered a million to do so. It just doesn't take expertise in the subject area to determine if (a) the article's properly sourced, and (b) if SIGCOV exists for it. Ravenswing 16:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravenswing: So did I, but I didn't known them. Thanks for finding those other two articles. I never saw them. scope_creep^Talk 09:15, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new era

Your friend Bishzilla and all her socks wish you a happy and healthy new Jurassic era! Bishonen | tålk 08:27, 31 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Happy New Year, Ravenswing!

Happy New Year!

Ravenswing,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 12:29, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Notify

Just in case my earlier ping did not go through. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposal 1: indefinite BLP topic ban (Æthereal). Also, happy new year! starship.paint (exalt) 16:21, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I did see it, thanks; I'm not sold on a ban myself, but I don't think Æthereal's hands are clean enough to oppose it either. Therefore, silence. And a pleasant new year to you as well! Ravenswing 16:30, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]