Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:14, 19 January 2024

Draft:British Empire flag

Hello, thank you for reviewing the Draft:British Empire flag page. I have followed your suggestion to alter the lead section to be more closely related to the contents of the article. Would it be possible to review the changes made? UAmtoj (talk) 00:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, today.--AntientNestor (talk) 07:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Done. B-Class!--AntientNestor (talk) 11:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Murder of Chris Grinwis

Hello, you reviewed the draft Draft:Murder of Chris Grinwis and I had some questions for my understanding. The murder case is one of the few high-profile criminal cases once every year that is in the mainstream Dutch news and in all talkshows etc. I started reading about wp:EVENTCRITERIA and more specifically Misplaced Pages:"Murder of" articles. I have the feeling that the murder case meets the notability guidelines. The article is short, a stub, so that might make it difficult to judge. And I think the murder case meets the notability guidelines while you stated it doesn’t. However I might be wrong. Can you please help me to understand when an article is accepted. If I see the criteria Factors that are relevant to the notability of a murder include there being a large volume of news coverage beyond the local area of its occurrence (Y) and the continuation of media attention for a lengthy period of time thereafter (Y), a highly publicized investigation (Y) or trial, articles or other media coverage about the case long after the case has been closed (not yet possible), coverage on a TV series, a movie or documentary being made about the case (Y, not a television series but for instance an 8-story podcast series (and counting) by the biggest national news source NOS and Algemeen Dagblad here), a law being passed as a result of the crime, or other lasting effects. 109.37.145.81 (talk) 19:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

I have taken another look, with particular regard to the necessary criteria specified in WP:EVENTCRIT, but I still don't think that the case of Chris Grinwis meets the standard. There is no "widespread (national or international) impact" or "enduring historical significance.". Also: "Most crimesare usually not notable.". Sorry.--AntientNestor (talk) 21:08, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:1925 KLM Fokker F.III Forêt de Mormal crash

Hello, you didn’t approve the Draft:1925 KLM Fokker F.III Forêt de Mormal crash. Your only comment is to see WP:EVENTCRITERIA. I did, but I still don’t understand what is wrong with the article. Can you please tell me why it’s not meeting the criteria for an event? 109.37.132.144 (talk) 21:28, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

I left a further comment on the IP contributor's talk page, which of course you may well have not seen. It explained that that the loss of H-NABS, which I accepted, had the consequence of a requirement for radio sets; there was no such result in the crash of H-NABM. Consequence is listed as one of the points that makes an event noteworthy. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to expand on this.--AntientNestor (talk) 06:08, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Indeed I didn’t see that. I will take a close look at the article and reply there if I have comments. 109.37.132.144 (talk) 07:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

This conversation is all over the place now—user's talk pages aren't permanent if the user isn't logged in as an editor. My reply is here.--AntientNestor (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Isbell's zigzag theorem

Thank you for your comments on the draft. I add an explanation of who proved the theorem and a wiki-link about Example of non-surjective epimorphism in the category of rings to lead sentence. Also, I had User:Jengod correct (rewrite) the draft. (Thank you !) Would you check the Draft:Isbell's zigzag theorem ? SilverMatsu (talk) 04:41, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

@Silvermatsu: AfC reviewers are only required to confirm that a draft article complies with basic guidelines regarding sources, notability, absence of original research, no copyrighted material and so on; no deep understanding of the topic is called for. On that basis I will be glad to look at Draft:Isbell's zigzag theorem again during the course of today. However, as a "general reader", the piece may still be so far beyond my comprehension that I will leave it to another reviewer specializing in STEM topics to take on the job.--AntientNestor (talk) 06:55, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

The guidelines are met. It's not quite blind faith on my part as there many similar topics already accepted.--AntientNestor (talk) 17:29, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much ! --SilverMatsu (talk) 02:38, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello AntientNestor:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

DYK for Hanscotte centre-rail system

On 5 November 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hanscotte centre-rail system, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that railroad engineer Jules Hanscotte developed a system for the safe braking of heavy trains on steep gradients, but its only significant use was on tourist tramways? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hanscotte centre-rail system. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hanscotte centre-rail system), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:03, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Charles Richard Vernon Pugh (Royal Navy officer)

Hi AntientNestor, I have added as much information as I have been able to find about Pugh's association with the Royal Air Force. He seems to have been assigned to it for quite a few years, no doubt as a pilot, and the award of a Norwegian medal suggests he was involved with that campaign early in WWII, possibly while still a pilot. I have also added many other references as a result of what I believe is a pretty thorough search. May I please invite your consideration of this page's resubmission? Thank you. Scribes52 (talk) 08:26, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Cross post—already commented on user's talk page.--AntientNestor (talk) 08:28, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

@AntientNestor Hi, I've just received your latest rejection and I think this is now at the point where further effort is probably pointless. Here's what I said earlier today to the author of the previous rejection, in case you haven't come across it:

"I decided to create a page for Captain Pugh after discovering that he did not appear among those in Category:Royal Navy officers of World War II yet seemed as remarkable as many already there and more-so than some. I believe that still to be true, but understand such a view may not be held by Misplaced Pages as sufficient justification for a new page, and consequently I am discouraged from ever attempting to remedy such perceived omissions in future. Lesson learnt. With Pugh though, I have ascertained why he held ranks concurrently in both the RAF and Royal Navy and provided links to the pages where that can be substantiated, and generally tidied the page, so will make a further attempt to have the draft accepted. Thank you." Scribes52 (talk) 10:49, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Your explanation about the relationship between the nascent RAF and the FAA was interesting and new to me, but it doesn't have any bearing on Pugh's notability. There were no new references, but there was a new assumption, i.e.: "which accounts for". Assumptions aren't allowed. Sorry.--AntientNestor (talk) 12:22, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

What would you suggest for Draft:List of nuclear coercion attempts?

Should it go back to being a list like before? Or do see a potential for (some or all of) it be merged into any relevant pages, like Nuclear blackmail? I know there is something similar on the Daniel Ellsberg page (I was looking at after watching "The Post" recently), so maybe something along those lines? Historyday01 (talk) 20:44, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

I did see that the piece had been changed from a WP:LIST to a prose passage. This turned it into an WP:ESSAY, rather than an article structured as specified in Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Layout. The bigger problem seems to be that the incidents you list tend to support the premise that there are "many attempts by countries to engage in coercive diplomacy", but a source specifically stating this needs to be quoted. See WP:RSOPINION for more. AntientNestor (talk) 22:07, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Right. I didn't write the article though, but I'd be willing to improve it so it is better, and isn't an essay. Historyday01 (talk) 02:55, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

That had confused me; I didn't noticed straightaway that you weren't Flurrious. I'm watching the page and I'll certainly look at it again when you're done, but it may better if another reviewer has a go wth a second opinion—the backlog of unreviewed articles is very low at the moment so there wouldn't be another long wait.--AntientNestor (talk) 07:55, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2023

• In the media: Propaganda and photos, lunatics and a lunar backup

• News and notes: Update on Wikimedia's financial health

• Traffic report: If it bleeds, it leads

• Recent research: Canceling disputes as the real function of ArbCom

• Wikimania: Wikimania 2024 scholarships

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

• News and notes: Beeblebrox ejected from Arbitration Committee following posts on Wikipediocracy

• In the media: Turmoil on Hebrew Misplaced Pages, grave dancing, Olga's impact and inspiring Bhutanese nuns

• Disinformation report: "Misplaced Pages and the assault on history"

• In focus: Tens of thousands of freely available sources flagged

• Comix: Bold comics for a new age

• Essay: I am going to die

• Featured content: Real gangsters move in silence

• Traffic report: And it's hard to watch some cricket, in the cold November Rain

• Humour: Mandy Rice-Davies Applies

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, AntientNestor. Thank you for your work on Laverstock ware. Storye book, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for uploading this interesting article. It has been reviewed and shows no issues.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Storye book}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Storye book (talk) 17:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Laverstock ware

You may have noticed that I have added a citation with an over-long quote in it. I accept that you might feel that the length of the quotation is overwhelming, but I thought that at least you might want to know what is in the citation. The date 1958 means that the quote is not yet out of copyright, but - should you wish - you could perhaps rephrase any useful bits, and include that in the article with the citation, then delete the over-long quote from the citation. Or you could put the quote on the talk page with its source - out of the way but still maybe useful. Up to you. Hope that helps. Storye book (talk) 18:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I had a PAYG account on that site, but my credits timed out before I could use them! What I'm looking for right now is a ref that would pass WP:DYK, preferably incorporating the stuff's usefulness in modern archaeology. If The Sphere piece would do that, I'd renew and get full access. Thanks.--AntientNestor (talk) 21:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Genes Reunited used to give access to the same newspaper collection - maybe it still does. If so, the subscription may be less than the BNA sub. Also, when you get a new reader card (or renew it) from the British Library, you get about 3 months free access to the BNA website, if I remember rightly - again, worth checking. If you are a member of your nearest large public library (e.g. a city library), you may be able to get free online access via your library card to the BNA and other research items. It's worth checking out. You shouldn't need to live in the same city as the library, to obtain its library card. I use a library card from a city 20+ miles away from me, to access Who's Who etc. Although I must admit, that since my research means that I'm using the BNA website almost daily, I prefer to pay the ridiculously high sub, because the search facility is better there than via all the other options. Hope that helps.

Re DYK - I believe the article would pass DYK, but I can't comment on a hook that I haven't seen. Meanwhile, the article in The Sphere only discusses what they found in the trenches in that particular dig. It does not comment on principles such as "usefulness in modern archaeology". I was unable to find any more articles on Laverstock ware in the BNA - probably because it does not have many microfilm photos of newspapers after World War I, and the first dig was 1940. Have you joined The Misplaced Pages Library? There surely must be a journal article or two about Laverstock ware? Storye book (talk) 08:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I'll go through the ref you provided and probably trim it, as you suggest—Musty et al covers the excavation comprehensively, apart from the pictures. I only started to pay for BNA when cuts at my local library stopped access (and a lot of other resources as well), so I'm not hopeful there. --AntientNestor (talk) 10:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Good idea. I only included such a long quote because I thought you would want to know what was in it, but now you've seen it, it can go. Re the library - don't forget, you can probably join another city library, wherever you actually live in the UK - it's worth checking. Also, I believe the Gale organisation has access to the BNA, maybe for free, within the Misplaced Pages Library. Worth a punt? Storye book (talk) 18:24, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I'll get on with this over the next couple of days. Gale's coverage of the London Times is complete but for UK provincial papers it's very patchy and only goes back for forty years—disappointing after the BNA. My local public library requires that you turn up from time-to-time and borrow a book, or else your card lapses—I wouldn't want to have to travel too far! All the best.--AntientNestor (talk) 22:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for all your research and suggestions.--AntientNestor (talk) 17:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

That's a nice article, now. I look forward to seeing it at DYK. Even if you're not quite ready, it's worth bagsying the date before you miss the 7-day deadline. It is permissible to then say on the DYK template that it will be ready for review shortly. I have been thinking that at some time in the (distant?) future, how nice it would be to get someone to visit the Brit Mus archive and photograph the jug for WP. Here's hoping. Storye book (talk) 19:07, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I didn't know you could do that with DYK. Watch this space, and thanks again.--AntientNestor (talk) 21:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

• Special report: Did the Chinese Communist Party send astroturfers to sabotage a hacktivist's Misplaced Pages article?

• News and notes: The Italian Public Domain wars continue, Wikimedia RU set to dissolve, and a recap of WLM 2023

• In the media: Consider the humble fork

• Discussion report: Arabic Misplaced Pages blackout; Wikimedians discuss SpongeBob, copyrights, and AI

• In focus: Liquidation of Wikimedia RU

• Technology report: Dark mode is coming

• Recent research: "LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less" with Wikidata

• Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols

• Comix: Lollus lmaois 200C tincture

• Crossword: when the crossword is sus

• Traffic report: What's the big deal? I'm an animal!

• From the editor: A piccy iz worth OVAR 9000!!!11oneone! wordz ^_^

• Apocrypha: Local editor discovered 1,380 lost subheadings in ancient Signpost scrolls. And what he found was shocking.

• Humour: Guess the joke contest

• BJAODN: Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

• From the editor: NINETEEN MORE YEARS! NINETEEN MORE YEARS!

• Special report: Public Domain Day 2024

• Technology report: Misplaced Pages: A Multigenerational Pursuit

• News and notes: In other news ... see ya in court!

• In focus: The long road of a featured article candidate

• In the media: What is plagiarism? Oklahoma Disneyland? Reaching a human being at Misplaced Pages?

• WikiProject report: WikiProjects Israel and Palestine

• Obituary: Anthony Bradbury

• Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2023

• Crossword: everybody gangsta till the style sheets start cascading

• Comix: Conflict resolution

Stanton Williams projects

Hi AntientNestor. You've contacted me about changes I've recently made to pages regarding projects by the architectural firm Stanton Williams. Would you be able to explain your concerns further to me so I can make sure there aren’t any problems?

When I have made the edits, I stated (with the exception of the very first few before I received your first message) that I am doing the changes on behalf of Stanton Williams. Is that sufficient information, or should I also spell out that they are paying me to do this?

The changes are to add factual information - ie crediting them for their work on making the building in question what it is today.  Is this allowable? Please let me know if you can suggest how I should rephrase any additions to the pages that you feel are problematic. Any advice would be very welcome.

Thank you

PJaneB (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

There's a specific template you could use on the talk pages of the relevant articles: {{Connected contributor}}. You also need to make a declaration on your own talk page. Full instructions here. AntientNestor (talk) 22:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC)