Misplaced Pages

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:04, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Relist suggestion

I would suggest that this AfD you closed be relisted. I'm still considering the matter, and only one other editor has reacted to the AfD request.--Epeefleche (talk) 13:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I closed this as "redirect" because there was strength in the arguments put by both User:Bearcat and User:Stalwart111 that the article fails WP:POLITICIAN in that its subject:

• Does not hold/has not held international, national or statewide office;
• Has not (yet) been the subject of in depth, independent coverage in multiple news feature articles, sufficient to become "part of the enduring historical record" in his profession; and
• Is not, as a candidate for office rather than an office-holder, inherently notable for this activity alone.

As the result was "Redirect" rather than "delete," the contents of the article remain available if/when Kallos wins the election next month and can be reassessed against WP:POLITICIAN.

I note the article has been open at AfD for 11 days and was flagged 9 days ago at the two most closely-related Wikiprojects, both of which have substantial memberships. This seemed a reasonable period within which editors might offer additional opinions or otherwise amend the article to make additional claims for notability. I agree with your comment that even if Kallos is presently non-notable as a candidate for office, he might be notable for other reasons and therefore eligible for an article. But having reviewed the discussion and the article refs, there was validity in Stalwart111's view that there was not enough here for this article to otherwise pass the general notability guideline. And lastly, though WP:RELIST provides the options for relisting articles if there is insufficient discussion, in my experience it is most usefully applied where there has no policy discussion. This is not the case here. WP:NOQUORUM also provides options in cases where there has been limited participation.

The short version: I don't particularly agree with you. But (and it's a fair "but") for all the arguments above, it does no harm to get some additional eyes. So -  Done. Relisted as requested, and good luck with your consideration of the article. :) Euryalus (talk) 15:30, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks. I appreciate your flexibility. As noted -- I haven't even !voted as of yet, as I am mulling it over. But I don't see it as a slam dunk at all. Much of the rationale was creaky, and only one editor (other than me) reacted to the AfD suggestion, and it seems appropriate under the circumstances to obtain other views. And, though the merits are secondary issues, wp:politician does not trump GNG, and furthermore the suggestion that precedent is compelling is belied by the fact that we don't rely on precedent (as distinct from courts of law), and that in any event the AfD pointed to here was all over the place, and certainly not one of overwhelming consensus. Bottom line: I appreciate your relisting it. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:37, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Any time. I reckon the close was correct but further discussion is always worthwhile. Euryalus (talk) 00:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Happily, further discussion led to a different result that reflected additional input. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

The House on the Lake

Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marknewton1 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi. On the basis of the arguments put at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The house on the lake, relating to notability. But if you'd like to have this close reviewed, please feel free to list it at Deletion Review and get another opinion. - Euryalus (talk) 00:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

,

Disambiguation link notification for October 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prince of Wales (ship), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Batavia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for HMS Flamborough (1707)

On 11 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Flamborough (1707), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that HMS Flamborough was the first Royal Navy vessel to be stationed off the British colony of South Carolina? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Flamborough (1707). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

That record company

I understand the note on the creating editor's page, however the circumstances in which it was created render it to be promotional of his business activities. Fiddle Faddle 10:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Very likely, yes. I suppose it is possible that there might be a viable non-promotional article on this company one day, provided there were proper sources. It is very unlikely it could be written by User:Pewny given the COI and the self-confessed promotional activity since that account was created. But on the chance that this is a potential genuine editor, now looking for a way to move to more productive areas while tinkering idly in a sandbox on a pet article they could one day send off for review by others and eventual posting by someone less conflicted ... Euryalus (talk) 11:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I also suppose it could be, but on a day without the letter Y in it, and in a month with fewer than 28 days. But it 'amuses' me that his first act after being unblocked was to create, yet again, an article on his own business. Fiddle Faddle 11:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

As someone once said, AGF is not a suicide pact. :) Euryalus (talk) 11:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Love it! I assumed it and even supported an unblock! I have a belief that, up to a certain point, anything can be redeemed. In the words of a US President, "Fool me once, and I have forgotten the rest, so I'll bluster for a bit!". Looking at the German Misplaced Pages, the same pattern of self promotion exists there. Of course their rules may be different. And I don't do German in any more than cursory detail. I can order a bar in a beer because I have trouble with their word order. Fiddle Faddle 11:14, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Well that's that then. Euryalus (talk) 12:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

I am waiting for the first sock to fall. That would be the second shoe dropping. Fiddle Faddle 12:15, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Euryalus

Hello, I've corrected the article Maxim Slipchenko and would like to add it again. Can this be done?Fightmaximus (talk) 06:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, and sure it can! Provided of course your new version overcomes the notability issue that led to the deletion of the previous one. The deleted article failed Misplaced Pages's general notability guideline, and also claimed titles for Slipchenko that it was not apparent he actually held. If you've got a new version which addresses these problems then you're welcome to present the case for its reinclusion in the encyclopedia.

Could I make a suggestion though - given the article has already been deleted (twice), it would be best to present your revised version as an article for creation rather than simply creating it as a standalone encyclopedia article. That way it can be reviewed by an independent third party before it reappears in the encyclopedia, and is much more likely to survive its restoration and not be re-deleted. And if there's anything that needs adding to the article before its ready for mainspace, the "article for creation" process will help make that clear.

Hope this helps. I can also flick you a copy of the most recently deleted article in case there's anything in it that might be useful for the new one. But please don't simply resubmit this deleted version - it will certainly get deleted a third time if you do. Euryalus (talk) 11:45, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

• -sigh- I notice that you simply recreated the article without addressing the notability issue or even significantly amending the text. I have deleted it again, as it is a recreation of an article deleted via a deletion discussion - see Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Maxim Slipchenko. Please don't recreate this article again without addressing the notability issue and providing actual references to support your claim. General links to muaythai club homepages are not sufficient, you need sources that reference specific claims that Maxim Slipchenko is notable enough for an article. Euryalus (talk) 11:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the closed discussion

Sir , the discussion was not yet over. Let it remain open for at lease 24 hours so that other admins can express there views. And i don't think that there is any norm on Misplaced Pages which says that i can't put up a matter for discussion , if i was not the victim . Please , this is a serious concern . You should open the discussion once again . I'll appreciate that move . Please do so. 122.163.226.164 (talk) 11:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for the talkpage message.

It seems like you are not objecting to any specific incident, but making a general comment about another user's conduct. Misplaced Pages has a system to resolve these issues, which is outlined at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct. But the first step would be to try to resolve your differences on article talk pages, or with the editor directly:

• If the dispute is over a particular article, you could try explaining the issues on the article talk page and seeing what the consensus of other editors might be. Or if you and they are the only people working on that article, you could ask for a third opinion from someone uninvolved and likely to bring an independent view. or you might try the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard.

• If the dispute is over the editor's conduct rather than their contributions, you could raise the issue with them on their talk page and ask that they bear your concerns in mind. If there's a specific concern, relating to you (ie not some other editor), and it really needs immediate action, you might then go to WP:ANI or somewhere similar. Or,. Misplaced Pages being a big place, you might find it worthwhile simply moving to a different set of articles and not interacting with the editor you're in dispute with. If they're really engaged in repeated edit wars, incivility, disruption etc, it will be dealt with soon enough.

The short version is, I suppose, that the first step in dealing with conflicts between editors is for the editors to try and resolve it themselves, and that admin intervention is unlikely unless there's evidence this has occurred in good faith but nonetheless failed. My best suggestion would be to simply not interact with the person you're in dispute with, and if there's article issues to raise them on the article talk page instead of going back to AN/I. Hope this is helpful. Happy to discuss further. Euryalus (talk) 12:19, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

John White (surgeon) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to White Bay

Prince of Wales (ship) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John White

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Euryalus

Hi, I want add my article - Maxim Slipchenko. Why you deleted my article? Help me add, please.Fightmaximus (talk) 11:14, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Per the conversation above, it's a near-exact recreation of the article deleted at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Maxim Slipchenko. You need a claim to notability, and you need reliable sources to support that claim. In their continued absence the article will keep getting deleted. Euryalus (talk) 11:23, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Euryalus

I add extra links and Maxim Slipchenko real person, him legend in Muay Thai, look this Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/maks.slipchenko, this site: http://slipchenko.com.ua/, this links youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dJ0-1tVMP4 - him 3 time World champion, this him TV show - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qv0HfV3OFzQ. Why you deleted? What information your need? Maxim Slipchenko legend in Muay Thai. Him author application, this app downloaded in 100 countries - https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/thai-boxing-for-you-free-edition/id440322259?mt=8. Help my please add this article. Thanx. Fightmaximus (talk) 11:36, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, sorry for the slight delay in replying. Some comments on these links:

• The Facebook page and personal website aren't reliable sources because they are both self-published. For an article on a person to meet the notability criteria they need to have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources - that is, other people need to have written or reported on them.
• The youtube link of Slipchenko fighting might be worth including, but I couldn't find it in any version of the article.
• The TV show link is worth including, but it was already in the version that was deleted via the Deletion discussion, and so was considered by other editors when reaching a consensus to delete the page. Clearly this alone is not sufficient to support the notability of this article.
• The iTunes app is not relevant to the claim for notability - the article doesn't suggest Slipchenko is notable for his ITunes app but for his boxing.

So we're back where we started. If you think the original deletion decision was wrong, there's a page called deletion review where you can present the case for the article to be restored. If instead you have additional material (ie, not just the TV show or self-published sources) then feel free to create another version of the article. But so that your work doesn't get unexpectedly deleted again, I suggest you create it somewhere like User:Fightmaximus/sandbox and get some other editor's opinions on its notability. The WikiProject on boxing would be a good place to find some. And if with the benefit of these opinions the article is considered notable enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia, it can easily be moved from the sandbox to the main article space. Euryalus (talk) 04:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Prince of Wales

I enjoyed this article very much. It gives a good picture of the events involving a single ship of the First Fleet. I have sorted out the caption to the picture and want to make a few points.

The book The Voyage of Governor Philip" was printed by publisher John Stockdale who didn't get the material until late May 1789, and had it illustrated and printed by November that year. It appears that there must have been some drawings and watercolours sent as illustrations, along with the maps and charts. What the illustrations were, and who did them, and where they are now I don't know. Phillip drew maps and charts, but he wasn't an artist.

Lieutenant Bradley drew scenes of the settlement. His pictures are very amateurish. However, in the hands of an accomplished illustrator and engraver, like those who made the engraved plates to print the book, well-drawn images, like the ones in the book could have been produced. It is thought that perhaps Bradley produced some of the works from memory after his return to England in 1780, so this would rule them out as a source. On the other hand, while the body of his work is now at the Mitchell Library, some is located in the Natural History Museum in London. This may indicate that he sent pictures back to UK with Shortland.

Two minor points:

• Please don't call any highly detailed picture a sketch. An artwork is only a "sketch" if it looks sketchy. A detailed drawing isn't a sketch. In this case the work is a print from an engraving made into a copper plate.
• Minor niggle. I hate the (Americanised) use of the word "likely" as an adverb as in "It was likely by Phillip" If you are going to use "likely" then it is an adjective and the correct form is "It is likely that it was by Phillip", which is circuitous. It is much easier to use one or other of the two more-descriptive adverbs available "probably" and "possibly". "Likely" is the same part of speech as "probable" and "possible", regardless of the "ly" on the end. The test is whether or not you can change the word for "lovely". "It was lovely by Phillip" doesn't work. "It was lovely that it was by Phillip" does.

Amandajm (talk) 02:01, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

It might have been lovely by Phillip, except as you correctly point out, it wasn't. Thanks for your edits to the article, especially the shortening of the Long Sentence from Hell. For some reason my sentence structure was off for most of it, so your improvements were very welcome. Agree on "sketch", not sure I agree on "likely" but I won't die in a ditch over it. :) Euryalus (talk) 10:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Invitation

Hi Euryalus,

I reviewed your article on the ship Prince of Wales and wanted to say congratulations on the article. I don't know where you live, but you seem to be someone who would be interested in the collections in the Mitchell Library which is the venue for a backstage pass and editathon on 23 November. The State Library is offering us Wikipedians access to some of the original materials in their collection. We are having a WWI editathon afterwards. This is the first time that an Australian cultural institution has opened its doors to us in this way and will be a great opportunity because the Library is providing: one of its best rooms; its expert curators (along with their expertise and their white gloves); a newly launched website (containing new resources); and of course, items from its collection (including rare and usually unavailable material) which we can look at, learn from, and use, to improve WP articles. For example, on the chosen topic (Australia and WWI), the Library holds many diaries and manuscripts from the period.

It should be an interesting event, so if you live anywhere nearby please come. Or if not, perhaps you could participate in the editathon online. As you can see from the Library's project page, they have connected this editathon with their own work. They have already set out a wide range of resources to make things easier for us. Please sign up on the editathon project page if you would like to participate. Hope to see you there! Whiteghost.ink (talk) 07:36, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Prince of Wales (ship)

On 23 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Prince of Wales (ship), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 1788, the convict ship Prince of Wales drifted helplessly off Rio de Janeiro for a day, because her crew were too ill to bring her into port? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Prince of Wales (ship). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 08:03, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Interesting read! Well done with it. Now imagining bugs and rats, ugh... Ruby 2010/2013 16:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that's very kind. She wasn't as bad as her fellow transport Alexander of which the Fleet surgeon said:

"The illness complained of was wholly occasioned by the bilge water which had by some means or other risen to so great a height that the panels of the cabin and the buttons on the clothes of the officers were turned nearly black by the noxious effluvia. When the hatches were taken off the stench was so powerful it was scarcely possible to stand over them." Euryalus (talk) 19:03, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Botany Bay

Hi, I wondered if you were local to Botany Bay area and if so if you were interested in Laperouse? --Botanybay1788 (talk) 08:05, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCI, October 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks Austro-Hungarian battleships of World War I Op-ed: Advice on reviewing Featured and A-Class articles

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)