User talk:Neelix/Archive 18

I will try to review it this weekend. Cheers. --Niwi3 (talk) 00:34, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Neelix, thank you for your hard work on this but you may not be fully aware of the scope of Soviet divisions in general.

This :ru:Шаблон:Стрелковые дивизии СССР is the list of Soviet infantry divisions only, for the Second World War only.

An approximate count would be five hundred regular rifle divisions, many formed twice or thrice during the war

(or up to four times), a hundred and third odd Guards Rifle divisions, a hundred cavalry divisions, at least fifty artillery divisions, and dozens of anti-aircraft divisions etc. Then there are the two hundred motor rifle divisions, fifty-sixty tank divisions, maybe fifteen artillery divisions, fifty plus mechanised divisions, twenty or thirty Strategic Rocket Forces divisions, and sundry others postwar. This excludes Aviation Division which has a list of two hundred or so air divisions. Take a look at List of Soviet Union divisions for a semi-complete list of Second World War divisions only. Thus would you mind considering taking down your list until at least some of the redlinks are installed? Kind regards and many thanks, Buckshot06 (talk) 02:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

:Secondly, would you mind explaining why you merged the 1989-91 divisions with the list of divisions circa 1917-1957? There are, for example, two completely different sets of tank divisions, with different organisational inspirations (the theorising of the 1930s and the actual experience of the Great Patriotic War/Second World War), not to mention a enormous amount of additional information to be added to the subpages. If you wish to make major changes to this type of specialist page, would you kindly please at least check with WP:MILHIST where those who have expertise on this type of thing gather on wikipedia?

Regards Buckshot06 (talk) 02:25, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

::On your first point, there is, in my view, no need for a navbox at all. The category system works just fine. The enormous size of the navboxes generated are merely confirmation in my view that we should stick to categories - none of them are orphans simply because they don't have navboxes. They're linked by the references in each article, primarily, to the armies, corps, and operational groups that supervised them (for the World War II articles) and the myriad of other internal links.

::Secondly, the reason that articles dealing with large subjects are sub-divided is because of our WP:SIZE article subdivisions. This is why List of infantry divisions of the Soviet Union 1917-1957 exists: because we split it from the original List of Soviet Union divisions. The 'sub' articles that we're discussing are all well above the 70-100kB split size that is normally utilised. In addition, I'm interested in your use of the term 'unencyclopedic': would you like to kindly explain on what basis you make this judgement? Buckshot06 (talk) 06:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

::Thirdly, would you also mind explaining why you removed the *vital* source data explanation at the top of the 1989-91 divisions list? It's impossible to do proper further research to expand and place the data on a more sound footing of verificable scholarly sources if you remove the source notes !! Buckshot06 (talk) 06:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

::Fourthly, if you want a mainlink for a template covering World War II, that was what 'List of Soviet divisions 1917-1957' was intended to do: that *covers* that historical period until the next major evolution in Soviet Ground Forces' force structure!! Buckshot06 (talk) 06:22, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Neelix, I am having problems with my Watchlist and notification set up. Up until last Sunday I was receiving email notifications anytime a change was made to any article on my Watchlist. This past week I have been checking my email daily, but saw not Wiki notifications for article changes. Due to other work, I haven't had much time to work on Wikipedia until night. I went into my Watchlist and found out that a great deal of changes had been made to several articles on my Watchlist, yet I did not receive any notifications of these changes. I have already checked my settings on Wikipedia and nothing has been changed. When I have a few minutes free at work, I try to check my school email, mostly to see if there are any Wiki changes. I don't usually have time until I get home to go on Wikipedia itself. As such, these notifications are really important and have been a great reminder system up until now. Please advise!!!! Thanks,Madscientist2007 (talk) 02:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Neelix, I have another question for you. This time it has to do with a formatting change that was proposed by one of my classmates. The same classmate then wrote back later with a concern regarding his proposed changed and suggested that I contact an OA. Please see below:

Here is the idea: When the article opens up, most of what I see is a super long "contents box" that kind of overwhelms me. And, as I scroll through the article, I hit the major sections, sub-sections, and sub-sub-sections and I can't really tell what is a "sub-section" and what is a "sub-sub-section". (If I look real close, I can see that the font size is very slightly smaller, but it is hard to tell.) So, one idea is the make the sub-sub-sections just "indented bullets". This will help to visually separate sub-sections from sub-sub-sections and also will take the sub-sub-sections out of the contents box (making it much shorter). To illustrate this, I did a copy/paste of part of your article into my "sandbox3". Click this link to get to it: Jim892/sandbox3 Good luck thinking through this. Note that I replaced the sub-sub-sections (that have 4 equal signs on each side) with a "*" at the beginning of the line and then bolded the sub-sub-section text. Then, I added two ":" at the beginning of each block of text below the sub-sub-section. The editing required to do the indenting is a little tedious, but might be worth it for the visual effect.

Here is the concern:You are correct. The "TOC limit" just changes what displays in the Contents Box. You can do the "TOC limit" and the indenting/bulleting together or do just one and not the other. They won't interfere with each other. Now, one concern I have about my own suggestion on the indenting and bulleting... You might want to check with an Online Volunteer concerning my approach to be sure it doesn't violate Wikipedia's style guidelines or something. I got a comment on my own article about "bolding" items in a list, so I'd hate for you to do all that work and then find out it isn't "legal" to do it that way.

I like the idea that he put together in his sandbox (Jim892/sandbox3). I think that it would help enhance my group's article (Molecular-weight size marker). However, I do not want to go through and make the changes only to find out that it is against Wikipedia guidelines, especially since my class is coming to a close on 12/14. Any advice/suggestions/feedback would be appreciated. Thanks,Madscientist2007 (talk) 17:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and sorry I didn't come to your talk page in the first place. I think my point was that although the hatnote may be discouraged by WP:NAMB, the object of the exercise is to help the reader. If a reader is looking for one of the 1880s footballers via the dropdown search, they might well guess, but end up at the wrong one. Without the hatnote, we're not giving them any help in finding the one they're really looking for. OK, they can guess that typing just Joe Smith into the search box might work, but with the hatnote, we're giving them an obvious link to the dab page where the description should get then to the right one. Anyway, that's something we can disagree on, and I'm not ready for an edit war about it.

But I really wish you hadn't renamed them all contrary to the relevant naming conventions. By WP:NCSP#Association football (soccer), footballers of similar names are dabbed by nationality, or if that doesn't work, by birth year. Using middle names runs counter to the advice at WP:NCP#Middle names and initials against doing so just for disambiguation, and removing (footballer) from the article title makes it impossible for the reader using the search box to even spot the footballers. I realise you've got far more experience than I have in working with disambiguations, but the logic of renaming the correctly titled (per NCSP) Joe Smith (footballer born 1886) to Joseph Edward Smith, apparently for reasons of length of disambiguator, and renaming one of the 1889 births with vital years and the other with middle name, escapes me. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 21:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

:Thanks for your note. How best to disambiguate the 1889 pair was raised by another editor at WT:FOOTY#Joe Smith (footballer, 1889–1971), and I should apologise again, for not linking you to that discussion when I replied in it earlier today (I was off-wiki all day yesterday). I suggested an alternative at that discussion, of including the playing position: (football forward, born 1889) and (football halfback, born 1889). As to the hatnotes, I'm not comfortable with removing them: WP:NAMB doesn't unambiguously support their removal, and in messy circumstances like the many Joe Smiths, they do help the reader by clearly pointing out how to find their desired target. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 20:24, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

This is a note to let the main editors of Nefarious: Merchant of Souls know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 17, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask {{user|Bencherlite}}. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 17, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

{{TFAIMAGE|Laila Mickelwait speaking.jpg|Laila Mickelwait}}

Nefarious: Merchant of Souls is a 2011 American documentary film about modern human trafficking, specifically sexual slavery. Presented from a Christian worldview, Nefarious covers human trafficking in the United States, Western and Eastern Europe, and Southeast Asia, alternating interviews with re-enactments. Nefarious was written, directed, produced and narrated by Benjamin Nolot, founder and president of Exodus Cry, the film's distributor. Nolot travelled to 19 countries to collect the film's content. Interviewees in the film include Agape International Missions founder Don Brewster, former prostitute Annie Lobert, and Swedish Detective Superintendent Kajsa Wahlberg. Laila Mickelwait (pictured), Exodus Cry's Director of Awareness and Prevention, screened the film in several countries in an attempt to persuade governments to make laws similar to Sweden's Sex Purchase Act, which criminalizes the purchasing rather than the selling of sex. Nefarious has won a variety of film awards, including the Honolulu Film Award for Best Screenplay, the Urban Mediamakers Film Festival Best Documentary Feature Award, and the Indie Fest Feature Documentary Award of Excellence. {{TFAFULL|Nefarious: Merchant of Souls}}

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

{{clear}}

• Congratulations David! And well done. You are doing a really great thing by raising awareness of this issue. I hope you're enjoying your weekend —Cliftonian (talk) 15:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this [https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_23JuoVF5e7dgDl3 brief survey.] Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

{{GOCEtb|article=National Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking|sign=Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC)}}

Your upload of :File:Addams.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:23, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, :File:Alan Alda (handprints and signature in cement).jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:37, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, :File:Allyson.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:40, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, :File:Amanda Falk performing at YC Newfoundland in 2009.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:48, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, :File:Andrews.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, :File:Bethany Dillon.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, :File:BobHope.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:52, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, :File:Burns.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:54, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I've reverted your recent edit to the above article since these things have already been discussed at the FLC. some similar lists are: List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Allan Donald, List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Kapil Dev and List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by B. S. Chandrasekhar. Regards, Zia Khan 04:11, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

:A right-arm fast bowler who represented his country between 1989 to 2003, the BBC described Waqar as "one of the most feared fast bowlers in recent cricketing history",[5] while former Pakistan captain Imran Khan said that Waqar was "a thinking cricketer and, at his peak, he was the most destructive bowler the game had seen".[6] was the part of the articleat the time of discussion at FLC ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_international_cricket_five-wicket_hauls_by_Waqar_Younis&oldid=485646558 see this version]). The cricket almanack Wisden noted his "pace and swing", and named him one of their Cricketers of the Year in 1992.[7] Waqar was inducted into the ICC Hall of Fame on 9 December 2013.[8][9] were added later which are normally part of almost every article (List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Dennis Lillee, List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Curtly Ambrose and the above mentioned). Zia Khan 11:49, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

::The second thing is the blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/December 30, 2013. I've only added the last sentence the (He was inducted into the ICC Hall of Fame in December 2013). This blurb was selected for the main page in May 2012 but the administrators deleted the whole data per discussion and the rest you know! Zia Khan 12:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

:::I've responded to your concerns at my talk page, please have a look. Regards, Zia Khan 17:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Neelix! This is the last day for my molecular class at Johns Hopkins and I just wanted to say thank you for your help as an online ambassador with our on-going Wiki project! Your suggestions and peer reviews were very useful and provided the guidance we needed to transform our stub article. Again, thanks for your help! Juanquina Thomas (talk) 03:03, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article List of Spy Fox characters has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

:In-universe fancruft

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 11:50, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Wow, congrats on another FA and Main Page appearance! I made a few minor edits to the article, mostly relating to the portals and image sizes. I hope my edits are okay. Keep up the great work! --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

:Congratulations also from me. Great to see this highlighted. Really jolly good show. —Cliftonian (talk) 18:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Spy Fox characters until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Frank Jenner you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 20px This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- {{User-multi

|doc=yes

|User=Quadell

|1=t

}} 16:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The article Frank Jenner you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 20px. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Frank Jenner for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- {{User-multi

|doc=yes

|User=Quadell

|1=t

}} 23:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The article Frank Jenner you nominated as a good article has passed 20px; see Talk:Frank Jenner for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- {{User-multi

|doc=yes

|User=Quadell

|1=t

}} 14:32, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

If you have a little spare time, I'd be glad for some comments and suggestions for improvement for my current FAC,

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey/archive1. Thanks in advance.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Greetings, nice to meet a wikipedian interested in GLAM. Almost simultaneously, I left a message on Nikkimaria's page. As you are interested in outreach on linguistics, I think you would be more appropriate for my contact. For starters, where shall one go for information, FAQs, tips and advices ? Shall I talk with Wikipedia:GLAM/Connect#Online_Volunteers first ? --- Ktsquare (talk) 03:57, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

P.S. Obviously Wikipedia:GLAM/About provides a page of overview but is something going on for W:GLAM in Canada ? -- Ktsquare (talk) 04:05, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

100px FWiW Bzuk (talk) 20:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jet Black Stones until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DBaK (talk) 23:23, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

:Comment - looks like a bad notification based on an old redirect. If so please ignore. I will notify the other editor. Thanks DBaK (talk) 23:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, thank you for the address which I could not find. This is an excellent example for why the city of Las Vegas is not the primary use of Las Vegas. According to the county assessors office, that address, are you ready for this, is actually in Henderson, Nevada which is a totally different city. Another clear cut case where Las Vegas is used to describe anything in the entire valley. So while Las Vegas Valley is accurate, it is not the most precise, but clearly it is not wrong like saying it is in the city of Las Vegas is! Vegaswikian (talk) 23:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Someone has recreated the Miss Asia Pacific World 2012 pageant and the other articles of the same subject that your merged per consensus in an AfD. --BabbaQ (talk) 13:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

:They are now trying to evade notice by creating the articles as Miss Asia Pacific World Super Talent 2013 etc.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

::Also I wouldnt be surprised if user Lemontee33 who created and expanded them are a pageant official as he edits several articles concerning the pageant with biased information.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

:::Miss Asia Pacific World 2014 also needs merger. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)