User talk:scope creep#top

{{User QAIbox

| image = Ehrenbach icicles.jpg

| image_upright = 1.3

| bold = story · music · places

}}

Happy new year 2025, opened with trumpet fanfares that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page had it). My story today is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

::Happy New Year {{ping|Gerda Arendt|label=Gerda}}. I hope you have a great and successful New Year!! Tom Johnson, "Nine Bells". I've not heard that. I really like that abstract/minimalist stuff, Its very peaceful but don't like the footsteps. I wonder if they are meant to be part of it, the movement itself is part of the piece. I was listening to Hymm, Mixmaster Morris, Pete Namlook this morning. I keep listening to this, "The real dream of sails" by Harold Budd and Steve Reich and Clair Chase (together) now and again e.g. "Vermont Counterpoint". The seem to collaborate with Phillip Glass now and again, who i've been listening too since my 20's. It seems chaotic but it is intensely ordered, or possibly chaos into order. scope_creep^Talk 15:00, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

::: I just love that last sentence! - Today a violinist from Turkey, Ayla Erduran, whom you can watch playing Schubert chamber music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

::: Today, pictured on the Main page, Tosca, in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author Brian Boulton. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:19, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

::: Today I had a composer (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with another who just became GA, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:32, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::Hi {{Ping|Hey man im josh}} Are you sure its as high as that. I don't feel as though I did that much. scope_creep^Talk 18:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

:::That's what the [https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/79199 quarry query] we use tells us. A little bit here and there goes a long way! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

::::Must be, certainly doesn't feel like it. scope_creep^Talk 18:19, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Hans Globke contains "Gale, Cengage Learning". I think that is a mistake, but I am not sure how to fix it. It is possibly Gale (publisher). Polygnotus (talk) 11:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Polygnotus}} That seems to be ok. Its Gale, which is part of Cengage Learning. I fixed an error in the references early. It looks odd. I'll make it make it Gale since its recognised. A bit of branding crept in from worldcat. scope_creep^Talk 12:00, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Woah that is the worst brand name ever. Polygnotus (talk) 12:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

::::Yea, I don't even know pronounce it properly. scope_creep^Talk 12:06, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello mate, there's an ongoing discussion about album reissues and remixes at WikiProject Music. Please do stop by and leave your suggestion {{thank you}}. dxneo (talk) 18:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

::Hi {{ping|dxneo}} How goes it? I've never created a band or an album article to be honest,so I'm probably not the best editor for this discussion. Generally I'd say it would be based on coverage. I do know during AFC reviews and during the NPP review check there is often a push to merge unless they are really special with their own standalone coverage that is seperate from the original product, but it seems to be very rare. They need to really special. I hope that helps. Its as much as I can offer and thanks for considering me. scope_creep^Talk 18:29, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Hiya, just checking you saw the section I started for your questions? User_talk:Akerbeltz#Gaelic_place_names Akerbeltz (talk) 11:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

You wrote "That is laudable." I don't understand what you meant given what you wrote after that. Doug Weller talk 09:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

::I didn't think he was going to post any sources originally. I thought the editor was just going to ignore the request, like other editors who have created many articles as I've seen in the past at Afd. Sometimes they don't take it on. When I looked at the sources, there was lots of passing mentions on the Battle of Lucano, single sentences, probably taken from a single Arabic source and duplicated across multiple books. I think there is a genuine reasoning there, not just some incompetence or elevating nothing into something to give it an artificial notabilty that doesn't exist. The article should be deleted and I still think he should banned from writing articles because the editor is still not capable of writing a real article or evaluating sources correctly. I'll clarify the comment. scope_creep^Talk 09:24, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Thanks. Doug Weller talk 11:20, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

{{anchor|18:50:25, 22 January 2025 review of submission by Flauren06}}

{{Lafc|username=Flauren06|ts=18:50:25, 22 January 2025|declinedtalk=Draft:Audrey_Moran}}

Hi Scope_creep, with respect, I would like to push back on the justification you offered. There's nothing in the criteria that says "ultra-local" sources are unacceptable, that seems to be a restriction you invented. The sources I cited are from local government, the city's paper of record, and the most formidable political news outlet in Florida. Judge Moran is an elected official in the largest city in Florida, she was the first woman in that city to run for mayor, and also one of the most significant contributors to the passage of a human rights ordinance that offered protection for the first time to the city's LGBTQ+ community. All of those experiences collectively speak to her notability.

Flauren06 (talk) 18:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

::Hi {{ping|Flauren06}} There are two different folk who looked at the article and came to the same decision. I know the criteria and I know what is needed. I have long experience of it. As a WP:BLP, it needs high-quality sources, stated in the first line of the policy and they are not there. Typically individuals who have done a job and shown some compassion arent particular notable and with ultra-local sources like that don't show much else, what can you do. It as much of a muchness in terms of the references and fairly generic and routine. I don't she is particularly notable. scope_creep^Talk 19:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

:::I'm looking at the notability guidelines right now...

:::"People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." She satisfies this requirement.

:::Under politicians/judges, "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage.". She satisfies this as well.

:::There's literally nothing that disqualifies local news sources. Flauren06 (talk) 19:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

--Lajmmoore (talk 08:54, 26 January 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Dear Scope_creep,

I noticed that my Wikipedia draft on **Prof. Mikhail Kudryashev** was recently declined.

I would appreciate your feedback on specific improvements that would help the article meet Wikipedia’s standards. Prof. Kudryashev has received two prestigious academic awards:

- Sofja Kovalevskaja Award (2015) – Listed on Wikipedia’s own page for this award. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sofia_Kovalevskaya_Award

- Heisenberg Award (2020) – A major distinction from the German Research Foundation (DFG).

The article also includes multiple independent and reliable sources that discuss his research contributions. Could you please advise on what adjustments are needed for resubmission? Your guidance would be greatly appreciated!

Best regards SuhovaNS (talk) 13:04, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

::Hi {{ping|SuhovaNS}} It been reviewed four times and each independent editor has found it lacking. I don't think there is any doubt that the man will eventually have an article, but I think if it was mainspaced now, it would be sent to Afd. I think it is too early. scope_creep^Talk 18:45, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi, Why did yo revert my addition of clean-up tags to the article about Saint-Gilles Prison? - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:34, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

::Because there not needed. You don't add cleanup tag to article created by an editor who is autopatrolled. You leave a talk page message which you've done and I've seen and read. It is the wrong tag. That isn't cleanup. scope_creep^Talk 05:36, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

:::Nevertheless, the article needs to be updated with the information about the prison's closure, otherwise the lead and the closure section in the article are inconsistent. I think it is the right tag because of WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:40, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

::::I will take a look. I don't think was a lot on it when I wrote it, but seems to have been extended futher. I was a single government press-release in the Brussels Times or something like that, not enough for a section paragraph. It a single event. scope_creep^Talk 06:03, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Scope creep, both articles are now GA. Thanks for your massive help and Elinruby too. Nourerrahmane (talk) 23:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

::Hi {{ping|Nourerrahmane}} That is excellent. It closes a summers work. Its been a long slog and a solid achievement. Are you planning to submit them for FA review? scope_creep^Talk 05:47, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

:::Hi @Scope creep I very much intend to do so after some time. Nourerrahmane (talk) 08:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

::::{{ping|Nourerrahmane}} How come your delaying? scope_creep^Talk 09:22, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::@Scope creep: I want to work a bit on the Kingdom of Numidia. I already made some additions. For the Regency I will need to check RS again and ask for another copyedit before nominating it for FA as was requested by the GA reviewer. Nourerrahmane (talk) 14:30, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

::::::Hi {{ping|Nourerrahmane}} There was some History article. Can you check the History article talk page. Another editor tried to put in a block of text that introduced a spelling mistake, changed an image props, split a para and added a block of text that didn't seem suitable. Can you check it. scope_creep^Talk 15:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Already checked. I left an answer. Nourerrahmane (talk) 15:51, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Do not communicate with me anymore or leave messages on my talk page moving forward. I want to have less interaction with you as much as possible. This will be my only message on your talk page. You can delete it once you've read it.  Versace1608  ^{Wanna Talk?} 20:54, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Versace1608}} That is fine, but its worth knowing I've went through this process many times before. I know it is difficult but you will need to do it. If you don't do it, I will do it. There is established process for this. I'll will be back in a few days. scope_creep^Talk 20:58, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

--Lajmmoore (talk 08:53, 25 February 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging

{{reftalk}}

{{reflist-talk}}

What would you think about a redirect or merge to Betfair? Bearian (talk) 14:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

::Hi {{ping|Bearian}} Yes, I think that would be ideal, if you fancy doing it. A redirect would be likely outcome of an Afd. scope_creep^Talk 16:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

:::I do fancy that. Bearian (talk) 19:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

HI. You make an extremely clear and relevant statement there which many of us need to remind ourselves of. That said, I think it would interest you very much to take a look at this (both pages) and if you think it will work, leave a comment there. It won't take up much of your time but do first read the two pages to get the overall picture. It is unconnected with the way NPP works, how the reviewers work, or the PAGs that are the basis of that work. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:50, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Kudpung}} Will do. scope_creep^Talk 09:11, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Kudpung}} Is the project stalled? I always thought the lack of a landing page to tender early explicit instruction and set expectations was a bit mad. I think it is one of the great failings on this project. scope_creep^Talk 05:28, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

:::The project is not stalled. Indeed it is a project some of us started 2 years and was put on a back burner, but in view of the poor results of the last backlog drive it's more important than ever to move it forward. Please take a look at it and then read through the chat that is developing. My descriptions of it make it sound bigger and more complex than it is. It will all come together as soon as we have another virtual meeting on it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:51, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

::::{{ping|Kudpung}} That is excellent. That is good news. scope_creep^Talk 08:10, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.

We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this [https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_bwKum9LHQGL5bWS survey], which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

could you activate it temporarily, scope creep? Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 10:01, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

::Hello {{ping|Fortuna imperatrix mundi}} How do I activate it? scope_creep^Talk 02:48, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Fortuna imperatrix mundi}} Did you used to be 'Serial Number 54129'. scope_creep^Talk 02:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Hi {{ping|Fortuna imperatrix mundi}}. I'm having problems with my email. I can give you a temp email to get started and I'll forward you an email. Ping me when your in and i'll drop it here. scope_creep^Talk 08:37, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm not particularly familiar with dealing with unsigned comments and the like, or I'd just fix this myself. Convenient Discussions thinks your Help Desk reply just now is part of this one of mine immediately below it. (Because of the missing timestamp, I think.) Musiconeologist (talk) 19:35, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Musiconeologist}} How are you. I think i've fixed it. scope_creep^Talk 19:47, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

:::You have. Many thanks! (And in reply to the question, I'm in my usual stupefied state from insufficient sleep . . . ) Musiconeologist (talk) 19:52, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Musiconeologist}} What is Convenient Discussions? scope_creep^Talk 19:48, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

:::It's this (follow the redirect)—a thing you install in your user javascript that does things like highlighting new replies, providing links to individual comments, etc. I've been using it for a while, and quite like it. Musiconeologist (talk) 19:58, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

::::I have not seen that. It looks interesting. I think I will give it a wee try tommorrow when its quieter. scope_creep^Talk 20:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::@Scope creep Here's one thing I didn't find immediately obvious: it adds two tiny links at the very bottom of the page, below the standard Wikipedia ones. One to reload the page with Convenient Discussions turned off (e.g. to do something manually that it does automatically), and one for making settings. I tend to forget those are there. (There's a gear icon visible while editing anyway.) I hope you find it useful, or at least fun to investigate! Musiconeologist (talk) 21:59, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article :Roster, Caithness has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Cannot find sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Roasted (talk) 17:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Roastedbeanz1}} These places are very remote and quite small but they also tend to very old, so they tend to have a lot of sources. Although you can see that some don't have sources at the moment, it is a genuine place with a post office. I created these very early and it took ages to do it. scope_creep^Talk 18:40, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

You've made a lot of vague claims about consensus formed in previous discussions, but I was not a part of those discussions and you haven't provided any links to these discussions, so from my point of view its just a lot of hot air on your part. If you want to make arguments against inclusion of content based on some alleged prior consensus, you have to link to that alleged prior consensus. And you do it on the article talk page where all the editors of the article get to collaborate on coming to a consensus. Bald assertions are just that, bald assertions, which can reasonably be ignored by any editor as self-serving blather unless you back up your claim with links. Fair warning: if you post them anywhere other than Talk:Roberta Hoskie, I will move your reply to that page. Skyerise (talk) 11:12, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@Scope creep Thank you for your feedback. I can confirm the issues have now been addressed. Additional independent sources have been incorporated, and references have been added to previously unsourced sections. The bolding has also been removed to improve readability.

Please let me know if any further refinements are needed. I appreciate your support in moving it to the mainspace.

Thanks! ~~~~ AndreiRares (talk) 14:35, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

I've requested a third opinion regarding the Operations section of Lifestance Health. See listing here: Wikipedia:Third opinion#Active disagreements

Regards, Delectopierre (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

::Thats fine. scope_creep^Talk 08:15, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your assistance on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Francisco_Nogales&action=edit

Followed your guidance, and hope it was implemented successfully. Thanks! MedEds2023 (talk) 14:08, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

--Rosiestep (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging

{{cot|bg=khaki|Misplaced accusations entirely irrelevant here due to a case of mistaken identity; they apologized and struck.}}

Hello. I left you a note at the ANI discussion requesting that you strike much of your misinformed language. thanks. Does casting aspersions include unintentional exaggerations reported as fact? I dunno. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:50, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

::I hope not and I hope I'm not casting any aspersions or swapping exagerations for fact. scope_creep^Talk 02:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:::You wrote that I've been brought to ANI many times. Wrong. I think it was twice (did you open one of those? I don't keep track) and for minor or mistaken reasons which were soon closed. The "many times" or whatever language you used, that's the exaggeration and what I ask you to strike. thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:17, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

::::{{ping|Randy Kryn}} What exactly is it your referring to. I don't think I've spoken to you for ages past. In fact I can't remember the last time. Where exactly is it. scope_creep^Talk 13:01, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

::::{{ping|Randy Kryn}} I can't locate what your talking about. but if I mispreprented you, then apologies. It may have been human error. scope_creep^Talk 13:09, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::Duh, my mistake, I misremembered the name and mixed you up with {{u|Snow Rise}}. Talk about human error! Apologies all around (except to Snow Rise) if your talk page readers have gotten the wrong idea. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:16, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

::::{{ping|Randy Kryn}} I just found the block of text. It a bit of a stretch there in the change of name. They don't even sound alike. I would be more careful in the future. scope_creep^Talk

:::::Agreed. That was a stupid mistake, and my I.Q. went down a few points (but has come back up again). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:24, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::{{ping|Randy Kryn}} I wouldn't worry about it. It was a simple mistake. scope_creep^Talk 13:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::I can kind of see how this could happen: our names both employ two separate lexemes, separated by an underscore/space, and in both instances, our names start with an /s/ and both words can be both a noun and a verb. Knowing a little something about how the brain stores and processes lexical entries, it sort of makes a certain degree of sense.{{pb}} That said (and scope, I hope you will forgive my responding here in the name of efficiency), Randy: I have already responded to your request in the ANI thread itself. Much like scope_creep, I would ask that you apply a little more care and read my comments slowly and thoughtfully this time, because you are misinterpreting both what I said and why I said it. It was meant to be an example of an uncareful, hasty, and unverifiable characterization of the sort you yourself used against others in that discussion. It is not something I am presenting as the truth of your motivation, but rather a counterfactual of something speculative someone might say about you that you would not appreciate--much as the good faith contributors to that discussion might not appreciate your drive-by labelling. {{pb}}Now, I've explained this laboriously several times at this point, and I believe that it was extremely express and obvious in the original comment, so this will be the last effort I will make to reassure you about my meaning. It seems to me that, between 1) your mixing up the identity of the person you thought was insulting you, 2) the fact that you misinterpreted my meaning in the first place, and 3) that you came here even though I had responded to you at length at the ANI thread, that you are speed reading through these discussions and responding hastily. That is a bad approach anywhere on the project, but especially at ANI, and especially, especially a CBAN discussion about serious conduct violations. SnowRise ^{let's rap} 23:21, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::{{u|Snow Rise}}, you said in your comment I had been brought to ANI many times. That is incorrect, and is what I asked you to strike. Your long response to me was criticized by others, and had little to do with my simple request. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:51, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Uninvolved editor here: yes, the OP's misplaced accusation could have misled readers of this page, so the ensuing apologies and added strikeout text was the right thing to do. There is nevertheless still a level of misdirection just by its occupying a certain amount of vertical space on this page and an eye-catching amount of strikeout, not to mention two third-party editors sniping at each other on a topic entirely irrelevant to this page. As this entire discussion has absolutely zero to do with scope_creep, I believe the best disposition for it for future readers is in a collapsed state. Scope_creep, this being your page, you get the last word, so feel free to undo. Mathglot (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

{{cob}}

Hello, I have fixed references 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 24, 25, 26, 28, and 29. These are now cite web citations with full citations. I have removed all nowiki tags. Draft:Michael_Harris-Love

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_Harris-Love

Thank you! Mikepascoe (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2025 (UTC)