Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:59, 27 February 2017

Archives

Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4, Archive 5, Archive 6, Archive 7

DYK for 1970 Commonwealth Paraplegic Games

On 4 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1970 Commonwealth Paraplegic Games, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1970 Commonwealth Paraplegic Games, held in Edinburgh, lacked day-to-day television coverage by British broadcasters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1970 Commonwealth Paraplegic Games. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1970 Commonwealth Paraplegic Games), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

— Maile (talk) 00:11, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

thanks for pitching in on Scottish people

'preciate it -- apparently the editor watching it only participates if he can revert something. Elinruby (talk) 02:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Copyvio clean-up suggestion

Thanks for your help with copyvio clean-up. I just wanted to let you know that if you remove the copyvio and request revision deletion, there's no need to also list the case at WP:CP. The only ones that need to be listed there are complex ones where you elect to use the {{Copyviocore}} template rather than cleaning yourself. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:59, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

@Diannaa: ok, thanks for the feedback, I had tried both approaches in the past but wasn't sure if the list added anything in terms of tracking the revdel requests. I'm happy to follow your advice. Drchriswilliams (talk) 16:15, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Revision deletion requests are tracked via the Category:Requested RD1 redactions. Articles are automatically added to this cat when you add the copyvio-revdel template. The category appears on the admin dashboard and I clean it out quite frequently. so yeah, no worries, no need to list at WP:CP. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:59, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Malda Medical College

Hello, You recently reverted the changes I made to the page Malda Medical College. I am a junior doctor of Malda Medical College and know about it much better than you do.So from next time do not revert the change I make. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.110.153.153 (talk) 14:34, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

As I explained in the my summaries, the material that you added was not adequately sourced, unlike the material that you removed. You can have a look at WP:VER and WP:RS to find out more about sourcing. Drchriswilliams (talk) 14:57, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

ramdevra

I'am sorry sir,this information was provided by my friends to me. But sir population which is showing in Misplaced Pages page is not the population of ramdevra which is situated in district jaisalmer.it is the population of ramdevra situated in Churu district. Sir can u add population of ramdevra jaisalmer??? Thanks sir Rajesh sharma KG (talk) 23:04, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

@Rajesh sharma KG: Yes, you have correctly identified that there is an issue here. I have put some details about this on the article's talk page. Drchriswilliams (talk) 23:44, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

KGMU

Sir i'am a student of KGMU. so i know very well about this college. i didn't add any fake information. was add number of UG & PG Students according to MCI official. Kgmu have 3500 bedded hospita,69 department,475 consultant,715 residents,new cancer institute,teuma center. All these information we can check from KGMU official website. KGMU Ranked as no.1 medical university.this ranking done by Central govt. Nickname of KGMU is KGMC. Rajesh sharma KG (talk) 07:23, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

U are add wrong information that 185 students admitted per year.... No....there are 250 students admitted every year..... I know very well about my college.. Why u remove those things which are edited by me. Rajesh sharma KG (talk) 13:22, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Information within Misplaced Pages's articles should be verifiable and appropriately sourced. If you are able to provide a reference that supports these claim then I suggest you do so. After I looked at the article in more detail it was clear that there were other things on the page that also needed to be removed, such as material which violated copyright regulations. Drchriswilliams (talk) 13:32, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Mid Level Practitioners

Hi - following the deletion of my previous edit, I have re-worded it. There was no intent to plagiarize as I had cited the source. But I have re-worded and left in the references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24601Valjean (talk • contribs) 16:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

British Nationality Law edits?

Hey -- you left me a message claiming I'd recently made undocumented changes to British Nationality Law which you reverted.

I didn't.

Please check your facts before posting messages to people.

Daen (talk) 12:38, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

@Daen: would you care to point to where you think that I did this? Drchriswilliams (talk) 12:42, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Did You Know that Nursing Care Plans were born in Edinburgh?

Hello Dr. Chris, Nursing care plans arose in that Edinburgh University Nursing Dept. They were the brain-child of Canadian Phd student now, Professor, Nancy Grant. Nancy is still alive in Ontario. She was in Margaret Scott-Wright's department, only I can't remember whether it was Annie Altschul or Lisbeth Hockey who was her supervisor. After Edinburgh, Nancy went on to the University of Calgary where she was associate professor. Do you think it's worth dedicating an article to her? Regards, --Po Kadzieli (talk) 12:01, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

References and copy edits

I find that I (inadvertently) create a lot of work for you carrying out the references wrongly. I have caused duplication of work. I use the automated references generated by the appropriate URL in the visual editor. Further, I seem to be referencing at the wrong points. I have searched for a policy on this, but to no avail. Any advice would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nossacasa (talk • contribs) 00:53, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

@Nossacasa: It's not a problem. Citations can be formatted in a whole range of different ways- the convention on Misplaced Pages is to have them in the main body of text rather than the Infobox or lead section. In terms of referencing, best sources are generally those that are independent of the subject and published by an organisation that checks the details. As content gets added to an article it will generally need to be re-ordered to some extent. Drchriswilliams (talk) 01:06, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Dr Paul Monaghan

Hello, Drchriswilliams, this is Professor PC. I think I continuously forget that I should not put an honorific prefix like 'doctor' or 'professor'. Thank you for reminding me to not put these honorific prefix and I hope you enjoy your last day of 2016 and happy year. - Professor PC. —Preceding undated comment added 14:27, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

@Professor PC: Thanks. I have expanded the lead of the article to include that information. Drchriswilliams (talk) 14:43, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Surgeon's Assistant

Can you assist me with the edits for the surgeons assistant page? The instructions are difficult to follow and you keep removing content which is accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.185.50.26 (talk) 15:03, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

When I looked into the material added in recent days it became apparent that there are issues relating to material that has been added over a period of more than a year without appropriate attribution. A copyright investigation has been opened to determine what can be salvaged from this mess. The template gives clear instructions about this. In simple cases, offending material can be removed and aspects of the edit history hidden from public view, however the template currently in place is needed for more complex copyright cases. Drchriswilliams (talk) 15:24, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Prime Academy

Hi. This is regarding your edit:

If you see the citation source , it clearly mentions: """ Lalit Kumar, chairman and managing director of Prime Tutorials Pvt Ltd, said, "More than 230 students from our coaching institute qualified. As many as 49 out of the 50 students from the batch of under privileged students cleared the exam with Anand Verma scoring 260. Many students got more than expected marks as bonus marks were awarded for a couple of mistakes in the question paper." Ankit Jha scored 287 and Mayank Kumar got 270.""

wikieditor 18:14, 8 January 2017 (UTC)helloanant007 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helloanant007 (talk • contribs)

I think it would be more accurate to say that Prime Academy get a brief mention in the 14th of the 16 paragraphs in the article, which can be viewed if you scroll beyond the block of adverts that is on the webpage. Drchriswilliams (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Need Help

	Need Help
	Hi, I need help to edit shalby hospitals wiki content but it was reverted by you. Can you please help me to improve content of shalby hospital. I want to update the content of that page. Mukesh8120 (talk) 05:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I need help for content update

Hi, This is Mukesh8120 (talk) 09:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I need your help for content editing, improvement and update. I request you to please help me to update the content of shalby hospital. I am an employee of shalby hospital and would like to improve that page. I appreciate if you help me to improve my content. I have also updated whole content on shalby hospitals' talk page..so please check it. I am new to[REDACTED] so i don't know too much about its guideline. Looking forward to hear back from you.

@Mukesh8120: Misplaced Pages is an encyclopaedia and has policy about content within articles being verifiable and written from a neutral perspective. I have been attempting to improve the Shalby Hospitals article and part of this involves addressing the promotional material that has been added. There are clearly significant WP:COI issues here. You have now added a large amount of text to the talk page, in a format that gives the impression that it is an article. I would suggest that you revert that addition of that large volume of material. Instead, appropriate use of the article's talk page would be to ask for specific changes or about specific points. Drchriswilliams (talk) 09:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Problem is specified in points

Hi Drchriswilliams,

Thanks for your suggestions. I have done changes in shalby hospitals' talk page and problem is specified in points. Now please go ahead to do changes in page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mukesh8120 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Lorne Crerar

Hello! Your submission of Lorne Crerar at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dan arndt (talk) 05:36, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

New Wikiproject!

Hello, Drchriswilliams! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time. Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

New Wikiproject!

Hello, Drchriswilliams! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time. Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Alice Brown (ombudsman)

On 24 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alice Brown (ombudsman), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Alice Brown, a professor of politics who advised the new Scottish Parliament on governance, went on to become the first Scottish Public Services Ombudsman? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Alice Brown (ombudsman). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Alice Brown (ombudsman)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Schwede66 12:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Optometry

Hey there, can I know if the Optometry only represents UK or the whole world? Why are you putting B.optom as a honours course again and again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:b107:93a0:4208:d83f:646e:1b19 (talk) 14:12, 25 January 2017(UTC) It may be regarded as hons course in UK, but not all over the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:B10C:DFD6:5AF3:38:3778:746F (talk) 14:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Information in Infoboxes should reflect the main text of the article. Improvement templates that are valid should not removed without reason, I reverted an edit where this had occurred without any explanation being provided. Drchriswilliams (talk) 14:27, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

I didn't remove the improvement templates. I was just talking about the Infobox information... In UK there is BSc (Hons) Optometry, but not B.Optom... B.Optom is not recognized as a honours degree, it itself is a specialized degree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:B00C:9737:B9FA:4A6D:4D00:E72C (talk) 14:51, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

School corporal punishment

My source is my own experience of English schools. Or does empiricism not matter? Does anything I wrote strike you as untrue? McMillan — Preceding unsigned comment added by James McMillan (talk • contribs) 13:14, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

The issue here is that Misplaced Pages depends upon reliable, published sources being used to support such material. Drchriswilliams (talk) 17:08, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

T2 Trainspotting

Please see wp:spoiler: Spoilers are no different from any other content and should not be deleted solely because they are spoilers. Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 07:17, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes please read wp policy before you change someone's edit. Spoilers are perfectly allowed. Just because you haven't seen the film yet doesn't mean you get to change people's edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.252.128.252 (talk) 07:49, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Precious

health and well-being in Scotland

Thank you for quality articles on Scottish topics about health and well-being, such as Centre for Excellence for Looked After Children in Scotland, Scottish Diaspora Tapestry and Alice Brown (ombudsman), for templates and project work, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda. Since I began to frequent the DYK noticeboards I have been aware of some of the many articles you have created. I appreciate and value your kind words. Drchriswilliams (talk) 20:23, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Lorne Crerar

On 4 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lorne Crerar, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that injury stopped Lorne Crerar from gaining a full international cap as a player, but 20 years later he took part in two Rugby World Cup Finals as a judicial officer? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lorne Crerar. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lorne Crerar), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:59, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Sri Sankaradeva Nethralaya, Guwahati

The article is in the afd for about 14 days so i closed the afd in good faith. Go through the comments in afd Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Sri Sankaradeva Nethralaya, Guwahati and let me know ur views, whether u want the article to be KEPT or DELETED. AdmWiki (talk) 23:27, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Joost van der Westhuizen

On 7 February 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Joost van der Westhuizen, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 05:19, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Royal Medical Society

Hi, can I clarify what the issue was with the sources used in the recent edits on the Royal Medical Society page? I realise I rely heavily on one source, but the book referenced is the only comprehensive record we have covering information from almost three hundred years ago. I would describe it as reliable, given that it is a secondary source synthesising our minutes, historical records and published information on the lives of members, in addition to its publication by Edinburgh University Press. I am gathering other citation sources but am concerned that the same issue will be flagged - our nature as a student society of a substantial history that is only reaching the public now places us in something of an information deadlock. The removal of all this work over one concern has now left us with a largely inaccurate page, so we'd obviously like to improve the article's integrity as soon as possible. In addition, can you clarify which details you have judged to not be notable? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hp12345 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Most of what you added appeared to be promotional or involved the details of multiple non-notable individuals. Even when referring to historical events, the descriptions added were far from neutral, for example: "By 1776, the Society's wealth of activity demanded its own premises." From your comment here it appears that you have a close connection to the society that you have not declared. I advise that you have a look at WP:SELFPROMOTE. Drchriswilliams (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance, I will modify my literary style. With regards to the guidelines, I voluntarily curate the library and museum, which I note is desired in editors and affords substantial historical information on a topic which is of little concern to non-connected people. See also comments re sources and information deadlock above; the author of the referenced book was not a member of the society. How do you suggest we deal with this? I noted that further information has now been removed due to "self-sourcing"- a massive amount of information on Misplaced Pages is placed without any sourcing at all and is not treated in the same way. Anyone providing information will obviously have some kind of link to the page topic, so I'm now rather unsure of how I can make the page informative and interesting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hp12345 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

@Hp12345: Some books are considered reliable sources, factors such as how widely stocked the book is in libraries may influence the how useful a source appears to be. A published review can help establish the importance of a source, e.g. . If you are citing a book, then adding page numbers is helpful. Adding a list of people to an article on the basis of them simply being members of a society is not likely to improve the article. In terms of modern day activities of a society, some of these might be considered notable if there has been coverage in newspapers but the sort of detail that would be published on your own society website might not be relevant to an encyclopaedia. Drchriswilliams (talk) 22:43, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I am aware of another review in the BMJ - do these permit me, along with page numbers, to cite this book in reference to the society's history? Secondly, is the issue with our current activities their relevance or the reliability of self-sourcing? This section now isn't really a true reflection of the society in reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hp12345 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

@Hp12345: The secondary sources- yes, go for it. The current activities- just because something occurs doesn't make it worthy of inclusion in an encyclopaedia. If reliable sources (that are independent of your society) cover such activities then they might be notable. Also, please learn how to sign messages that you leave on talk pages. Drchriswilliams (talk) 23:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Third Sector magazine

Hello,

I work for Third Sector magazine and have been asked by my superiors to put the information in that you keep undoing.

The information you have put in is not up to date and comes from last years event therefore is not a source. I would therefore like you to stop changing the copy that Third Sector Magazine have asked me to include.

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex.Laybourne (talk • contribs) 08:48, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Springchickensoup

Hi Drchriswilliams

I came here because after leaving a note at User talk:Springchickensoup#Non-existent_categories, I checked the page history and saw that it had been blanked by the user on 24 Feb, and that the previous version recorded several problems raised by you.

The user talk page's history contains sevral further blanking of criticisms, e.g. 23 Feb 2017, 5 FEb 2017, and 18 Dec 2016.

There seems to me to be a persistent set of problems with inappropriate edits, misleading edit summaries, and not hearing any criticisms.

I see that you brought this to ANI at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive941#User:Springchickensoup, but received at thoroughly unco-operative response, followed a groundless revenge complaint at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive941#User:drchriswilliams_Now_being_confrontational_and_warring.

Two months on, nothing seems to have improved. I am inclined to think that there is some sort of NOTHERE/IDHT/COMPRETENCE problem here, which merits another trip to ANI. What do you think? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@BrownHairedGirl: Thanks for picking up on this. It is helpful to hear this summarised by someone who is experienced but has not been involved with this difficult situation so far. There is a problem with this editor failing to recognise problems that they have been causing yet still rushing to implement similar changes across multiple pages. This is compounded by a refusal to even pause to consider their actions when challenged. Directing this editor towards relevant Misplaced Pages policy hasn't worked either. On several occasions they have failed to face up to the issues and also sought to deflect blame onto external factors. Over the last few months there have been a fair number of editors that have offered Springchickensoup advice- on their own user talk page, talk pages of articles and at WikiProject Scotland. Any responses to any feedback have continued to be negative, often scornful, and with a general failure to engage. I agree with your suggestion of another trip to ANI as a way forward. Drchriswilliams (talk) 07:16, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Chris. It seems that we agree there is a persistent problem.

Looking your previous ANI post, which didn't attract as much support as I would have hoped, it seems to me (with the huge benefit of hindsight) that you cast the problem a bit narrowly and didn't provide supporting diffs. So I think that if we are going to make the case for some sort of restraint or warning, it needs to be more detailed (setting out the wide range of problematic editing) and drawing in the other editors who have tried to help guide this editor.

At a quick glance, the problems I see so far are:

1. mass archiving talk pages which didn't need archiving, thereby blanking the talk pages; not responding to complaints, and not cleaning up the mess
2. persistently adding inappropriate or non-existent categories
3. repeatedly using uninformative or false edit summaries
4. repeatedly adding navboxes which do not link to the page on which they are placed
5. Not signing comments on talk pages, and responding with hostility when asked to do so
6. Unconstructive editing of infoboxes, such as distance of miles to two decomal places, or location by centimetre, and again respnding with hostility
7. Edit warring rather than BRD

How that that list look to you? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:58, 27 February 2017 (UTC)