Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:49, 23 October 2024

Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Feldflieger-Abteilungen

Hey Keith! You reverted my edit on Feldflieger Abteilung saying "No OR". Where I beg you did I insert any OR? I just copy-edited, esp. using English rather than German. Wegesrand (talk) 15:50, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Dropping German terms for translations instead of keeping both. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 15:51, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

That's not OR. The English terms are verifiable; they are not likely to be challenged; ergo the German does not have to be present. Read WP:NOR carefully. Wegesrand (talk) 10:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Yet they have been challenged. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 11:18, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

No, they haven't. What is the challenge? Are you referring to your removal? Just saying "this is OR" is not a challenge. If you were to say, "I looked in appropriate sources, <here> and <here>, and was unable to verify these translations," that would be the very minimum level of a challenge. Wegesrand (talk) 15:33, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

The burden is on you. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 15:44, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

No, it's not: that's exactly what you're missing in your reading of WP:NOR.

In addition, WP:NOR says, "Faithfully translating sourced material into English ... is not considered original research."

That's clear enough. I'll revert your reversion. Wegesrand (talk) 12:52, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Please don't start an edit war. Keith-264 (talk) 13:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you mean, please don't continue the edit war you started? Shall we invoke mediation then? Wegesrand (talk) 12:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I've had enough of this, you can have the last word.Keith-264 (talk) 12:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Raid on Grand Harbour

Hello Keith-264! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Raid on Grand Harbour, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://docer.tips/grub-street-cull-b-hurricanes-over-malta-june-1940-april-194.html, and therefore to constitute a violation of Misplaced Pages's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Misplaced Pages's copyright policy. Misplaced Pages takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Misplaced Pages, then you should do one of the following:

• Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA 4.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Raid on Grand Harbour and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-enwikimedia.org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Raid on Grand Harbour, in their email. See Misplaced Pages:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Raid on Grand Harbour. See Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA), version 4.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Raid on Grand Harbour with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Misplaced Pages article layout. For more information on Misplaced Pages's policies, see Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines.

See Misplaced Pages:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Raid on Grand Harbour saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages. Happy editing! — Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

@Diannaa: You will note that I have already mentioned my reservations about Cull et al. because the book is structured as quotes with linking passages. I would have reverted it yesterday but was distracted by a flood from the cold water tank. Keith-264 (talk) 07:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Cosmetic edits

FYI that this edit would be considered "cosmetic" and likely shouldn't be done on its own. See WP:COSMETICBOT, Misplaced Pages:Bots/Dictionary#Cosmetic edit, and Misplaced Pages:Bots/Dictionary#editor-friendly wikitext. Ed  17:09, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@The ed17: Why? Keith-264 (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't make the rules, but the first link there says "Cosmetic changes to the wikitext are sometimes the most controversial, either in themselves or because they clutter page histories, watchlists, and/or the recent changes feed with edits that are not worth the time spent reviewing them. Such changes should not usually be done on their own, but may be allowed in an edit that also includes a substantive change." Ed  18:19, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

@The ed17: I read that and remain puzzled, I was copy-editing the article with a view to remedy its lack of citations. I found the unpipe edits facility recently and I've used it to save space, which seems eminently reasonable. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Is auto ed frowned upon too? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:44, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:AED's second paragraph is devoted to cosmetic edits. :-) Ed  18:53, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Battle of the Beams

In this edit to Battle of the Beams you added a number of references to page 533 of

• Hinsley, F. H. (1979). British Intelligence in the Second World War. History of the Second World War. Vol. I. London: HMSO. ISBN 978-0-11-630933-4.

{{sfn|Hinsley|1979|p=533}}

I can't see any mention on that page of line of sight or the earth's curvature. Could you verify your source please? Cabayi (talk) 11:17, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cabayi: OK. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 11:18, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cabayi: Ahem! it was page 553. I have amended two citations and removed one as i think that passage is taken from Jones. Apologies Keith-264 (talk) 11:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Cabayi (talk) 11:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Copy editing

Are there any specific articles you'd like me to take a run through? Primergrey (talk) 16:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Not offhand but I'll bear it in mind. Thanks Keith-264 (talk) 16:50, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Euphemisms

Please don't add euphemisms to Misplaced Pages, as you did in this edit. MOS:EUPHEMISM is the relevant guideline. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: In English English it's a synonym ("A synonym is a word, morpheme, or phrase that means precisely or nearly the same as another word, morpheme, or phrase in a given language"). Dead, deceased and late are synonymous. see here . Regards Keith-264 (talk) 07:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's kind of the point of a euphemism. It's a synonym that sounds less harsh. Just use "dead", as the guideline says. If you're having trouble identifying euphemism (one trick is to ask yourself why you're replacing a perfectly good word with a synonym), you can check Wiktionary. Or you could check Google: . First hit. In the future, when you feel an urge to replace a harsh word with something that sounds more comfortable to you, please resist it. Or if you consider it helpful to go around replacing random words with synonyms, replace "deceased" and "late" with "dead", which is actually kind of helpful. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: No "A euphemism is an innocuous word or expression used in place of one that is deemed offensive or suggests something unpleasant." This is the opposite of a synonym which is used to avoid repetition, did you read the definition?. Dead, deceased and late are synonymous not euphemistic. Do not assume my intentions as you have done above it is facile, a failure to AGF and smacks of WP:OWN. Keith-264 (talk) 14:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Haha. Right. Completely ignore that a reliable source says that it's a euphemism. Good luck with ignoring sources and violating the MOS. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Keith, but I'm only a native. DuncanHill (talk) 23:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: Your reply should have read 'on reflection I realise that I jumped to conclusions, made a mistaken inference about your motives, confused synonym with euphemism and failed to make due allowance for the difference between English English and American English'. That said, I grant you the last word. Keith-264 (talk) 07:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Apparently, I need to keep this link handy for people who have a shaky understanding of their native language: the Dictionary of Euphemisms by the Oxford University Press, a peer-reviewed British academic publication. Now, if you still want to argue it, please do it with someone else. I'll no longer receive your pings. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: I gave you a chance to back away graciously and you funked it. Good riddance.Keith-264 (talk) 12:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

October 2024

@HJ Mitchell:

Keith-264 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

One-sided block for a many-sided debate with me more bludgeoned against for good faith edits Keith-264 (talk) 19:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

It's striking that you do not commit to doing better in future. There's no way I am undoing these partial blocks. PhilKnight (talk) 19:52, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

An editor of your experience should know better than to behave the way you have been on that talk page (which is on my watchlist, as are many FAs) and I'd been intending to leave you some friendly advice about your discussion style but this comment is so far beyond the pale that admin intervention is clearly necessary. Another admin might have made this a site-wide block. I hope I don't regret that decision but if that's your idea of "good faith" I suggest you take an extended break from anything collaborative. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I find your views patronising and one-eyed, do you really think that I'm the one at fault or haven't you read the thread? Keith-264 (talk) 19:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I find your conduct obnoxious and anathema to a collaborative project. If that comment were directed at anyone but me I would convert this to a site-wide block without talk page access. I'm unwatching now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Why don't you answer the challenge to list the three best improvements I suggested and look at the insults and abuses that have been aimed at me? Keith-264 (talk) 19:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@PhilKnight: I don't accept the ruling, obviously. Keith-264 (talk) 19:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@PhilKnight: Potential conflict of interest "HJM is a regular at WP:FAC as you probably know. He and SC regularly review (and ALWAYS support - often with pretty cursory reviews) each other articles for promotion. The spirit of INVOLVED if not the letter? E.g:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Lancashire_Fusiliers_War_Memorial/archive1

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Secretum_(British_Museum)/archive1

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Tottenham_outrage/archive1

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Brighton_hotel_bombing/archive1#Harry

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Portland_Spy_Ring/archive1

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Southend-on-Sea_War_Memorial/archive1

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Wolverton_Viaduct/archive1

The interaction analyser brings up plenty more:

https://sigma.toolforge.org/editorinteract.py?users=HJ+Mitchell&users=SchroCat&users=&startdate=&enddate=&ns=&server=enwiki

I received an e-mail soon after you waded in. Perhaps you might care to comment? Keith-264 (talk) 20:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

If it was up to me it would be a site-wide block. PhilKnight (talk) 00:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

@PhilKnight: Who is it up to? Keith-264 (talk) 09:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

It's up to the blocking admin whether or not to make the block site-wide. PhilKnight (talk) 14:02, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Keith-264 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Failure of the reviewer to address my reasons Keith-264 (talk) 09:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Au contrare, this request for unblock fails to address the underlying issues highlighted by the block, nor the rationale from the last decline (which was perfectly valid). Daniel (talk) 02:03, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Sophistry. Keith-264 (talk) 10:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

That's the third uninvolved admin you've attacked because you were blocked for (checks notes) personal attacks. You don't have to agree with it but if remaining part of this community is important to you, you are going to have to take no for an answer sooner or later. I say that in the spirit of retaining an editor who is a net positive. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

How many times have I been attacked, by how many people? Keith-264 (talk) 21:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Have I attacked you? Has Phil? Has Daniel? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:47, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

See for yourself. Keith-264 (talk) 21:49, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Misplaced Pages, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)