Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:06, 29 September 2014

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If I have been active and have not yet responded, please place {{Talkback}} on my page as I may have missed your response. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist.

This is Chris troutman's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Today's motto... → A wizard is never late, Frodo Baggins. Nor is he early; he arrives precisely when he means to!

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report No RfXs since 17:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC).—Talk to my owner:Online

Archived discussions

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

Hunt

So who is Richard M. Hunt? I presume not the architect. DuncanHill (talk) 21:33, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

@DuncanHill: He was an historian, specializing in European history. He taught at Harvard for many years and eventually served as the University's Marshal. The sentence is worded that way because it's his concept, not the idea of an amorphous "some people". I guess you think Hunt's statement has to be qualified for the reader; I prefer the reader to go to JSTOR and read the Dr. Hunt's article. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

References

1. "University Marshal Rick Hunt to retire". Harvard University Gazette. August 22, 2002.
2. "Dr. Richard M. Hunt" (PDF). American Council on Germany (pdf).

I prefer that the reader is able to get at least some context from the article itself - the original wording, to which I appended the "who?" tag was unhelpful to say the least. We should not assume that our readers will have read the references before reading the article to get an idea as to who someone is. Do you have a link to the article that could be added to the reference? Preferably not to JSTOR as most readers will not have access (and I just searched for it on JSTOR and it does not appear to be there). DuncanHill (talk) 22:18, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll look into it this weekend and try to find the original text, although I'm not clear what you want explicated, Dr. Hunt's article or who he was? Chris Troutman (talk) 22:26, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Well it was the who he was that attracted me initially, but it would be nice to read the article. Virginia Quarterly Review isn't on JSTOR at all. Thanks for looking into it. DuncanHill (talk) 22:30, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Just as a by-the-by, his time at Harvard overlapped with my uncle's time as Dean of Students - small world! DuncanHill (talk) 22:47, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

@DuncanHill: I have added a URL and a quote at Stab-in-the-back myth#Post-war reactions and reflections for that source. I hope that works for you. I'll be developing an article about Hunt but it may be several weeks before I have that together. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - unfortunately I don't have ProQuest access, but it's good to have the link anyway for those who do. Looking forward to the Hunt article! DuncanHill (talk) 06:22, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Trolling

It is not necessary or appreciated to troll user talk pages with warnings about citing sources literally within minutes of fresh edits. I was searching for the most authoritative source to cite when you left your note. You are welcome to look for your own sources if you wish to do something constructive for the article. Ketone16 (talk) 22:40, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

@Ketone16: I don't troll; ask anyone. Adding good content without also adding a source looks just the same on my watchlist as adding unsourced content, which I summarily revert. If you have a source, feel free to revert me and add your source. In fact, I'm curious why you'd add any content at all if you're not sure which source(s) you're using to substantiate it. You can't just add what you think is right and then go searching for a reliable source to back it up. You find the source first and then add the content. You've been editing Misplaced Pages intermittently for a long time so I don't see why we're having this conversation. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:56, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

There is no rule that says you find the source first and then add the content; what matters is that the source gets cited in the end. It is not appropriate to interrupt someone's work process mid-flow. I added a stub edit and was adding more information when you reverted my edits. I am not at all unsure about my source. My source was a book on Armenian history I found online, but since Armenia was not a party to the treaty, I was looking around for a better source, preferably something contemporaneous with the treaty. I could not access the book's references directly in the online preview I was viewing, so I had to search around. I stress, however, that the book is a reliable source and I was planning on citing it if I couldn't find a better source. It is my opinion that immediate summary reverts of uncontroversial material are not productive for Misplaced Pages, in addition to being rude on a personal level. Sometimes people are editing in a flow, and even those who do post unsourced material as a matter of habit are not necessarily harming Misplaced Pages. I'd rather have someone make an unsourced edit (as long as it is not dubious or non-NPOV) and then find and add a source later myself (as I frequently do) than have information never make it into less-frequently-edited articles at all. It's more valuable to Misplaced Pages (and polite) to add a challenge tag or open a discussion on the talk page than simply to revert an uncontroversial unsourced edit, particularly when the revert comes minutes after the original edit (and without considering the editor's previous history). Immediate summary reverts of uncontroversial information have a destructive effect on Misplaced Pages because they discourage editing. There are more constructive ways of ensuring the information on Misplaced Pages is reliable. And I do consider leaving warnings about citing sources on people's talk pages to be trolling, unless the person is a habitual abuser. Ketone16 (talk) 23:18, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Your help on Draft:Underrail

Hey, thanks for your help on Draft:Underrail! You found and fixed exactly the kind of errors I was worried about. However, I'm not sure why you removed the references to credits as original research. The documentation for {{cite video game}} uses citing staff credits as an example and many video game articles do that, so I've restored those references using that template. - 91.157.57.222 (talk) 21:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

@91.157.57.222: I guess you're right. If that's a norm for WikiProject Video Games then I'll defer to them; I tend to remove primary sources like those when I see them. No problem making those edits for you, either. Sometimes it's far easier to just do it yourself than it is to explain step-by-step what the problem is. If you've come to like editing Misplaced Pages, consider registering your own account so the community can interact with you personally rather than whomever uses the IP you happen to work from. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:17, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation, but I've been sparsely editing wikipedia for nearly a decade from whatever ISP/IP I have at the moment and that's not going to change. :) - 91.157.57.222 (talk) 21:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 August newsletter

The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:

1. Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer, finished top of Pool A and was the round's highest scorer. Godot is a featured picture specialist, claiming large numbers of points due to high-quality scans of historical documents, especially banknotes.
2. Casliber (submissions) is a WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist every year since 2010. In the semi-final, he was Pool B's highest scorer. Cas's points primarily come from articles on the natural sciences.
3. Czar (submissions) was Pool A's runner-up. Czar's points come mostly from content related to independent video games, including both articles and topics.
4. Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Pool B's runner-up. Another featured picture specialist, many of Adam's points come from the restoration of historical media. He has been a WikiCup finalist twice before.
5. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) won the WikiCup in 2012 and 2013, and enters this final as the first wildcard. She focuses on biology-related articles, and has worked on several high-importance articles.
6. 12george1 (submissions) is the second wildcard. George's points come primarily from meteorology-related articles. This year and last year, George was the first person in the competition to score.
7. Sturmvogel 66 (submissions), the third wildcard, was the 2010 champion and a finalist last year. His writes mostly on military history, especially naval history.
8. Bloom6132 (submissions), the fourth and final wildcard, has participated in previous WikiCups, but not reached any finals. Bloom's points are mostly thanks to did you knows, featured lists and good articles related to sport and national symbols.

We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists. Matty.007 (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), WikiRedactor (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), Yellow Evan (submissions), Prism (submissions) and Cloudz679 (submissions) have all performed well to reach this stage of the competition, and we hope they will all be joining us again next year.

There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.

There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. As ever, questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Joseph Janus Article

Hey Chris, Thank you for taking the time to review my article. It is for my boss (Joseph Janus). I was just hoping to get a little more detail as posting on here is completely new to me. This was given to me by Joseph so I can definitely go back and check his references, but other than that how can I fix things like promotional sounding voice? Once again thank you for all the help. LaurenSullygirl (talk) 20:15, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

@LaurenSullygirl: Here are some examples:

1. "Janus also created the luxury handbag line Bodhi, with distribution in top retailers such as Fred Segal, Nordstrom, Neiman Marcus, Macy’s, Bloomingdales." So who says Bodhi is a luxury line? It's just as well to say he created Bodhi handbags. Why call all those stores "top retailers"? They're stores. There are already articles about them so just link to them and leave it alone.
2. "Using the same market savvy he developed in the fashion industry, Janus created Fearless Management to manage music artists, assemble groups and produce and write music." Who says Janus has market savvy? Why explain about managing, assembling, and writing? Just say he created Fearless Management. This sentences isn't neutral and anything you say really needs to be sourced.
3. "Collecting donations from Fiji Water, Altoids and Café Bustello. Their charitable efforts combined will help fund green initiatives around the globe." I know people in your industry love name-dropping but it's a logical fallacy born of a desire for self-promotion. Janus created a charity; leave it at that.

I understand your situation: writing to help your boss's PR effort. I also appreciate your patience in working through the Articles for Creation process. Be advised that the changes needed to get this article acceptable for Misplaced Pages may make it unacceptable to your boss. Also, you still have to make a case for notablity and you're far from it right now. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey Chris, I completely understand, I have been going through and making all the statements neutral and re-writing most of this article. Once again your help is greatly appreciated. I, hopefully, will be able to send you something much more acceptable in the near future.

Hey Chris, Is this any better?

As always, thank you for your help and time. ThanksLaurenSullygirl (talk) 13:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC) LaurenSullygirl (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

So let's address the sourcing. There are three groups: sources that are reliable, the ones that are not, and the ones that are unclear and sit somewhere in the middle.

Advertising Age, Billboard, USA Today, Women's Wear Daily, Yahoo news, San Francisco Chronicle and possibly Pagesix.com are ok.

PRNewswire and the like is specifically forbidden. AllMusic can't be used as a source. All the others are questionable at best. I recommend cutting all the unreliable and questionable sources and the content supported by them exclusively.

You did a much better job on verbiage; I have no problem with the tone. I'd also recommend you make the changes on the draft and read WP:REFB to convert your endnotes into proper in-line citations. Because I've been involved in coaching you on this draft I won't be reviewing it. You can post at the help desk again when you've made the changes I've described. If I were a smarter man, I'd be charging money for this advice. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:52, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Gail Boggs

Hello! Your submission of Gail Boggs 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! Yoninah (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Original Research (yet again)

I've just (admittedly rather belatedly) read your comments about "bickering" on the Thomas More talk page. So I came back here to remind you of how this "bickering" started. The sequence of events is as follows:

a) You accused me of trying to publish original research in the More article.

b) Here's when you did it.

c) I (politely at first) invited you to substantiate that claim or withdraw it.

d) Nearly a year later you have failed to provide a single scrap of evidence for what you say.

e) Because you can't - I haven't written a word of that article.

And yet you haven't withdrawn, let alone apologised for, your remark. In fact you've - ludicrously - tried to deny having made it. (Here are your exact words: "At no point have I accused you of publishing original research".)

Here's my message: don't pull that stuff with me. You want me to stay away from your talk page? Nothing would give me greater pleasure. You flatter yourself if you think I'd spend any longer here than I have to. I had never heard of you until you accused me of original research. But you're in for a rude awakening if you think I or anyone else is going to tolerate people making things up about them.

I'm happy to leave the More stuff on the talk page (where I've addressed your nonsensical points about sources and "troublemakers" etc). But here's some advice for you personally. Don't pick a fight with someone if you're going to burst into tears when they fight back. You want to substantiate your accusation that I tried to insert original research into the More article, fine, let's hear your evidence. You want to withdraw it, fine, I'm all ears. But don't deny what you said. That's the cowards way out. From skimming through your posts, it's clear you're a tough guy in cyberspace, ready to dish out insults and (more irritatingly) patronising advice. But like all bullies, you cut and run the minute anyone stands up to you. Even behind the anonymity of a keyboard you can't summon the courage to answer a straight question.

Here's that question one more time. Do do you or do you not acknowledge that you wrote the following on the Thomas More talk page:

"It is not the job of editors to philosophize about St. Thomas More."

It's a yes/no question.

If no, and someone hacked into your account, fine, we'll call it quits. Otherwise, just grow a pair and stop trying to deny what you said. You obviously don't have enough honour to apologise when you make a false accusation, but don't try and pretend it didn't happen. Otherwise, you make people's blood boil, and then "bickering" happens. When it does, don't whinge about it. If you're so thin-skinned you can't bear it when someone points out you're wrong, just disconnect your modem now, because sooner or later people are going to acquaint you with the facts, and that's evidently more than you can stand. Brooklyn Eagle (talk) 02:12, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

tl;dr I stand by everything I said. I explained that I didn't want to be bothered anymore. You're a waste of my time. Leave my talk page or we're going to WP:RFCC. Chris Troutman (talk) 02:37, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Writing Enthusiast 03:33, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Gail Boggs

On 10 September 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gail Boggs, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that long before portraying Louise Brown in the 1990 movie Ghost, Gail Boggs portrayed Silvia in a 1971 performance of The Two Gentlemen of Verona? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gail Boggs. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), 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.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

16:25:09, 10 September 2014 review of submission by 69.71.193.130

• 69.71.193.130 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:A Leading Man (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

How can I get reliable sources when the information in the article was generated by me as an original source? This information isn't published anywhere, like a book or website. In this case I reworded the synopsis, but the first section I wrote myself.

69.71.193.130 (talk) 16:25, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@69.71.193.130: I'm sorry but original research doesn't belong on Misplaced Pages. We're not a webhosting service. You can simply abandon your draft or ask for it to be deleted. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in here uninvinted, but there are actually sources for A Leading Man such as IMDB. It can be improved. Snood1205 (talk) 20:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I welcome talk page stalkers. Remember, Imdb isn't a reliable source. You can use sources like this article from The Hollywood Reporter. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Yet another LA meet-up!

Hi Chris! I just found out that Simone Montemurno (who you saw on Saturday) is organizing a Misplaced Pages editing session this coming Tuesday. Since I've sent too many messages lately (and soon will be sending another message for October events), I'm not doing a super huge spam effort for the event, but I figured I'd call it to your attention! Info here if you'd like to join! Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

ANB discussion

There is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Move War at History of the Jews in Nepal, and RFC review that concerns you because you were recently involved with one or more of the related Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/History of the Jews in Nepal, Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2014 June 30 (History of the Jews in Nepal), Talk:History of the Jews in Nepal#RfC: Should we change article name to 'Judaism in Nepal'?. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 07:55, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Request on 09:38:33, 11 September 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Olamikhx

• Olamikhx (talk · contribs)
  • User:Olamikhx (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Chris, Thanks for your recent comment on my article for creation (Kenna Partners), I will be working on the article by adding more independent sources to support the notability of the article. my initial thought was that the Newspapers I cited are enough to give credibility and notability to the article.

Government publications mentioning the article are not available online for now hence why I didn't use such.

Thanks for your time and I hope the decline tag will be removed once I make your noted corrections.

Olamikhx (talk) 09:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Olamikhx: Sources don't have to be online to be used. Also, WikiProject Articles for Creation doesn't remove declination templates; those templates stay on the draft and stack up until the draft has been accepted. This is done so reviewers know which issues with the draft have already been addressed; those templates don't affect if your draft is accepted later on, so don't remove them.

As for your existing sources, I'm not familiar with the newspapers you've listed so I can't determine their importance. "CAC Certificate of Incorporation" appears to be an unpublished primary source document, so it can't be used as a source. Again, I have to be able to verify your sources.

Chris Troutman (talk) 17:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: Thanks for your prompt response. All the newspapers I cited are notable and credible media in Nigeria with both paper copy & e-copy publications, I hope this add credibility to my sources. CAC is the main body for company registration in Nigeria and certificate of registration is issued after a rigorous verification. All registered company can be verify through a written request by quoting the registration number of such company. Hence it is illegal to quote a company as registered under CAC when such registration does not exist.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Olamikhx (talk • contribs)

How would someone verify a CAC registration? How would I verify the sources you've listed? I can't simply take your word for it. Unfortunately, English-Misplaced Pages doesn't seem to have discussion of your sources so I don't know where to start investigating it and I'm not that interested in chasing it down only so your draft can be accepted. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:35, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

I unlinked a a redlink from "Quranism" to "Gibril Haddad" because the "Gibril Haddad" page was deleted to due a lack of notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.162.189.88 (talk) 00:07, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure. That red-link doesn't have to remain but as I indicated on your talk page, redlinks help editors assess demand for articles. I'm not familiar with the AfD for Gibril Haddad and you're probably right that he's not notable. However, leaving a red link does no harm to the article and I'd recommend you at least use an appropriate edit summary to indicate to editors like me on the hunt for vandalism. Remove the link if you like; I won't revert it again. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:27, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

List of banned users MfD

Hi Chris. Thanks for taking the time to comment on the proposals for change at the list of banned users. It's clear that there's sufficient support that a deletion will not be SNOW closed, so I've listed it at MfD - Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:List of banned users (6th nomination). I thought it appropriate to keep you informed. Worm(talk) 09:53, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Precious again

cleanup
Thank you for quality articles such as Rudy Boesch, for "beginning the cleanup"and making the small steps in the right direction, - you are an awesome Wikipedian! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 607th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Many thanks for the reminder of that award. I proudly display the PumpkinSky ribbon on my userpage alongside my other awards. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:28, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

10:14:43, 17 September 2014 review of submission by Handbaglover101

• Handbaglover101 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Luke Hughes (company) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Mr Troutman,

I'm confused as to why my submission was rejected under the premise that much of the information does not pertain to the company. All the information relates to a project the company has undertaken and is very much in the style of comparative articles on other designers.

The suggestion that the article on the person Luke Hughes could be expanded is valid but much of the information on that article does not pertain to him as a man as much of the projects are completed by his company under a raft of other designers.

Please could you suggest ways in which I can alter the article to more closely resemble the guidelines of wikipedia.

Many thanks,

Christine

Handbaglover101 (talk) 10:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

@Handbaglover101: First, in some sources (like this) I find the individual indistinguishable from the company. Second, you use many citations (like this) that say absolutely nothing about the company. Once you strip out all of those sources along with the sources that aren't independent and reliable you have essentially nothing left. I think it would make more sense to build a section about the eponymous company in the existing article about the man. As the content develops, you can use that section to start a new article.

I caution you not to use other articles as a guide. Much of the content on Misplaced Pages is problematic, at best. When looking at Misplaced Pages articles, look at their grade (found on the article's talk page). If an article is rated "B," "Good," "A," or "FA" then they serve as a fair example. Otherwise, I'd ignore them. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Will Eisner

I didn't make a "test edit." Your reversion introduced a punctuation error: You have double quote marks marks within double quotes.

In a passage in quote marks (double quotes), anything in quote marks within the passage should be in single quotes.

I don't want to get in an edit war, so would you please look this up in a book of grammar if you don't believe me and fix it? The reason you don't see the whole passage's double quotes in edit mode is because the template's quote field generates them automatically: Look at it on the live site, and you'll see the two erroneous sets of double quotes. --209.122.114.237 (talk) 13:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

@209.122.114.237: Thanks for letting me know. Had you used an edit summary when you made your edit I might have discussed it rather than revert it. Regardless. Misplaced Pages doesn't go by "a book of grammar;" Misplaced Pages (per MOS:QUOTES) allows quotes within quotes. I italicized that publication title, although the source doesn't, to placate your concerns. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:34, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Harry Scott Smith

On 20 September 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Harry Scott Smith, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Harry Scott Smith coined the term "biological control" in 1919? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Harry Scott Smith. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), 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) 00:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:South African Republic

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:South African Republic. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed  22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Help Please with Article opinion

Hello Chris,

I have left a message at the Village pump on my article here Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Questions#Recently_started_article._But_unsure_of_Notability. on the Article I have drafted on my page here User:DmitryPopovRU/Alex_Gilbert and currently waiting for review here Draft:Alex Gilbert. The issue is that this page has been made in the past but due to not enough sources at the time it was nominated for deletion. I have found more sources as you can see on the Village Pump question I left and I want to know from someone like you if you agree that this article is notable to be moved to Alex Gilbert or that I should work on it more first, though I do believe the 3 reliable sources that are on there make this article ready. Thanks heaps for your time.

Dmitry, --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 06:36, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

@DmitryPopovRU:  Declined I don't think anything has changed since the last deletion. Your draft relies on the subject's website, IMDB, and other non-reliable sources. The two articles from The New Zealand Herald aren't enough to establish notability. There isn't a "magic number" of sources which are enough, it's up to the reviewer. If you cut the entire article down to only include content from reliable sources you might stand a better chance. As it is, this draft looks like a promotional attempt with a mere fig leaf of sourcing. Furthermore, those reliable sources really only speak to the single adoption story. Like the deletion of Belle Knox, even dozens of articles about one event is still just one event. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:54, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Chris, but I think you also missed the link here - http://tvnz.co.nz/sunday/s2014-ep1-video-5821764 that shows clear notability. This being the biggest TV Network in NZ and also on the most watched TV Channel in NZ. TV One (New Zealand) Thank You, Dmitry --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 18:18, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Again, I made that point about one event. The video is entitled "Alex Gilbert goes to Russia looking to find his birth parents". It's the same story of a Russian child adopted in New Zealand. There's nothing new there, though it was on a news magazine program. (I can't view the video as I live in the US.) Since Gilbert doesn't pass our criteria specific for people in TV/movie production, he would have to pass general notability on more than one aspect. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:57, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

14:06:57, 24 September 2014 review of submission by 216.8.167.64

• 216.8.167.64 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Farrow (customs brokerage) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

216.8.167.64 (talk) 14:06, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Troutman

I have edited my submission with complete references. I made sure to follow your guidelines from our last talk.

Furthermore, I have been awaiting for the approval of my submission for over a month, and I am seeing the amount of articles for verification before me increase on some days, rather than decrease.

I was wondering if there was anyway that you would be so kind as to help me speed up the verification process!

I understand that this may not be possible, however, I figured that you were the right person to ask.

Thanks Mr. Troutman!

Alpha Huynh

@Alphahuynh:  Done Submissions are reviewed randomly; there is no queue for review. The number of backlogged submissions has gone up because most of the drafts are promotional articles like yours and encyclopedists get burned out telling people no.

Of course, I'm the right person to ask. I was able to accept your draft, although I had to do some cleanup. Please remember that ideal articles are neutral and boring and we have a manual of style that also has to be followed. Do not re-insert the promotional foolishness that I removed. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:57, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Blast message re UC Irvine WLL event

Hi Chris, it's looking like there will be another Wik-Ed women event on 10/7 so I'll be sending out a talkpage blast message probably this weekend for that. Can I tack on a message about your event, and if so, is there anything in particular you'd like me to say about it? Also, re the fish class project I told you about-- see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fishes/Archive_3#Apparent_class_project_re:_fish, Misplaced Pages:Education_noticeboard/Incidents/Archive1#Tracking_down_a_class_project_re:_fishes, User:Calliopejen1/to do/Fish article cleanup. Probably would make sense to look at the pre-editing versions of a handful of fish articles to get the general issues. On a totally unrelated note, I stumbled across Misplaced Pages:Education_noticeboard/Incidents#Class_project_without_a_course_page_at_University_of_California_Irvine while I was digging up those links, which might also be of interest to you! Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:20, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

In regards to the links, I'll start chasing down those responsible. For my UCR edit-a-thon you could post something to the effect of: "There's also an upcoming edit-a-thon at UC Riverside. Join students and faculty learning how to edit!" Thanks Chris Troutman (talk) 01:40, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Farrow (customs brokerage), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The United Way. 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) 09:12, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for John W. Olmsted

On 29 September 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John W. Olmsted, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that John W. Olmsted earned his blues playing lawn tennis in 1927? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John W. Olmsted. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), 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) 00:03, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Misuse of template warnings

You recently templated me and accused me of not assuming good faith. That is an inappropriate use of the templating system. First of all, refrain from templating regulars. Second of all, there is no need for me to assume good faith when it comes to sock and meat puppets. Third of all, a coordinated canvassing campaign was occurring on AfD, which is indicative of bad faith. Since you obviously don't understand what "assume good faith" means, given the fact that you gave me a template warning in a situation that did not demand good faith, I suggest you review the guideline to correct your error. Viriditas (talk) 02:36, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

@Viriditas: First, I template regulars. Boilerplate doesn't run the risk of being offensive when upbraiding users. Second, you do need to assume good faith. Yes, I recognize there are several new accounts and probably some socks participating in that discussion. I've been mulling over requesting an investigation to stop this misuse. However, I'm one of those keep voters and I'm neither a sockpuppet nor a meatpuppet. (For the record, I live in Los Angeles; far from the Heartland.)

You deserve a reprimand for spouting this vitriol. While I'm familiar with this sentiment, I'm disappointed that you bring this sort of attitude to Misplaced Pages. I would assume after 10 years you would know better. I was generous in only pointing out your AGF problem; if you're connoting this statement to me then it's a personal attack. The best thing for you to do is to strike out those comments and stop contributing on pages where your personal beliefs cloud your objectivity. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:06, 29 September 2014 (UTC)