User talk:Neelix/Archive 23

31: 1610: 539: 944: 1737: 1978: 1015: 2522: 2440: 221:. We started with a script-compiled list of older FAs that have not had a recent formal review. The next step is to prune the list by removing articles that are still actively maintained, up-to-date, and believed to meet current standards. We know that many of you personally maintain articles that you nominated, so we'd appreciate your help in winnowing the list where appropriate. 1260:, which you've just created? Etty painted over 800 works, of which we only currently have articles on ten. Keeping this template will either give extreme undue weight to those few paintings on which I happen to have written articles (which are by no means his most significant), or create a huge and unsightly sea of redlinks which are unlikely ever to be filled. – 211: 1847: 810: 1927: 905: 3059: 3012: 2965: 2918: 2352: 2305: 2258: 2211: 2164: 2117: 2070: 2023: 1083: 260: 1621: 550: 1279:

we have articles about these particular paintings is what gives them the undue weight, not the fact that we have linked the articles together. Nonetheless, I will not object if you wish to add red links to the navbox. How many of the 800+ paintings are notable enough to receive Knowledge (XXG) articles?

2861:

state that we should "use gender-neutral language where this can be done with clarity and precision." The gender-neutral "actor" can be used in this context with clarity and precision. The people in question have not stated anything about their preferences on this point, so I don't think that line of

1586:

article is a painting by Collier, I would think that his activities as a painter are important. I agree that the title should be no longer than necessary, but I think the additional disambiguation is necessary in this case. You are certainly welcome to start a move discussion if you disagree; I would

1557:

says a title should be "no longer than necessary" to identify a subject and distinguish itself from other subjects. So adding "Pre-Raphaelite" seems to a redundant extra descriptor. It would only make sense to disambiguate it like that if there were multiple people with that name known primarily for

1278:

approved for featured status only fifteen days after creating the article; I normally take months to go from creating an article to getting it featured. I think it important for there to be a navbox on these articles, and that the undue weight is present whether the navbox exists or no; the fact that

1220:, what I get is the "Mr. Nguyen Van An at the lower house", and it was shot by the Dutch charges d'affaire in South Vietnam. North Vietnam never recognise South Vietnam, and I think North Vietnamese would have a chance to be in South Vietnam only if they joined the Vietcong guerilla. According to the 1204:

and the person introduced in the article above are the same person. I was thinking that the evidence were in favour of my revision: either from a look at their appearances and the career history of An (born 1937, the same below. Nguyễn Văn An should be referred as An according to Vietnamese customs).

1135:

and I don't see anywhere that a previous declined speedy deletion precludes PROD. Obviously, you can contest or decline the PROD for any reason whatsoever and I'm not looking to argue that, I'm just curious if your only reason for declining the PROD was a policy that I can't seem to find. I'd like to

370:

Hi, I want to make sure I didn't give the wrong impression before. I think it would be great if we can dig up images we can use, and I'm glad you're looking around. But I know very little about what will fly with the Knowledge (XXG) community ... Crisco knows a lot. So ... keep looking, but also keep

101:

Hey, I made another change to the text ... correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see in the article that Nimoy talks about a strained relationship with the cast in the film, so I went with "Shatner's strained relationship with some of the cast members". Do you see anything else I should change? - Dank

1379:

I can understand your reasons for wanting to be the first editor to create the other articles relating to Etty's paintings. Why not create stubs for each with a single citation? That way, your chosen citation variation will have priority in each. The number of articles you mention sounds manageable

1297:

I honestly can't see an advantage to a navbox that doesn't outweigh the disadvantage of making people think "these are his most significant works since they're the only ones Knowledge (XXG)'s highlighting"; these are being written with the specific aim of highlighting the re-opening of the York Art

1208:

First, As given by Knowledge (XXG) and the CV given by the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV), An was born in 1937. Hence by 1967 An should be 30 years old (it shouldn't be wrong). But what I see in the picture I remove is a man who seems to be in his middle or late years. Also to compare the picture

1126:

of the PROD of this article due to the fact that a speedy deletion has previously been declined. Since the threshold for an A7 deletion is significantly higher than the subject simply not being notable, I've never heard of a previous A7 decline being a reason that an article cannot be PRODed. In

2747:

part about the 1978 series of the article into a new one like you did it with the 1989 Batman series before. But a user returned it into the old, confusing version because it is a featured article from 2007 (when the whole new universe wasn′t rudimentary planed). Can you help me to exclude it by

2573:

and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the

2491:

1227:

Last point. The source of that picture doesn't provided adequate information on the tones of the name the person shown in the picture (not a surprise). Vietnamese is a tonal language, thus it is possible that their names are the same if all diacritics are removed, but different if diacritics are

1347:

I'd be reluctant to introduce redlinks (and am intentionally not doing so on the articles as I write them). It encourages other people to create stubs; normally that would be a good thing, but in this case it means obliterating someone else's work when I get round to writing it (as has already

735:

Neelix, we've worked together for long enough that I don't think it's out of line to ask that you make any edits before TFA day, not on TFA day. I reverted because I don't agree on either point. The comment has a "parenthetical" feel to it, and a good way to clue readers to that is to use

736:

parentheses. And later in the article, I see "the viewer has no way to know who Brad is" ... if we don't know anything about him, then how do we know he's a hero? In a related article, it's made clearer that we don't know he's a hero. I already checked this out before TFA day. - Dank (

2831:

There is no single sentence in the gender neutrality guidelines supporting your opinion.None of the people in question have stated that they prefer masculine pronouns.Even the separate articles for the people in question call them actresses.I await an adequate response on this very

1811:

Ah ok, he referred to your "unilateral move" in many of the moves he did last month, so I had assumed you had some background. Unfortunately, I've only handled his behavior on the India related moves in the past, so I'm a bit lacking in context on a lot of these. cheers.

1304:, weren't even exhibited in his lifetime; equally, some of his most significant works are hidden away in private collections and can't make viable articles since I don't see a point in writing articles on anything for which we can't get an image). I wouldn't object to an 1562:

might have done some illustrations in paintings, but he's not primarily known as a painter. Paintings seem to be just one format amongst others that he may have done his illustrations, but he's described by the Oxford DNB as a satirist and caricaturist, not a painter.

1797:! Unfortunately, I don't think I'm going to be much use to you; I don't have much familiarity with Chile, and any past page moves I was involved with were probably just part of general article title standardization. I hope the cleanup goes well! 232:

your assessment of their current status. Likewise, if you have taken on the maintenance of any listed FAs that were originally nominated by a departed editor, please indicate their status. BLPs should be given especially careful consideration.

970:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

1410:. On reflection I think I'll just ignore the navbox completely, and let other people add it to articles if they really feel it's necessary; this is such an obscure corner of the 'pedia that it's really not worth losing sleep over. – 1224:, An finished his study in Donetsk in 1967, then transferred to Hanoi to work in a working site for a electricity supplier. If so, is it possible for An to appear in South Vietnam? How come he is the man in the picture I removed? 442:

I don't think the Astatine periodical table image itself is particularly useful. It doesn't tell anything about the element itself that's not already in the text. There's a reason, after all, it's not used in the article. As for

1175:! I hadn't seen that there before, and had previously been under the impression that the opposite was the case. I'll keep that in mind in the future. I'm sorry for unnecessarily complicating the deletion of this article. 1333:

or a bit longer, say) and which are significant enough to justify stand-alone articles, there are around 40, assuming I lump all the works which are effectively copies or pastiches of other works into a single very long

754: 305:) came out yesterday. Read the section "Rights issue" in that article. This is bad news for Nick and Fanny Rodwell (whom the Tintin community has never much liked). I will keep watching for further developments. Cheers. 834: 182: 974:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

967: 567:

The Knowledge (XXG) Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources.

145:

I don't think he distinguishes; it was roughly the same group of cast members in both TOS and the films, and the conflict began in TOS and continued on past the films right up to the day of the making of

1453:

Neelix, I just noticed it was promoted, congratulations! And I see that it will be on the main page soon! What a trial it was, I imagine, but you kept your head as always and persevered. Best wishes,

1436:

I finally got round to looking at this, and for various reasons I don't think it's an article I want to review. Fell free to ping me next time you have an FAC up though, and good luck with this one

1406:

It would be grossly hypocritical of me to create a batch of stubs, given that I've spent the last decade arguing that Knowledge (XXG) should have a minimum article size and stubs should be deleted

1715: 1867: 1200:

Thanks for your message. I don't think that copyright issue is a matter there, I never considered this when I did the revision. What I was thinking when I did so is whether the person shown in

2980: 2555: 2473: 3074: 3027: 2933: 604: 569: 1327:; there are 14 on the list but I've done five of them since I made the list). In terms of articles on which I have enough to bring up to "at-least-adequate" level (roughly the level of 2367: 2320: 2273: 2226: 2179: 2132: 2085: 2038: 1863: 1748: 1098: 229: 382:

There was previously a fairly strong consensus against running signatures. While we're on the subject of images, could you please vet the copyright status of the images you add?

275: 729: 628: 364: 338:

Good question, and I had wondered the same thing. Come to think of it, I believe the American film company that made the first one must already own the rights to the next two

95: 2558:, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the 2476:, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the 787:

in hopes that my answers would help you understand why I did what I did. Please feel free to respond there if you are still interested in the development of the article.

225: 1323:

In terms of numbers, of the ones I could realistically bring up to FA level that don't yet exist, as things stand there are nine definites and three possibles (list

1517:

Hi Neelix. I wanted to follow-up on this request and see if it is something you wouldn't mind assisting with. Thank you for your time and consideration in advance.

416:; thank you for letting me know. I will attempt to be more discerning in my image recommendations in the future. As for the Astatine blurb, what do you think of 2578:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 2496:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 1360:

issues since there are obvious advantages to all the articles using the same citation style, but one can't change the citation style on an existing article. –

1217: 956: 695:

According to the discussion on the article's talk page, all of the covers in the second run are in the public domain. I'm glad you like the new image.

1771: 2559: 2551: 2511: 2477: 2469: 2429: 1985:

for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can

1022:

for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can

677:

nudity that is usually objected to). However, Neelix's cover does show up better at 100 px, so I don't mind this new image - assuming it is free. —

412:. I will try to continue looking for appropriate images for TFA. I hadn't realized that there was a consensus against using signatures with TFAs, 784: 1546: 3052: 3005: 2958: 2911: 2345: 2298: 2251: 2204: 2157: 2110: 2063: 2016: 1972: 1744: 1076: 1009: 253: 1335: 617: 538: 510: 1774:. As you seem to have an understanding of the Chile articles, pinging you to see if you can help with that part of the cleanup. cheers. — 2776: 1201: 1650: 780: 1609: 1236: 1692: 1274: 1272:

You've been doing some amazing work on articles related to Etty paintings lately! I was amazed to find that you were able to get

2729: 1930:

This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.

908:

This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.

613: 2894:

Thanks for your kind words, I try to do my best, and hope someday my work will be appreciate like here in Chinese wikipedia.--

2531: 2449: 447:... I'm concerned about the implications of depicting him in the context of a children's show while holding a can of beer. — 2664:

for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

1162: 1142: 2593: 1853: 2575: 2493: 1136:

make sure I'm on the right page in the future. Either way, I've gone ahead and taken the article to AFD instead. Cheers,

483:

That would, presumably, be acceptable. I'm not 100% happy, but such an image would address both the concerns I raised. —

1678: 1664: 1496: 1156:#6 states "A rejected speedy candidate is still eligible for proposed deletion, but a rejected AfD candidate is not." -- 2858: 960: 346:

the Tintin community must feel now about Nick Rodwell (it would be difficult to write about him in the neutral voice).

2998: 2702: 1583: 1559: 1232: 86: 81: 69: 64: 59: 2538: 2456: 951: 935: 1986: 1526: 1507: 1475: 1023: 741: 639: 425: 376: 38: 1957: 1902: 1231:

Hope you will understand my rationale on this, though it may just be rebutted as it's just my original research.--

1221: 994: 880: 199: 107: 2607:, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted: 1982: 1300: 514: 1314:

template, which makes it clearer that "these are the ones on which Knowledge (XXG) happens to have articles".

2780: 2359: 1819: 1781: 1740: 1329: 1308: 469:. The beer can could easily be cropped out of the image of Burns. Would you find the image acceptable then? 1770:

I see that you had moved some Chile articles earlier, they've been moved elsewhere by Tobias Conradi, see

1644: 1542: 1116: 1065: 1042: 924: 869: 651: 195: 2822: 2749: 2687: 2679: 2640: 1522: 1503: 1468: 1254: 1019: 714: 682: 488: 452: 395: 2899: 1880: 1686: 1324: 444: 383: 187: 1357: 3088: 3041: 2994: 2947: 2866:

for additional discussion of the gender neutrality of the word "actor" and the history of its use.

2375: 2334: 2287: 2240: 2193: 2146: 2099: 2052: 2005: 1968: 1961: 1946: 1913: 1906: 1756: 1568: 1458: 1443: 1057: 351: 310: 298: 2843: 2803: 2709: 2633: 1813: 1794: 1775: 1349: 794: 283: 190:, - before my next FAC (but nothing planned right now) I will ask you about image licensing ;) -- 3019: 2775:, I was just adding minor edits which could have been corrections. Thank you for understanding. 2574:

speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

2492:

speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

1921: 1499:. I have since submitted another edit and was hoping you wouldn't mind reviewing due to a COI. 899: 1090: 2857:"Actor" is the gender-neutral profession term, and is neither a masculine term nor a pronoun. 2795: 2772: 2757: 1722: 1640: 1061: 1038: 1033: 981: 920: 915: 865: 826: 814: 591:

reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.

417: 241: 191: 3066: 2972: 2556:

something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally

2474:

something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally

1153: 1132: 218: 2871: 2818: 2737: 2721: 2683: 2667:

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can

2644: 2604: 2597: 2399:

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can

1858: 1835: 1802: 1672: 1658: 1592: 1385: 1284: 1180: 1005: 998: 891: 884: 762: 710: 700: 678: 502: 484: 474: 466: 448: 433: 413: 391: 329: 155: 122: 47: 17: 821:

that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

2895: 2419: 2411: 1871: 1682: 1482: 1462: 1448: 1411: 1361: 1261: 839: 663: 657: 1917: 1554: 895: 2603:

Hello, Neelix. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started,

634:

I don't follow; wasn't that the image Crisco chose? It seems pretty tame to me. - Dank (

3078: 3031: 2984: 2937: 2583: 2501: 2371: 2324: 2277: 2230: 2183: 2136: 2089: 2042: 2001: 1996: 1942: 1937: 1752: 1579: 1564: 1454: 1437: 857: 737: 645:

I don't consider what little nudity there is in that image to be objectionable (and we

635: 409: 372: 347: 321: 306: 217:

We are preparing to take a closer look at Featured articles promoted in 2004–2010 that

165: 136: 103: 2550:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge (XXG). This has been done under

2468:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge (XXG). This has been done under

1701:

New donations - Taylor & Francis, Science, and three new French-language resources

2839: 2799: 1172: 1157: 1137: 790: 343: 279: 2753: 1992: 1977: 1933: 1587:

be glad to bow to consensus if the community generally agrees with your assertion.

1353: 1029: 1014: 977: 911: 669: 237: 3092: 3045: 2951: 2903: 2875: 2847: 2838:

P.S.The vandalism warnings for 173.180.3.128 were uncalled for to say the least.--

2826: 2807: 2794:

Why should not Sophia Lynn be called an actress?Is this the latest fashion in the

2784: 2761: 2691: 2647: 2587: 2505: 2423: 2379: 2338: 2291: 2244: 2197: 2150: 2103: 2056: 2009: 1950: 1889: 1846: 1825: 1806: 1787: 1760: 1725: 1596: 1572: 1530: 1511: 1416: 1389: 1366: 1288: 1266: 1240: 1184: 1166: 1146: 1110: 1069: 1046: 987: 928: 873: 798: 766: 718: 704: 686: 621: 492: 478: 456: 437: 399: 355: 333: 314: 287: 245: 169: 159: 140: 126: 2867: 1798: 1668: 1654: 1588: 1381: 1280: 1176: 758: 696: 470: 429: 420:? I would also be grateful for your thoughts on the image I recommended for the 325: 151: 118: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2415: 2171: 1210: 1102: 856:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

779:

You'er welcome. I enjoy copy-editing. You wrote me about my copy edits of the

267: 2396:

for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

2579: 2497: 2218: 114: 1704:

Expansion into new languages, including French, Finnish, Turkish, and Farsi

1298:

Gallery and thus focusing on works with some relevance to that (some, like

210: 1912:

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

890:

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

2661: 2530:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

2448:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

2124: 2030: 387: 3058: 3011: 2964: 2917: 2697:

A page you started (Let the Right One In (franchise)) has been reviewed!

2351: 2304: 2257: 2210: 2163: 2116: 2069: 2022: 1082: 259: 2814: 2570: 2547: 2515: 2488: 2465: 2433: 2393: 2312: 2265: 2077: 2565:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may

2483:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may

1926: 1620: 968:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of Call of Duty characters

904: 549: 324:! I wonder how this will affect the possible sequel to the 2011 film. 709:

Thanks for showing me that discussion. Yeah, the image looks good. —

2771:

Hi I would like to notify you that I was not abusing the article of

1495:

Thank you again for your earlier assistance and guidance on editing

755:

Wedding of Prince Carl Philip, Duke of Värmland, and Sofia Hellqvist

1467:

Congrats on the article's promotion to featured status, Neelix! ---

1060:

to be copyedited. You should be good to go for your GA nomination.

2925: 2863: 2817:, might be considered sufficient grounds to be called an actress. 117:! I made a minor tweak, and I think the blurb is now good to go. 2675:, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. 2632:

you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on

2407:, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. 1127:

fact, I've often seen editors advised to take an article to AFD

390:, was a) not actually of the element itself and b) a copyvio. — 1213:(shot in about year 2001), the appearance doesn't look alike. 1841: 783:

article. I have left you a message on the article's talk page

164:

Okay, for the broader conflict, "on the set" will do. - Dank (

25: 3065: