Knowledge (XXG)

User talk:SMcCandlish/Archive 162

Source šŸ“

271:
an effort to try to bring some sense to these sorts of "fantasies" but there are indeed a lot of amateur genealogists or monarchists or whatever they are on WP who are obsessive about these "princesses" and "dukes" of nonexistent monarchies and they all gang up and argue until they are blue in the face that the articles labeling somebody the holder of a royal title that was abolished more than a hundred years ago are correct. So I gave up, thinking "oh well, what the heck, let them live in their deluded fantasies, what does it matter really" but I don't actually think WP should be a refuge for that kind of nonsense. I am mostly a content creator, on opera and Baroque music more than anything else, and am not as familiar as you are with all these procedures of how to try to change MOS guidelines etc., I don't even know what VPPOL is, but I am more than willing to try to help in any way I can so please try to set that up Believe me, those examples I gave at NPOV noticeboard are the mere tip of the iceberg, there are zillions more. You are welcome to contact me on my talk page at any time. Best,
413:
even, after ignoring two banned users, so it was reasonable to come to a no-consensus result, especially since this this comes down to a source-interpretation debate (i.e., neither side has an overwhelming policy argument in their favor, nor a near-totality of sources). There is real-world debate about the matter, but it's pretty clear what the scientific consensus is. In a later RfC, we're just going to have to take the opposers' arguments into account and produce a clearer showing of that off-site consensus, in a way that cannot be claimed to be cherry-picking. In the interim, it's really perhaps not actually important whether the article contains the word "fringe" or not. We just do the sourcing work, and it will become clear to the reader that it's a fringey idea with only minority support in the literature. There are lots and lots of topics like this, and that's okay.
31: 864: 786: 714: 662: 450: 122: 365:
character-assassination handwaving by the other party, to whom anyone in disagreement is "against consensus" and "pushing pseudoscience", and etc. That kind of borderline personal attack on entire groups of editors is why he's apt to get topic banned eventually. Well, part of why. The civil-Pov /
270:
Hi - I totally understand if you are too busy in the current crisis to take any action about this but since you raised the issue on the NPOV noticeboard I hope that you consider it important enough to deal with to some extent as you are able. As I said there, it was about seven years ago that I made
137:
page for at least B-class. It is currently listed as C-class, but a lot more referenced content has been added and lead revised in the past few days. But alas, the list there indicates that it often takes a looong time for anybody to react to such a request. So if not you, who do think would be a
412:
Not what I would have preferred (it's just going to extend the debate to another, later round of RfCing). The closer has been around for almost 2 years, which is long enough for some successful RfAs. As a "no-consensus", it's not a supervote. The support/oppose head counts were pretty close to
286:
I just burned all my WP time for today on a C-to-B-class cleanup and assessment. I agree it needs to be done, but I don't relish the drama, and it would be time-consuming to even draft a VPPOL RfC on it. I can do it, but not immediately. I'm hoping someone else will run with it. Then again,
160:
Done. I pored over it with a fine-toothed comb, mostly to make the citations all consistent and properly using the parameters. Fixed up some typos, punctuation, grammar glitches, and inclarities. The sourcing looks tight. At first I was concerned that the substantial lead, mostly devoid of
346:
I'm not into striking; what's said is said. But, it's enough for now; as I already indicated over there, I'm going to let that aspect of this alone. I get where you're coming from, but in this particular dispute (I mean the entire months-long saga, not just today) and this
186:
Thanks a ton for your fast reply and addressing the ratingĀ !!! This article now being B-class gives is better base for the next step: nominating it for GA. But I'll first work on it again, as I have a few more references that may be worthwhile to be included. --
236:
Yeah, GA can take a long time, since it's dependent on someone randomly volunteering to dig deep into the article. It's best done by someone not connected to the topic (or it looks like wikiproject participants just scratching each others' backs).
355:
encampments and all us other editors caught in their crossfire ā€“ it really is all about conduct, and the "content" matters cannot really be separated from that cleanly, because the content is hostage to the conduct problems. That's
360:
it keeps going to noticeboards, and RfC, and AE, and ArbCom. But, yes, the article talk page isn't really the place for a conduct issue to be aired out. I have to say, however, that I was responding to
461:
SMc, can you, or any of the MOS savants watching this talkpage, point me to if/where in the style-book the use of 'The' in article names is discussed? In particular, the practice of distinguishing
678: 393:
As you are someone who has done non-admin closure of discussions and talked about it on your user page, I'm just wondering about your take on the recent non-admin closure of the RfC on
598:
I actually looked into this a bit on a minor, cursory level, but didn't post here because I didn't find anything. Well done, and thanks for schooling
797: 291:, and this stuff has been ucked fup for a very long time, so another week or month or whatever won't kill anyone. Note to lurkers: This is about: 222:
I nominated sand cat for GA last week, did not get a response yet, but will wait with nominating black-footed cat until this is done. --
838: 736: 624: 565: 514: 424: 377: 307: 248: 212: 176: 94: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 161:
citations, might be a problem, but everything in it appears to be in the main body with an inline citation already. This may be
133:
Hey SMcCandlish: are you still busy? I just put up a request at Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Cats/Assessmentā€Ž for reassessing the
898: 528:
is exactly wht I was looking for and I wouldn't have found it w/o your help since searching MOS pages for the word 'the' or '
873: 779: 707: 655: 443: 288: 115: 751: 554:
You're welcome. MOS:THE didn't even mention WP:THE (WP:NCTHE); I added it as a "see also" after you asked about this.
331:
conduct. Coming as it does on a reply to a reminder to focus on content please consider striking the conduct pieces.
294:
WP:NPOVN Ā§Ā Labeling modern descendants of nobility with theoretical titles: NPOV, BLP, NOR and other policy problems
877: 758: 38: 747: 824: 482: 499:" internal disambiguation page; one of the things listed there is probably what you're after. Also of note is 816: 352: 906: 885: 835: 755: 733: 690: 621: 604: 562: 511: 421: 402: 374: 304: 245: 209: 173: 47: 17: 820: 800:, I'm about to hit the road to take care of some long-delayed stuff for the inlaws or I'd weigh in. -- 809: 227: 223: 192: 188: 155: 143: 139: 880:, one of Monteverdi's exceptional works, in memory of Brian who passed me his collected sources. -- 580: 545: 478: 336: 805: 525: 293: 902: 881: 529: 394: 276: 830: 728: 686: 616: 557: 506: 416: 398: 369: 299: 240: 204: 168: 134: 537: 500: 162: 910: 889: 843: 766: 741: 694: 682: 629: 608: 584: 570: 549: 519: 429: 406: 382: 340: 312: 280: 253: 231: 217: 196: 181: 147: 863: 599: 576: 541: 490: 474: 470: 332: 801: 272: 503:(part of the naming conventions), since you're asking about titles in particular. 674: 646: 46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
901:, in honour of the composer who died and my brother who plays double bass. -- 533: 496: 469:
as article titles. If it helps, you can see the context of my question
473:
although I'm not asking you to weigh in on that move request. Cheers.
750:, which you created, has been nominated for speedy renaming to 798:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Catholicism#Post-nominals RFC
25: 872:
Thank you for article improvements in May! - DYK our list of
894: 855: 324: 673:
Hi there. I've been trying to get some clarity about
575:
Ha. Then there is some lasting benefit to my query!
592:Aah, Saint McCandlish, the MOS wonk to the rescue! 677:and the only specific discussion I could find was 899:triple concerto for violin, harp and double bass 725:Looked over the nomination, and it makes sense. 532:' is pointless; and checking what the shortcuts 815:Thanks for the note. I commented there, and at 540:link to, is obvious only in hindsight. Cheers. 683:Talk:New Mexico#Spanish and Navajo in the lead 8: 854: 138:competent assessor? Stay healthy! Cheers -- 876:enough to improve their articles? - I have 862: 853: 327:which is just about content not content 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 7: 681:. Would you be able to comment at 435: 874:people for whose life I'm thankful 24: 897:a composer pictured who wrote a 784: 777: 712: 705: 660: 653: 448: 441: 120: 113: 29: 366:slow-editwar thing is another. 1: 828: 778: 726: 706: 654: 614: 555: 504: 442: 414: 367: 297: 238: 202: 166: 114: 772:In case you weren't aware... 752:Category:Works about pinball 748:Category: Pinball mass media 351:of dispute ā€“ of two warring 926: 775: 703: 651: 439: 111: 861: 911:15:16, 26 May 2020 (UTC) 890:20:27, 17 May 2020 (UTC) 844:21:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC) 810:13:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC) 771: 767:10:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC) 742:21:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC) 695:21:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC) 630:18:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 609:04:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC) 389:Non-admin closure of RfC 856:May Ā· Mary Ā· Monteverdi 613:Glad to be of service. 585:17:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC) 571:17:25, 9 May 2020 (UTC) 550:17:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC) 520:10:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC) 483:07:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC) 430:19:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC) 407:16:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC) 383:06:59, 6 May 2020 (UTC) 341:02:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC) 313:23:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC) 281:23:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC) 254:19:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC) 232:09:45, 6 May 2020 (UTC) 218:07:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC) 197:07:07, 6 May 2020 (UTC) 182:23:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC) 165:-worthy at this point. 148:20:48, 3 May 2020 (UTC) 436:'The' in article names 323:There is a version of 42:of past discussions. 18:User talk:SMcCandlish 819:, and also notified 289:WP:THEREISNODEADLINE 201:Sounds like a plan. 858: 602:and I about this! 870: 869: 591: 395:Indigenous Aryans 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 917: 866: 859: 842: 792: 788: 787: 781: 780: 762: 744: 740: 720: 716: 715: 709: 708: 668: 664: 663: 657: 656: 628: 607: 597: 596: 589: 569: 518: 494: 456: 452: 451: 445: 444: 428: 381: 311: 266:"Fantasy" royals 252: 216: 180: 159: 135:black-footed cat 128: 124: 123: 117: 116: 108:Black-footed cat 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 925: 924: 920: 919: 918: 916: 915: 914: 852: 795: 794: 793: 785: 783: 774: 760: 745: 724: 722: 721: 713: 711: 702: 671: 670: 669: 661: 659: 650: 603: 594: 593: 488: 459: 458: 457: 449: 447: 438: 391: 321: 268: 153: 131: 130: 129: 121: 119: 110: 105: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 923: 921: 868: 867: 851: 848: 847: 846: 782: 776: 773: 770: 710: 704: 701: 698: 658: 652: 649: 644: 643: 642: 641: 640: 639: 638: 637: 636: 635: 634: 633: 632: 446: 440: 437: 434: 433: 432: 390: 387: 386: 385: 364: 359: 353:WP:GREATWRONGS 350: 320: 317: 316: 315: 292: 267: 264: 263: 262: 261: 260: 259: 258: 257: 256: 220: 118: 112: 109: 106: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 922: 913: 912: 908: 904: 900: 896: 892: 891: 887: 883: 879: 875: 865: 860: 857: 849: 845: 840: 837: 834: 833: 826: 822: 818: 814: 813: 812: 811: 807: 803: 799: 791: 769: 768: 765: 763: 757: 753: 749: 743: 738: 735: 732: 731: 719: 700:Pinball media 699: 697: 696: 692: 688: 684: 680: 676: 667: 648: 645: 631: 626: 623: 620: 619: 612: 611: 610: 606: 605:North America 601: 588: 587: 586: 582: 578: 574: 573: 572: 567: 564: 561: 560: 553: 552: 551: 547: 543: 539: 535: 531: 527: 523: 522: 521: 516: 513: 510: 509: 502: 498: 492: 487: 486: 485: 484: 480: 476: 472: 468: 464: 455: 431: 426: 423: 420: 419: 411: 410: 409: 408: 404: 400: 396: 388: 384: 379: 376: 373: 372: 362: 357: 354: 348: 345: 344: 343: 342: 338: 334: 330: 326: 318: 314: 309: 306: 303: 302: 295: 290: 285: 284: 283: 282: 278: 274: 265: 255: 250: 247: 244: 243: 235: 234: 233: 229: 225: 221: 219: 214: 211: 208: 207: 200: 199: 198: 194: 190: 185: 184: 183: 178: 175: 172: 171: 164: 157: 152: 151: 150: 149: 145: 141: 136: 127: 107: 102: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 903:Gerda Arendt 893: 882:Gerda Arendt 871: 831: 827:of the RfC. 796: 789: 759: 746: 729: 717: 672: 665: 617: 558: 524:Thanks SMc! 507: 466: 462: 460: 453: 417: 392: 370: 328: 322: 300: 269: 241: 205: 169: 132: 125: 78: 43: 37: 832:SMcCandlish 730:SMcCandlish 687:Magnolia677 685:? Cheers. 675:MOS:FORLANG 647:MOS:FORLANG 618:SMcCandlish 559:SMcCandlish 508:SMcCandlish 418:SMcCandlish 399:BirdValiant 371:SMcCandlish 319:R+I Request 301:SMcCandlish 242:SMcCandlish 206:SMcCandlish 170:SMcCandlish 95:ArchiveĀ 165 90:ArchiveĀ 164 85:ArchiveĀ 163 79:ArchiveĀ 162 73:ArchiveĀ 161 68:ArchiveĀ 160 60:ArchiveĀ 155 36:This is an 878:a FAC open 825:WT:MOSABBR 590:(passerby) 224:BhagyaMani 189:BhagyaMani 156:BhagyaMani 140:BhagyaMani 817:WT:MOSBIO 756:Fayenatic 600:Abecedare 577:Abecedare 542:Abecedare 495:See the " 491:Abecedare 475:Abecedare 333:Barkeep49 802:Ealdgyth 526:WP:NCTHE 363:en masse 103:May 2020 534:MOS:THE 530:article 497:MOS:THE 273:Smeat75 39:archive 821:WT:MOS 538:WP:THE 501:WP:THE 163:WP:GAN 895:today 764:ondon 467:The X 16:< 907:talk 886:talk 823:and 806:talk 790:Done 754:. ā€“ 718:Done 691:talk 679:here 666:Done 581:talk 546:talk 479:talk 471:here 465:and 454:Done 403:talk 349:sort 337:talk 325:this 277:talk 228:talk 193:talk 144:talk 126:Done 850:May 841:šŸ˜¼ 739:šŸ˜¼ 627:šŸ˜¼ 568:šŸ˜¼ 517:šŸ˜¼ 427:šŸ˜¼ 380:šŸ˜¼ 358:why 329:and 310:šŸ˜¼ 251:šŸ˜¼ 215:šŸ˜¼ 179:šŸ˜¼ 909:) 888:) 829:ā€” 808:) 727:ā€” 723:ā€“ 693:) 615:ā€” 595:šŸ˜€ 583:) 556:ā€” 548:) 505:ā€” 481:) 415:ā€” 405:) 397:. 368:ā€” 339:) 298:ā€” 296:. 279:) 239:ā€” 230:) 203:ā€” 195:) 167:ā€” 146:) 64:ā† 905:( 884:( 839:Ā¢ 836:ā˜ 804:( 761:L 737:Ā¢ 734:ā˜ 689:( 625:Ā¢ 622:ā˜ 579:( 566:Ā¢ 563:ā˜ 544:( 536:/ 515:Ā¢ 512:ā˜ 493:: 489:@ 477:( 463:X 425:Ā¢ 422:ā˜ 401:( 378:Ā¢ 375:ā˜ 335:( 308:Ā¢ 305:ā˜ 275:( 249:Ā¢ 246:ā˜ 226:( 213:Ā¢ 210:ā˜ 191:( 177:Ā¢ 174:ā˜ 158:: 154:@ 142:( 50:.

Index

User talk:SMcCandlish
archive
current talk page
ArchiveĀ 155
ArchiveĀ 160
ArchiveĀ 161
ArchiveĀ 162
ArchiveĀ 163
ArchiveĀ 164
ArchiveĀ 165
black-footed cat
BhagyaMani
talk
20:48, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
BhagyaMani
WP:GAN
SMcCandlish
ā˜
Ā¢
23:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
BhagyaMani
talk
07:07, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
SMcCandlish
ā˜
Ā¢
07:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
BhagyaMani
talk
09:45, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

ā†‘