User talk:Moonraker

Archives
1) 2009 – 2010 2) 2011 3) 2012 4) 2013 5) 2014 6) 2015 7) 2016 8) 2017 9) 2018 10) 2019 11) 2020 12) 2021 13) 2022

Happy New Year!

Moonraker,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 02:57, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 02:57, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Moonraker,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 04:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 04:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Moonraker, we have spent a happy christmas trying to work out who you might be, and your kindness at putting up such a professional page for me. I rarely get noticed for the work I do, so it was a lovely christmas present. As to your identity, your other articles are so eclectic that it flummoxed us as a family trying to see if we knew the connection. All I can say is thanks. I will edit the very few errors, eg I have 4 sisters not 2, and my father in laws title is not correct. I will also add the youtube video of the conference with the Fawcett Society in 2018. YorkshirePetal (talk) 10:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, YorkshirePetal. I have tried my best to make those changes. If I have the wrong YouTube video, will you please link it here? There is a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest policy which you might want to glance at, as a few others have got into hot water over it! Actually, I believe we have never met, although we have had narrow misses once or twice. Kind regards, Moonraker (talk) 14:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited National Archaeological Museum of Nuoro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Mary of the Snows.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Johann Georg Seidenbusch, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that while at high school, Johann Georg Seidenbusch declared to Our Lady: "ad carissimam Sponsam te eligo" (I choose thee as my dearest Bride)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Johann Georg Seidenbusch. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Johann Georg Seidenbusch), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 12:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC) [reply]

January songs

happy new year

Thank you, - I love it when somebody else creates my red links! The colours of my January calendar image are Ukrainian for a reason. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

today, I point at two singers I whose performance I enjoyed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Leonard Potts, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that L. J. Potts translated the Poetics as Aristotle on the Art of Fiction, a title accused of "[narrowing] dangerously the wide gap between Aristotle and ourselves", but later called "creative genius"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Leonard Potts. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Leonard Potts), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 9 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Malcolm Gaskill, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that witchcraft historian Malcolm Gaskill documented a real-life 17th-century witch hunt in Springfield, Massachusetts? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Malcolm Gaskill. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Malcolm Gaskill), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 12:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have added a screen shot from a video to Commons to illustrate the Svante Thunberg article which you are trying to push through for DYK. The upload requirment is "for identification and critical commentary on the video and its contents" which appears to be false. As per an edit summary you "see no harm" is that. I do. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 04:51, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I find the rules about non-free images hard to understand. I think you are also wrong in your interpretation of them, and it is about the subject of the image, not the source of the image, but I gather you have arranged for this one to be deleted, so the point is now moot. Moonraker (talk) 09:18, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The question here is whether or not you intend to stop uploading images to Wikipedia under false pretenses. You know English. The permission you clicked on is limited to image use to illustrate or discuss a video. You must have seen that. Will you do things like that again, in order to try to push your favorites through to DYK? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:32, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So far as I understand it, SergeWoodzing, you are wrong, a non-free image can be used to illustrate the subject of the image, and not the source of the image, but whoever is right you are beating a dead horse, and you might like to see WP:Civility and try assuming good faith and not making personal attacks. Moonraker (talk) 00:44, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The only personal attack here is that accusation against me. We are to use each other's user talk pages to warn each other about behavior that might need to lead to administrative review. The issue is not mute, as you continue to skirt it. Will you continue to upload images where the permission you used clearly is for the image to illustrate a video, or will you not? There is no good faith in ignoring the explicit text under which an image may, or may not, be uploaded. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:51, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An example of your personal attacks is the “under false pretenses” above. There is no good faith in that. Moonraker (talk) 01:00, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is my well-founded opinion that you uploaded an image under false pretenses since you disregarded the circumstances under which that image would be allowed. That's why I gave you this warning, not because of ill will or because of anything less serious than that.

Will you continue to upload images for non-video text where the permission you used clearly is for the image to illustrate a video, or will you not? Please answer the question! Ignoring it can only backfire on you. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 02:39, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SergeWoodzing, you and I do not agree on this, but I followed the reasoning for deleting the file put forward by jmcgnh, which was nothing like yours and was essentially that the file was replaceable, which indeed it was. I saw his point. I think perhaps on the upload form ticking the box to say that the image comes from a video creates text which focusses the page on a video, but if the image is from a video that is not intended by the uploader. In this case, all of the text entered made it clear that the subject was a person and not a video. I do not think there is any good purpose in taking your complaints any further. Moonraker (talk) 10:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Robert Rattenbury, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Robert Rattenbury said to his student Geoffrey Kirk: "Good Heavens! Well, I don't suppose I shall be seeing you again"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Robert Rattenbury. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Robert Rattenbury), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 12:02, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mark Pepys, 6th Earl of Cottenham, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Lord Cottenham resigned from MI5 during the Second World War, as he did not support the war with Germany? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mark Pepys, 6th Earl of Cottenham. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mark Pepys, 6th Earl of Cottenham), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 9,050 views (754.2 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2023 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 03:28, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cathedral of Our Lady of the Snows, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after architect Frà Antonio Cano died of a fall from scaffolding at his new Cathedral of Our Lady of the Snows (pictured), Alberto della Marmora accused him of destroying many former basilicas? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cathedral of Our Lady of the Snows. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cathedral of Our Lady of the Snows), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Antonio Cano, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after architect Frà Antonio Cano died of a fall from scaffolding at his new Cathedral of Our Lady of the Snows (pictured), Alberto della Marmora accused him of destroying many former basilicas? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cathedral of Our Lady of the Snows. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Antonio Cano), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, You'd changed Clan Donnachaidh to Clan Robertson on 2 Jan, with the note "Most reliable sources say Robertson". This is incorrect. The clan is officially Donnachaidh. The chiefs from the 4th chief have taken the name Robertson, and most clan members are Robertsons, but the clan remains Donnachaidh. Please refer to the clan society itself https://www.donnachaidh.com/history-clan-history.html GalliaCeltica (talk) 00:24, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GalliaCeltica. I agree of course that the clan society uses that name, but most independent reliable sources do use Robertson. Moonraker (talk) 09:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Georgina Butler, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Georgina Butler until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 March 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Mats Löfving, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 01:48, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, From 1997 I am following the history of Junius Brutus Booth (senior) and this morning I was pleasant surprised by the information of one Sarah Blackbeard and her son William claiming that the father was Junius Brutus Booth. Through Professor Stephen M. Archer's 'Junius Brutus Booth - Theatrical Prometheus I was already informed about JBB very young 'romances' with one 'poor Molly' (see page 8 and notes p. 283) and another young 'maid'. For me the name of Sarah is significant because it relates to an Old Dutch custom where a woman of 50 celebrates her 'becoming Sarah party' and a man (50) 'has seen Abraham birthday'. I discovered a strange pattern which goes as follow; When Junius B. Booth met his first wife in Brussels it was in those days, together with Amsterdam (my birthplace) one of the capital provinces of the Netherlands. In his first marriage Junius Brutus Booth had a daughter Amelia with his wife from Brussels; Amelia died in infancy. She was born on the fifth day of October in 1815 which in America 05-10-1815 is considered as May -10-1815 and in 1838 was the birthday of John Wilkes Booth. Here follows a little game; The 15th year in 1800 in mirror writing stands for 1851 which date 05-10-1851 in America was Junius Brutus Booth's second wedding day on John Wilkes Booth's 13th birthday and looking from the European point of view 05-10-1851 was in memorial Amelia's 36 birthday. The next year in November, Junius Brutus Booth died among strangers and in particular in the presence of one man that had looked after him during his illness. Mrs Junius Brutus Booth was 50 year old (Sarah according to the Old Dutch Tradition) and she was also the daughter of Sarah Holmes in the UK. Richard Junius Booth had married in 1949 with one Sarah P. Ware, she had already children and was pregnant on her wedding day. Coincidental; Sarah P. Ware easily can be mispronounced as Sarah B. Ware (beware) which as a threat or warning towards Mary Ann Holmes proved fatal being a 'Sarah' in 1852 which was the year she became a widow. Having reflex upon this Old Dutch Abraham + Sarah regarding the 50th birthday, to me it is striking that an 'Abraham' (President Abraham Lincoln) became the cause that Mary Ann had celebrated for the last time John Wilkes Booth's birthday in 1864 (was in memory her 13th wedding anniversary). Mary Ann Booth, being 13 years a widow, calamity had hit her again and by the time it was 05-10-1865 it was John Wilkes Booth's first memorial birthday while his half sister Amelia according to the Dutch custom had become the traditional 'Sarah'. In 1865 Richard Junius Booth's mother from Brussels had already past away in 1858 while at the marriage of his son in London in 1875 he and his wife Sarah had died in 1868 during an epidemic in London. This is the short findings of my research and the trail goes further in London 1875 with John Wilkes Booth's sister living in England and goes into the Wainwrights Trial in connection of 'Harriet Lane'. This line of research lands at the second battle of Galveston where one captain Wainwright was killed on the vessel Harriet Lane and mirrors in details the murder of Harriet Lane. In 1875 Henry Wainwright and his wife Elisabeth were for 13 years married. Henry was arrested with the ballet dancer Alice Day from the Pavilion Theatre (owner was Mr. Abrahams). During the Trial there were the witnesses Rogers' couple from which Mr. Rogers' first marriage took place in the same church where in 1815 Junius Brutus Booth was first married. Mr. Rogers' remarried in 1872 from all days the 14th in April (assassination of Lincoln Good friday 1865, April 14). Mr. Rogers' bride's from all maiden surnames was Mss. Davis the same as Lincoln's opponent during the American Civil War Jefferson Davis. Speaking of Good Friday, in 1851 (in 24 hours sense) 13 days away from his birthday (first of May) Junius Brutus Booth divorced which brings along another coincident. Henry Wainwright was sentence to death while his brother Thomas got 7 years imprisonment with hard labour; thus at the time Thomas had served his time it was 1882 which was the year (in memorial) of Henry Wainwright's 50th birthday. What I came across is a pattern in which persons, like John Wilkes Booth, Henry Wainwright and many more were innocent. Have reason to belief that John Wilkes Booth's presence in the Presidential Box was to promote the next coming play of Julius Caesar most likely in Pike's Opera House because the next coming trail went in that direction but I stop here as I ques that for someone on the other end it is rather dazzling complex and as I have experienced over the years; no one takes me serious and often my findings gets deleted (story of my life). Hope you came this far and hopefully when correct I hope you let me fit in this 'Sarah Blackbeard' link in what this is, 'Victorian Cryptic Labyrinth'. Pikeveronica (talk) 13:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pikeveronica. I see you are telling me this because I added the information about Sarah Blackbeard's son William Blackbeard. It has a primary source, but a good one. Everything in Wikipedia is in the public domain, so you can of course use that. I thought I would let people work it out for themselves that if Booth did father this child, as alleged by the mother, he was only fourteen at the time, and a little over fifteen at the time of the birth, which would throw some light on him. But I have no knowledge of your other points. There is evidence that John Wilkes Booth was part of a conspiracy against Lincoln, although most of the people in the story do not seem like reliable witnesses to me. You might like to read Kauffman's American Brutus, if you haven't already. Moonraker (talk) 21:37, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Benchball is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benchball (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

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 until the discussion has finished.

 Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 18:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Svante Thunberg 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) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 18:33, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding you're move a few years ago all the other Grade I listed buildings lists aren't at "List of" apart from Salisbury so I'd suggest the "List of" be removed and that we have a wider discussion on if "List of" should be included. Per User:Peter I. Vardy at Talk:Listed buildings in Ironville and Riddings Ward#Requested move 16 March 2022 there was an earlier discussion which agreed "List of" was too clumsy. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Found it, in 2009, see Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates/Archive 11#Lists of listed buildings. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:22, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Moonraker,

Looking over the AFD logs, I see several where you are taking pot shots at LibStar that are clearly casting aspersions even if they do not rise to the level of personal attacks. I understand that the AFD area can be frustrating when you are at odds with the nominator but insulting them doesn't help persuade anyone to your point of view. It lowers the tone of the discussion so please keep your comments limited to the article under question and its sourcing.

If you think a serious problem exists with another editor, and you have evidence to back up your claims, then take it to an appropriate noticeboard like ANI, do not bring it into AFD discussions. Thank you for your contributions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Liz, that term "pot shots" suggests some kind of personal abuse, which you will not see. To point out that an editor has the declared aim of achieving the deletion of articles about ambassadors is simply a statement of fact. Unless the user page has been changed, you will be able to see that for yourself there. Moonraker (talk) 13:27, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.  // Timothy :: talk  21:23, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from Toronto, Canada. I was surprised and delighted when I happened to stumble on your Wikipedia entry for Ivor Halstead. My mother was born in Batley, Yorkshire, England in 1914 and told that her father was Ivor Halstead although she never met him. I am an amateur genealogist and always on the lookout for anything that would help me prove this claim. I am curious as to what your interest in Ivor Halstead is and if you are related to him, even if only distantly. Thank you, Debi Eatherley Shakeygoose (talk) 02:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shakeygoose, this page on Ivor Halstead was one of a few I started on authors published by the Right Book Club. I can only trace one wife for him, but clearly he may be your grandfather. If no marriage, it may be hard to trace any written records to show the connection, so my suggestion would be to take an Ancestry.com DNA test and see what relations that finds. Moonraker (talk) 14:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Sir Roger wrote to Cromwell in 1564 ..."; some mistake with the date, surely? 2A00:23C4:2F92:8901:419D:79C0:D2F9:E89E (talk) 06:10, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, 1564 must be wrong, as Cromwell was long dead by then. The source is the Norfolk VCH, and I have checked it, it does say 1564. So the best I could do was to take the date out. Moonraker (talk) 09:59, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nicholas Hill, 9th Marquess of Downshire, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas Hill, 9th Marquess of Downshire (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:25, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Randal Alexander McDonnell, 10th Earl of Antrim is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randal Alexander McDonnell, 10th Earl of Antrim until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

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 until the discussion has finished.

Pilaz (talk) 17:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I am the one that provided information to West Bethel, Maine page. Although I do not have citations for bethel fest, you can rest assured that this is an annual festival operated by Sunday River Ski Resort and the locals know the folks involved. It's been a yearly tradition since 1979 and it primarily happens in West Bethel. Feel free to contact me for further information, or I can provide you a sunday river contact. Thank you

Tc3345 (talk) 17:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tc3345, that isn't a page I am watching, I can't help you. You might like to start a thread at Talk:West Bethel, Maine. Moonraker (talk) 20:31, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a Request Move discussion about William IV. Since you participated in the previous move discussion involving William IV, I thought you might want to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:27, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you made s9me good points. I believe some places switched between being a Protectorate and being a Colony. I also have to say I do not think we need to use former if we go to a different name. First because we avoid former in most Category names. Secondly because it is sometimes used to refer to places that were once part if a unit but are no longer, wgmhich we do not want here. Most importantly because there is no reason to exclude Bermuda, Gibraltar and other current British overseas possessions from this category, so it is not actually all former.John Pack Lambert (talk) 11:09, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Moonraker, I have been given your name as someone who can help to get a Wikipedia page published? I have been trying to get Clan Irving set up but it has been rejected even though I have added all the citations. Would you be able to help or advise please? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Clan_Irving

Thank you, Jo McD JoMcD (talk) 10:18, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JoMcD. This morning I have taken an interest in Robert Beaufin Irving and have started a page for him.

The people who check out the draft articles are notoriously tough, but in this case I see the problem, which is that you have a lot of sources for individuals and the Irving of Bonshaw family, but you do not have what Wikipedia calls "reliable sources" to establish the notability of Clan Irving, which is what your draft page is about. Can you focus on that for a bit and see what new sources you can find which have substantial coverage of the clan and are independent of the subject? Moonraker (talk) 13:11, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice. I will go and see what else I can find. Good to see your new page on Robert Beaufin Irving! JoMcD (talk) 10:33, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Moonraker and thank you for kindly drafting the article on my great-great uncle Robert Beaufin Irving. I have tried putting together articles for Wikipedia but failed miserably as I find the process confusing and difficult to understand. I would really like to be able to put more articles that meet the strict criteria up onto Wikipedia but I really do need some help. Would you know of professionals such as your good-self who could undertake such work please? ForgottenScot (talk) 11:32, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, ForgottenScot. In terms of amateur v. professional, I am an amateur, so not looking for work, and I don't know any professionals, but I have been here a long time and have learnt the ropes. The main thing to understand is WP:GNG, which is the threshold a page needs to cross to avoid being deleted. It's all about finding reliable sources which give enough coverage of what you want to write a page about. Any questions, feel free to ask me here, but there are days when I am busy in real life. Moonraker (talk) 12:00, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Moonraker for your reply and your advice is appreciated. Like you real life takes up most if not all of my time hence the request for assistance. I am sure there will be further questions as we shuffle along life's mortal coil. ForgottenScot (talk) 12:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Suicides in Oxford has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 01:02, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas, Moonraker! Wishing you Season's Greetings and a Happy Winter Solstice! As the year comes to a close, I want to express my appreciation for your dedicated efforts on Wikipedia and extend heartfelt thanks for your assistance throughout the years. May the holiday season bring you and your loved ones abundant joy, good health, and prosperity.

RV (talk) 09:33, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy New Year

2024

Like 2019, remember? -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had forgotten, Gerda Arendt, but have looked back. A long way from home. Wishing you a Happy New Year! Moonraker (talk) 22:18, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - On the Main page: the person who made the pictured festival possible --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think your recent edit was probably posted to the wrong discussion page.[1] TFD (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TFD, you might like to look back at what was said by Dimadick. Moonraker (talk) 04:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. TFD (talk) 05:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Moonraker, thanks for thanking me for my edit on the Dorothy L. Sayers page. Unfortunately, it was reverted because another editor believes that "US is fine and understandable by all" which I happen to disagree with, and so does wiki MOS. Anyway, having been accused there of edit warring, I've decided to walk away and turn my attentions elsewhere. You do occasionally come across articles that are "policed" by very possessive editors who get extremely upset when someone else comes along and tries to make minor improvements on their territory. It's such a shame, but I always find it's best not to ruffle feathers. Ho-hum! Keep up the good work. Regards, Rodney Baggins (talk) 13:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, Rodney Baggins, and you are right. But the pushiest ones usually have a chum backing them up. So looks as if they go around in pairs, like the police in Eastern Europe used to do. Sometimes, the answer is to take it to the talk page, but then the whole mob can turn up. So I spend most of my time here starting new pages and working on them, it can take the problem editors years to find them. Moonraker (talk) 16:12, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What a lot of rather disgusting bad faith there is in display here. Baggins, your edits were partly poor and when those poor parts were reverted, you edit warred. The MOS is not prescriptive on the US/United States point, so some flexibility is acceptable (particularly in this specific case).

As to ‘a chum backing them up’, that’s another piece of nonsense. Tim riley and I both did the rewrite recently and we both took it through PR and FAC. To denigrate two colleagues working together in such a bad faith manner reflects more on your bad faith approach than on anyone else. - SchroCat (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than slagging off other editors here, Moonraker, I suggest your time would be better employed in answering the question I asked you here. It would be a pity to have to revert what may be beneficial changes simply because you won't supply a reliable citation for your changes. Tim riley talk 08:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For me boot is on other foot. Moonraker (talk) 16:51, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Moonraker, I've moved Ælfheah of Canterbury back to the original name, since the matter is clearly in dispute and was moved without formal discussion. You're going to need a RM if you wish to pursue further. Best – Aza24 (talk) 07:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

What about the march you mentioned on my talk? - I was on exciting vacation, see places if you are not afraid of peaks ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Afternoon, Gerda Arendt. That was Johann Heinrich Walch's funeral march, his best-known work, although it isn't always chalked up to his name. It must have a good story. Glad to see the spring is coming over there too! Moonraker (talk) 16:47, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Seiji Ozawa. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The image, taken on a cemetery last year after the funeral of a distant but dear family member, commemorates today, with thanks for their achievements, four subjects mentioned on the Main page and Vami_IV, a friend here. Listen to music by Tchaikovsky (an article where one of the four is pictured), sung by today's subject (whose performance on stage I enjoyed two days ago). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

more music and flowers on Rossini's rare birthday --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]