User talk:Midnightblueowl/Archive 6

Three years ago ...
Tintin
	... you were recipient; no. 565 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

The article Heathenry (new religious movement) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Heathenry (new religious movement) 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

The article Tintin and Alph-Art you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tintin and Alph-Art 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Brigade Piron -- Brigade Piron (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello! I've just finished an article of Joseph chipimo he is Zambia's internet entrepreneur enthusiast who is the founder of worklance and uchatt which are internet based startup companies. Could you help me out keeping this article alive on wikipedia or expand it if need arises? this article contains important things about the person. Thank you 41.72.102.123 (talk) 11:13, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

The article Tintin and the Picaros you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tintin and the Picaros 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Brian Williamson you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 17:20, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Midnightblueowl. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Tintin and Alph-Art.
Message added 07:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

On 14 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tintin and Alph-Art, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Belgian cartoonist Hergé died before completing Tintin and Alph-Art, the final volume in the The Adventures of Tintin, leaving the character's fate unexplained? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tintin and Alph-Art. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 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) 12:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Hey there, Midnightblueowl. Been a while. How's everything with you? :-) I happened to notice that you nominated Lansbury for GA. I would very much like to review the article if it's alright. Watched Bedknobs and Broomsticks a week ago. You were right, she was fabulous in it. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 04:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello Ssven, yes if you would like to review it then I would be more than happy for you to do so. All the best for now! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:07, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I've read until Mame and theatrical stardom (not including). Found little to say there. Will look at the rest tomorrow. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 11:59, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Angela Lansbury you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 (talk) 17:00, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi not sure where the best place for this is. Angela Lansbury holds citizenship of 3 different countries. British, Irish and US.

She acquired both British and Irish citizenship at birth. She has held an Irish passport which is clearly a positive act identifying her as Irish. She has lived in Ireland for several years. Additionally she has lived in the US and acquired US citizenship. Thus she holds 3 citizenship from countries. If she is to be described as British American in the intro she could/should equally be described as British / Irish /American. I have edited the page in the past to reflect this but you have repeated undone my edits. What is your problem with my edit?

@Kevinc565:If you would like to make a contentious edit to the lede section then I would suggest that you open up the issue to wider discussion through an RfC over at the article's talk page rather than unilaterally changing it yourself. I personally don't take massive issue with your suggested alteration but given that you are trying to bring about a change to something that has proven contentious in the past then you must ensure that you have a consensus behind you before doing so. That's just the way that Wikipedia works. (Also, try to remember to sign your name to your comments, so that we all know who is talking!) Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article James Murrell you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 19:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

The article James Murrell you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:James Murrell 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 14:02, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

The article Angela Lansbury you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Angela Lansbury 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ssven2 -- Ssven2 (talk) 08:41, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your contribution in bringing Angela Lansbury to GA status. Congratulations and keep it up. Yours friendly, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:26, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks, Pavanjandhyala! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:11, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. All the best for your future endeavours. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

[Note to any readers: For any uninvolved observers, the exchange below began on 4 February 2016 when I realised that the West Wycombe Park article, which has remained FA rated since 2006, did not meet the FA criteria given that it contained vast amounts of un-cited material. I raised the issue at the article's Talk Page, where Giano, who was the original FA nominator, expressed disagreement with my perspective, and decided to be rather impolite and facetious in their comments rather than actually constructively responding to my concerns. Their condescending attitude (exhibited here, here, here, and here) was totally unwarranted and was in clear breach of WP:Civility. I soon after initiated a Featured Article Review (FAR) of West Wycombe Park, although the latter was (understandably) dismissed by other editors for being too hasty; by policy I should have discussed the issue at the talk page for a longer period of time before going to FAR. I subsequently noticed that two other articles recently edited by Giano (Buckingham Palace and Louis d'Oger, Marquis de Cavoye) also contained uncited text, and added "citation needed" tags onto them at the appropriate point. Giano responded by starting the conversation that one can find below. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC) ]

At least stalking my edits in order to add silly citation tags should keep you out of mischief for a while, but it is making you look rather silly. Giano (talk) 13:56, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh but how can I help myself, Giano, when the temptation to stalk you is overwhelming me! Seriously, do you get some sort of pleasure out of being rude and uncivil to other editors? Does it make you feel good about yourself? Does it improve your day? Citation needed tags belong on uncited material in articles, it's as simple as that. I wouldn't be able to get an article through GAN or FAC with large chunks of uncited material in the prose, so why do you expect yourself to get a free pass on this issue? Because you're a self-professed expert on architecture and everyone should take your word that everything you write is the undisputed gospel truth? (Don't worry, I don't seriously expect to receive an answer to any of these questions). Frankly, I've never been unreasonable to you so I have no idea why you choose to act in such a manner toward me. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:09, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

because you are clearly trawling my edits, and simultaneously amusing a great many people. Grow up and find another interest other than me. Giano (talk) 14:33, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, yesterday I had a fairly brief trawl through some of your recent edits, I admit it. Having seen your work on West Wycombe Park I had become well aware that not only do you tend to add large chunks of information without citations to articles, but that you also seem to see no problem with doing so, even when the issues that this raises are (politely and cordially) pointed out to you. Instead you start throwing ad hominem insults around without addressing the original concern. Accordingly I decided to take a quick look at some of your other contributions (a grand total of two, I believe); when I saw that they too often included chunks of un-cited prose, I slapped a "citation needed" tag onto those sections. (But don't worry, you are not alone in being my victim here, for I actually have the alarming and monstrous habit of adding "citation needed" tags to un-cited prose whenever I see it, at any point in Wikipedia! What a fiend I must be.) Maybe I should indeed "grow up". Or maybe – just maybe – you should stop calling the kettle black. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

1; 2; 3;4; 5; 6; 7; 8 (you are edit conflicting me in some of those edits), but by then you had already expanded your search: 9. Please do not play little Miss innocent with me; I have been writing here for a great any years, and no one has ever yet proven that I make things up. I have seen you about over the last few years, you like trouble! I don't, but if it comes knocking on my door, I meet it head on. Now you have two choices, stay away from me, or go wringing you innocent little hands on some notice board or other Giano (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh for Heaven's sake, you don't actually pay attention to anything that I write, do you? I certainly don't deny having put "citation needed" tags in some of the articles that you have worked on, and never have denied doing such a thing. Rather, I openly admit to doing so; thus, I haven't the foggiest what point you are trying to illustrate by showing me these links? Moreover, I have never, ever accused you of "making things up" so don't claim that I have. I merely pointed out that an article lacking in-line citations can lead to a reader suspecting that the information contained in it might be original research (a perfectly reasonable thing to point out, no?) and that accordingly it is much better if we do have inline citations in our articles here at Wikipedia. And "I like trouble" do I? Well, truthfully no I don't and have no idea how you have come to that impression of me. Perhaps it's because I speak up to impolite, uncivil entities such as yourself and actually spend a great deal of time improving the encyclopaedia with well-sourced content rather than repeatedly picking fights with other editors over the most trivial of issues. You're a very odd character, I must say. I wonder if you are so damnably unpleasant 'in real life' or whether this is just part of your online persona? Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:37, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not unpleasant at all, just rather perceptive. I have encountered your sort before. You like to swoop down on pages other people have mostly written and then nominate them for something-or-other and pretend they are all your own work (pour example). One only has to look at the revision history statistics of some of the pages you so boastfully promote on your user page - remember you enticed me, yesterday, to look at your user page - mistake, big mistake! Now go and find something useful to do. Giano (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

"Boastfully promote on your user page"? Yes, I like to have a neat, ordered, and well presented record of all of my work and awards on my user page, as much for my own reference as anyone else's. Doing so makes accessing my regularly used articles easier. Furthermore, seeing them lined up in this manner does indeed give me a sense of satisfaction and achievement. Some might see it as boastful; if that's their opinion then so be it. But I don't see it that way. I honestly don't. Moreover, given your decision to criticise me for "boastfully" referring to my contributions on my own talk page, I would like to point out that you yourself link to all of your awards and significant contributions on your own user page; is it really that different from my own approach? I don't think so. This is just yet more of the pot calling the kettle black.

"You like to swoop down on pages other people have mostly written and then nominate them for something-or-other and pretend they are all your own work." No, no I do not. That is a lie, an untruth. "One only has to look at the revision history statistics of some of the pages you so boastfully promote on your user page..." Fine, be my guest. If you actually do so and take the time to look at them you will soon find that your accusation is totally and utterly baseless. You quite clearly haven't looked at them at all; you've merely made an assumption about me without fact checking anything (just like when you referred to me as a "he" without bothering to check my gender...). Which raises the question, why are you making baseless accusations against me? Do you enjoy doing so? Does it give you pleasure? For someone who claims to be "not unpleasant at all" you sure seem to be doing everything possible to give the opposite impression.

In trying to evidence your malicious accusations you cite one just example, that of the Mick Aston article, where I briefly clashed swords with two of your Wiki-chums last year (no doubt that it is because of that instance that you know of me). However, this article too does not support your statement that I hijack the work of others to claim it as my own; rather it exposes it as the poppycock that it is. Contrary to your accusation, the Mick Aston article, as it stands, consists primarily of my own work. Check the user stats. Check the past 500 edits in the page history. I'm not lying. I'd been working on the article in concentrated bursts since 2011 until its GAN in 2015. The vast majority of prose was written by me; the majority of references were added by me; the article structure was shaped by me. Is it such a surprise therefore that I was the one who took it upon herself to (successfully) nominate it as a GA? Where's this evidence of (alleged) hijacking? Oh, it doesn't exist... As for the argument that I had on the Mick Aston talk page with your two pals, I was initially in the wrong, because my wording inadvertently belittled their contributions to the article's formatting. I was wrong to do that; hands up - I'm guilty! And I immediately apologised to them (even if they then decided to follow up with a long line of insults and erroneous accusations that just went into total over-kill and reflected a severe lack of civility on their part). Moreover, the Mick Aston situation was a lone example in which I unintentionally cocked up and offended some of my fellow editors, at which they overreacted. There is no other comparable incident in my editing history (at least in the past five years or so, I can't remember beyond that) so you are wrong to generalise from this incident and assume that it is my normal approach to editing Wikipedia. I avoid confrontation unless it is forced upon me, as it was in that instance, and as it is here, by editors that appear to enjoy a fight.

Seriously Giano, this image that you appear to have of me isn't correct. I don't go around nominating articles for GA/FA unless I have been the primary or in some cases secondary contributor to them. I just don't. I work hard to produce readable, well-cited articles, and then I nominate them for GA and then (in some cases) FA status. In that respect I'm not unlike you, the only difference being that I don't launch ad hominem attacks, mock, and belittle fellow Wikipedians - instead I try and keep everything civil wherever possible. I try to be nice, to behave cordially and with respect for others. Why you decided to be rude and obnoxious from the first instant of our encounter I have no idea; why you insist on continuing to just insult me and lie about me boggles me just as much. "I'm not unpleasant" indeed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:03, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Good afternoon, recently I did some edits at Igbo Wikipedia. The stubb about ig:Sani Abacha would look better with a foto in it. There is one on the english version and, if I understood well, you are the holder of the rights. Is there a posibility to use the foto on other wiki's? Greetings from --Tschips (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Tschips and thanks for contacting me. Unfortunately no, I do not own the rights to the image, but merely uploaded a (copyrighted) image of Sani Abacha to Wikipedia using a "non-free media rationale" which allows us to use copyrighted images in certain circumstances (the English language article on him had lacked an image up till that point). You could probably do the same thing for the Igbo Wikipedia, although I am unsure of what a non-free media rationale is called in that language. Sorry that I couldn't be of more help. All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I will see what's possible... :-) Greetings from Tschips Tschips (talk) 11:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Tschips! All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:40, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

The article Order of Nine Angles you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Order of Nine Angles for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of A. Parrot -- A. Parrot (talk) 04:01, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Leslie Grinsell you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 02:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

The article Leslie Grinsell you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Leslie Grinsell 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 08:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Midnightblueowl, Just a wee note to let you know that I've removed some of the material re-added to Bahar Mustafa race row incident. While I would normally agree with & appreciate the BRD process that was followed, the initial removals of this particular material were performed under WP:BLP@WP:BLPCRIME; which requires that we move straight to the "discuss" phase and obtain consensus that the information complies with the BLP policy before re-adding. Hope this explains the removal. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 11:53, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your message, Ryk72. I shall open up a talk page discussion on this issue. All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:55, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mari Lwyd you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 12:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

The article Mari Lwyd you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mari Lwyd 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 11:21, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi MBO, this one was just scheduled for later this month. Quick question: the source for the Paris film festival doesn't give the name of the festival awards. Google Translate (on fr:Chéries-Chéris) gives a name of "Paris Gay and Lesbian Film Festival Awards 2010", and the awards won were the Grand Prize and the acting awards; do you have a source that gives a better name, or should I run with that? - Dank (push to talk) 00:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello Dank, yes I'm happy with you to run with that. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:24, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Precious again, your Uncle David, an "experimental independent film produced in Britain in 2010, engaging with LGBT themes"!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks Gerda Arendt. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

		The Surreal Barnstar
		For your fascinating biography of Margaret Murray, now (finally!) featured. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks for all your support in getting it this far, Josh! Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:26, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Leo Martello you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 17:40, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

The article Leo Martello you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Leo Martello 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 20:01, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey, there. There's a discussion that involves your work on the article Marjorie Cameron at Talk:Marjorie_Cameron#copyright_infringement_of_Wormwood_Star_biography_on_Marjorie_Cameron_page. Just a heads up. -- Rrburke (talk) 03:04, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for alerting me, -- Rrburke. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:35, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Just to follow up, he contacted legal@wikimedia.org via OTRS and they told him much the same thing as you and I did. -- Rrburke (talk) 10:57, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Rrburke. I expected that that would be how things would turn out. We best be on the lookout in case this deteriorates into vandalism and edit warring or anything like that on the Marjorie Cameron page itself. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Vladimir Lenin you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:21, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

I am am very impressed with your commitment to only using sourced material, at the Marjorie Cameron article, and on the hard work you have done on the article. It is not clear to me, reviewing edit history, if someone else wrote large tomes, and you had to forensically edit and find sources, or if you were adding material from the sources yourself. In either case, it is a lot of admirable work.

That said, I came to the article solely on procedural grounds—the book author had approached JW, and caught his attention, and he had replied, and I wanted to make sure his reply was understood at the article page (hence my Talk entry). The reply at JW's Talk has apparently drawn additional attention as well.

Please take my comments as being collegial, and desiring both recognition of your hard work, and recognition of the likely singular nature of this particular book source. Aim is to see balance in the article (even if it is only appearance of balance that is yet needed). Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 04:35, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, Leprof 7272. Please do stick around at the Talk Page of the Cameron article so that we can all sort things out amicably. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:10, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

The article Vladimir Lenin you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Vladimir Lenin 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 23:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I thought we should probably stop cluttering up that GA review any more than it already is!

Yes, women's history is tragically underrepresented at the moment. With any luck, the article on women in Classical Athens will pass its GA review; I'd like to get it up to FA in due course. This is what it looked like before I got my grubby paws on it; it has quadrupled in size and the number of references have gone up by a factor of 15 since I first edited it...

I see you've been involved in some important LGBT history articles, though, so it's not like you're not doing your bit to improve wikipedia's coverage on the gender/sexuality front... Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 23:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

@Caeciliusinhorto: Well done on the women in Classical Athens article, and good luck on getting it to FA status! I've certainly tried to ensure that I work on coverage of women's biographies (for instance, I've managed to get Luo Yixiu, Margaret Murray, and Madeline Montalban to FA status) but on the whole I still find myself working on a greater number of male biographies, particularly in the realms of world socio-political history. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, political history has many more notable men, and they tend to be much better discussed in reliable sources. The problem is not just wikipedia's.

We shall see how the Women in Classical Athens campaign goes; I've just nominated it for a Did You Know (my first! how exciting!) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 12:22, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I came across your profile for the first time today, and I cannot help but salute your mighty contributions, which I hope to emulate some day. Here's a beer to help you relax after all that hard work. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Vanamonde93, it is appreciated. It has taken a lot of work and a great many hours to get all the work done, but I think – or at least I very much hope – that it was all worth it! Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I have just submitted Women in Classical Athens for peer review here, and thought you might be interested following our conversation the other week. It'd be great if you could drop by and give it a look. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Doreen Valiente you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 06:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Victor Henry Anderson you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

The article Doreen Valiente you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Doreen Valiente 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 16:21, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

You've said in the past that you tend to avoid citations in the infobox since the infobox primarily serves to summarize information found in the main body of the article and that citations in the infobox can start to look pretty messy, but what about Influences and Influenced that aren't mentioned in the main article? Should they be cited?

As an aside, I think the article is coming along rather nicely. I've been sending out some emails trying to get permission to use the photos from this project in the article, and once I get clearance we can substantially augment the article with those pictures. I also have a few ideas to improve the Linguistic Theory section some more, and then after that and a bit more polishing I think that the article might be ready for a GA nomination. Vrrajkum (talk) 10:41, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Vrrajkum; I think that in those instances it is permissible to use citations. I'm just a little cautious about throwing in too many and having the whole thing look really cluttered. I've not been paying too much attention to the Chomsky article of late but I will return my attentions to it soon(ish); there's some more stuff from McGilvray that I think can be added. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:02, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

I temporarily reverted the changes that you just made; I just sent an email to chomsky@mit.edu asking for permission to use some of the photos from that project, and gave links to the specific sections where I saw certain pictures fitting in. It seems like the URL coordinates for each section hadn't fully refreshed after the alignment changes that you made, so the hyperlinks I sent in the email weren't linking to the correct locations in the article. My revert was just to make sure that everything matches up visually on Chomsky's office's end.

And Chomsky's uncle didn't go past fourth grade, which is what I was trying to convey with "dropout". It might be better to just explicitly say that he hadn't gone past fourth grade. Vrrajkum (talk) 12:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Vrrajkum: Ah, I see; I still don't think its particularly relevant that he didn't have a higher education though. After all, he is just an uncle mentioned in passing; we really don't need to give any biographical backstory about him. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:45, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Is there any reason that you recolor the quote boxes on Chomsky's page to be blue rather than the default off-white? And, unrelated: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-36296551

In case you want to work it into the Mandela article in some way. Vrrajkum (talk) 10:17, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Vrrajkum; I used to think that quote boxes stood out better if they were coloured, but actually I'm not really sure that that's the case anymore, so I'm happy for the boxes on the Chomsky page to be changed to off-white. And many thanks for the BBC link; I had actually seen the news piece on other websites and do plan on incorporating it into the article. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:23, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl: I never got a reply from Chomsky's office about permission to use those pictures, but overall I think that the article is in fairly decent shape. Do you see anything that precludes a GA nomination at this stage? Vrrajkum (talk) 07:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

@Vrrajkum: - I think that we would have trouble using non-free images like File:Syntactic Structures (Noam Chomsky book) cover.jpg, because they aren't essential to the article itself. That would be an issue that would crop up at GAN. The Philosophy section is woefully short. The "Linguistic Theory" section needs work. Various parts of the "Reception" section are too 'bit-y', i.e. containing far too many lone sentences not merged together into a paragraph. Right now I don't think that the article could pass as a GA, to be honest, but we're getting there. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:09, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sylvester (singer) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zppix -- Zppix (talk) 14:20, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Please fix issues mentioned on the review page. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 18:26, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi MBO, I'm impressed to see the work you've been doing on Cameron's article and I'm pleased to see you've submitted it for GA review. Funnily enough I've recently started reading Kansa's biography and I'll look into making my own contributions to the article when I've finished it. Hopefully we can get Cameron's article to FA standard as we did with Parsons'? JJARichardson (talk) 18:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good, JJARichardson, although I would advise against making any further additions to the article at present (there has already been extensive debate on the issue over at the talk page). Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:36, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

I just read the talk page and am sorry to see that you've been through such a stressful saga. You've single-handedly built this article to quality status so you deserve credit for it. JJARichardson (talk) 13:27, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks JJARichardson. I get where Mr Kansa is coming from; he has spent a lot of time and money in producing his book and perhaps relies on it for part of his income, but obviously he doesn't own any sort of copyright or legal control over the information contained within it. Still, I'd hold off packing the Cameron article with all manner of detail from the Kansa book for now, lest he starts to raise his concerns once more. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:31, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kenneth Grant you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 07:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Midnightblueowl, how's everything with you? I've listed the article for PR here as I wish to take it to FA. Feel free to leave comments. Thanks. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 01:20, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Ssven2; I'm not the best at PR as I tend to skim read text but will take a look! Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:58, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks.

— Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 10:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

The article Kenneth Grant you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kenneth Grant 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 10:01, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

The article Sylvester (singer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sylvester (singer) 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Prhartcom -- Prhartcom (talk) 21:21, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Else Christensen you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 01:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

The article Else Christensen you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Else Christensen 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi- in case you missed it, I've left some more comments here. There's no hurry at all, but it's going to be a funny few weeks for me, so I may not be able to respond for a little while myself. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:14, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

The article Victor Henry Anderson you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Victor Henry Anderson 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Marjorie Cameron you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 13:20, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for starting this article. I hope you don't mind, but I added the list to Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride 2016/Results, which is tracking new LGBT-related content created and improved as part of an ongoing Wiki Loves Pride campaign. If you improve other LGBT articles between now and the end of June, feel free to update this page with your contributions. Thanks again! --- Another Believer _(Talk) 14:36, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Another Believer! Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:09, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Marjorie Cameron you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Marjorie Cameron 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 12:21, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Julia Gasper you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 15:21, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

The Writer's Barnstar

Hold on! It's not you this time who is going to thank me, it's my turn now! Let me tell you that I have been fatally stunned by your monstrous contributions.

Just joking, I happened to visit your gem of an userpage and saw your marvelous work. And, after having the fortune to read five of your masterpieces in detail, this is just a little present I can award you to show my gratitude to you. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 15:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

@Sainsf: - many thanks for both the review and the barnstar! Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:54, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Julia Gasper you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Julia Gasper 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 15:21, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

		The WikiProject Dorset Barnstar
		For your efforts to raise the quality of Dorset related content.--Ykraps (talk) 19:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

That' very kind, thank you Ykraps. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Murder of Lenford Harvey you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 07:20, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Murder of Lenford Harvey you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Murder of Lenford Harvey 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 11:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm really sorry about the bad news. I suppose it is a victory for for UKIP and Nigel Farange. My sincere condolences. —Prhart com♥ 14:39, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, democracy has spoken. I've never been an enthusiastic supporter of the European Union (for various reasons), but clearly this will have many economic and socio-political ramifications for the United Kingdom and its neighbours; many of them will be very damaging, others perhaps more positive. We shall just have to wait and see what happens. At least it will make for some fascinating history: the disintegration of the United Kingdom and the re-establishment of an independent Scottish state, the potential unification of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, the domino effect of growing Euroscepticism across Western and Northern Europe, potentially destroying the EU itself... and maybe its eventual replacement with a new free trading block? Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sadiq Khan, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Liberal Democrat and Pay as you go. 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) 09:32, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi MBO, I'm trimming this one now. Suggestions welcome. - Dank (push to talk) 18:45, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

@Dank: It's looking good to me. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:58, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Just FYI: pinging (with or without the "ping" template) is broken. I didn't get pinged by what you just did. It works almost all the time if you: 1. create one short paragraph in one edit, 2. don't change anything with further edits, and 3. sign it at the end. - Dank (push to talk) 22:04, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I'm stuck. It's currently 2906 characters; it needs to be under 1175. I can't figure out which are the most significant bits. Could you delete some sentences that won't be needed in the summary? - Dank (push to talk) 23:32, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Did you want to delete any more? - Dank (push to talk) 23:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

I'll give it a go if you're stuck, but I'm not really sure how to determine when 1175 characters has been met; is there a way of doing that? Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:19, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

I am. http://www.javascriptkit.com/script/script2/charcount.shtml. - Dank (push to talk) 23:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Will have a trim now. Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:25, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Nice job. I can't wait to read the article now. —Prhart com♥ 02:02, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Thrilled to see this coming on to the MP; a great topic and a great article. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:03, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

The TFA text looks great. - Dank (push to talk) 16:37, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Precious again, your "Anglo-Indian Egyptologist, archaeologist, and folklorist, known for being one of the earliest female scholars in her subject matter and for establishing the controversial witch-cult theory"!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:24, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

On 3 July 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2 July 2016 Baghdad bombings, 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. Thryduulf (talk) 18:18, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello. Per DS, will you revert the ideological position you added to the Donald Trump article? I think how his ideological position should be mentioned in lede is a potentially controversial decison that ought to be discussed at the talk page before being added to the article. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 22:59, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Please note that you need consensus before making potentially controversial edits to Donald Trump. Edits can )and have been) blocked without warning for doing this. Your edit here has been reverted (and a talk page discussion started), which shows that your edit was controversial. St Anselm (talk) 02:00, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Margaret Murray.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dion Fortune, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Erskine. 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) 10:36, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I was wondering if you'd be interested in participating in Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge in August which includes Dorset. A chance to win £250 as well! If contests aren't your thing we welcome independent contributors too. If interested sign up at participants. Cheers!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:53, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Dr. Blofeld and thanks for your message. I shall give the project some thought... I'd like to try and improve the article on the 'Obby 'Oss festival of Padstow. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, nobody is going to respond to a closed 3RR notice I think, I suggest you remove the comments, though you could try contacting the admin (EdJohnson?), on his talk. Though I suspect he'll think the two pages unconnected. Pincrete (talk) 22:17, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

All due respect, but a huge number of FAs have Ancestry Charts in them, start checking here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Royalty_and_nobility. Your field data when editing out the chart gave a personal opinion and not a valid reason for removing existing work (other than a need for sourcing, but that could have been handled with a tag or two). If a Request for Comment is needed, it should be put into the Talk Page by the person proposing to remove content who has no existing policy to back that decision up. While I think it would be a good idea for the Ancestry Chart (ahenhtafel) to be reconfigured to render better on smaller devices, I do think the value of the charts is greater than that problem, particularly when there is a lot of family network discussion needed for a subject. They provide a great way of rapidly linking between a network of connected articles and understanding at a glance what the relationships are. (Putting in a tree with a bunch of non-notables is not worth anyone's time, but a significant amount of the Boris Johnson article tries to elucidate all his family connections and how they have affected his life and career and most of the people in his tree do have their own articles). His ancestry -- including its quite frankly astonishing peregrinations -- became very notable to many people after a few news pieces and the WDYTA episode but if you were not familiar with it, I would not be surprised if you removed the content because you assumed it could not be true and was potentially weasely in some way. It really isn't.--JBVaughan (talk) 01:30, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi JBVaughan and thanks for stopping by. I see your point. I was thinking largely of political biographies rather than royal ones when I made my comment. I do however think that sourcing is very important on something like this, so in my view (and indeed in Wiki policy I think) it should be properly cited before being added. Shall we discuss it in greater depth over at Talk:Boris Johnson, where we are more likely to get a larger input? Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:16, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Are you sick of the sight of my comments or would you be happy for me to review the article for GA? Happy to do it or not, as you prefer. Best, Tim riley talk 14:58, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tim, please go ahead and be my guest! Always happy to read your comments. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:12, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article O. G. S. Crawford you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 08:20, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

The article O. G. S. Crawford you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:O. G. S. Crawford 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tim riley -- Tim riley (talk) 20:21, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

One day I shall lurk in the shadows and sandbag this bot as it passes. Permit me, as a real person, to add my felicitations. I hope for more archaeologist biogs in due course. Tim riley talk 21:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rollright Stones, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arbury Banks. 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) 09:46, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for looking at GA nomination of Oran fatwa. I'm currently travelling with limited internet access. It was nominated a long time ago, so I didn't anticipate the review happening during the time I'm travelling. I will probably only be able to address your comments late-ish next week. Would that be ok? HaEr48 (talk) 01:16, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello HaEr48, that's fine by me. There's no rush. Have a nice time travelling! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 08:52, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Midnightblueowl. I just finished doing major work on Anglo-Saxon weaponry, and have nominated it for GA status. I see that you originally wrote a great deal of the content, so if you are able I would like to ask that you make a quick correction. Reference [50] (John Powell) needs a page number, and I cannot fix that problem because I don't have the book. I presume that you do have access, since you added the content, so I would greatly appreciate it if you could simply add the page number to the citation. Thanks. Biblio (talk) WikiProject Reforming Wikipedia. 22:16, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Biblio. The "Powell" reference was in the article before I came along, so unfortunately I am not able to access it; I'll just remove it altogether. However, generally speaking I'm a little concerned as to whether this article currently reaches GA quality. When I was building it up back in late 2014 (gosh, was it that long ago), I was mostly using two sources — Pollington and Underwood — neither of which are academic publications but rather are works of popular history/archaeology. With this in mind, I added some further, academic sources into the Bibliography, with the intent of getting back around to work on this article in the future, but thus far I just haven't had the chance. Still, it's good to see some more interest in the article! Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:02, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

I believe that I've seen GAs (or even FAs) by noted content creators that rely mostly on one or two specialist sources. With rather narrow topics such as this one, I wouldn't think that many authors would give it an in-depth examination. It would be rather unreasonable for a GA reviewer to demand otherwise. Biblio (talk) WikiProject Reforming Wikipedia. 13:33, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

It may pass a GAN, because there are no gaping problems in terms of unreferenced text etc, however I do believe that its serious over-reliance on just two (non-academic) sources when there is a very wide and deep academic literature on Anglo-Saxon weaponry in existence is a big, big problem (and I say this as someone who wrote most of the article text anyway!). However, by all means let the GAN process continue and we shall see where we find ourselves when that has been carried out. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

I got called the the Elizabeth Dilling article by your RfC. Left some comments on the talk page, then made a post on zzz's talk trying to point him to relevant Wikipedia policies. Feel free to ping me if there's WP:AN discussion regarding the Dilling article you'd like me to comment on. Chris Hallquist (talk) 00:12, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chris and thank you for your message. Given that Signedzzz has resorted to their edit warring ways at the Elizabeth Dilling article, I have decided to raise the issue at the administrators' noticeboard here. Please do contribute if you feel the desire to do so. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:38, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Quick Facts Tintin ...

Close

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:54, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Midnightblueowl. I understand completely if you are too busy to help, but given your interest in articles on LGBT topics, and your experience with WP:GAN, I'd be interested if you had any comment on Sexual Preference (book)? This is an article I've worked on extensively and nominated for good article status. Given the article's current state, what do you think the chances are of its meeting the good article criteria? I'm not asking for active collaboration on the article, just a few comments, if you wouldn't mind. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 00:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello there FreeKnowledgeCreator; the article is looking to be in good shape, and I think it will pass GAN with ease. Indeed, I might as well be the one to review it! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:34, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I have replied to most of the points you made in your review, and will try to work out any remaining issues soon. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 07:27, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

I wanted to take a moment and personally thank you for your Talk:Sherpa Fire/GA1 review! I left a few comments that would be great to get your feedback on. I am still working through your comments and really appreciate you taking the time. P.S. I hope that you DID learn something! --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:50, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Zackmann08: Many thanks for your message, I will take a look. I guess I learned a little more about wildfires (we don't tend to get them where I'm from)! Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Much appreciated! --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:25, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm curious what you think of just removing File:Scherpa_fire.jpg. It is such a poor quality image and doesn't really contribute anything to the article.... --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:55, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. It is quite blurry, but at the same time is also quite evocative. I don't think that it matters much either way, Zackmann08. Your choice. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:23, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Once again, thank you for your assistance with Sherpa Fire! I took care of the last few notes you gave. Should be good to go, pending your approval. :-) -- Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:58, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

I've passed it now Zackmann08. Well done in all your work in getting it to this status! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:11, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chestnuts Long Barrow you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Joe Roe -- Joe Roe (talk) 10:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Chestnuts Long Barrow you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Chestnuts Long Barrow for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Joe Roe -- Joe Roe (talk) 11:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

all these articles need to explain that "barrow" is just a localized term for tumulus - a term that is hardly if ever mentioned. Johnbod (talk) 14:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Johnbod; yes I see what you mean. I've provided a mention of the origins of the term "barrow" in the Terminology section of Chambered long barrow but I should look into incorporating this information into sub-articles too. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:17, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Greetings, MidnightBlueOwl. I don't believe we have crossed paths before, but I cam across your profile a few days back, and I am amazed at the number of important articles that you have improved. My salutations, and beer to help you relax after all that hard work! Vanamonde (talk) 18:06, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks Vanamonde! Hopefully we'll run into each other more often in future. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:11, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Aaaand then I notice that I gave you a beer three months back. Well, now I look like an idiot, but you are still beer-worthy, so you're most welcome. Vanamonde (talk) 18:17, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Well, it's all thirsty work! Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:20, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Chestnuts Long Barrow you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chestnuts Long Barrow 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Joe Roe -- Joe Roe (talk) 19:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Anglo-Saxon paganism

added links pointing to Gwent, Eadbald, Paulinus and Oswald

Cult of saints in Anglo-Saxon England

added links pointing to Acca and Church of Rome

Albany Park, Bexley

added a link pointing to Footscray

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on the Lenin article. I don't know if you remember my suggestions on his Kalmyk ancestry. I am currently reading Figes' wonderful book on the revolution, and considering he made it after the opening of Soviet archives, and his deep study of its contents, I think there might be some good information in the book. There sure is a lot of interesting facts I didn't know about Lenin before reading the book. Would you be interested in me writing/sending you some of the interesting points made in the book to see if some of it can be woven into some article on his life? Have a good day!--Simen113 (talk) 15:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC):

Hello Simen113 and thanks for your message. Do you feel that there are specific points addressed in Figes' work that are omitted from the more detailed and specialised studies of Lenin's life? Many of Lenin's more recent biographers, namely Robert Service, also accessed the same sources that Figes did, but have conversely focused to a greater extent on Lenin himself, rather than the wider revolutionary period. Thus, I would generally tend to the view that if those sources omitted certain information, then it probably isn't important enough for our article here at Wikipedia. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

You raise fair points, but I also believe that Figes' condensed bits of information can be sift out information from these larger works. He does include sources, so I could always give you the sources he provides for the information. If your point that these more detailed sources who may have omitted certain information not being relevant for Wikipedia is true, then I would hold that Figes' information are mostly relevant for Wikipedia as it is, in my view, as I said, like a sieve for these other bipgraphies, where the most interesting and relevant small bits and pieces to understand Lenin's character remains in the sieve.

One piece of information that could be woven into the text, for example, is Valentinov's claim that Lenin was something of a coward (Valentinov knowing Lenin well in Switzerland): ' Valentinov, who knew Lenin well in Switzerland, wrote: "He would bever have gone on to the streets to fight on the barricades, or stand in the line of fire. Not he, but other, humbler people would do that ... Lenin ran headlong even from émigré meetings which seemed likely to end in a scuffle. His rule was to 'get away while the going was good' — to use his own words — meaning from any threat of danger. During his stay in Petersburg in 1905–6 he so exaggerated the danger to himself and went to such extremes in his anxiety for self-preservation that one was bound to ask whether he was not simply a man without personal courage." '

This could provide more viewpoints on his character and personality, than already in the article. Have a good day!--Simen113 (talk) 14:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

I would suggest taking these ideas to Talk:Vladimir Lenin, where they can be discussed by a wider range of interested persons. There is currently an FAC of the Lenin article, with some commentators concerned that the article is already excessively long, so I would certainly be hesitant about unilaterally encouraging the addition of more information. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Raymond Howard (Wiccan) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MWright96 -- MWright96 (talk) 19:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Raymond Howard (Wiccan) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Raymond Howard (Wiccan) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MWright96 -- MWright96 (talk) 20:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Doc's just started up this contest about topics and articles covering Classical Hollywood cinema. Do express if you are interested or not by signing up under the "Editors Interested" section. Thanks. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 05:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Raymond Howard (Wiccan) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Raymond Howard (Wiccan) 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MWright96 -- MWright96 (talk) 11:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, the FAC is going well, but whatever the outcome, well done for taking on such an important subject. Your discussions at FAC and on the Lenin Talk Page, show an admirable knowledge of the subject. Thank you for all the time and hard work you have put in. We never get know most of our many readers, but one thing is certain, they will benefit greatly from your contribution. Graham Beards (talk) 13:59, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

That's very kind of you, thank you Graham. Thank you also for taking the time to read through it and offer your thoughts at the FAC. Best for now, Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Midnightblueowl, Just a wee note to let you know I've removed the additions to the external links section on Bahar Mustafa race row incident. I don't believe these meet our guidelines at WP:ELNO, particularly #1. Suggest that if we want to use them, then it should be as inline citations for text included in the article itself. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 11:24, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ryk72. Thanks for your message; I see your point. Problematically, those links all used to be attached to prose that was in the article itself, but it was removed my editors concerned that it violated WP:BLP restrictions (a concern that I personally thought was misplaced). There was a debate on the subject over at the article talk page, if you were at all interested in offering your opinion about the prose there. Best! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:38, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm happy to have a look (and opine if I think I can add anything to the discussion). If you feel the discussion would be improved by involvement of more editors, then there's WP:BLPN. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 11:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Theosophy (Blavatskian)

added links pointing to Maya, Progress and I AM

Satanism

added a link pointing to Idol

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Temple of Set you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 18:40, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

During a recent lengthy discussion on the WP:FAC talkpage, several ideas were put forward as to how this procedure could be improved, particularly in making it more user-friendly towards first-time nominees. The promotion rate for first-timers at FAC is depressingly low – around 16 percent – which is a cause for concern. To help remedy this, Mike Christie and I, with the co-operation of the FAC coordinators, have devised a voluntary mentoring scheme, in which newcomers will guided by more experienced editors through the stages of preparation and submission of their articles. The general format of the scheme is explained in more detail on Wikipedia: Mentoring for FAC, which also includes a list of editors who have indicated that they are prepared to act as mentors.

Would you be prepared to take on this role occasionally? If so, please add your name to the list. By doing so you incur no obligation; it will be entirely for you to decide how often and on which articles you want to act in this capacity. We anticipate that the scheme will have a trial run for a few months before we appraise its effectiveness. Your participation will be most welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 21:21, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Greetings, Midnightblueowl. Since you recently did the GA review for The Word for World Is Forest, I was wondering if you could see your way to doing the review for "Vaster than Empires and More Slow". The latter is a relatively short article (it's about a short story, after all) and it shares a lot of sources, themes, and background with the one you just looked at: so it should be a relatively easy task. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 08:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Theosophy (Blavatskian)

added links pointing to Adyar, Charles Johnston and George Russell

Cult of saints in Anglo-Saxon England

added links pointing to Ceolwulf and Patrick

Nadiya Hussain

added a link pointing to British

Talbot Mundy

added a link pointing to This Week

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

The article Temple of Set you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Temple of Set 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 23:21, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi MBW, three quick notes that may be of interest:

I've promoted the article on the Temple of Set to GA status. Good work.
Aquino's article was previously deleted at his own request. Maybe best not to recreate.
There was an edit to Heathenry (new religious movement) which caught my eye, given the previous happenings on the page. You should perhaps take a look if you haven't already... Josh Milburn (talk) 23:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello Josh - many thanks for this message and for promoting the Temple of Set article. I've taken a look over at Heathenry, and undone the edit in question (it seems to be the only edit that that editor has ever made to Wikipedia). Also, I've just noticed that you have relocated to Ontario - hope that that is going well for you! Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 08:38, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks- I love it here so far, both the town and the university. It's surprisingly warm, which I wasn't prepared for, but it'll get much colder soon. I'm only here for the year, so I'll be back on the job market very soon (in fact, I've already started seeing jobs advertised for next academic year); time will tell where I end up next. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:39, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Glad to hear that you are enjoying your time in Ottawa, and all the very best wishes for finding an academic position in a location that suits you, Josh! Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:29, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Kingston, I'm in. Ottawa's a couple of hours away. But thanks! Josh Milburn (talk) 21:35, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Heyo! How's it going? So a few weeks back you helped me with a wonderful review of Sherpa Fire and helped me get it to WP:GA status. I have a couple of articles I am working on promoting to WP:GA status. Rim Fire & Cedar Fire (2003) among them. Would be interested in or willing to help me out? Your review of Sherpa Fire was incredibly well done and I'd love your assistance! --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Zackmann08; I'm not as able to be as active on Wikipedia as I was a few months ago so I won't take on any of these GANs just yet, but if I get the chance to do so next week then I shall take a look. All the best! Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good! Hope all is well. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:52, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For your contributions to the Temple of Set, Satanism, and other Occult pages, and bringing many of them to GA status Coolmoon (talk) 03:10, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks Coolmoon! Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:21, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dion Fortune you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Rhododendrites -- Rhododendrites (talk) 04:00, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cult of saints in Anglo-Saxon England, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rochester, William I and Ely. 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) 09:59, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, hope it is alright for me to ask here. I think you make the articles of finest quality on Wikipedia, and also some of the most aesthetically pleasing. I am wondering, as I am currently working on rewriting the article Magellan-Elcano circumnavigation, if you know how to make a bulleted list sort into several columns, like one can do with reflists. I want to have the list of crew members sorted this way, so it isn't one long vertical list. I would also love it if you could give your thoughts on some of it when I get more done, as to what I can do better. At the moment I am writing the first part (background and preparations), which I will publish once I am done, before I move on to the voyage itself. Have a good day!--Simen113 (talk) 04:24, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Simen113 and many thanks for your kind words. Unfortunately I have no idea how to sort a bulleted list sort into distinct columns, but I presume that it could be done. I'm sorry that I can't be of more help, but I wish you well in your work on this article. If I ever do some across anything that might be able to answer your question I shall be sure to let you know. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:21, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Simen113: - what about this? Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:23, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl: Thanks a lot for the help and the willingness to go look it up and post a second reply! I will try it out. I'll also tell you when I've posted the first part. Hope you have a great day!--Simen113 (talk) 05:43, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

@Midnightblueowl: I thought I'd notify you that I found a good template checking from the link you sent. The template Div col seems to produce the result I want, and in case you would need it in an article, I send it to you. Have a good day.--Simen113 (talk) 13:44, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Priti Patel page, your edit caused an archiveurl error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

		Lenin smiles at you!
		A truly commendable job in getting Vladimir Lenin to FA status. —Vensatry _(talk) 17:41, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

@Vensatry: Many thanks! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:33, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Midnightblueowl,

I noticed your criticism of the Suleiman the Magnificent page - certainly well-placed. Being relatively new, I don't know how Wikipedia's featured article system works, but there's another Ottoman-related page which is marked as a featured list which I think doesn't at all deserve the title. It's List of sultans of the Ottoman Empire. The article is based almost exclusively upon official Turkish government websites rather than actual scholarly sources, has lots of other uncited content, and seems to in general have a great deal of made-up information. What can be done? Chamboz (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Chamboz. As I understand it, the first thing to do is to raise the issue over at the article Talk Page. Contact the editor who originally nominated it as a Featured Article and see if they can help deal with the problems that you raise. If they do not respond, or the problems cannot be dealt with, wait for a while to see if anyone else can help. If no improvement is forthcoming, then it would probably be time to nominate the article over at Wikipedia:Featured article review. I hope that this helps. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Heyo. SUPER sorry for me taking FOREVER to respond to your comments on Jesusita Fire... Like an idiot I somehow managed not to be watching the page so I never saw that you had updated it. Kept waiting for it to show up... Finally went and looked at it and found my error... Anyway, thank you so much for once again taking the time to go through one of the articles I've worked on. You clearly were very methodical about your approach and review. It is much appreciated!!! --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@Zackmann08: - not a problem! Glad to have been of some service. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your assistance with multiple WP:GAs. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:46, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@Zackmann08: Thank you, and well done on all the good work that you have put in to getting those articles up to GA quality. Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:02, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Respect Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. 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) 10:58, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

You have reversed material from an academic source. Please be respectful.

--Eswedenborg (talk) 00:07, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Anglo-Saxon paganism

added a link pointing to Oswald

Church and School of Wicca

added a link pointing to Astral

UK Independence Party

added a link pointing to Paul Sykes

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Also pinging User:JJARichardson. Hi MBO, here's another one of your FAC nominations at TFA, I'm working on the TFA text now. - Dank (push to talk) 14:24, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, User:Dank! Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:25, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

thanks for the updates on bnp just wondering could you also update British National Party election results on the Local elections because it has not been updated with results since 2011 Local elections. Torygreen84 (talk) 10:28, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

@Torygreen84: thanks for your message. I hadn't planned to do that but perhaps I shall get around to it at some point. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:45, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

just wondering are you do you like the bnp because of your good updates on it. Torygreen84 (talk) 03:20, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Wolfgang Behringer has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no reliable references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

No sources

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Kleuske (talk) 13:15, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nine Stones, Winterbourne Abbas you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 15:41, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Nine Stones, Winterbourne Abbas you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nine Stones, Winterbourne Abbas 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 22:21, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Dion Fortune you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dion Fortune 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Rhododendrites -- Rhododendrites (talk) 01:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Rempstone Stone Circle you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 21:01, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

The article Rempstone Stone Circle you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Rempstone Stone Circle 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 20:01, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

I know you may not want to hear this, but the "Morality and ethics" section could probably do with a little TLC. Josh Milburn (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, not again! Thanks for letting me know, Josh. I'm thinking of maybe trying to increase the protection level on the article, although given that there is no 'persistent vandalism' I'm not sure that it'll get anywhere. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:06, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't think we've a sock on our hands, it's just looking a little untidy after the ongoing discussions. As for a higher level of protection... From the outside looking in, this may look like a content dispute in which one side has resorted to socking. This doesn't mean that everything they're saying is completely wrong. Maybe you could meaningfully incorporate some of the material suggested; I don't know if that would be feasible, but it would show willingness on your side, at least. Something to mull over- I leave it in your capable hands! Josh Milburn (talk) 13:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, I now see your IP report. I don't know how much they'll be able to do about it over at SPI; maybe you're right about longer term protection. I'm not sure they'd be buttons I was personally willing to push, but there are admins more experienced with these things than I. Josh Milburn (talk) 14:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

@J Milburn: Yes, we seem to have two individuals who have made edits here. One, the anonymous IP (based in West Virginia), is clearly Holtj. They are adding in information that (while academically referenced) actually duplicates much of what the article already states. (At least they are beginning to understand the need for academic sources, even if their writing skills still display a total lack of competence). Then we have the otherwise uninvolved LordHuffNPuff who deleted some of the longstanding information because it was now duplicated. I have now taken the entire section back to its original GA-rated version. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Someone else has jumped in now (I suspect, though I couldn't say for sure, someone recruited by Holtj). Again, I'm not in a position to judge how warranted the edits are; going forward, this is something we need to think about. We could just keep reporting them to SPI, but I think it's probably time to escalate this somehow. That said, 1) I'm not sure what the next step is and 2) We have to make sure that we (by which I really mean "you", given my hands-off approach to the article/dispute) have made a sincere effort to incorporate the requests/preferences of the editor(s). Again, thinking about next steps, this is probably going to look like a perfectly legitimate (possibly even lame) content dispute from the outside; while there is puppetry going on, others are probably going to want to make accusations about ownership, edit warring and all kinds of things. My experience of (for example) AN/I is that there are a lot of people who get a kick out of finding fault in everyone involved in a situation. Josh Milburn (talk) 00:58, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

It's almost certainly still the same individual as Holtj. Their IP shows that they are based in the West Virginia area, and they are presumably just using different IP addresses in the local area (home and school or work, perhaps). Your latter point, that "there are a lot of people who get a kick out of finding fault in everyone involved in a situation", is sadly true. I tried to get the page protected but it appears that my request was dismissed fairly quickly. At present I'm content to simply undo any of Holtj's edits, although as you say there is the fear that it will leave me open to accusations of edit warring. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:23, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm pleasantly surprised to see the result of the most recent SPI report; perhaps continuing to report there is the best option. If problems persist, the regulars there will be able to advise about the best next steps. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Another has popped up. I've reported the IP to SPI and reverted the edit. I fear I'm too "involved" to block the user and/or protect the page at this time. Josh Milburn (talk) 01:50, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

FWIW, I don't think this is the right course of action; that's not really what the template's for, and it could be misconstrued as a bit too vendetta-y. Unless there are ArbCom sanctions, I wouldn't have thought we need a notice on the talk page like that. Josh Milburn (talk) 00:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

@J Milburn: - you're probably right. I'll remove it. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:58, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

You moved Ásatrú in the United States to Heathenry in the United States. Could you also do the same to the two talk page archives? Talk:Ásatrú in the United States/Archive 1 and Talk:Ásatrú in the United States/Archive 2 Thanks--76.14.35.61 (talk) 18:39, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Sure thing. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't have the time to do a full review of your Mandela article, but I wanted to give you kudos on all the work you've put in. I'm glad people like you are still around. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks Ed. It feels like there's a lot of forces trying to push me away from Wikipedia, but thus far I've been able to stick it out! All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The article Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism! has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No reason to believe that this publication of a minor socialist group deserves its own article. This article has no independent sources, and should be redirected to the parent article, Revolutionary Communist Group (UK).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RolandR (talk) 18:58, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello! I come here because you have, afaik, been the most helpful Wikipedian to me, and you are one of the best. I wonder if you know any users who know how to make maps, which I can contact to get a map made, from a book I have, which would be great for Wikipedia. If not, no problem. Have a good day!--Simen113 (talk) 13:35, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello Simen113. I once created a map using MS Paint (File:Map of the Medway Megaliths.jpg) which could be an option for you, but then again the finished project doesn't look that great. Beyond that I can't say that I know of any editors who specifically specialise in the making of maps. Try finding some maps that you like and sending the creator a user message, maybe? Sorry that I can't be of more help. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Midnightblueowl. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I'm doing some research into the initiation of Stewart Farrar; you added to his article saying that he was initiated by Maxine Sanders and I'm wondering where this source is. It is a print source by any chance? I'm looking for claims by Stuart himself that says Maxine initiated him. Cheers. -- Xxglennxx (talk • cont.) 19:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey Midnightblueowl, The ed17 again, but this time in my o-fficial capacity. Fidel Castro just died, so I'd like to interview you for a post on the Wikimedia Blog about how, why, and what got you to write the article about him. If you're game, can you reply to the following or email me at eerhartwikimedia.org?

What got you interested in Castro and that period of history? What caused you to work on his article?
What, in your words, makes Castro so significant to world history? What made him such a lightning rod that fascinates and draws people to him even today? What do you think people will remember about him in fifty years?
As I noted (as The ed17!) above, you've written quite a few big-picture articles on politicians and other topics. What challenges do you face in writing them generally? What about Castro specifically? How hard is it to cover their lives while keeping in summary style?
What am I missing that I should include?
And on the mundane side, can we get and use your real name in the post? (no worries if not!) Ed Erhart (WMF) (talk) 07:03, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

would you please put back 'skinny legs', because that is cool information last time 'skinny legs' show up https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fidel_Castro&oldid=648972405 18:47, 26 February 2015‎ in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fidel_Castro&offset=20160101000000&limit=500&action=history&tagfilter=

i read 'skinny legs' in fidel castro wiki page one time then 'skinny legs' disappear. then i found https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/18w7bc/what_did_an_attractive_person_look_like_in_your/ from google (fidel castro sex symbol skinny calf) result 1 thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnon81 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

FYI

All I ask is that you allow academically referenced material be allowed to the article in question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Heathenry_(new religious movement) --146.85.212.56 (talk) 00:01, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Holtj. Josh Milburn (talk) 02:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Science
	For taking the trouble to do actual research, and bring actual data, to the discussion at Talk:Fidel Castro. It's very refreshing to see that kind of approach - "let's do a study and find out" - in a contentious discussion. Examining reality like that is science in its most basic sense. MelanieN (talk) 19:33, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks MelanieN! Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Dear Midnightblueowl, I write to challenge your closure of the Request for Comment at Talk:Michael Portillo. The standard, approved length for an RfC is 30 days, unless no new contributions are being made to the discussion and there is either a mutual agreement by all sides to close it or there is a compelling reason for closure. As new contributions were being made just 10 hours before closure, and as the 30 day period had not elapsed (the RfC was started on Nov. 14), I would be grateful if you would retract your decision to close the thread. Whilst I respect your decision, I should inform you that it is my intention to seek an official review if you should decide to keep it closed. Best wishes, Specto73 (talk) 19:22, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello Specto73 and thanks for your message. I was responding to a note at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure which had requested that the RfC be brought to an end. However, I can appreciate your argument that the 30 day period had not elapsed. According to procedure, I think that it is probably best that you seek an official review rather than me 'undoing' my edits (which may cause some confusion). Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, very much, for taking the time to review this RfC for consensus and close. LavaBaron (talk) 21:32, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the thank you LavaBaron! Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

		Home-Made Barnstar
		For yeomanry work closing several open RfCs from 1DEC2016 to 3DEC2016. LavaBaron (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

@LavaBaron: - many thanks! Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:25, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Premiership of Fidel Castro 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/Premiership of Fidel Castro 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.

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. Scaleshombre (talk) 05:55, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Presidency of Fidel Castro 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/Presidency of Fidel Castro 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.

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. Scaleshombre (talk) 16:14, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

There was a second opinion on BLM. Thanks for your help. --JumpLike23 (talk) 14:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

updated the changes that I made --JumpLike23 (talk) 06:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks JumpLike. Will take a look. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Made some more changes. --JumpLike23 (talk) 18:38, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Some new edits from an IP address. The IP resolves to Cornell University rather than the haunt of our old friend, and the edits don't look horrifically unreasonable, so I think it's fair to treat the IP as a new and good faith editor, and react accordingly. (To put it another way, I've not reverted, and advise you to go in gently if you think a reversion is necessary!) Josh Milburn (talk) 22:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Josh. You're probably right that it is a different editor to the Ohio-based sock puppeteer. Nevertheless, I think that there are problems with their additions and removals (which I suspect may well be motivated by a form of WP:Advocacy, so I am undoing their edits, and providing explanations in my edit summary. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:36, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hampton Down Stone Circle you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 02:21, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

		The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit
		For conducting a wonderfully thorough and constructive review at Talk:Black Lives Matter/GA1, but also for the prudence to ask for input when you are not sure. The article is much improved because of your review and now has goals on how to improve further. Your review is one of the best I've seen, so here's an award for a great job! Wugapodes [t^hɔk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɻɪbz] 22:47, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks Wugapodes, both for this message and for offering your second opinion on the article. All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:51, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Uncannily, after I mentioned the possibility of a glossary of archaeology to you just a couple of days ago, I bumped into Joe Roe who has literally just started working on one. If the two of you don't know each other, it might be worth saying hello! Josh Milburn (talk) 19:53, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

That looks like a very good idea! Joe was kind enough to review my article on Chestnuts Long Barrow back in August. Sadly I failed in my mission to convince him that megalithic monuments were the most exciting thing about the Neolithic. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:57, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Not a coincidence! I had been thinking we ought to have a glossary article for a while, and coming across your suggestion in the GA review of Hampton Down Stone Circle prompted me to get on with it. I'd welcome the help expanding it, of course. Joe Roe (talk) 20:00, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Great, this is all very neat; I'm not sure how much help I'll be (archaeology fascinated me as a child, and I have been on a dig, but I've no real knowledge of the subject) but I'll stick it on my watchlist and chip in if I can. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

The article Hampton Down Stone Circle you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hampton Down Stone Circle 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 nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 21:01, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

	We wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2017!
	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas, and a Happy, Glorious, Prosperous New Year! God bless! — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 11:36, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cuba under Fidel Castro 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/Cuba under Fidel Castro 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.

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. Scaleshombre (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

This description of Mugabe by Smith was while the Bush War was still going on. Smith actually publicly endorsed him in 1980, after the election, as "sober and responsible", though that view dissolved within a year or so. Later Smith descriptions of Mugabe included numerous variations on "gangster", "mentally deranged" and the like. For more and for refs etc see Ian Smith. Hope this helps, Happy Christmas — Cliftonian (talk) 11:51, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks, Cliftonian. I will amend the prose in the article accordingly. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:53, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Dorset Ooser article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 17 January 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 17, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:37, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

@Mike Christie: - thanks for letting me know! Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:09, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kingston Russell Stone Circle you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Tintin

... you were recipient no. 565 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

Your GA nomination of Heathenry (new religious movement)

Your GA nomination of Tintin and Alph-Art

Joseph Chipimo

Your GA nomination of Tintin and the Picaros

Your GA nomination of Brian Williamson

Talkback

DYK for Tintin and Alph-Art

Angela Lansbury

Your GA nomination of Angela Lansbury

Your GA nomination of James Murrell

Your GA nomination of James Murrell

Your GA nomination of Angela Lansbury

A barnstar for you!

Stalking

Image of Sani Abacha

Hey Midnightblueowl, good morning!

Your GA nomination of Order of Nine Angles

Your GA nomination of Leslie Grinsell

Your GA nomination of Leslie Grinsell

Bahar Mustafa race row incident

Your GA nomination of Mari Lwyd

Your GA nomination of Mari Lwyd

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 25, 2016

Margaret Murray

Your GA nomination of Leo Martello

Your GA nomination of Leo Martello

Marjorie Cameron

Your GA nomination of Vladimir Lenin

I want to say

Your GA nomination of Vladimir Lenin

Moving to talkpage

A beer for you!

Women in Classical Athens Peer Review

Your GA nomination of Doreen Valiente

Your GA nomination of Victor Henry Anderson

Your GA nomination of Doreen Valiente

Chomsky

Your GA nomination of Sylvester (singer)

Marjorie Cameron

Your GA nomination of Kenneth Grant

Anbe Sivam PR

Your GA nomination of Kenneth Grant

Your GA nomination of Sylvester (singer)

Your GA nomination of Else Christensen

Your GA nomination of Else Christensen

Talk:Victor Henry Anderson/GA1

Your GA nomination of Victor Henry Anderson

Your GA nomination of Marjorie Cameron

Re: Cecil Williams (anti-apartheid activist)

Your GA nomination of Marjorie Cameron

Your GA nomination of Julia Gasper

A barnstar for you!

Your GA nomination of Julia Gasper

Barnstar

Your GA nomination of Murder of Lenford Harvey

Your GA nomination of Murder of Lenford Harvey

Brexit

Disambiguation link notification for June 26

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 13, 2016

2 July 2016 Baghdad bombings

Donald Trump - ideological position

Warning re Donald Trump

Orphaned non-free image File:Margaret Murray.jpg

Disambiguation link notification for July 15

The West Country Challenge

3RR board

Ancestry charts

O G S Crawford

Your GA nomination of O. G. S. Crawford

Your GA nomination of O. G. S. Crawford

Disambiguation link notification for July 22

GA review of Oran fatwa

Anglo-Saxon weaponry

Elizabeth Dilling and zzz

Precious anniversary

Good articles

Sherpa Fire

Your GA nomination of Chestnuts Long Barrow

Your GA nomination of Chestnuts Long Barrow

Barrows