Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:37, 4 June 2011

This is Cirt's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

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

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24Auto-archiving period: 7 days

WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Misplaced Pages.
Nominations: Climate change feedbacks (talk | history | start review) • Metropolitan Club (New York City) (talk | history | start review) • Interstate 85 in North Carolina (talk | history | start review) • Rico Krieger (talk | history | start review) • Maisi (talk | history | start review) Reassessment: WSJ Magazine • World Chess Championship 1972 • Green Lantern (film) • Cú Chulainn • Wings (1927 film) • Electric vehicle warning sounds • Vampire folklore by region • Henry VIII • British Library • Mikhail Gorbachev • Bleeding Through • Task forces: Project quality • Sweeps • GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013)
Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations list | edit

Centralized discussion Village pumps policy tech proposals idea lab WMF misc Refining the administrator elections process Blocks for promotional activity outside of mainspace For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard. view edit history watch archive talk purge

15 January 2025 From the editors: Looking back, looking forward Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2024 In the media: Will you be targeted? Technology report: New Calculator template brings interactivity at last Essay: Meet the Canadian who holds the longest editing streak on Misplaced Pages Opinion: Reflections one score hence News and notes: It's a new dawn, it's a new day, it's a new life for me... and I'm feeling free Serendipity: What we've left behind, and where we want to go next Op-ed: Elon Musk and the right on Misplaced Pages In focus: Twenty years of The Signpost: What did it take? Arbitration report: Analyzing commonalities of some contentious topics Humour: How to make friends on Misplaced Pages Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Other neat portal ideas for longer term

• Longer term ideas to think about from other portals:

1. Events section, like: "On this day" e.g., Biography, Religion, United States; "Selected anniversaries" e.g., War; "Calendar" at Holidays. Interesting idea of "Month selected anniversaries", at Oregon.
2. Model intro with some rotating images, after Portal:Oregon, Portal:Indiana, Portal:Iceland/Intro and Portal:Philosophy of science/Intro.
3. Revamp DYK sections w/ free-use images, model after Portal:Criminal justice and Portal:Oregon.
4. Portal palettes at User:RichardF/Palettes/Portals. Comparable color schemes can be developed from the various hue lists at User:RichardF/Palettes. Also see Portal:Box-header.
5. If there are a lot of categories, then categories section to 2 columns, like in Portal:Indiana.

   Also take some time to check out style/formatting at Portal:Indiana Cirt (talk)

Note to self - tools and templates

• MakeRef
• Reflinks
• Citation tool for Google Books
• Citation tool for DOIs
• Tools, part 1: References, external links, categories and size
• User:Edward/Find link

independent reliable secondary sources

• User:Citation bot/use

• {{findsources}}

Refs inside scroll box

<div class="reflist4" style="height: 200px; overflow: auto; padding: 3px; border: 1px solid #ababab">{{reflist|2}}</div>

Cite templates

<ref>{{cite book| last =  | first =  | authorlink =  | coauthors =  | title =  | publisher =  | year =  | location =  | page =  | url =  | doi =  | id =    | isbn = }}</ref>
<ref>{{cite news| last =  | first =  | coauthors =  | title =  | work =  | language =  | publisher =  | page =  | date =  | url =  | accessdate =  }}</ref>
<ref>{{cite journal|last =| first=| authorlink=| coauthors=|title=|journal=|volume=|issue=|page=|publisher=|location = | date = | url = | doi = | id = | accessdate = }}</ref>
<ref>{{cite web| last =  | first =  | authorlink =  | coauthors =  | title =  | work =  | publisher =  | date =  | url =  | format =  | doi =  | accessdate =  }}</ref>

Citation model

The Simpsons (season 3)

Body text in-cite

<ref name="REFNAME">], p. PAGENUMBER</ref>

References section

(reference template from WP:CIT)

*<cite id=LASTNAME>REFERENCE</cite>

Different model

• Template:Citation
• Template:Harvnb
• Example: <ref name="REFNAME">{{Harvnb|LAST|YEAR|p=PAGENUMBER}}</ref>

See models at The General in His Labyrinth and Mario Vargas Llosa.

More info. Cirt (talk)

More at Misplaced Pages:Harvard citation template examples.

And Template talk:Harvard citation no brackets.

Cirt (talk)

Note to self - New article creation project - Game for Vultures

Game for Vultures, novel by Michael Hartmann, 1976.

• Made into a film, A Game for Vultures.

1. Fix both redirects, Game for Vultures and Game for vultures.
2. Create a hatnote, from one to the other. (Slightly confusing with the only different being the "A" in the beginning).
3. Begin research for WP:RS secondary sources, book reviews, news articles, etc.
4. Think about sect on Film adaptation or just Adaptations within the book article.
5. Draft up sourced brief article for author, currently empty with disambig at Michael Hartmann.
6. Notes regarding relevant WikiProjects, post regarding interested parties to work on the article.
7. IMDB page for author, not much there, link
8. Other books by same author: The Hunted (1982), Days of Thunder (1980), Leap for the Sun (1976), Web of Dragons (1988)
9. Research on the reception from secondary sources, of these other books.
10. Credited also as co-author on the screenplay, OCLC 6567974
11. Book, OCLC 2425654, and OCLC 16481951

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

-- Cirt (talk)

Thank you for keeping us from having to wear helmets

Sorry if you object to what some term "the orange bar of death" but I just wanted to take a moment to express my sincere appreciation for your work at RFPP and elsewhere too, of course. I have nothing but respect for contributors who keep the substantial infrastructure here from crashing down around the heads of the rest of us. I'm grateful; thank you.  – OhioStandard (talk) 14:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, you're most welcome! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 14:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hugo Austin

Hey Cirt. I noticed the article 'Hugo Austin' has been deleted recently. I have a odd request, is it possible you could get me the text that was present so I can place it in a sandbox. The character was notable but just needed a lot more effort putting into it. It had something useful there already I think.Rain the 1 00:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done, now at User:Raintheone/Hugo Austin. -- Cirt (talk) 03:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for that. :)Rain the 1 12:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 12:59, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Keep me posted regarding improvements if you are thinking about proposing it go back into article mainspace. :) -- Cirt (talk) 14:58, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

The protection is appreciated. I had to do a bit of fiddling around with that article and Dipendra of Nepal because of vandalism. --Kevin W./Talk•CFB uniforms/Talk 19:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Jeopardy! international tournaments AfD

Cirt, I think a merge or relist outcome was probably best here . One of the deletion arguments is apparently wrong (and frankly irrelevant as a former participant writing an book on a topic doesn't make that book lack independence) and I think the others might be read as being much less relevant in the face of actual sourcing. Thoughts? Hobit (talk) 02:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Restored, relisted, back at AFD. -- Cirt (talk) 03:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.Hobit (talk) 03:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) -- Cirt (talk) 03:42, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

inre Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Keltz

You were the deleting admin on February 2, 2010 of the article Jonathan Keltz. It was a good deletion. The article was recreated January 2011 as a two-sentence unsourced stub and was quickly A7 speedied. No problem with that either, as its author did nothing but write two meagre sentences. But 15 months have gone by and the actor's career has not stood still. He has now completed major roles in three more major productions to now meet WP:ENT, and has the coverage that he lacked back then to now meet WP:GNG. As I wish to return a far improved version to mainspace, I invite you to visit my new and improved version at User:MichaelQSchmidt/Jonathan Keltz, and perhaps offer your blessing at User talk:MichaelQSchmidt/Jonathan Keltz#Comments:. Thanks, Schmidt, 08:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Just wished to re-affirm that the original deletion 15 months ago was a good one, and to get your approval for a return of an improved article. Thank you and best regards, Schmidt, 18:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Scaoch

Dear Cirt,

I think deleting the article Scoach was not necessary at this stage as improvements have been made on a going basis. Rather than deleting it I would appreciate your input for improvements or deletion of parts that you deemed wrong.

Regards. Lefa1992 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lefa1992 (talk • contribs) 10:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

AfD: Parental Rights Amendment

Shouldn't this have been relisted? 4 deletes to 3 keeps (one "weak" and one from the article creator, who is paid to promote this bill) seems like a weak basis for keeping the article, even as "no consensus." Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Edits 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack

My recent edits to the 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack article were meant in good faith. I did not realize that we had to cite sources showing how the previous version of the article was inaccurate. I've started a talk page discussion. Polyquest (talk) 19:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I see the talk page discussion, and I am participating there, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

A quick FYI...

relative to a block you made Ticket: 2011060210013923. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyo 19:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

It appears an appropriate response was given to the individual. -- Cirt (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Unblock request was declined. -- Cirt (talk) 19:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree the appropriate response was given and the unblock denial sound, I just wanted to drop you a small note regarding the ticket in case it becomes relevant at any time. --Jezebel'sPonyo 20:01, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 20:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

New articles for LGBT Project discussion..Dan Savage biblio

Rather than placing these on the Project Page I think they should go on the Talk Page..I also think that they're more likely to get some attention there. Pjefts (talk) 22:33, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I at least agree that both are appropriate places. :) -- Cirt (talk) 02:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Bummer of a login

Hi. Thanks for your welcome note. It turns out, though, I just never noticed I wasn't logged in. Oh well. My userspace is found here for future reference. Schyler (one language) 02:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Could you do that? I would like to have the two edits under my username. Let me know on my talk page when the deed is done. Thanks a bunch! Schyler (one language) 02:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

That is, the removal of the tag on the article and the discussion top/bottom tags. Schyler (one language) 02:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done -- Cirt (talk) 03:55, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Email

Rivertorch (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello Cirt

I just wanted to drop a note to you. While we've not had a great deal of direct interaction, I noticed that we've both been involved in several of the same threads lately where you and I disagree on some fundamentals. (the Santorum stuff). I had to note that you have worked extremely hard to be reasonable, compassionate, understanding, and always showing the utmost respect for all editors and their viewpoints. While we may disagree on this particular article, it is a true pleasure to work with someone who shows so much maturity and understanding. Your efforts to find a reasonable compromise in the entire situation have not gone unnoticed. Thank you for being the type of editor and admin. that I think we should all aspire to. Cheers and best. — Ched :  ?  14:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ched, thank you so much for your kind words, and for recognizing my efforts at a polite and respectful demeanor. I really appreciate that. A lot. So very much, actually. It means a lot to me. Thanks again, -- Cirt (talk) 15:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		What Ched said. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 00:17, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

User:Ico-Man/BS.Player

Not sure whether to drag the discussion out of the archive, or just to ask here. Would you stand for or against reinstatement of the article, given the recent improvements? --Lexein (talk) 20:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Not really seeing enough there in terms of secondary source coverage. -- Cirt (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh. I thought three reviews was enough. --Lexein (talk) 20:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Also, the page appears to still be tagged with citations needed. -- Cirt (talk) 20:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I put those there, but am willing to assume good faith that there's changelog or bsplayer.org forum news announcement about it. You're saying it shouldn't reinstate with any challenged claims. --Lexein (talk) 21:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Right. -- Cirt (talk) 21:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Meh. I'm not married to it. --Lexein (talk) 21:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Santorum

Funny that the discussion of this neologism seems to be best described by another neologism: truthiness, which seems to describe most of the arguments made by those who would see the article removed. In two years, santorum will be eligible for inclusion in the Oxford English Dictionary, and I wouldn't be totally surprised if it winds up there. That would amuse me greatly... but I doubt it would suffice to end the debate. // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Cirt, I think the article lacks any real glaring issues at the moment... or, at least, I see nothing that I wouldn't fear would lead to an edit war if made at this time. I think there are a lot of highly politically-partisan hackles raised right now, and a fair number of editors engaged who cannot adequately divorce their personal feelings and political leanings from the rules of this community. For the same reason, I'm not sure how much good will be done by reasoned discussion: someone will come along with an impassioned-but-unsupported plea that Something Must Be Done that ignores opposing viewpoints.... At this point, I think it's clear that the article won't be deleted, merged, or substantially altered if the community consensus is respected. It's nearing dead horse time... but it's equine flagellation time in US politics now, so I imagine the fury will keep seeking an outlet. One must have faith that enough editors will shout down those who see WP:IAR as the answer to WP:IDONTLIKEIT... or, at least, that someone will actually put in the effort to bring forth a good, cogent argument for the other side that sways us, eh? (Perhaps the biggest lack of understanding 'twixt the sides is the difference between firm and intransigent with regard to beliefs...) // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 02:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

...for your kind note. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 00:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

truly disappointed

Hi, Cirt. May I say I am truly disappointed by both you and C.Fred? Anyway I did not expect you to side with conservatism. I am puzzled by the inappropriate action of deleting "burnt out diabetes" of a likely biased user and by your support for the said actions, in particular by your locking the deletion and for not allowing further discussion on this topic. FYI, the key word "burnt out diabetes" has over 2,000 positing and websites. It is a likely paradigm shifting concept, which, as the history of science and medicine has shown repeatedly, antagonizes traditionalists and those who have minimal tolerance for the scientific progress and for advances in science and medicine. History repeats itself. As for technicality of DELTERION OBJECTOIN (“use conventional methods to protest deletion”), not all people on the planet are as Misplaced Pages-savvy as certain biased. Instead of supporting people who have mitigated tolerance for new concepts and mark anything for deletion that is not consistent with “their” traditional and science-conservative expectations, you may wish to also support the underdog of the Misplaced Pages World in the interest of advancing freedom of science and allowing Misplaced Pages to grow rather than becoming yet another tool in the hands of the monitors of the monitors of the monitors…. Very few people mean vandalism, and to discredit a balanced effort of reviving an unfairly deleted page as "vandalism" and showing least tolerance for such efforts in not consistent with your impressive track record in your website. Hope we see your true you and your advocacy for freedom of science and against scientific fanatics.Burntout1234 (talk) 06:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

FYI, this account is a sock of Burntout123 (talk · contribs), who recreated Burnt-out diabetes mellitus and other variant titles about a dozen times tonight/this morning. I finally wound up SALTing the original title and blocking him for 31 hours. I had advised him before the block to contact you if he objected to your close of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Burnt-out diabetes mellitus, and that if you and he couldn't resolve the situation, he could take the matter to DRV. —C.Fred (talk) 06:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Blocked the sock, the sock should request unblock, through its main account. -- Cirt (talk) 06:28, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

And I would grant an unblock request—obviously with the understanding that any attempt to create the article again would result in an immediate block. —C.Fred (talk) 06:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family

Hello! Your submission of The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! OCNative (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed an ALT1, thanks. -- Cirt (talk) 06:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)