Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
  Policy   Technical   Proposals   Idea lab   Miscellaneous  
The miscellaneous section of the village pump is used to post messages that do not fit into any other category. Please post on the policy, technical, or proposals pages, or – for assistance – at the help desk, rather than here, if at all appropriate. For general knowledge questions, please use the reference desk.
« Older discussions, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53
Centralized discussion
Proposals: policy other Discussions Ideas

For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Note: entries for inactive discussions, closed or not, should be moved to the archive.

Hello[edit]

Please note that Ernesto Maceda has died. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.185.175.84 (talk) 11:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Has been handled in the article about him. --Jhertel (talk) 07:44, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Academic works translation needed before Wikimania[edit]

Hi,

I've finished a French academic work named Ethical drift with in Wikimedia movement and I will finish soon a other one named For a better economic justice with in the Wikimedia movement. I would like to translate this two works in English before Wikimania for sharing the contain with the whole community and maybe inspire discussion during the week. I didn't have time and competence to do it my self before Wikimania. Is that in this forum any person who can help me, starting translation or pointing a place where I can found this kind of help ? Thanks in advance Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 15:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Ok, never mine. I've found a trick system to present my works in english thanks to google : For a Fair Economy in the Wikimedia movement and Ethical Drifts in the Wikimedia movement. A nice day for every one. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 21:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Lionel Scheepmans, you can post it on Meta and mark it for translation, if you want something more precise. (Do you know User:Trizek at the French Wikipedia? He knows how to set this up.) Then you can send a request for translation to the translators' mailing list. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:19, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot WhatamIdoing, I'm in contact with him in Italy. Have a nice day. Lionel Scheepmans Contact (French native speaker) 08:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Anachronistic ship prefixes[edit]

Someone on the Reference Desk just asked a question about the use of the prefix "USS" with the ship USS Bonhomme Richard (1765).

It turns out that this is seriously anachronistic: the ship was not part of the US Navy, but of the earlier Continental Navy, and the use of USS with US Navy ships didn't become standard until much later, in the era of Theodore Roosevelt.

Possibly this means that the article should be renamed—but possibly not, as WP:AT#Use commonly recognizable names specifies that "Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used". I am no expert on 18th century US naval history who would know what name is most commonly used in reliable sources [added later: or even if the addition of "USS" was retroactive"], so I'm just posting the question here for possible consideration.

And the reason I'm posting it here rather than on the article's talk page is that if it should be named, then quite likely there are other articles about pre-20th-century ships whose titles start with "USS" and which should also be renamed. If there is a better place for this suggestion, then I invite someone else to copy this posting there; for me, this is just a drive-by comment. --69.159.9.187 (talk) 23:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

From what I remember reading, it is not referred to as the USS BHR, and indeed the article, other than in the title, doesn't refer to it as the USS BHR. I would rename to BHR (1765). Sir Joseph (talk) 15:09, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello 2[edit]

When died George Forrester, born 1934? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.106.146.91 (talk) 12:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Invisible Guy: I restored the above question which called attention to the death date of George Forrester (footballer, born 1934) having been vandalized. --Pipetricker (talk) 18:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Oops! I messed up, sorry. - INVISIBLE-Talk! 18:42, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Request for Comment German invasion of Belgium: Eastern Front?[edit]

Comments from experienced editors with an interest in military history are kindly requested at the talk page of this article. Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:29, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Good article reassessment input sought[edit]

It has been suggested to me by the editor Coretheapple in the Discussion area of a current GA reassessment that the review be brought to the attention of a wider audience. The issues above are included in the review, so I hope there's enough of a cross-functional applicability. The article in question is Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz.

At the WP:FTN, the article was deemed as needing more attention from uninvolved editors:

  • The article has so far been commented on mainly by editors who write military biographies, which seems to have its own separate standards regarding sourcing and details such as I have never seen before. -- diff.
  • What we're not saying is that this is a GAR for a 10,000+ word essay full of WP:FANCRUFT that apparently seems to meet the GA criteria of a wikiproject with its own set of rules for what's encyclopedic. -- diff.

I would welcome feedback or a review of the article to see if it still meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria and whether it should be retained or delisted as a Good article. Specialist knowledge of the subject is not required. Thank you and happy editing. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:22, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry if this [creation of a] "Talk:" page for a redirect page, was done in the wrong place[edit]

I added a new section, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Larceny_by_trick#Idea_for_changing_the_redirect

I apologize if, in so doing, I inadvertently did something "incorrectly". It seems to have created a brand new "Talk:" page (for the corresponding article-space page, which is a redirect page), where no "Talk:" page previously existed. Please [feel free to] tell me if that new section should have gone somewhere else, instead -- "such as", into the (already existing) "Talk:" page of the article [about] "Larceny". (...which [article] is the current "target" of the redirect page, that I was Talk:ing about.)

Also, Please feel free to answer any questions asked in that new section -- "such as" this question:

(Is it possible for a redirect to point directly to a specific section of an article-space article?)

Thanks for any help / answers / advice. --Mike Schwartz (talk) 21:33, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I've implemented your suggestion. It's quite fine to create the talk page against the redirect as you did, you just might not get many readers. Better alternative is to create it at the talk page of the article itself, as you have observed. Bottom line, though: a) no harm done b) eminently sensible idea. I think you should feel free to amend a redirect without discussion in as clear-cut a case as this - see WP:BRD, for instance. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:54, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Release Automatically signing[edit]

Hallo all there, I am glad to point out a new functionality-ability. There is "now" a user-script, see Signing (with 10 years development ^^). It is open for testing and feedback. ToDo next week: Functionality in Mobile version! User: Perhelion 12:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)