User talk:Schwede66/Archive 10

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Phil Holloway may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• of Otago]], but did not finish his degree because he went overseas. He was a [door-to-door]] salesmen for vacuum cleaners in England before undertaking more study at [[Boston University]].<

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

[Stub Contest] 4th place

4th place

Congratulations. With a final score of 1,332 points, you earned 4th place in the Stub Contest. You were declared the fourth place finisher at at the contest talk page. There you can find the info to receiver your €25 voucher for Amazon.com. You did an excellent job, expanding all those stubs is hard hard work (and I loved your formatting with headers) and earned it. Mitch32^{(The man who renounces himself, comes to himself.)} 05:13, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Charles Wilson (librarian)

Hello! Your submission of Charles Wilson (librarian) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  Ohc ^¡digame! 10:15, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

AIV

Hey, Schwede, thanks for reporting User:165.155.196.85! Just so you know, though, the more usual way to do it is to make an entry on AIV; if you have Twinkle installed (a gadget in the preferences section), it should have a function to do it for you under the ARV tab. No worries, though; your way works too, though perhaps not as fast. In any event, cheers! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:08, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Schwede66 19:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Elections reference

Hi Schwede: a good ref for NZ elections; will add to New Zealand general election, 1946 as as soon a I can work out how to edit the table of initial MPs. Only problem is no loan copy in Wellington library. Hugo999 (talk) 00:43, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

• Norton, Clifford (1988). New Zealand Parliamentary Election Results 1946-1987: Occasional Publications No 1, Department of Political Science. Wellington: Victoria University of Wellington. ISBN 0-475-11200-8. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

• Nice one. The results table is in a template (Template:New Zealand general election, 1946), and this is done so that both the election and the nth parliament article can use the same table; stops us from having to make corrections or amendments in two places. All the results tables will get templated over time, and all elections from 1890 onwards will use the format that the 1946 election uses. Over time, the election articles will all go to shortened footnotes, so if you want to add a reference to the results table, you'd need to do the following:

• Add cite book to both the election and the nth parliament article (note I've edited the ref somewhat)
• add {{sfn|Norton|1988|pp=x–y}} to the table header, where x–y represents the page range.

• By the way, for page or year ranges, you need to use an endash as opposed to a simple dash; you get to it via the Wiki markup menu and it's the first dash next to the label 'Insert:'. If you get stuck, just put something into your edit summary; I have the 1946 pages on my watchlist. Schwede66 01:11, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
• Have added Norton as first source (Bay of Plenty, Dunedin Central, Eden), but kept the other ref. Norton has surname and initials for candidates; though the candidate index shows that AR Boord stood for No 8, Bay of Plenty in 1946 and No 100, Rotorua in 1954 which he won. NB: Gustafson on early Labour says (from memory) which electorates various candidates stood for. Hugo999 (talk) 08:27, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

• Gustafson, Barry (1980). Labour's path to political independence: The Origins and Establishment of the New Zealand Labour Party, 1900–19. Auckland, New Zealand: Auckland University Press. ISBN 0-19-647986-X. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

PS: The 1935 & 1938 templates have the four Maori electorates together at the end, but the others I have looked all have the Maori electorates spread in alphabetical order throughout the list. Can we standardise on this? Hugo999 (talk) 09:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I'd say we should be alphabetical by electorate, just as I've done it with the 1946 table. By the way, 'pp' in the sfn template stands for 'pages', and 'p' stands for 'page'. I've amended your entry accordingly. Great to have the three uncertain 1946 candidates confirmed! Schwede66 09:07, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Schwede: Have amended the 1919 also 1935 & 1938 templates so the Maori seats are in alphabetical order also. But still some 19c ones to do; 1875-76, 1879, 1881 & 1890. Also 1884 & 1887, which are arranged not alphabetically (by seat) but geographically north to south. And the 1899 template has most of the table obscured by the black background spread all over it. Hugo999 (talk) 01:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Jermyn Symonds

Just to let you know I nominated your recent expansion at DYK. Best, Yoninah (talk) 11:38, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Jermyn Symonds

Hello! Your submission of Jermyn Symonds at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Bloom6132 (talk) 23:33, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

NZ Election Templates again

Hi Schwede: Have finished modifying the 1993 election template, will do 1990 template next. Re general election articles, the table of votes by party often do not have a column for the number of candidates standing; a few years do not have the table at all. It seems simplest to use the table as used for the 1978 election (1990 election table is similar but does not have the right hand change column). The numbers of candidates are given in Wilson (1985) pages 295-6. Though this table for Labour groups all left candidates together, will use table in Brown page 225 (except for 1919). Suspect Wilson’s table similarly classes Independent Liberal as Liberal, and Independent Reform as Reform? Also while the Communist Party stood candidates 1946 – 1969 including to Norton and some election articles tabulate them seperately, they are not separate in Wilson, presumably under Independent (Wilson’s table also has 25 P or “Peoples Movement” candidates in 1943 tho I have not heard of them! 1943 was the year that 54 of John A. Lee’s Democratic Labour Party stood). Hugo999 (talk) 12:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

PS Finished an article on the Maori loan affair Hugo999 (talk) 22:59, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Help

I am lost and confused on Wikipedia Jaobo (talk) 19:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC) Jaobo

Savart wheel DYK?

Hello Schwede66. I'm writing here as I know from experience that you can be extremely helpful with DYKs. In the last 2 days I have expanded Savart's wheel (sorry, as an ip I don't think I can add redirects) over 5-fold, and I think the page meets the basic DYK criteria and could provide an interesting and informative entry. Do you perhaps know someone interested in nominating this? Right now I'm afraid I feel the need for a wikibreak (though I may wake up shortly). Thanks anyway :) Best wishes, 86.173.146.3 (talk) 00:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for my slow response, but I've had a rather busy week. I hope somebody else picked this up. Schwede66 18:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Best New Zealand Poems series, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tom Weston (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:57, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

It very much was deliberate. Schwede66 23:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Redlink notability

I removed the redlink from Isaac Coates/Isaac Coates (not to be confused with this Isaac Coates) not solely because I believe his notability is not established, although as mayor of Hamilton (then with a population under 1,000) between 1888-92 notability is not a given, but precisely because it was a redlink. If there is a likelihood of a redlink becoming an article in the short term (as in Maureen Pugh) then I don't see that a redlink is a problem. However, for redlinks that are not likely to become an article in the near or medium term future I see no point to them. Notability is a double-edged sword; if an article is unlikely to be created then notability is not proven. Further, I think Isaac Coates fails Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline in that [Presumed notability] means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject should be included, Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Politicians, and AFD-politicians meaning any such article may not survive AFD. FanN | talk | 00:01, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Tom

Done. Let me know if you need anything else. Jinian (talk) 19:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Excellent - thanks! Schwede66 19:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

NZ Template Problem

Hi Schwede, The NZ Election Results templates do not work properly now when a Runner-Up is added to a New Electorate, see template for 1969 & 1972 general elections. Hugo999 (talk) 13:38, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I alerted to the relevant discussion on the politics talk page the other day; I hope that the latter is on your watchlist. Schwede66 19:19, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Pan Pac Forest Products Ltd

Should this article be allowed to disappear? I did in fact find it because I was looking for it - I mean it does provide information that I was looking for. The author has not contributed for some years. I think the proposer is just 'testing' but I don't know local standards. 330 people seems quite a lot in Hawke's Bay. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 07:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

You were looking at a Wikipedia:PROD, which is a way to suggest an article for uncontroversial deletion. If you disagree with it, you can simply remove the PROD tag. What happens next is usually one of two things: either, the article gets put up for the formal / normal deletion process, or an editor who thinks the article is worthy of keeping improves it somewhat, and that's often enough to keep it away from AfD. Sometimes, it goes to AfD even after the improvement. I've removed the PROD because it was about to expire (when it expires, the article gets deleted), but I suggest that you add some reliable sources to the article that helps establish its notability. Schwede66 19:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's right. I'm not going to do any more than tell someone else about it though. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 01:22, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Chippenham Lodge

Hello! Your submission of Chippenham Lodge at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Edwardx (talk) 09:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

C D Barraud

I don't know the reason (maybe another around at the time called just Charles Barraud) but I think it was wrong to move Charles Decimus to Charles Barraud. Will ask around and be back tomorrow. I was concerned to see he was only Charles in Wikimedia. Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 13:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Simplest to suggest you carry out this quick Google test. Enter the query term: Dunbar-Sloane Barraud. Your responses will all be either C D Barraud or Charles Decimus Barraud. (or one of his descendants, cousins, ancestors etc etc). Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 08:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Eddaido, what you are talking about affects a number of Wikipedia policies and practices. Firstly, we have naming conventions for people, with a particular section on middle names. The advice is to go with the common name used in reliable sources. What Wikipedia does not concern itself with is whether other people who do not have a WP biography may share the same name; this is of no relevance to our naming conventions.

You should know that Stuartyeates went through the commendable exercise of creating some 2,000 stub articles for people with an entry at the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, based on the premise that with a few exceptions, all of these are notable. Stuartyeates used an automated process for this, and what he did not do is read the biographies. All the articles set up this way use full names as per their entry at DNZB, but when you read the bios themselves, you generally learn what a person's common name is. When I come across any of those bios and link to them or expand them, I often read the DNZB entry and then move the page if necessary to bring it in line with our naming conventions. This is what happened in the case of Mr Barraud.

Your query also touches on disambiguation. Just for clarity, once we have established a person's common name, this is what determines the article title. If disambiguation is needed at some later point, this is done by adding a descriptor in parentheses, unless we are dealing with a primary topic. What is not done is to now add a middle name for disambiguation; if it's not the common name, that is not how we disambiguate.

Lastly, there is no alignment between article titles on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. In my opinion, it would make sense to achieve alignment, and I'm sure that at some point in the future, we will have that. The process for moving pages on Wikipedia is entirely different to changing category names on Wikimedia Commons. I'm sure this will sort itself out over time and my guess would be that related categories on Wikimedia Commons will be moved by a bot upon article titles changing on Wikipedia. But for now, there is no alignment across these different platforms. Schwede66 20:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for all this. Isn't it usual to save time and keyboard by making the usual references to the "rule book"? I point out again that this person's common name is either C D Barraud or Charles Decimus Barraud. I refer you again to the Google test. Surely that gives the common name.

I'm aware of the sterling work done by you and your colleagues and as a fellow citizen thank you for it, you've just made this mistake. Surely Life's simpler if there is an alignment between WP and Commons? Commons was wrong, WP right. Just telling you so you can easily fix it. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 22:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

It appears we disagree. I suggest you put up a formal move request so that this can be debated. Schwede66 07:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Indeed we do. I'd be happy if you just reverted your change. You might like to consider these cases (if you would like to change them too then I've better ones):

Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Johann Sebastian Bach, Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Georg Friedrich Händel, Heinrich Rudolf Hertz, Erich Maria Remarque, Rainer Maria Rilke, Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen, Ernst Christian Friedrich Schering, Karl Friedrich Schinkel, Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, Diedrich Hermann Westermann, Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 08:17, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Firstly, even if I wanted to revert my change, I assume that I can't move the file over the redirect because it has been edited since the move; this needs to be done by an admin. Secondly, I never said that middle names are never used, and you have compiled a nice list of people who are known by their full names. Schwede66 08:31, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Firstly - then it will be no problem for you. Secondly I find when discussions become heated some points can be accidentally skipped. Have you really tried that Google search I suggested for a test as to how / by what name the article's subject really is known? I do not really mean to suggest this artist ranks with Bach or Goethe but whatever the perceived quality of his many pictures they are a visual record of NZ soon after European settlement and so I think interest in him will remain permanent. As you say yourself its how the subject is commonly known that provides the test isn't it. Glad you liked my list, regards, Eddaido (talk) 02:39, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't agree with you. Schwede66 20:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

I'd worked out that part. Have you tried the Google search Dunbar-Sloane Barraud? Dunbar Sloane is a local firm of auctioneers, I've turned up sales through some of the European-USA multinational auction houses too. Eddaido (talk) 22:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

We have discussed this for long enough on my talk page and I am happy to engage in further discussion as part of a formal move request only. Schwede66 20:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

By all means. Will I then learn the reason you don't follow my simple suggestion and answer my question? I'll get organised before Monday. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 08:22, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about this, a copy editor, Samblob, follows me around "trailing his coat". Eddaido (talk) 02:02, 8 June 2014 (UTC)