User talk:SchroCat/Archive 35

Archive 30

←

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Your GA nomination of Littlehampton libels

The article Littlehampton libels you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Littlehampton libels for comments about the article, and Talk:Littlehampton libels/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Premeditated Chaos -- Premeditated Chaos (talk) 02:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Re: WikiProject Crime banner BLP issue

Following this comment I added sk= as an alias parameter for the task force call in the banner, if in any case you feel it is inappropriate to add that in the wikitext. Also works for the importance parameter as sk-imp. Hopefully this helps your concern? PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:35, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks PARAKANYAA. I think that would suit in the cases where there is a BLP element to the matter. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang

Congratulations, SchroCat! The article you nominated, Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Haydn Talk Page Infobox Discussion

Talk:Joseph Haydn

There appears to be an infobox discussion for Joseph Haydn even though an RfC was never initiated. It appears to have been going on intermittently for several months but only a few users have contributed. However, someone has added an infobox even though there appears to be no clear consensus (last I counted there were five in favor of the infobox and four against, including myself). Is there anything that can be done? It seems to be a very unofficial way of trying to push for an infobox. Barbarbarty (talk) 17:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

It appears especially egregious as if this was an RfC it would have been long closed by now as before yesterday the last post was made over four months ago. However, a single user appears to have dropped in and that was used to add the infobox. Barbarbarty (talk) 17:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Claiming a consensus that doesn't exist? Colour me unsurprised.... - SchroCat (talk) 05:03, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Grammar check

Hi Schro, hope you are keeping well. I was wondering if you could do a quick grammar check at 2001: A Space Odyssey. The sentence mixes the singular and plural senses of "tribe"—not great but not grammatically incorrect either. But there is a disagreement about the final clause. I contend that the final clause can read "returns to drive its rivals away with it" (singular) or "return to drive their rivals away with it" (plural), but not "returns to drive their rivals away with it". I really don't care which sense the sentence uses, but the latter simply does not sit well with me. Basically it just needs to be grammatically correct, that's all that matters. Betty Logan (talk) 09:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Betty Logan, how are things? I hope you're keeping well. The problem is that "the tribe" can be either plural or singular, and it's being used as both in such a short area here. Getting rid of "the tribe" for "they" solves much of the problem. How does this look:

In a prehistoric veld, a tribe of hominins is driven away from a water hole by a rival group. The next day, they find an alien monolith has appeared in their midst. They then learn how to use a bone as a weapon and, after their first hunt, return to drive their rivals away.

Sound okay? - SchroCat (talk) 10:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

That reads great, although it actually looks like the dispute has been resolved. Thanks as always. Betty Logan (talk) 11:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Socompa

Greetings, since I remember (perhaps I am imagining things) that you were interested in whichever my next FAC effort would be, it's Socompa (since Cerro Panizos) has now passed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jo-Jo: I did say I'd look in at the article, and I completely forgot about it! I'll try and pop in for a look today. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

FAC Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

New message from Jo-Jo Eumerus

Hello, SchroCat. You have new messages at Jo-Jo Eumerus's talk page.
Message added 09:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

my H. Nelson link

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Please say, was wrong with my Nelson edit, that needed your attention? Broichmore (talk) 13:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

As you can see from the changes I made, the newspaper should be italicised, 'comma date' is better than 'of date' and linking to a category of paintings on Commons isn't great. - SchroCat (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for italicised, comment, I will follow it in future. Even though its not a hard and fast rule, especially within the bounds of a page.

The 'comma date' is better than 'of date' is your opinion.

Why is linking to a sister project, that is a major conrtibutor and an integral part of the community not great? Broichmore (talk) 13:14, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Because MOS:INTERWIKI explicitly states that "To avoid reader confusion, inline interlanguage, or interwiki, linking within an article's body text is generally discouraged." If you believe that Horatio Nelson is notable enough for an article, a redlink would be preferable over an inter-project link. Creating an article about him first, and then linking, would be even better.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
• "'comma date' is better than 'of date' is your opinion". Correct, but it's also widely considered a superior manner of phrasing too, including—importantly in this context—by the MOS, which lists 'comma date' 'of year' at MOS:DATESNO as an "unacceptable date format".
  And yes, italicising publications is a hard and fast rule: see MOS:NAMESANDTITLES. - SchroCat (talk) 13:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC) (Amended SchroCat (talk) 17:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC))

  This particular case, the use of the comma, is not mentioned. There is nothing wrong, with my use of it. Please pick out the particular phrase in this mad woman's knitting that proves your point.

  I gave way to you, I can see the sense about italicising publications, however, there is nothing there, in your link, about italicising them being a hard and fast rule. Again, tell me the particular phrase.

  The meaning of generally discouraged, doesn’t mean it’s totally forbidden. If used sparingly, and as, in this particular case, there is no possibility of confusion. This person is not notable enough for inclusion on this project as an article, and never will be. The content on commons, in terms of displaying an artist’s body of work (such as the one mentioned) is quite enough, and every bit as valid as the noted exceptions of Wiktionary and Wikisource. The two mentioned are only examples, as such. Broichmore (talk) 16:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not going to bother coming back to this: you are being unnecessarily abrasive and confrontational in your stance for one thing, and ignoring both the MOS and common practice. The links to the guidelines are there for all to see and back up what I've said, which is all that counts. Given the edit was made to an FA, there is a requirement to follow the MOS, which the article does. The image you added is still there, but the supporting text is now MOS-compliant, which is all that is needed, without this extended and unnecessarily aggressive stance. - SchroCat (talk) 17:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Promotion of Littlehampton libels

Congratulations, SchroCat! The article you nominated, Littlehampton libels, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Littlehampton libels

On 28 October 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Littlehampton libels, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in the Littlehampton libels, Edith Swan fooled three juries and two judges, had another woman sent to prison twice, and was declared not guilty before finally being convicted? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Littlehampton libels. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Littlehampton libels), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 18,102 views (754.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2024 – nice work!

GalliumBot (talk • contribs) (he/it) 01:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Why Let’s get a long way into 2025 first

why Let’s get a long way into 2025 first GAMERBOY102 (talk) 06:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Because there is no need to have it there. We only added 2025 onto the page a week ago, so adding 2026 is premature. Plus it’s only half the job, there are other steps to take to do it properly. As you’re very new, it would be best to focus on improving articles, rather than trying to change the fabric of the place. - SchroCat (talk) 06:24, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

ps. GAMERBOY102, Please don't do things like this again. Aside from the fact we have a process for getting on the front page, the articles that go in the TFA slot must be featured articles, Gateway Mall (Quezon City) is a very long way away from that. - SchroCat (talk) 06:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

ok GAMERBOY102 (talk) 06:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Street numbers on Baker Street

Concerning Baker Street robbery: Thanks for your recent edit to this article to clean up the street numbers of the premises involved. However, the illustration (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Baker_Street_robbery#/media/File:Baker_Street_burglary_tunnel.svg) in the article still shows incorrect street numbers, both for the bank (shows 187 but should be 185) and for Chicken Inn (shows 188 but should be 187). I understand that the illustration was requested by you (and executed by Goran tek-en). If you agree with this, would you be willing to ask Goran tek-en to alter the illustration? Thanks! Felix116 (talk) 14:05, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:GAMERBOY102 is trying to game Today's Featured Article Process. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Beholder (horse)

Beholder (horse) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 14:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:The Man with the Golden Gun, wraparound cover.jpeg

Thank you for uploading File:The Man with the Golden Gun, wraparound cover.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 12:34, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

It's a false rationale to think FREER applies, unless you can explain it here. One non-free image showing part of the cover has been replaced by another non-free image showing the whole cover. Both were non-free, but the whole cover actually manages to show the whole book title, not part of it. - SchroCat (talk) 12:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

TFA dates

Hi, you've put January 2024 instead of 2025 for some of your recent additions to the FA talk pages - could you check please? Thanks. — Voice of Clam (talk) 11:20, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Done, thanks. - SchroCat (talk) 11:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Mentoring for FAC

Hi, I'm contacting you because I noticed your username is listed at WP:FAM and I am interested in nominating a FAC but have never done so in the past. I'm contacting several people listed as FA mentors so if you are busy that is okay. The article is Neurocysticercosis, a parasitic brain disease. Thanks in advance for your time and consideration! IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 22:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, IntentionallyDense. I'm not great woeful and clueless on Med and science articles, so you may want to ask Graham Beards or SandyGeorgia to have a look at the article. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 07:54, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I will be happy to help but there is a long way to go. I have made few edits to indicate what is needed.[1] I suggest a copyedit to improve the prose at this stage, before addressing the other FA criteria. It would be better to continue this discussion on the article's talk page and let SchroCat get on with his writing. Graham Beards (talk) 11:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the help! I really like the changes you've made thusfar! I'll see what SchroCat has to say and feel free to weigh in over at the talk page! IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 13:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Oops I realized this is on SchroCats userpage I misread... IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 13:58, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Archiving of Talk:Littlehampton libels

I do see how in this case, the old review, GA comments, and the DYK nomination are inherently stale and not worth keeping. I'll do my best to keep that kind of context in mind for the future when I'm cleaning up broken auto-archiving.

As far as the necessity of an archive box, the talk page header does have a search function, but it has to detect that archives exist before it shows up. You can see it now. There may be other benefits to the {{Archives}} template or some nuance I'm missing about the search, though. Retro (talk | contribs) 04:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the appearance of the search facility in the header. I didn’t realise it was hidden until the archives showed up. I’ve taken out the second search box now. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 04:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Rimsky Infobox

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There is no status quo on the Rimsky page. Two editors wanted an infobox. Two editors didn't. That's a stalemate. It's obvious that an infobox would improve the article. I voiced my opinion in favor of it, tilting the balance to 3-2.Trumpetrep (talk) 05:25, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

There obviously is a status quo: it’s the fact that the article has been IB free since it was first written: that’s a status quo by definition. As you your thought of counting votes, see WP:NOTAVOTE. Consensus isn’t achieved by vote counting or edit warring. - SchroCat (talk) 05:28, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

But the article hasn't been "IB free since it was first written", as you well know. Why misstate the facts? Moreover, why oppose a useful tool for readers? Trumpetrep (talk) 13:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

It has, except when people have tried to edit war it in there. This is not the venue to have a discussion about elements of any specific article: I suggest you leave it to the article's talk page, not this poorly attended backwater. - SchroCat (talk) 13:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Promotion of Martha Bradley

Congratulations, SchroCat! The article you nominated, Martha Bradley, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your great contributions! Maliner (talk) 20:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you: that’s very kind of you. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:02, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Village pump RfC notice

I don’t know if you’ve seen this but a usual suspect has again posted the composer RfC for Rimsky-Korsakov on the village pump page. https://en.m.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)&diff=prev&oldid=1262655852 Barbarbarty (talk) 04:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Sadly nothing surprises me with the disruptive elements nowadays. - SchroCat (talk) 04:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

John Gielgud

Hi SchroCat, on the GielGud page, ZeroAlpha87 mentioned that honours can still go in the lead sentence if the page has no infobox (bizarrely one of England's most famous actors has no infobox). I just thought I would mention it. This recent MOS thing has caused a bit of activity. :D.Halbared (talk) 15:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

That's just not true - there is nothing in MOS:POSTNOM that even comes close to suggesting it. The only point where an IB is mentioned is that post-noms can go into one, but that's it. - SchroCat (talk) 16:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings!

File:Statues of Three Wise Men in the Philippines 06.jpg

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Doc - I hope you're keeping well. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Apology

Hello,

I would like to apologize for my comments directed to you in Mahler's article talk page. I realize that, although I do stand by my original point, the language used was too emotional and heated, and I didn't treat you with all the respect you deserve. I should have been more civil and I'm sorry.

I would like to apologize to you if I have caused you any harm or offense.

Merry Christmas,

Milo8505 _(talk) 14:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, that's very gracious of you. - SchroCat (talk) 14:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Io Saturnalia!

		Io, Saturnalia!
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

		Season's Greetings
		Wishing everybody a Happy Holiday Season, and all best wishes for the New Year! The Adoration of the Magi in the Snow (1563) by Pieter Bruegel the Elder is my Wiki-Christmas card to all for this year. Johnbod (talk) 17:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

a request for a prose once-over!

Hey, SchroCat! You have a good eye for catching prose mistakes, and I was gonna to ask if you could take a look at my Gusuku Period FAC if you have the time. Gog raised some pretty salient prose concerns on overly technical language, so I redid a lot of the sections, but considering that it popped up a bunch across the article, I wanna make sure I haven't missed anything that's still confusing. Feel free to decline if you're busy; I know a lot of us are this time of year! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Generalissima, I am a bit busy (with work, rather than Christmas stuff), but I’ll certainly try and have a look over in the next day or so. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 05:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello SchroCat, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, –Davey2010Talk 23:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

–Davey2010^Talk 23:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! I just saw your FA work of A Christmas Carol in the On This Day section today. Great work you've done there! Panini! • 🥪 01:55, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Promotion of The Man with the Golden Gun (novel)

Congratulations, SchroCat! The article you nominated, The Man with the Golden Gun (novel), has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Nadolig Llawen

Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Dda.
Happy Christmas and Best wishes for a peaceful 2025: "Gabriel's Message" performed by the Winchester Cathedral Choir.
("Birjina gaztetto bat zegoen", Basque folk carol)

---

Martinevans123 (talk) 16:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Xmass

		Best wishes as always. Keep on going. Ceoil (talk) 03:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Christmas Greetings!

I hope you have a very merry Christmas and a wonderful 2025. Here is a seasonal recipe so easy that I can make it: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KjB3GmDm9Uw

-- Ssilvers (talk) 19:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Marley revert

User: Angryped has reverted an edit on the Marley article mentioning Scrooge's sister death, saying that "His sister's death during childbirth is why he resents his nephew. Certainly not a misnomer" I also tried to take Seasider53 advice on removing "portrayals" from the characters articles as they describe it as "Trivia and mostly unsourced for coming up on five years". My suggestions for the Cratchit article was based on these; "Scrooge threatens to sack his clerk if he asks for more coal to heat the fire. Cratchit wears his woollen scarf at work as he is so cold." is based on the sentence, "The door of Scrooge's counting-house was open that he might keep his eye upon his clerk, who in a dismal little cell beyond, a sort of tank, was copying letters. Scrooge had a very small fire, but the clerk's fire was so very much smaller that it looked like one coal. But he couldn't replenish it, for Scrooge kept the coal-box in his own room; and so surely as the clerk came in with the shovel, the master predicted that it would be necessary for them to part. Wherefore the clerk put on his white comforter, and tried to warm himself at the candle; in which effort, not being a man of a strong imagination, he failed." The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come shows Scrooge the Cratchit family mourning the death of Tiny Tim, with Bob returning from the graveyard where Tim's funeral will take place, and paying his respects to Tim's body upstairs. is based on "Yes, my dear," returned Bob. "I wish you could have gone. It would have done you good to see how green a place it is. But you'll see it often. I promised him that I would walk there on a Sunday. My little, little child!" cried Bob. "My little child!" expressing by offering Cratchit a drink of "smoking bishop", and even telling him to buy a coal-scuttle for his room. Bob is at first taken aback by Scrooge's transformation. Bob trembled, and got a little nearer to the ruler. He had a momentary idea of knocking Scrooge down with it, holding him, and calling to the people in the court for help and a strait-waistcoat.

Scrooge and Bob Cratchit celebrate Christmas with smoking bishop.

80.45.146.138 (talk) 16:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP, The problem with your revert is that you didn't include a reliable secondary source that backs it up: that makes it easy for someone to delete. If you can source that to a high quality, reliable source, then it shouldn't be deleted. However, what you deleted was also unsourced, so that shouldn't really be there either, given it's partly WP:original research. I've tagged it for someone to find a source, but if they do, there is no reason for it to be removed. Having said that, there is no reason why your addition should also not be included if it has a secondary source to back it up: it's a valid enough point for inclusion. I suggest you do some searches of Google Books, or the book section of the Internet Archive to find something (preferably an academic source) that backs up your point. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 20:46, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Christmas

Merry Christmas, SchroCat! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 23:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas from the Bishonen conglomerate!

Bishonen | tålk 13:33, 23 December 2024 (UTC).

Ditto, and hoping it brings you a nice bit of Fanny. Bottoms up! :) --SerialNumber54129^{A New Face in Hell} 15:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Wishes

@SchroCat Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a joyous festive season! MSincccc (talk) 18:23, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

@SchroCat

Wishing you a Happy New Year! Apologies for the early greeting—I wasn’t able to collaborate much this year due to my limited online presence. Looking forward to your FAC nominations in 2025. Thanks for the advice which you've shared with me this year which have broadened my perspective and helped me improve my quality of writing. MSincccc (talk) 18:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Hello SchroCat: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Abishe (talk) 15:05, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Abishe (talk) 15:05, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello SchroCat, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:15, 26 December 2024 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For blocking the person who went after two of my edits! 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 19:58, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

In appreciation

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For the line "Trying to wade through the Maps, music, manuscripts and literature section is like being mugged by a gang of particularly aggressive blue links" at the British Library GAR. Gave me a hearty chuckle. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Martha Bradley scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 25 February 2025. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 2025, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/February 2025. Please keep an eye on that page, as notifications of copy edits to or queries about the draft blurb may be left there by user:JennyOz, who assists the coordinators by reviewing the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before it appears on the Main Page. Thanks, and congratulations on your work! Gog the Mild (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Durrell blurb

Here's a draft; if I remember the rules rightly a few more words need to be cut? If so please cut at your discretion.

Gerald Malcolm Durrell (7 January 1925 – 30 January 1995) was a British naturalist, writer, and zookeeper. He was born in British India, and moved to England in 1928. In 1935 the family moved to Corfu, but the outbreak of World War II forced them to return to the UK. In the 1940s he began animal-collecting trips for zoos, and published well-received accounts of these, starting with The Overloaded Ark. His account of the years in Corfu, titled My Family and Other Animals, appeared in 1956 and became a bestseller. He founded the Jersey Zoo in 1959, intending it to be an institution for the study of animals and for captive breeding. Durrell and his second wife, Lee McGeorge, made several television documentaries in the 1980s, including Durrell in Russia and Ark on the Move. They co-authored The Amateur Naturalist, which became his most successful book, selling well over a million copies. He was diagnosed with liver cancer and cirrhosis in 1994, and died the following January. He was cremated, and his ashes were buried at Jersey Zoo.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Mike. The blurb is at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 7, 2025 should you wish to check (it's 95 per cent the same as yours, but I've trimmed off part of the end to get it within the word count). Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

That looks great. Thanks for doing this on such short notice, and sorry to have booted one of your own articles! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Not a problem at all. And the fact it was one of 'mine' makes it easier - at least I don't have to try and persuade someone else and have them get upset about it! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Commas after years

To say "Then you are wrong" to someone simply because they disagree with you, especially when they are a professional in the industry, is incredibly arrogant. Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them wrong unless you are under the delusion that your are infallible. You are also dismissing the entire editorial and proofreading team of eight people with whom I work, all of whom agree that the usage of commas in the way discussed is correct in British English. Moreover, as someone who has lived in the UK and used British English for 62 years, I am not going to take such arrogance from someone who doesn't even use British English on their own profile page. I suggest you learn a little humility and drop the arrogance. Neilinabbey (talk) 15:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I say! What an outstanding example of ignorance of the King's English! I suggest that Neilinabbey should consult the current edition of Plain Words, p. 249, from which in this context: Some writers put a comma here as a matter of course. But others do it only if a comma is needed to emphasise a contrast or to prevent the reader from going off on the wrong scent, as in: A few days after, the Minister of Labour promised that a dossier of the strike would be published/Two miles on, the road is worse. On the principle that stops should not be used unless they are needed, this discrimination is to be commended. See also all four editions of Fowler. I was going to add that User:Neilinabbey could be excused as a non-native speaker of English, but I see from his/her talk page that that isn't so, rather sadly. Usually one can blame the superstitions of dim American beaks for such error, but that excuse doesn't apply here. I hope we can work together with less friction for an improved Wikipedia. Tim riley talk 18:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Neilinabbey, Next time you want to post arrogant nonsense to someone's talk page, make sure you know what you're talking about. When you claim such commas are "required", I will repeat that you are wrong. As a self-trumpeted "professional in the industry", you really should know that they are not "required" by any measure. Maybe you should consider that just maybe you are the one "under the delusion that your are infallible". In the meantime I suggest you learn a little humility and drop the arrogance. - SchroCat (talk) 07:51, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Wodehouse page edits

I am not edit warring. The change you have objected to was obviously made in good faith - as all edits to the page *clearly* have been. Rather than summarily reverting it without explanation the appropriate thing to have done would have been to cite the MOS establishing grounds for the reversion. That would have been the end of it. I may think that the MOS is stupid here (and do), and including the name in the link is utterly unnecessary, but defer to the MOS (assuming it has been appropriately cited). It's all part of WP:Civility.

In that regard, thank you for providing the clarification in your second revert, which indeed obviates any nascent edit conflict. Yours, 2601:196:180:DC0:D58C:FCE0:52AA:9D31 (talk) 20:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

You made a bold edit which was reverted: you then re-reverted. That's very much the definition of edit warring, so it's difficult for you to say you weren't. No-one has said your edits are not in good faith, but there were some MOS fails, which is why - in my first revert - I pointed out it was in breach of the MOS. The usual practice is to go to the talk page and discuss (per WP:BRD), rather than start an edit war. - SchroCat (talk) 20:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Moving a town name out of a link is not a "bold edit". It was a common sense edit that evidently is (inexplicably) at odds with the MOS. I did not know that. And, in point of fact, did not see that you had cited the MOS in your initial revert: all I noticed was the tag "manual revert". My error. Things would have ended there if not for that oversight. Thank you for pointing this out. And restoring a good faith edit is not "edit warring". Persisting in it in the face of countervailing information is, or certainly may be. I did not do that once I understood the "standing" for the revert, albeit belatedly. I have simply complied. Yours, 2601:196:180:DC0:C82B:3819:C2B3:EE29 (talk) 21:19, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

'And restoring a good faith edit is not "edit warring"': Yes. It. Is. It doesn't matter if it's made in good faith, or whether you were right or wrong, it is edit warring. Please read Wikipedia:Edit warring to understand what it actually is. (The sub-section on the page about what is not edit warring is here: good faith or thinking you are right is not one of the exemptions). - SchroCat (talk) 21:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 66

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 66, November – December 2024

• Les Jours and East View Press join the library
• Tech tip: Newspapers.com

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --17:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Promotion of Octopussy and The Living Daylights

Congratulations, SchroCat! The article you nominated, Octopussy and The Living Daylights, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Me (DragonofBatley). Thank you. Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 22:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Terry-Thomas

Can you help me out with this? I've looked through the screen persona and legacy sections of this article and can't where the term "character actor" is used and a source for that. I've Googled Terry-Thomas and "character actor" and similarly haven't found a good source for it. Where is it in the article? Rodericksilly (talk) 12:01, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

It's written throughout. I'm surprised you didn't find any sources for it: his inclusion in British Film Character Actors: Great Names and Memorable Moments comes up when I run the searches, as does Robert Ross's The Complete Terry-Thomas, Anna Cale's The Real Diana Dors, Terry Rowan's The Kings & Queens of Hollywood Comedy and many others - and that's just from Google Books, let alone the wider internet or any other book data streams. - SchroCat (talk) 12:21, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Edit summaries

That probably could have been phrased differently. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

It certainly could, but it's not incorrect. - SchroCat (talk) 18:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, SchroCat. I'm just posting to let you know that Winston Churchill as a writer – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for February 17. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 02:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Giants2008. Good to hear from you: I hope you’re doing well. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 06:04, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Promotion of Whipping Tom

Congratulations, SchroCat! The article you nominated, Whipping Tom, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

The English Channel

You undid a revision on the English Channel page which added the mention of the French name on the first paragraph, writing “there is no consensus”.

The only discussion on this subject on the talk page seemed conclusive enough to me… What consensus are you talking about exactly ? 185.31.150.14 (talk) 13:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for coming here to raise the point, but please, if you're going to quote me and base an argument on my words, at least get them right! I said "That's not a consensus", because the thread on the talk page isn't a consensus for change. At most only 50 per cent of the people in the thread think it should be included (in comments from four years ago) and neither of them have provided any real reason except that they want to. Anyway, La Manche is one of eight alternative names used for that body of water and all eight of them are listed in the footnote right after the main name. There's no reason to elevate any single one of them above the others. - SchroCat (talk) 13:12, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

I understand your point. However, the French name being only in the list of alternative names (among which you can find Cornish, spoken by 3,000 people in the world) makes this particular article differ from others similar to it. I’ll take the example of the Bering Strait article, which quotes the Russian name in the first paragraph in addition to the English one, since the Bering Strait separates Russia and the US.

I just wanted to remove the exception (the article itself says : “The major languages spoken in this region are English and French”) in keeping with what seemed like a consensus (the only person against the revision was obviously trolling).

Is this enough to change the page ? (please tell me if it’s not) 2001:861:5602:2180:3D3F:EFB5:E872:11BB (talk) 22:49, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

I don’t think so. Partly because I don’t see that post as trolling, partly because there is no consensus (a couple of four-year-old comments don’t constitute a consensus) and partly because there is a list of eight others. There’s no reason to raise that one above the others. By all means start a fresh thread to see if a new consensus can be found, but the WP:STATUS QUO should remain until one develops. - SchroCat (talk) 06:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Me at the zoo

Hi! In the linked article's FAC, you've mentioned that "[Jawed] Karim’s status is a bit unclear: he is shown as a founder and then shown criticising YouTube’s actions, while readers are still thinking he’s connected." Since the 20th anniversary of YouTube is soon approaching, I'd like to promote this article to FA status before then. I need clarification on Karim's status in the article. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 03:06, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Also, I'd highly recommend doing the same for the rest of your review (let me know what parts need to be corrected!) TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 04:51, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

As I said in my review, the structure was all wrong (I don't have time to go over it all fully at the moment) and information had been put in the wrong places within the article. It has to clearly tell the 'story' of the subject in a clear and logical manner that leaves no questions in the mind of someone who has never come across the subject before. Have a look at The Bus Uncle, an FA on a video meme as an example (it's a 2007 FA, so a bit shaky, but it's still a good model to use). Have a look at a couple of the other culture and society FAs to get an idea on the layout, standards, approach and extent of sourcing. Once you've looked over the previous FAs, use the Wiki Library and go through every source they have. Repeat the searches at the Internet Library and Google Books to find every scrap of information you can. - SchroCat (talk) 08:35, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Taking a look at the articles you've provided me, I assume you want the article to have sections about the video, its immediate reception, and its retrospective reception (in that order)? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 02:42, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

FAC mentor?

Hi there, I saw you on the FAC mentor page, where you mentioned your interest in anything. Let me introduce you to a quintessential part of modern history - One Direction. The boy band is considered one of the best-selling and most successful music acts in the world, have been attributed towards forming part of the new "British invasion" in the United States, and their impact on fan hysteria has had them compared to The Beatles and Beatlemania. I am looking forward to promoting this article to FA by the band's 15th anniversary this July, so all help is appreciated. Thank you! :) jolielover♥talk 15:57, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi Jolielover, while I have been a mentor in the past and am happy to do it, it does depends on the subject - and that’s one I’ll have to turn down, I’m afraid. Good luck with the nom though. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

No problem! Thank you anyway! jolielover♥talk 02:27, 3 February 2025 (UTC)