User talk:Bencherlite/Archive 24

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Personal attack

  • This is borderline, but given his petulance, I think the "last edit" mention at the top of HectorMoffet's user page crosses the line from WP:DIVA to personal attack. If I were an admin (thank god I'm not), I'd block him then blank his page for such nonsense.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Discretion

You wrote: "If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs)." Sorry I missed the discussion, but small wonder many intelligent people do not perceive Wikipedia as a serious tool. No overarching reason exists to FEATURE that article. Include it in the encyclopedia if it's interesting to a lot of the readership, but kindly remove it from the main page. What's the point of such in-your-face lack of discretion toward audience members who find it divisive while you seek donations? Is that article what you want children reading when they first open the site? Rammer (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Richard David Ramsey, further reading at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Fuck (film). Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 01:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Interesting, Cirt. Although individual posts there vary somewhat, overall the "Supporters" argue for free speech as if including the article in the encyclopedia is the issue and the "Opposers" argue on the basis of responsible behavior about featuring it on the main page. Rammer (talk) 01:51, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

The Featured Article for March 1, 2014 - Fuck (film)

I just wanted to give you some feedback on today's featured article. While I understand Wikipedia is not censored, it seems that there are a lot of excellent and interesting articles out there without featuring one that many will find offensive. It almost seems that it was chosen simply for its shock value, which clearly is not what an encyclopedia is about. While I am only one person in the community, I would prefer not having articles like that featured. I'm sure there are many that disagree with me, but I just wanted to give you my two cents. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 21:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Or perhaps it was chosen to make close-minded numpties think again about what's really offensive? Eric Corbett 21:38, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
What is there to find offensive about a single word? Did you read the article, or did you just "react" to a word? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:37, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
(ec) My personal opinion is that certain words are offensive. I was just expressing my opinion, and that I'm sure others in the WP community don't care to see it featured. Some will find the topic interesting, but I don't. That's all I'm saying. Bahooka (talk) 21:43, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
And perhaps offensive is the wrong term. Unnecessarily crude may be better. Bahooka (talk) 21:44, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Yep, I find "genocide" crude and offensive. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:45, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Why does your personal opinion carry any more weight than anyone else's personal opinion? Eric Corbett 21:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
There was an extensive conversation on whether to run the page. This was widely advertised in several central pages. The result was an overwhelming consensus to run the page. - SchroCat (talk) 21:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
(ec) First of all, my opinion is not more important than another's, nor is their opinion more important than mine. I rarely view the front page because I usually go direct to my watchlist. I occasionally view it, and this happened to be one of those times. I wasn't aware of the discussion page on pending featured articles before, but now I know for future reference. I wasn't trying to debate the topic nor make any change in today's featured article, I was just trying to give some civil feedback to the editor that makes the decision. Bahooka (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
From memory there were 48 people who made the decision, and Bencherlite enacted that consensus. - SchroCat (talk) 22:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Further reading at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Fuck (film). Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 22:09, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Hmm... well, that sums up your run of "Ten years of TFA in a Week", Bencherlite. Close it with a complete meltdown at T:MP. Now if you'll excuse me, I need more popcorn. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

pöpcørn

Have some and enjoy, - I like today's FA also ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:45, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Further to Fuck (film)

Someone asked at Main Page/Errors why the title of the film was being censored in the list of previous Featured Articles, and looking for what they were referring to, I found it must be the little lists that appear at the bottom of the current blurb, and that they were apparently created by you in that form. I find the bleeping out strange, too, but I won't mess with it, especially since it seems to have gone unremarked for 2-3 days. But bringing it to your attention in case you want to respond. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:04, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

See WP:AN#Fuck. Jehochman Talk 15:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Sigh. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Predicting the future now, huh?

Interesting choice of TFA today (given recent events), even though you chose it in February. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:28, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@The ed17: You have no idea of the extent of my powers as TFA coordinator, mw-hah-hah.... BencherliteTalk 16:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

How about......

Triangulum Galaxy
Triangulum and Triangulum Australe are two small constellations named for the pattern of their brightest stars, located in the northern and far southern celestial hemispheres respectively. The former was one of the 48 constellations listed by the 2nd century astronomer Ptolemy, while the latter was first depicted as Triangulus Antarcticus by Petrus Plancius in 1589. Triangulum contains several galaxies, the brightest and nearest of which is the Triangulum Galaxy (pictured)—a member of the Local Group, as well as the first quasar ever observed, 3C 48. At magnitude 3.00. the white giant star Beta Trianguli is the brightest star in Triangulum, while Alpha Trianguli Australis, is the brightest star in Triangulum Australe. At magnitude 1.91, it is an orange giant that is 5500 times more luminous than and 130 times as wide as our Sun. One star system in Triangulum Australe and three in Triangulum have been found to have planets. (Full article...)

Alright, how is this for a combined FA mainpage? Just juggling and thinking out loud at present.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

  • I think that would be a good choice for combo TFA, I really like the constellations and astronomy articles when they get the spotlight--I know they are both two shorter FAs, but can you boost the word count by about 300-350 characters?--ColonelHenry (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Ok...that should be easy. added some now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I'll have a think. BencherliteTalk 08:30, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I concede it isn't quite so yin-and-yangish as Corona Australis and Corona Borealis, so don't worry, if it leaves you cold I won't mind...was a bit of a stretch anyway...Am buffing Canis Major so regret Canis Minor already being mainpaged....just will have to go buff Corona Borealis now.... cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@Casliber:, I think they'd work better on their own but if you'd like them as a pair, so be it! BencherliteTalk 16:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, I am happy to throw it out there for open discussion and see how everyone feels. I do sorta like doing a double...mainly as we're pumping out a few constellation articles so there'll be plenty of astronomy to be mainpaged..and is nice for northern and southern hemisphere stuff to be represented on the day. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:16, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Too subtle for me...

Re [1] - I'd wondered if there was a theme related to ten, as the previous article was Malcolm X, but couldn't see anything else related. Well hidden! Optimist on the run (talk) 16:49, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@Optimist on the run:, thanks! (Malcolm X was unrelated.) BencherliteTalk 16:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • As I said, more than just a cookie was needed. Very nice. Also like how the TFA Oddities page has a Friends theme going on. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:50, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Oxford Bodleian

Hi! Is it possible to get a scan of a rare work, held on Oxford Library: http://solo.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=OXVU1&docId=oxfaleph015119309 I cannot get it anywhere else, so I hope you can help me, or you know anyone, who can help.

I need: "Assam Forest Records. Botany." Calcutta, India. vol. 1: part 5, t. 3. 1934 [July 1934] / There is an article about "Stercula khasiana" in it. I need a scan of this article and of the title pages and the imprint of this work. Thank you very much, -- Doc Taxon (talk) 09:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

@Doc Taxon:, sorry I can't help as I left Oxford some years ago... BencherliteTalk 16:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Possible TFA for June (date tbc)

Wells Cathedral has recently been promoted to FA. I went to TFA to look at requesting a date, but it appears for several months ahead this needs to be specific. The new Bishop of Bath and Wells will be enthroned at the cathedral during June 2014 and it would be nice to request that date - however the specific date in June has not yet been announced. Is there any way to say can this article be considered for whatever date that might be - without knowing the specific date?— Rod talk 21:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Funnily enough, the same thought had crossed my mind (away from WP, I know, or knew, the Bish of Taunton...). Sounds a good idea - if the date isn't announced by the time TFAR "bidding" for June has opened (which will probably be about early or mid-May) perhaps put a blurb up for a non-specific date with the comment that it'll be moved to a specific date once the date is announced. If the date is known before then, of course, you can nominate it for a specific date once TFAR reaches your chosen date. I'll try and make a note to self somewhere about this.... BencherliteTalk 23:36, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Peter Hancock will be enthroned as the new Bishop of Bath and Wells on 7 June (at 14.15) at the cathedral so I've put it in Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/pending for consideration and will try remember to return & do the blurb etc in May.— Rod talk 10:02, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Marvellous. I'll try to remember to jog your memory! BencherliteTalk 10:10, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Who is an Admin

I was trying to add tools to see who is an Administrator, see here - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Mosfetfaser/monobook.js&diff=prev&oldid=599263365 - nothing worked, please tell me how to add the code? I had a good look at the edit history prior to deletion, please have another look, was it three times that Ukxpat replaced the disputed external or not? Mosfetfaser (talk) 10:37, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't know about that code. To see who is an admin, you can go to Special:ListUsers and enter the name of the person you want, and then any groups to which the person belongs are listed, e.g.
Hope this helps, Mosfetfaser. And yes, it was twice - I have checked several times. Ukexpat only has four edits to that article - one to make a copy edit, one to add categories, one to replace that reference and one to replace all the references. BencherliteTalk 10:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Ta, not really helpin, there is a automatic code , no worries I will ask around, ta for your efforts anyways. Just to let you know, I intend to ask a second opinion of Ukxpats contributions to that article and corresponding, your response to my request for assistance - Mosfetfaser (talk) 11:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Feel free. First, though, please explain what I've done wrong. BencherliteTalk 11:08, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Please restore the edit history of the article to my userspace so I can investigate it - Mosfetfaser (talk) 11:11, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
No, that's inappropriate. Articles are not undeleted to allow people to carry out private investigations into the edit history. BencherliteTalk 11:16, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
Bencherlite, I continue to be impressed by your expertise, good judgment, and kind civility and politeness while administrating WP:TFAR. You are an inspiration to me. I aspire to comport myself and emulate the same degree of service that you model at such a high level for the community. Thank you for your continued contributions to Wikipedia in this capacity. :) — Cirt (talk) 05:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Cheers, Cirt, much appreciated. BencherliteTalk 10:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
You're most welcome! :) — Cirt (talk) 17:25, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

April 1

Hello genius of TFA. Seen my suggestions at WT:TFA? Any good? --Dweller (talk) 10:42, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

That's the way to get my attention, Dweller! Yep, seen them, will see if I get a chance to polish them up a bit later. BencherliteTalk 10:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
OK. NB the discussion, such as it is, threatens to splinter, as two suggestions, one of which crashed, have been posted at WP:TFA. --Dweller (talk) 14:33, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

<bump> --Dweller (talk) 09:53, 13 March 2014 (UTC) I think no-one was noticing the nominations with them posted as a group and not on the summary chart. NB two things: 1) I've not added images as I can't get my head round our image copyright policies and 2) I've not notified anyone involved in writing those articles. --Dweller (talk) 10:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Rani Mukerji TFA

Hi, the image that was previously used in this version of Mukerji's blurb was probably a copyright violation. In order to avoid any conflicts later, I have changed the image in the blurb. I hope that's okay. -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 12:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for letting me know. BencherliteTalk 12:23, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I have updated the image after finding a better one. I hope this doesn't cause any problems later. No more future changes for sure. :) -- KRIMUK90 ✉ 08:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

St James' Church, Sydney

Following our earlier conversation now archived here, could we have St James' Church, Sydney as TFA on St James' Day (25 July) rather than on Australia Day as I first requested? I think your suggestion is better than mine. Cheers, Whiteghost.ink (talk) 09:29, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I've moved the suggestion at WP:TFARP - don't forget to come back nearer the time to WP:TFAR to nominate it. BencherliteTalk 20:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

On This Day

Thanks for replying to my query about this (here) yesterday. Was the sound file linked from the OTD section, then? I missed that completely! Moonraker12 (talk) 13:01, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes! Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/March 13. BencherliteTalk 20:32, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Mike Jackson

Hi Bencherlite, I know it's not common practice to include titles in TFA blurbs, but I wonder if you'd make an exception for this one (scheduled for Thursday). He's been in the news quite a bit over the years, always referred to as "General Sir Mike Jackson"; without the title and without a photo of him in uniform, I'm not sure people who might otherwise recognise him would twig who he is, and there are a lot of "Mike Jackson"s out there. Is there any chance we could add the "General Sir" to the TFA blurb? Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:25, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Meh. He looks like himself, in or out of uniform; he wasn't always a knight when he was in the news; the opening sentence of the blurb tells us who he is, including the word "general"; and there's a handy bold link (two of them, in fact) to take us to the article if we're still not sure. If the Queen managed to cope without any of her titles preceding the bold link, ditto Douglas MacArthur, can't Jackson? Titles and decorations have a habit of bloating and taking away valuable space in a blurb as well, and if we start making a habit of it... BencherliteTalk 20:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

TFA points question

Bencher, you have possibly noted that I will be putting up an article for TFA in May (Oxbow (horse)). I think it MIGHT be able to get two or even three points, one for date relevance, one for underrepresented topic (horse racing), and one for no Main page representation within three months (there's been a horse breed on Feb 9, I'm seeking May 17, and also no individual horse "biographies" at TFA since Ealdgyth's Easy Jet). But not sure if I can claim all three points? My other question is whether I can claim another point for it being "my" first TFA or not; Eight articles I've collaborated on have been TFA, but this is the first one that I led the run through the FAC gauntlet (almost solo, though help from others did arrive at critical moments and I don't want to downplay those valuable contributors) and will be the first I personally have put up for TFA "all by myself". I don't want to claim points I can't claim, but OTOH, don't want to let any slip by. Your ruling, oh great one? Montanabw(talk) 16:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes for date relevance (1), no for diversity (which is limited to FA topics with fewer than 50 FAs ie "Awards, decorations and vexillology; Chemistry and mineralogy; Computing; Education; Engineering and technology; Food and drink; Geology and geophysics; Language and linguistics; Mathematics; Philosophy and psychology" not subsections of larger categories like sport or biology, otherwise everyone would create their own underrepresented subject i.e. "no articles about Prussian generals in the last 6 months, no articles about Italian birds of prey with white feathers in the last 6 months..."), yes for no recent similar articles (1). So 2 points. Sadly, no bonus point for first TFA - the bonus is only for "significant contributors who have never had any FA on which they have significantly worked appearing as TFA", so veteran TFA writers like you (you've got even more than me!) don't get that point. Still, 2 points is a healthy score and unlikely to deteriorate between now and then. WP:FADC has an Aussie airman's 120th birthday on the same day, but we run rather more Aussie warfare bios than we do individual horses, so I would have thought that you've got a pretty good chance of getting your preferred date for Oxbow.
The "diversity" and "first TFA" points rules predate my elevation to greatness - the TFAR talk page archives probably explain somewhere why those principles were adopted, but I can't give you a link offhand. Perhaps one of these days I ought to do a little research and write a little explanatory piece as to how we got where we are. Fascinating reading it will be too (not...). Hope this helps, let me know if I can help further. BencherliteTalk 19:30, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
I can live with two points, thanks. IMHO, you might want to look at the overall points thing, the diversity standard in particular may no longer be relevant (if the broad cats are all now well-enough represented) and perhaps something else relevant should be eligible for points though it isn't at present. Montanabw(talk) 01:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Montanabw (and TPSers) - see this TFAR thread. BencherliteTalk 09:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Redirects

Thank you for your fix to the main page. In reference to your comment: I think there's a difference between bypassing a redirect (usually not worth doing) and removing a completely pointless piping and redirect. That's why I commented on the Implementation Force link, piped to IFOR which then redirects back to Implementation Force, but chose not to comment on the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps link, which is also a redirect, but a perfectly sensible and reasonable one. Colonies Chris (talk) 12:34, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

You and I have different ideas on whether this is worth reporting as an main page error and whether it is worth "fixing" as an independent edit. We've had this discussion before. BencherliteTalk 12:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Well, I guess I don't get to try out my welding skills - but it was making my brain hurt working out which edits to put where, so thank you for stepping up! Yunshui 雲‍水 14:28, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much! BencherliteTalk 14:29, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

31MAR14 TFA

I'm really appreciating your choice for 31 March.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:18, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

So many hidden gems among the potential TFAs, aren't there? BencherliteTalk 15:49, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Shame there's also so many unreferenced paragraphs in that article... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:11, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Precious again

colleges and churches
Thank you for the spirit of education, expanding the coverage of English and Welch colleges and churches, their history and people, their impact, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (23 April 2010)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:41, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Two years ago, you were the 69th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, one year ago, He was despised appeared in Messiah, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:26, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

TFAR suggestion

Thanks, I'm really busy in RL at present (two two-hour drives today in opposite directions from home for a start), but I'll visit when the dust has cleared a bit Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

WP Law in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Law for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 03:37, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Shoe the 'Tab for ITN/R

A plea for an "experienced editor" to nominate the annual 'Tab shoeing competition for ITN/R has arrived, some three hours after your prediction... Go on, go on, go on, go on, go on.... The Rambling Man (talk) 12:38, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I think the The Goat Race should go up instead. Particularly as both "Oxford" and "Cambridge" lost... BencherliteTalk 12:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

NFC image main page question

We discussed a few months ago my current FAC Finn M. W. Caspersen and that the image for the article File:Finn Caspersen 1941 2009.jpg is not free, so it couldn't be used on the main page when the blurb came up at TFA. However, the photographer who took the photograph, George Simian, and I have engaged in a few emails back and forth. He is willing to release the image solely for the use of Wikipedia. He won't do a CC-3.0 that would compel him to release it by giving up commercial rights, but he's fine with us using it as long as only we use it. Is there an appropriate tag that would allow it to be used at TFA that could be added? He will send whatever email is necessary to OTRS to state such, but if there's an appropriate tag, we'd be able to use the image. --ColonelHenry (talk) 12:09, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

ColonelHenry, my understanding is that licences that say "only for use on Wikipedia, not elsewhere" aren't allowed precisely because they prevent the file being freely used elsewhere. Crisco 1492 will be able to give you chapter-and-verse, I think. BencherliteTalk 12:44, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Essentially (detailed info), Bencherlite is right ColonelHenry. Although... Commons still accepts CC-ND or CC-NC, so long as it is paired with a free license which meets the rules on Commons. Some photographers have taken to using a dual CC-NC and the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 only, which allows commercial use so long as the full license is included (i.e., something no commercial entity in its right mind will do for every image in a book or newspaper). This is controversial, to say the least, but still accepted on Commons (and on the English Wikipedia). That may be an alternative... if it makes sense... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:59, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Nancy Mitford plaque updated

Thanks for your promptness substituting File:Nancy Mitford (4372865634) perspective.jpg in Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 7, 2014. The original image File:Nancy Mitford (4372865634).jpg is now unlocked on commons so I have updated it with the corrected version. File:Nancy Mitford (4372865634) perspective.jpg is now marked as a duplicate on commons and may be speedily deleted there, so you may wish to "undo" your change to Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 7, 2014. - Pointillist (talk) 07:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Done, thanks for your work on this Pointillist. BencherliteTalk 08:16, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok, how much did I do wrong?

Hi Bencherlite, I just put up Oxbow (horse) for TFA on May 17. I did the template but it didn't do like DYK and transclude onto the request page when I copied and pasted the template syntax (which would be uber-cool if it did) but I do have it done up that way as well as just pasted the nomination onto the TFAR page. Please let me know if I screwed anything up (or just fix it and tell me later!). Wasn't sure if it was my job to add to the date chart too, but I did. Mea culpa in advance if I totally messed up! Montanabw(talk) 23:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah, you posted the wrong template syntax... I've fixed it now and clarified the instructions on the TFAR page, and will see where else I can clarify them. As more people use the template it will be easier because there will be other examples to copy. Thanks for trying it out, Montanabw! BencherliteTalk 23:29, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Making it work like DYK is a cool idea and way more user-friendly! Took me a lot of time to prep the submission at QAI back when I got it ready. Montanabw(talk) 23:41, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm glad you like it. I'm sure there are still bugs in the templates and ways we can improve the system and instructions, so the more people use it (correctly and incorrectly!) the sooner we can make further improvements. So far, so good... BencherliteTalk 23:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Now to see if anyone actually uses it properly; you may have your hands full getting that part to work (?). Montanabw(talk) 01:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Fingers crossed... BencherliteTalk 08:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Easter

I could imagine the bishop relevant to the calculation of Easter featured on 20 April, instead of 24 April. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

... but his feast day - or one of them at least, he's a popular guy - is 24th April, so I think I'll stick with Plan A. Have you got any non-specific date ideas to try now that we've moved to a "no points" system, something you've long wanted? BencherliteTalk 08:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Understand, thank you. I like the new nomination procedure a lot, but am passionately absorbed at present, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Bencherlite! I just wanted to thank you for scheduling and preparing "Spinning Around" to appear as the TFA on April 17. I was about to nominate it but then I noticed the bot doing some protection stuff on the article page and I checked the queue page and found it there. Thanks a lot for your effort and hard work! --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 17:34, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

You're very welcome, WonderBoy1998. A bot should pop about midnight UTC and leave a message on your talk page as well as updating the {{article history}} on the talk page. Then all you have to do - if you're happy with the blurb - is sit back and wait for the vandalism enjoy the show! BencherliteTalk 18:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Haha! Thanks! --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 14:42, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

"teh" Template

Bencher, may want to note that clicking on the "edit" button can result in hiccups like this: [2] The editor fixed it, but I am thinking that the more that a TFAR can be identical to DYK, the better, just to avoid confusion - the earlier version where there was something of a "click here" may have been superior. Just a thought. Montanabw(talk) 02:04, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Hah! Someone else said that it was odd to click "edit" and not get to comment straight away on the nomination! At present, of course, it's like FAC in that clicking "edit" next to a nomination gives you the nomination, not the FAC page. I'll see whether this is a mistake that gets repeated before deciding whether to change back. Thanks for letting me know, though. BencherliteTalk 05:16, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

St Michael's Church, Brynford

On a different topic, I wondered if you'd be interested in adding to this. It's probably too far east for your liking though :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:23, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bencherlite/Archive_24&oldid=1139821547"