User talk:Belbury/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Tucson Gay Museum/Arizona LGBTQIA Archives

That Tucson Gay Museum/Arizona LGBTQIA Archives article could use some help? Seems maybe the article got mixed between those two museums/archiving efforts, but maybe each effort/organization/archives/museum should stand by itself as its own article? The text/references/article there now seems to be documenting the Tucson Gay Museum. Should it be made into a solely Tucson Gay Museum article? Desertscribe (talk) 13:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Desertscribe: Hello. My understanding from their 2020 press release was that the Tucson Gay Museum no longer existed, and had been merged into the Archives. The only changes I made were to rename the article and to update the logo/infobox/link. If I've misunderstood the situation, let me know, or start a talk page thread to sort things out. --Lord Belbury (talk) 13:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply Lord Belbury! Seems there a couple of 'related' 'all in the family' LGBTQ+ museum archiving efforts there and they each appear to stand on their own and are active. Tucson Gay Museum [tucsongaymuseum.org], [tucsonlgbtqmuseum.org], and the [arizonalgbtqiaarchives.org]. Desertscribe (talk) 13:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Desertscribe: Okay, I guess I misunderstood their press release, and whatever else I might have read at the time. I'll move it back to the previous title. --Lord Belbury (talk) 14:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I might add some references and links to that article. Your advice and help is appreciated! Desertscribe (talk) 23:14, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Precision

You recently changed my "thousands of dollars in today's money" in the article Ciro's (London) with a precise figure in pounds sterling. You clearly understand the difference between accuracy and precision, as the coordinates you gave for its location are not precise to the millimetre or even metre, yet we now have "£1,106" for an typical night's spend (and my conversion of "10 guineas" to £10/10 is already excessively precise when the original author almost certainly meant it as a "ballpark figure"), translated across a hundred years. There are many ways of converting values across the years, and they give widely different results. I also contend that "thousands of dollars" in today's money is readily understood by any reader where "£1,000–£1,500" may not. The fines quoted later are historically accurate, but a conversion, even if its basis (artisan's wages? / bundle of groceries?) were specified, adds nothing to the article. Doug butler (talk) 22:18, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

@Doug butler: Thank you for catching that, I must have glossed over the "might" when reading the sentence.

Looking at inflation rates, which spiked during WW1, it makes a significant difference which year Haskell was harking back to. If he was referring to 1912 prices, that's around £1100 today; if he was talking about prices at the time of the club's closure in 1916, that's only £800. It's even possible that he was thinking in present-day 1917 terms, in which case a night at Ciro's was a mere snip at £600.

I've put it back into a footnote clarifying that the year is speculative (1916 seems most likely, I think?), and rounding the figure to the nearest hundred. As an article about a London club, it should use pounds rather than dollars per MOS:MONEY. I think it's worth using a template that will be updated automatically in the future. --Lord Belbury (talk) 08:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Not sure if this the right spot

This is reply to your comments about the National varieties of English regarding the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_centre You are ruining the encyclopedia function of WIKI by be militant British. You are doing it to the extend of misquoting the source. The IMF defines: International Financial CentER (IFC). Described by the IMF https://www.imf.org/external/np/mae/oshore/2000/eng/back.htm Some other organization is called Global Financial Centres Index (2007–ongoing) And you keep it that way. Honour AND HONOR the source. If you want to be militant about it than the max you can go is: International Financial CentER (IFC). Described by the IMF as a centre. That is weird but fine. Better to recognize that the IFC is an American English concept.

I did by the way add that to the talk page. And I might have deleted something before. But it is always british people complaining about and putting British English marks on articles that don't need or deserve that. This is one that CANNOT have it if you want to stay fair.

I know the rule and it seems that last line was added to it more recently. But the rule was al can co-exist. But you still cannot misquote and you do EXACTLY that. 76.133.57.207 (talk) 03:30, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Talk:Financial centre is the right spot to discuss this with other editors. If I'm wrong about the IMF using both spellings interchangeably, or about how MOS:RETAIN might apply to the article, please let me know there.

I'm not "militant British", I regularly expand US English articles by writing in US English, and would be applying WP:ENGVAR the same if the situation were reversed. --Lord Belbury (talk) 07:15, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:Uw-copying-nosource

Template:Uw-copying-nosource has been nominated for merging with Template:Uw-copying. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 01:37, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Madeley Junction, Staffordshire for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Madeley Junction, Staffordshire is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madeley Junction, Staffordshire until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:17, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Madeley Junction, Shropshire

The article Madeley Junction, Shropshire has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

None of the sources give any real detail about the junction itself, mostly talking about the signal box (which realistically will not be notable at all) - proposing deletion for this reason.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 16:35, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Patcham Pylon

Thanks for finding that possible source of the quote: I had often wondered where it was from! Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 15:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

@Hassocks5489: Thanks! Both may be quoting something else, but the Welsh door explanation was at least in print prior to the pylons being built. --Lord Belbury (talk) 15:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

It was right to mark that edit as minor

Just note I did partially change the edit back to the previous edit I did before. And it was right to mark my first edit to the World Health Organization page as "minor" since in the explanation for what a "minor edit" is, it notes that when you add a wikilink, which is what I did, it's only considered a "minor edit". Sorry for the misunderstanding. Also see my edit summary in my most recent edit to the WHO page for my explanation as to why my partial revert of your reversion of my first edit to that page. LudditeOne (talk) 17:21, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

@LudditeOne: No problem, and I stand corrected on wikilinks being considered minor.

There is a bigger WP:EGG "easter egg" issue in your rewrite of the sentence, though. A reader of Wikipedia should always have a good idea of what to expect when they click a link. Someone reading a sentence of

The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations responsible

may conclude (without hovering their mouse to check the target) that the "specialized agency" link isn't of any interest to them, because they already understand what it means for an agency to specialise in something. If the link is extended to specialized agency of the United Nations, that makes it clear that Wikipedia has some kind of article about the UN's specialized agencies.

You're right that it helps for there to be a clear link the UN article as early as possible, though. I guess that could be done by just mentioning the UN again later in the text. --Lord Belbury (talk) 17:37, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Chico Marx article hatnote

Hello - FYI, the reason I [added the note at the top of the page for Chico Marx is that I was looking at something about Leonard Marks and I realized that Leonard Marx is currently a redirect to Chico. Because the surnames are homophones, I added the note. Would there be a better way to address this? Thanks KConWiki (talk) 04:15, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

@KConWiki: I see! There's the {{redirect}} template to catch an incoming redirect term, although I don't know Wikipedia's exact policy on homophones. It seems okay, though, I'll add it. --Lord Belbury (talk) 08:33, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

OK great - Thanks for taking a look and thanks for your contributions. KConWiki (talk) 14:20, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Predicted impact events

Hi, I rolled back your category addition at Category:Predicted impact events. The category is for past impacts which were predicted in advance. (It's very hard to predict impact events before they happen!) So future events does not apply.

If you have a suggestion for a better category name, I'm all ears.

CRGreathouse (t | c) 18:18, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

@CRGreathouse: Careless of me not to have read the article names more closely! Apologies for the error. No issue with the category name at all. --Lord Belbury (talk) 18:20, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll add a description to the category to clear this up for future users. - CRGreathouse (t | c) 18:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

edit to NFT page

hi , you just reverted some carefully made changes to the NFT page , which updated it to take into account Ethereum's move to a proof-of-stage from proof-of-work consensus mechanism. Your reversion is an error that makes the page out of date and incorrect. Jeremy rutman (talk) 11:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

File:Punk Hair by Keishii Roo.jpg

Hi @Belbury, can you re-upload this file locally if you want to use it? Because it's a screenshot from the game second life, the person who uploaded it to flickr doesn't actually have the rights to it, and so couldn't have released it under CC-BY-SA. Thanks! Alyo (chat·edits) 14:25, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Decentraland and Ethereum

Hi! Regarding to the change on the Decentraland short description wanted to point out a couple of issues: Ethereum is the name of a blockchain, the cryptocurrency is ether. And Decentraland does not accept ether as a payment in any way. I'm sorry I can't edit it directly due to conflict of interests. Bests. Eibriel (talk) 21:01, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

@Eibriel: Thanks, I was only going for brevity. I've made a further edit in light what you've said. --Belbury (talk) 21:06, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

HEY

WHY DID YOU CHANGE THE IMAGES ON THE WIKI PAGE FOR INTERNET MEME 195.94.51.242 (talk) 13:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Because they weren't very good. --Belbury (talk) 09:22, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Australian pantomime

Can you please add to the caption which pantomime story is being performed? Thanks! I moved the image lower to the Australia section. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:04, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

@Ssilvers: Afraid I can't identify it, the Flickr account I took it from doesn't name the performance. I thought a modern stage photo made a better MOS:LEADIMAGE than an 1890s book cover, for a theatrical tradition that's still very much alive. (Aside from the book cover saying PANTOMIME, I don't think modern readers would recognise two harlequin clowns on a ladder as illustrating a pantomime performance.) --Belbury (talk) 19:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I disagree about the lead image. A historical image is infinitely better than an image of a sloppy local production that we can't even identify. One needs to understand the development of pantomime to understand the art form as it exists today. Plus, we don't have any good images that illustrate modern pantomime. None of the modern photos in the article provide much insight or context, and they are only there because they are free under Wikipedia rules. Pantomime is all-but-unknown in the US and other big parts of the English Wikipedia audience, and the newer images in the article do not help explain the art form to those readers. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Dungeness

Hi,

I think all of Hoban's evolved names on the map figure in the journey described and explanations of the situation in the book.

People do study the book in academic courses.

Perhaps you could reconsider your revert at leisure?

Many thanks Ed1964 (talk) 17:28, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ed1964: Pop culture references should be significant ones, per WP:IPCEXAMPLES. Has been a while since I've read it, but Dungeness is only mentioned in passing, rather than being a place that Riddley actually visits, isn't it? That neither the cited source nor the Riddley Walker article can tell me anything more about Dunk Your Arse suggests that this probably doesn't belong in the Dungeness article.

Really, this kind of thing would be a useful addition to the Riddley Walker article itself, which barely gives examples of the book's language or geography at all! --Belbury (talk) 17:38, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

As you like. Likewise it is many years since I read the book but we all keep vivid memories of it after ploughing through word by word and repeatedly referring to the sketch map... Think I will leave the Riddley Walker page to those academics. All the best. Ed1964 (talk) 17:57, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Joshua Project removal

I think it would not be great to remove the Joshua's Project projections from Wikipedia as I feel that there are really not a lot of reliable sources that care to give even the slightest of information on African ethnic groups, so why not preserve the few that do? As for me, I would be contributing very little to ethnic groups moving forward because I don't really take the CIA's projections on Nigeria's ethnic groups seriously. Firstly, there has only been one census in Nigeria over the past 25 years, and the last one, which was in 2006 only gave a breakdown of males and females, so I don't understand where the CIA got it's projections from. Secondly, as a Nigerian, saying the Hausa alone make up 30% of the Nigerian population while the other two major ethnic groups (the Igbo and the Yoruba) only share 15% each is pure ignorance and it shows the CIA knows absolutely nothing about Nigeria. The Yoruba and the Igbo are just as large as the Hausa if not larger. The Hausa are indigenous to North Western Nigeria, along with over 80 other ethnic groups, and they also have a significant population in the North East, along with another 50-100 ethnic groups, there are also little or no indigenous Hausa population in the North Central part of the country so except the CIA is counting these 150+ northern minority groups as Hausa then there is absolutely no way the Hausa are as large as the Yoruba and Igbo people combined. Incase you don't know, the Yoruba and Igbo people boasts of completely homogeneous populations in the Western and Eastern part of the country respectively, bear in mind that these sections of the country are the most densely populated compared to the mostly sparsely population North. Don't forget that the Yoruba are also one of the largest ethnic groups in North Central Nigeria just like the Igbo are also one of the largest in Southern Nigeria. So that being said, we actually don't know the exact percentages of Nigeria's largest ethnic groups, but the Hausa population is definitely overly exaggerated, if you live outside Nigeria, you can also do a consensus of Nigerians if you know any and I promise you that none of them would be Hausa. Da5ft9 (talk) 15:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@Da5ft9: Would suggest raising this at Talk:Hausa people for wider input and discussion of sources. All I'm doing is reverting a number to match what the source says, and removing the Joshua Project as a source because Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources considers it to be "generally unreliable". --Belbury (talk) 15:27, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Mondegreens and eggcorns

Dear User:Belbury. Please explain in layman's language in anywhere from one complete compound sentence to one short paragraph the similarities and distinctions between mondegreen and acorn.

This will give us a place to start. Thank you. 2601:196:181:BE00:DD5B:C608:95CE:E296 (talk) 18:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

If this is about the hatnotes on the two articles, the starting place is WP:RELATED: Disambiguation hatnotes are intended to link to separate topics that could be referred to by the same title. They are not intended to link to topics that are simply related to each other, or to a specific aspect of a general topic. - mondegreens and eggcorns are indeed similar concepts, but they only need hatnotes connecting them if people actually get the two terms mixed up. Which I'm not sure they do.

Eggcorn#Similar_phenomena and Mondegreen#Related_linguistic_phenomena both highlight the similarities and distinctions, which I'd agree with. --Belbury (talk) 18:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of List of The Bugle episodes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of The Bugle episodes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of The Bugle episodes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

TipsyElephant (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Internet art

Hi! Thanks for your note. I am an art historian cleaning up pages to accurately reflect transitions in art's discourse community to fit representations of art movements online. I was looking for a record of the edit I made that you pointed out (I think I removed some content that wasn't relevant to internet art) but recall that this was a structural edit, and not necessarily related to the content that should or shouldn't be there. If you have a record of the edit it'd be great to refactor, or at least be more aware of the editorial protocol here! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Penelopemachine (talk • contribs) 04:04, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

@Penelopemachine: All articles here have their full history archived, just hit the "View history" tab at the top. Your edit can be seen at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internet_art&diff=prev&oldid=1131240045

I wasn't sure if you removed the image and the emerged from mid-2000s discussions about Internet art by Marisa Olson, Gene McHugh, and Artie Vierkant sentence on purpose or inadvertently. If there's an issue with this content, please clarify that in your edit summary or on the article talk page. (Note that I've since changed the image to a different one.) Belbury (talk) 12:39, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Matchstick_puzzle_and_solution.png

Hi Belbury,

Re your updating the graphic on Matchstick puzzle, you made a fair point regarding needing the user to hover for the answers. I can update the original to have the answers.

The current image doesn't cover the different types of matchstick puzzles commonly found, and also replaces a vector image with a bitmap.

Cheers,
cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 14:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cmglee: Thanks, afraid I'm still taking baby steps in vector images, a little Gimp editing was the best I could do. I limited it to just the one example because it's such a short article right now, but perhaps a four-image gallery beneath the text would be a better approach to take. Belbury (talk) 14:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Non-interactive version

Hi Belbury,

I've uploaded a version of File:Matchstick_puzzle_examples.svg not needing hover and updated the article. Hope that's better.

Cheers,
cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 16:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@Cmglee: Thanks, great job! Belbury (talk) 16:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

for improving the cursed painting page

Soulware2 (talk) 21:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Why Did You Remove My Edit?

In the 1997 movie, both the judge's instructions to the jury and the discussions between the jurors strongly imply that the death penalty was not mandatory in case of a guilty verdict. Imprisonment for life was also a possibility. This was one of the most important differences between this and the 1957 version. Watching the 1997 version carefully is all that is needed. No research is required. The Untamed One1991 (talk) 16:32, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@The Untamed One1991: Some research is required for "strongly imply". The way to go would be to either directly quote the instructions from the script, or (ideally) to quote from a review that commented on this aspect of the film. Belbury (talk) 21:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Little's law, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bottleneck.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Of what? Belbury (talk) 09:06, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

There's a link, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

GGPoker Draft

Hello, I noticed that you've contributed to the Online Poker Wikipedia page. Would you mind taking a look at the GGPoker draft? Full disclosure, I'm employed by GGPoker's parent company but I'm doing everything I can to ensure that the draft meets Wikipedia's standards and best practices, and if we've fallen short anywhere I'd welcome the feedback.

Thanks for you time. Chris H (GGPoker) (talk) 05:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

@Chris H (GGPoker): No thanks. --Belbury (talk) 09:42, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Lou Sanders Birthdate

A recent Guardian article (Google 'Lou Sanders Guardian') notes her age, so there's no disputing that. A Google search brought up the day and month, but the source is difficult to track. Perhaps list just the year of birth? 109.154.200.111 (talk) 22:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; the Guardian article can be used as a source here, but "a Google search" (assuming it just returned IMDb or Twitter or some other page that didn't meet WP:RS) can't. I'll update the article based on the Guardian article, Wikipedia has a special "possible birth years based on age as of date" template for it. Belbury (talk) 08:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Roy Fransen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Timex.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Conflict Of Interest

Hello Belbury

You sent me a message regarding a link you removed from Annabelle Dowlers page. I added the link to the Hobsons website without realising any conflict of interest. Are you advising that it is not possible to add a link to her agent? thanks Hellohobson Hellohobson (talk) 16:39, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, exactly that, see WP:ELMIN. Belbury (talk) 16:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out! Hellohobson (talk) 16:54, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Help

Can you help me with my request? HenrichZaleska (talk) 13:28, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

@HenrichZaleska: Your request to fix minor glitches and errors checked for computer virus made no sense. Please be specific about the edits that you believe should be made to the article. Belbury (talk) 13:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

You know the other article history of horror films? HenrichZaleska (talk) 13:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

See Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Jinnifer, this is a long term vandal. MrOllie (talk) 13:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

I thought it might be, but was deliberately letting them dig their hole a bit bigger first. And there it is, below. Belbury (talk) 13:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

It has a 2010s section and a 2020s section but on the main horror film article on its history section it's a 2010s to present content someone accidentally left it merge it wouldn't make sense to just literally watch horror films since the 2010s can you restore the 2020s on there? HenrichZaleska (talk) 13:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

please ignore MrOllie he doesn't understand. HenrichZaleska (talk) 13:38, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Not sure if I already thanked you for this

Just looked at my talk page and I forgot if I thanked you for helping me understand WP Policy, Thank you very much! -- Grapefanatic (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Tree Shaping

Thank you so much for taking an interest in improving the article. The page sorely needs input from neutral editors like yourself. The editor that reversed it, IMO is practicing page protection with a acknowledged COI. I hope your not dissuaded from continuing your efforts. Slowart (talk) 17:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I was only passing through but I'll take another look. Belbury (talk) 17:48, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Belbury, thanks for clearing that up for me I was having a difficult time in the history comparing the differences. I've reverted my edit Blackash (talk) 09:09, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Origins of the term smombie

I’m glad you caught the crowd-sourcedness of the Macmillan reference I’d added. Thanks.

The reason I had deleted your mention of German-language origins is that it seems to me pretty plainly off topic. In the first place, this is English-language Wikipedia, and in the second place, it’s Wikipedia, not Wiktionary, so detailed accounts of etymology are not appropriate.

And now that I have gone back and re-read your reference from The Spectator, I discover that it doesn’t support your statement that Smombie started in German. Did I miss something? Furthermore, the Wiktionary entry for German Smombie says it comes from English.

I don’t want an edit war, especially over what is likely no more than a nonce word and not even the article’s headword. If you feel strongly that mention of its use in German should be retained, could you please explain your thinking. Otherwise, I’ll delete it again. PaulTanenbaum (talk) 01:32, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

@PaulTanenbaum: Thanks for the thoughts. The Spectator article at https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-word-of-the-year-whether-we-like-it-or-not/ is about the 2015 Youth Word of the Year in Germany, and describes it as only a "putatively" English word; it doesn't feel like this is a story about English slang being adopted by Germans. The BBC source at https://www.bbc.co.uk/learningenglish/features/the-english-we-speak/ep-180402 says more explicitly that "it comes from German, but people are now starting to use it in English". My assumption would be that it's similar to handy; an English-sounding German slang term which sounds a bit silly to English speakers and (eight years later, I have never heard or read anyone using it) didn't catch on in English.

All English-language news coverage around that time seems to frame the story as how the Germans have started using the term "smombie", putting it in quotation marks and explaining that it means "smartphone zombie". This suggests that they don't expect readers to know what it means, and that it wasn't a pre-existing English slang term.

On given sources I think we should avoid suggesting that the word is strongly used in English, which is how it reads when written neutrally as "sometimes blended" on a page of the English Wikipedia. I'm seeing this as giving the context of some international slang terms (like Hong Kong's dai tau juk) rather than a deep dive into the English etymology. If the Germans use smombie while English speakers have generally stuck with smartphone zombie (which itself could use better sourcing), the article should communicate that. Belbury (talk) 06:58, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

I guess our discussion now has two forks, the primary being what should be done with this article, and the second—which has emerged from it—being what are the word’s origins.

As to the first, I’d be happy with adjustments that downplay the word’s importance and perhaps report it as having already had its 15 minutes of cachet, though it would be best if we could cite a source documenting any such fall into disuse. And based on the weight of the evidence I have so far seen, I could also live with a suggestion along the lines of, “It seems to have first appeared as an English-flavored coinage in German.” But before fully subscribing to that kind of remark, I would want to coordinate it with what is provided in the sister reference, Wiktionary. To that end I am going to post a query on its discussion forum. This will likely bring out some informed remarks that should help in the crafting of as truthful, useful, and mutually consistent accounts as possible. PaulTanenbaum (talk) 15:12, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

FYI, I've posted my query on Wiktionary. PaulTanenbaum (talk) 22:28, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Vaisakhi

In this edit [1], you changed the number of images in the infobox from 3 to 1. In my opinion, I think it would be best for the infobox to have 3 images- one for Hindus, one for Sikhs and one for Pakistani Muslims given that all 3 religious groups observe this holiday. Would you be okay with that? Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 02:54, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@Suthasianhistorian8: WP:INFOBOXIMAGE and the {{Infobox holiday}} template both suggest that only a single image should be used in an infobox. Belbury (talk) 11:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Conflict of interest.

Hi Belbury. Thank you for taking the time. I’m only following the instructions given to me by Wikipedia and I feel like you’re trying to put me down. This is new to me and I really like doing it so please guide me instead of jumping to conclusions. SundayNinja (talk) 22:35, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@SundayNinja: Hi again. I just gave you the standard "if you have an external relationship" template: editors who do have a conflict of interest really need to know about that. Editors who don't, don't. No conclusion jumped to. Belbury (talk) 07:54, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you SundayNinja (talk) 19:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

WP:LLM isn't policy (yet)

Hi Belbury, I've just stumbled upon Lets.Custodio's talk page via ANI and just wanted to note that WP:LLM clearly isn't a policy nor a guideline (yet). Thus, "must be disclosed in the edit summary per WP:LLM" seems inaccurate. I wouldn't strikethrough or formally correct it to avoid confusing the user and because the advice is generally good; I'd just avoid citing essays in this way. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:54, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: Thanks, will do, I must have conflated it with another page. Belbury (talk) 09:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

no worries ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for work on Kenny page

YellowFratello (talk) 12:51, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you (sincerely) for the thoroughly-constructive counter-edit to my admittedly perhaps-suboptimal edit. I appreciate that you did not simply blindly-revert. Elmer Sdoner (talk) 21:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Elmer Sdoner: Thanks for identifying two overlooked problems in an article! Welcome to Wikipedia. Belbury (talk) 21:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I will press release 3 articles on Marium Uz Zamani

I will release PR on mainstream media on Marium uz Zamani aka Cyrus Mary PruthviPakalapati (talk) 08:01, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@PruthviPakalapati: Wikipedia does not use press releases. See WP:PRSOURCE. Belbury (talk) 08:03, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Brazilian fan of Oswald the Lucky Rabbit

@Belbury can you please appreciate to @Brazilian fan of Oswald the Lucky Rabbit? 89.243.205.200 (talk) 13:29, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

You were rude to him 89.243.205.200 (talk) 13:30, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what you're talking about. Belbury (talk) 16:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Ghost lights

I see on Template:Urban legends that you removed Atmospheric ghost lights while keeping St. Louis light, and since, other editors have added The Spooklight and Brown Mountain lights. To me, these should either all go or all stay, preferably clustered together. Mapsax (talk) 00:48, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mapsax: That's the question, really, where to cluster them. I removed the ghost lights link from the North America section mainly because it's not a uniquely US phenomenon, and the template has no "international" section. Maybe it needs one. Belbury (talk) 16:00, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Concur. Until then, any individual ghost light article should be added for consistency, but that could also lead to undue weight. Mapsax (talk) 21:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Greetings

We could team up Pope Belbury XV (talk) 07:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

David Bruce (brewer)

Hi Belbury. You stated a source was needed for Bruce resigning but this was already included in the Companies House link under people so I have reinstated it. Mini-hb (talk) 10:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mini-hb: Thanks, but where is that information? I only see 15 Feb 2022: Termination of appointment of Alexander David Michael Bruce as a director on 26 January 2022 on the URL cited at https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03667842/filing-history, and the linked PDF only describes it as a termination. Belbury (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

THE WEST BERKSHIRE BREWERY PLC people - Find and update company information - GOV.UK (company-information.service.gov.uk) is the link and under people it states he resigned on 22 Jan 2022. This is the citation I have used on this page. Mini-hb (talk) 10:33, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

sorry i mean 26 Jan Mini-hb (talk) 10:43, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mini-hb: Okay, I see it now under that tab. It's easier for others to verify sources if you link to the specific URL that you're referring to. Belbury (talk) 10:53, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

sorry it's taking me some time to get used to the formatting. In regards to the companies house page you can't just direct to the people page as far as I'm aware Mini-hb (talk) 11:07, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mini-hb: The URL of the people tab is https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03667842/officers

WP:BLPPRIMARY does discourage use of Companies House for information about people, though, and another editor has since removed it. Belbury (talk) 11:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Austin Moon

It's unattributed yes, but as a note Fandom is CC-BY-SA so allowed with a {{cc-notice}}-- thought I'd make you aware (the image is correct though). – Isochrone (T) 17:56, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

@Isochrone: Thank you, I wasn't aware! I'll sort it out. Belbury (talk) 18:01, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Choux Pastry

Dear Belbury,

I was wondering if you could provide some insight into why my edit on Choux Pastry was removed. I took the time to write in the talk section and included a reliable source to support my claims. I made sure to use language that was not categorical, stating that "some historians believe" instead. I would appreciate any feedback you could provide on this matter. Thank you. 77.205.18.191 (talk) 14:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't know which edit you're referring to, as your IP address had never edited that article.

If you're interested in working on this article, I would suggest creating an account - or, if you are the user Xiaomichel evading their block - requesting an unblock. Belbury (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Request

Belbury, If all you do on Wikipedia is play gotcha with paid editors, could you please let me update the Hank the Tank article? Literaturegirl (talk) 17:29, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

@Literaturegirl: Sorry about that! I'm done for now, I was just updating the facts and references for the bear's current location. It's all yours. Belbury (talk) 17:34, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

User:VechXIV/Ramesh Babu

FYI, while that editor has made few edits here outside of user space, they’re a regular editor on the Italian Wikipedia. I think they’re building the article here in good faith. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 14:39, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

@A. B.: The page is about an entirely fictional character in their FIFA video game team, they removed the footnote clarifying this. I'm sure they don't mean any harm and probably don't intend to publish it to mainspace or push to restore the copyvio screenshot, but it looked like a CSD U5 to me if that's all they're doing here at enwiki. --Belbury (talk) 14:48, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for catching this!

—A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 14:49, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Request

Could you please add Metalbilly to this template? 128.92.166.70 (talk) 19:00, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Which template? Belbury (talk) 06:30, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

The Heavy Metal template. 128.92.166.70 (talk) 16:58, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't know which template you're referring to, would suggest you leave a message on its talk page if you can't edit it. Belbury (talk) 16:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I meant this template.128.92.166.70 (talk) 17:00, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not familiar enough with the genre to know if it's appropriate, request the edit on its talk page. Belbury (talk) 17:05, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Musical statues has been accepted

Musical statues, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

-- NotCharizard ^🗨 14:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you :)

		The Content Creativity Barnstar
		For creating the very surpringly missing from Wikipedia musical statues article. -- NotCharizard 🗨 14:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but I was just bringing it back from deleted draft purgatory, with a bit of a polish. Nobody had bothered to give it any sources since 2005, and it got draftified and then archived as stale in 2021.

I was surprised to see the redlink and requested that the draft be restored so that I could find some (obviously very easily located) references for it. Belbury (talk) 14:26, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Sometimes it's just a small but not minor edit or I don't know what to write for the summary. CurryCity (talk) 09:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

walter matthau

i need to edit Kalifah001 (talk) 20:58, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kalifah001: What are you trying to edit? You added an IMDb reference to nothing. Belbury (talk) 21:07, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Replaceable non-free use File:Unfinished 1 Leadenhall Street promotional image.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Unfinished 1 Leadenhall Street promotional image.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Unfinished 1 Leadenhall Street promotional image.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Unfinished 1 Leadenhall Street promotional image.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Bin Weevils

The website is called Bin Weevils Rewritten. The website is still available! --212.140.252.242 (talk) 15:06, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but it needs a source to confirm that that's an official reboot rather than a fan project. Raise it at Talk:Bin Weevils if you like. Belbury (talk) 15:12, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Oromo article edit warring

Please see the Oromo article as there is an edit war going on between two users over an image to put for the main information box on the Oromo people. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 15:50, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@Cookiemonster1618: See Wikipedia:Edit warring#What to do if you see edit-warring behavior for advice on how to deal with that. Belbury (talk) 16:11, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Omaze edit reversion

Thank you for reverting my edit on Omaze. I now realize it didn't make the article better in any way. I'm still new to editing wikipedia, so I'll try to be more constructive when revising articles in the future. LeviEdits (talk) 18:47, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

WTAE-TV Letter for Ricki and Copper

The photo that you deleted has been part of the Ricki and Copper page for over two decades. It demonstrates how children were invited to appear on the show, carries the signature of the star of the show, and is therefore relevant to the content. I was simply fixing the color balance of the photo. Bruce.Graham.TV (talk) 19:14, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

It seems a pretty unremarkable stock letter to me. Belbury (talk) 19:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Faisal71945

I'm sure this is a sock of User:FaisalFilmAndTVFan99, User:FaisalMusicFan99 and others. For more details please see User:Arjayay/Albert. I'd start an SPI but am due at a meeting in 10 minutes. If you want to start an SPI please do so. - Arjayay (talk) 15:35, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Sure, never heard of the user before, I just saw someone adding an obviously fake TV show to an actor's credits on my watchlist. Will take a look. Belbury (talk) 15:36, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

@Arjayay: Agree that it seems likely from the article overlap (eg. Draft:The Scavengers (London band) vs Draft:The Scavengers (band)) but they've been blocked now anyway. Belbury (talk) 15:43, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm back now - Thanks for your help - Arjayay (talk) 20:57, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Anna Turley page

Hi there, I noticed with disappointment that you immediately and summarily tore up a reversion I made today to an earlier page version wherein I had expanded on Ms. Turley and her blame apportioning. I wrote that earlier text because it seemed fair and apt for me to provide context (without comment or editorialising) for her election loss, something she herself was vocal about and is quoted on here. I made no assertions of how influential her disregard for the Redcar voters was in her defeat so not I plead innocent to theorising on that score, I was simply happy to add to the sum of knowledge (with attributions as required). I hope that you will not therefore delete again. 2A00:23C4:9A4:E101:F160:11BD:493C:70CE (talk) 18:09, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

You can't take an MP's voting record and the area's Leave vote percentage and conclude this must have been the most important factor in the 2019 election.

Offering to put this in context by comparing it to something you think is relevant is also inappropriate.

Wikipedia calls it WP:SYNTH. The article should cite actual analysis. Belbury (talk) 16:14, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Agnolotti

Hi Belbury,

I think the last IP editing in Agnolotti is sockpuppet of Frukko and not Xiaomichel, and the last good version should be restablished (WikiCleanerBot 9th of October), could you have a look please? Cheers 81.185.168.37 (talk) 16:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

You can raise it at WP:SPI or WP:ANI if you think a user is trying to circumvent a block. Belbury (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, done :) but I can not restore the version of 9th of October as the article is protected. 81.185.168.37 (talk) 16:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Suggest you raise the disputed content on the talk page if you think it should be included. Belbury (talk) 16:22, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Done, I hope I can have your feedback. 81.185.168.37 (talk) 16:28, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm sorry to see this person who started this thread falsely accusing me. Xiamichel was banned for sockpuppeting, and I was only banned on the agnolotti channel for edit warring because I removed sentences unsupported by credible sources, but I never used a sockpuppet, unlike Xiamichel. I recall that Belbury had restored the last correct version on June 11, 2023. Agnolotti were not invented in Savoy; that is entirely false. Also, I was not informed of anything until now when I was brought into this discussion. Furthermore, I now see there has been new edit warring, and certain false information has been restored in the article. I kindly request that you take into consideration what I'm stating here. I also want to point out that on the Spanish Wikipedia, Xiamichel and its sockpuppets are contaminating all Italian food articles with false information. --Frukko (talk) 17:37, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Rigenera

...

Where else am i supposed to make fake stuff? The sandbox?! I am outraged by this. I get it, Wikipedia is not a wesbite to not host personal stuff even though it's sandbox pages, which I thought mean't "Oh, these pages aren't going to be deleted", but anytime I try to make any sandbox page, it's just: DELETED, DELETED, AND DELETED!! EVEN THOUGH IT'S SANDBOX

Okay, sorry for getting mad, it's just I thought making sandbox pages would make it to where it wouldn't be deleted, but I guess that's false...🦧🦧🦧🦧 BreadGuy1922AUTOMOBILE (talk) 22:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@BreadGuy1922AUTOMOBILE: Try somewhere like Fandom.com, who are fine with users uploading personal and fake wiki articles. https://www.wikihow.com/Start-a-Wiki has a guide on how you can make a whole wiki there about anything you like. Belbury (talk) 08:03, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

I've used fandom for 2 years now. And some fandoms don't take kindly to me making fake stuff on my profile sandbox. So I'm out of options... BreadGuy1922AUTOMOBILE (talk) 16:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@BreadGuy1922AUTOMOBILE: It's my understanding that people can always make their own, new wikis at Fandom, but I'm not too familiar with the site. You could also try somewhere like https://neocities.org. Belbury (talk) 17:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Question

Sir how I can edit page so u will not revert it. Please explain me with example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hari7773 (talk • contribs) 13:42, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@Hari7773: Don't delete content without saying clearly why you are doing so. --Belbury (talk) 13:49, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Heavy Metal Request

Could you change the Heavy Metal template to look more like this?

Extended content

2601:C7:C201:C640:45AE:FB60:2F4E:5B3E (talk) 02:56, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what you're changing or why, and don't know the genre well enough to know if it's correct. You should request any edits at Template talk:Heavy metal music. --Belbury (talk) 08:09, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Internet meme trolls in Kerala for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Internet meme trolls in Kerala is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internet meme trolls in Kerala until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

 — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:47, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of a photo

Hello! I saw that you said one of the pictures I uploaded does not follow the copyright criteria. While uploading the picture, I didn't realize that it wasn't my picture since all the pictures in my gallery are kept together and not in different files. I would like to delete the photo but I'm not sure how to do that so could you please tell me. I'm extremely sorry for the inconvenience. Sunshine Owl (talk) 16:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunshine Owl: No problem! If you're talking about an image you uploaded to Commons, just go to the file page, click "Edit" and put {{SD|G7}} at the top to say that you, the uploader, now want it to be deleted. Then hit "Publish changes". Belbury (talk) 16:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

If you're talking about File:Dino (Lee Chan).jpg, though, that image has already been marked for deletion - an admin at Commons will remove it soon. Belbury (talk) 17:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh ok! Thanks for helping. I was talking about File: Dino (Lee Chan).jpg. It did say something about deletion but I was a bit confused. If the admin deletes it then will my Wikimedia page also be deleted since I violated one of their policies (though it was a mistake)? Sunshine Owl (talk) 17:10, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunshine Owl: No, if you've made a genuine mistake that's okay.

You should check your other uploads to Commons and put {{SD|G7}} at the top of any that aren't photos you didn't personally take yourself, though. Belbury (talk) 17:14, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you so much ad sorry for the convenience. Sunshine Owl (talk) 19:03, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Ehsan Roohi

Why do you change in my edits for Ehsan Roohi's page? Why do you replace high quality images with lower quality ones? It is much better to provide high quality images. ZahraHeidari2 (talk) 00:34, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for the reply. I do not have any connection with him. I read his paper and I just have some data about him want to share to the research community. He made big contributions to the DSMC's scientific community and I just like the others have more knowledge about his contributions. That's it. ZahraHeidari2 (talk) 00:57, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

@ZahraHeidari2: As I say in the edit summaries, AI-upscaled photos are against Wikipedia policy (Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images#Editing images) when the originals are available: AI upscaling software should generally not be used to increase the resolution or quality of an old or low-resolution image.

Where are you getting the candid photos of Roohi meeting other engineers and having meals in restaurants from, if you have no connection to him? Belbury (talk) 08:41, 2 December 2023 (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 Socking and edit-warring at Ehsan Roohi. Thank you. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:00, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Thanks for weighing in on this! I was planning to wait to see how they'd thread the needle of permission for the "own work" Commons uploads before giving the article a closer look on its merits.

But their choice to create some socks and have one of them run a level 4 warning light definitely sped things up. I'd already requested page protection. Belbury (talk) 17:08, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

You definitely have patience. I used to too, but I seem to have lost it somewhere. Anyway, I lost my temper when I saw them reverting with IP. Until then, I was prepared to wait and see how they respond to your questions about the images. Guess we'll see how it goes. Cheers! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:15, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Belbury. Thank you for your work on Bedford Green Wheel. North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

good start

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 19:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

"Treaty of Vasai(1802)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Treaty of Vasai(1802) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 5 § Treaty of Vasai(1802) until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 16:23, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

request

@Belbury I beg pardon for the fault. I just wanted to contribute. For some reason I am unable to add cites and references on phone. Pls can you help me how to add those on a mobile device. I already read the cites and references article on Wikipedia but still it's not helping. Thank you ☺️ Achintya Sarkar223 (talk) 19:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC) Achintya Sarkar223 (talk) 19:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

What device are you using? Jaymailsays (talk) 19:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@Jaymailsays: You should take this to the other user's talk page if you want to ask them a question, all you've done here is notify me. Belbury (talk) 19:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Asking for Clarification

Please will you state that this account is not an alternative account for Owen Blacker? I ask because this account is 7 years old yet you have created only 18 articles though you have made 1000 s of edits. Those article coincide with OBs declared interests. Your logs for the last few days show a striking pattern of you editing when OB does not. And most of all of course your joint interest in me. If you would state that there is no connection it would be a great relief to me. NoorStores (talk) 11:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Also you and Owen Blacker seem to share an interest in Welshness? As per your most recent contribution. NoorStores (talk) 12:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm afraid NoorStores your accusations look absurd and are bordering on personal attacks. Theroadislong (talk) 13:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree they are absurd. They are also deeply worrying for me because Owen Blacker has a publicly linked account. I've already taken down my twitter account because I am afraid of the consequences if he realises who I am. So, I very much hope that Belbury will simply assure me that this not the case. I've asked Owen Blacker if he has another account and he won't deny it, so that is very worrying too. NoorStores (talk) 15:04, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Theroadislong is not agreeing with you, they are saying that your accusations look absurd. They are absurd. I am not Owen Blacker's alt account. Belbury (talk) 09:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Editing

This is in response to the warning message you left on my talk page. I am just a sensitive person, and it seems I cannot win no matter what I do. I love game shows, and I figure good faith editing should be used, but whatever. Smh. I did add sources (albeit incorrectly formatted I will agree to that, and I was told the website I used in particular wasn't allowed, and that's fine. I can find other sources etc. The article was also revered by another Wikipedian I believe due to the incorrect refs and that's fine etc. and I was still going to revise that article, the sources were still correct/not myth information on the Hurl game show page, but still). I take a break from Wiki for personal reasons, for a couple of weeks, and come back to that. Smh. If it wasn't for the fact I'm scared to edit that article again, due to a false edit war claim, I would revise it now. But I need to stay away from that article for the time being on principle, because again I don't want the false edit war claims, and I'm going to take a deep breath and calm myself down smh. I have to defend myself/give my side of the story. It's just if I didn't leave this message on your talk page it seems I'm being defiant. If I defend myself, give my side of it; I cannot win, and again, it comes across that I'm also being defiant it could come across that way etc. and yeah you know what I'm sorry, but now I'm almost kinda scared to edit on Wiki now, as good faith needs to be used between Wikipedians. I apologize if this came across harshly, but yeah. I'm sorry.☼Phrasia☼ (talk) 02:54, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Phrasia: Hi there. I didn't revert your edit because you hadn't formatted the source correctly, I reverted because the source didn't support most of the content that you'd added. You can't source a statement like Due to possible shock audience response, the show was very short lived. to a single press release put out prior to the show starting. Belbury (talk) 09:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I see. But you also left me a message on my talk page as if I am intentionally trying to be disruptive, which I'm not. In any event, I apologize and I'm sorry about this, and I understand, and you can delete this conversation if you wish. I just wanted to just agree to disagree with you, that yes I was wrong with not having correct sources, but I still feel the way you came at me wasn't right, and I'm trying my best to be a good editor and yes. Thank you. :) ☼Phrasia☼ (talk) 09:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Phrasia: I think a level 3 warning template was justified here. I initially gave you a level 1 template assuming you to be a new user who didn't know they had to use sources, but then realised you've been here 17 years and just don't keep talk page WP:ARCHIVEs, that you've deleted several past warnings about the same problem.

You need to use sources when writing Wikipedia articles.

I'm obviously assuming good faith and don't think you're being intentionally disruptive. Belbury (talk) 09:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I'd argue that you should have a reverse approach, if I was a new/inexperienced editor, then more stern warnings/being on edge/being concerned is okay, maybe even assuming this is a troll/vandalism etc., but yes I have been a Wikipedian for a long time, however as I am not perfect, I am Autistic, so I make mistakes, and I feel immediately leaving a message on my talk page "You will be blocked from Wiki", over a mistake on a solitary article, I don't now man, smh. But yeah. Now do you see what I mean etc. Again I'm sorry about all of this, and yeah. ☼Phrasia☼ (talk) 09:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC).

bk gen art for whopper

its as much as art as i guess a straight line. i mean a big corporation using llms for a contest has got to be newsworthy Slinkyw (talk) 22:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

References

Please Help Me | Request for Clarification Regarding Recent Sockpuppet Investigation

Dear @Belbury

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to address the recent Sockpuppet investigation that was initiated concerning my Wikipedia account. I would like to provide some context and clarification regarding the circumstances that led to this investigation.

First and foremost, I want to stress that I am not a Sockpuppet. I have been an active contributor to Wikipedia for a considerable period of time, and I am genuinely committed to upholding the principles of integrity and transparency within the community.

Recently, I have been more actively engaged in contributing to Wikipedia, particularly in relation to articles such as Baryl Vanneihsangi & Sultan Salahuddin Owaisi. During this time, I encountered challenges in sourcing appropriate images for these articles. In an effort to address this, I attempted to upload publicly available images directly to Wikimedia Commons for use in the articles. Unfortunately, I was unaware of the specific copyright concerns surrounding these images, which led to their removal.

In light of these events, I am reaching out to you to communicate my genuine intentions and seek your understanding. I acknowledge that my recent activities on Wikimedia Commons may have raised concerns, but I assure you that I am approaching my contributions with sincerity and good faith. It is important for me to emphasize that I am still in the process of familiarizing myself with the intricacies of Wikimedia Commons, and I am open to learning from experienced editors like yourself.

I kindly request your assistance and guidance in navigating these challenges. I am eager to rectify any inadvertent missteps and ensure that my future contributions align with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Your support and mentorship would be invaluable to me as I strive to contribute positively to the community.

I genuinely appreciate your attention to this matter and the opportunity to discuss it further. I am eager to address any concerns and clarify any doubts that may have arisen.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely, Zuck28 (talk) 21:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Big Three Horror Icons

Dracula, Frankenstein, and The Wolf Man are considered the big three from the classic age of horror films right? WaseWislown (talk) 17:25, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

And Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers, and Freddy Krueger are considered the big three from the modern age of horror films right? WaseWislown (talk) 17:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Given that the Universal Classic Monsters page previously listed Universal's "most famous monsters" as being Dracula, Frankenstein, the Mummy and the Wolf Man, maybe not. Belbury (talk) 17:32, 14 February 2024 (UTC)