Jump to content

User talk:Johnbod: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 452: Line 452:
{{talkback|Serial Number 54129|Seriously|ts=19:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)}}
{{talkback|Serial Number 54129|Seriously|ts=19:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)}}
[[User:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">'''——'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">''SerialNumber''</span>]][[User talk:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:#8B0000">54129</span>]] 19:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
[[User:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">'''——'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">''SerialNumber''</span>]][[User talk:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:#8B0000">54129</span>]] 19:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

== User talk:Legacypac ==

Why are you reinstating the ramblings of an LTA? [[User:Natureium|Natureium]] ([[User talk:Natureium|talk]]) 19:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:31, 17 February 2019

Dirty angel from the Monumental Cemetery of Staglieno in Genoa, c.1910

memo to self - arty student project pages to check through

Johnbod (talk) 19:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The

In the discussion that Ceoil said was over, I didn't question that Princesse was her title, nor that it even mattered. What I don't like is the English "The" attached to a title in French, - Princesse de Broglie would be fine, Portrait of the Princesse of Broglie would be fine, but I dislike The Princesse de Broglie. Just to make you understand. The discussion was declared over. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:00, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Convicted book-thieves has been nominated for discussion

Category:Convicted book-thieves, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:33, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BM image

160, Room 45

Hi John, do you have any other captures of this - would like to include in the main boxwood article, if a little less blurred. I think it might be bothersome, policy wise, if I was to use one of the images from their website. Ceoil (talk) 18:25, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, any other versions would have been worse! I'm a poor photographer with a very cheap camera, and apparently very shaky hands. I was in the room at Waddesdon Manor this came from on Friday, btw! Johnbod (talk) 18:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Seems like I may have to pay a visit to the BM shortly, maybe even before x-mass ;) Re Waddesdon Manor, lucky you, look at the article it seems very impressive and Chardin always struck me as underappreciated, at least in English. Ceoil (talk) 18:36, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Johnbod. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

It was good and interesting to meet you last night and don't worry you haven't offended the hurricane community. :P Jason Rees (talk) 15:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for coming! A very enjoyable evening, I think for most. Johnbod (talk) 15:52, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Londinium (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Isotype
Prehistoric Ireland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Periwinkle

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 18 – 30 November 2018

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aegean art, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intaglio (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer Printing Process

In the article on Transfer Printing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_printing) you added the line "Usually several different transfer sections were needed for each piece." However, none of the two provided references (Honey 6-7 and Savage 30) make mention of this. Would you be able to add a citation for this fact? 128.84.126.23 (talk) 21:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some time, but the two photos of patterns both make this pretty clear. Johnbod (talk) 03:23, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:30, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Murano glass - Venetian glass

Hello Johnbod - I have redone Murano glass, and hope to get it to Good Article. I see you were opposed to a merger of Murano glass and Venetian glass. What do you think now I that have changed Murano glass? I believe that the current Murano glass article, with changes mostly to the intro and "Today" section, should be the Venetian glass article, and Murano glass should redirect to Venetian glass. Right now, Murano glass gets over 10,000 view per month, while Venetian glass gets about 2,000. Perhaps with your assistance, a decision on the merger could be made—and have a GA for a glass article. Your thoughts? TwoScars (talk) 17:21, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll comment at the merge section. Johnbod (talk) 17:50, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Angelica and Medoro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Villa Valmarana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Gothic X-mass

Gothic Seasons Greetings
Wishing you all the best for x-mass, hope it is a time of cheer, and thanks for all the guidance and help over the year. Ceoil (talk) 18:26, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Saturnalia

Happy Saturnalia
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:00, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Dear Johnbod, I'm not sure you know what you're talking about regarding Vikings, Viking Age and Norse, despite your know-it-all attitude. That's alright. However, would you mind spreading some positivity, though? Take it easy. Chicbyaccident (talk) 19:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What is clear, because you've said so yourself, is that you don't know much at all, and can't understand the term Viking. Yet rather than actually attempt to find anything out, you waste people's time by launching a string of move requests. It would be a very positive development if you stopped doing this. Johnbod (talk) 19:56, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Replied here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Norse_history_and_culture#"Norse",_"Viking"_naming. Chicbyaccident (talk) 20:31, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Yo Ho Ho

ϢereSpielChequers 13:54, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Holidays!

May a serene and snowy Christmas and New Years' await you. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 01:37, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

no thanks?

Could you please explain why you removed the infobox from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoration_of_the_Shepherds_(Cariani)? What's wrong with it? Thanks, Laboramus (talk) 04:42, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Hi Johnbod, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year,
Thanks for all your help and thanks for all your contributions to the 'pedia,

   –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 14:40, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas !!!

— 20:07, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Xmas

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Seasonal Greetings and Good Wishes
Seasonal greetings for 2018, and best wishes for 2019 to all who continue to fight for good practice and higher standards in building this great encyclopedia. Brianboulton (talk) 11:07, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The picture for the article Nativity at Night is to go on the Main Page tomorrow, and the accompanying text is essentially what you wrote in December 2009. That includes "It is a small painting presumably made for private devotional use," I have raised at WP:ERRORS my disquiet with the encyclopaedia making a presumption: is there a source attached to this? Is the presumption addressed in Campbell p232/8 ? Kevin McE (talk) 12:42, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course it fucking is! When WP:ERRORS gets into art history the introduction of mistakes inevitably follows. But at least thank you for actually letting the outside world know what the errors crew are up to for once. So unusual. Johnbod (talk) 12:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What is the need for the attitude? The article, and extract, read as though the reference is to it being derived from the van der Goes work. I don't know what dealings you have had with people at ERRORS before that makes you so bad tempered about it, but I am trying to ensure that mistakes, and unsourced presumptions, are avoided. Perhaps you would like to make clear that Campbell publishes this presumption, maybe with a quote for the benefit of those who don't have a copy of The Fifteenth Century Netherlandish Paintings to hand. Kevin McE (talk) 13:02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Season's greetings!
I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2019 will be safe, successful and rewarding...keep hope alive....Modernist (talk) 15:54, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Austral season's greetings

Austral season's greetings
Tuck into this! We've made about three of these in the last few days for various festivities. Supermarkets are stuffed with cheap berries. Season's greetings! Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Adoration of the Shepherds (Cariani)

On 25 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Adoration of the Shepherds (Cariani), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Adoration of the Shepherds (detail pictured) by Giovanni Cariani seems to have been started as a Rest on the Flight into Egypt before the subject was changed by adding shepherds? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Adoration of the Shepherds (Cariani). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Adoration of the Shepherds (Cariani)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tis the season

Holiday Cheer!
To Johnbod, best wishes to you and yours for a joyous holiday season and a happy & healthy 2019. Ewulp (talk) 01:30, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Johnbod, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,

Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 05:49, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Merry Christmas

--Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:32, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And a Happy New Year


Merry
Rexxmas
2018


Facto Post – Issue 19 – 27 December 2018

New Rfc on List of cryptids

Since you participated in the rfc earlier in the year, I am letting you know of another rfc to merge List of cryptids. Which ever way the wind blows you are welcome to join in. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:53, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Persian vs Iranian

Hi. It looks like you're confused with the use of the term "Persian". The history and culture of Iran is not limited to the ancient Persian Empires, the region of Persia, or the Persian people. You can't categorize articles concerning the Median Empire and the Parthian Empire of classical Iran or the Azerbaijanis or the Kurds of modern Iran under the name "Persian". So, are you going to stop reverting my edits or do we need to start a discussion on this issue?
Rye-96 (talk) 17:50, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all confused, though I think you may be as to the usual usage of these terms in English (which confuses many Iranians - this guy for one) and the way Wikipedia categories work. You seem to be trying to carry a distinction between "Persian" as an ethnic sub-group of "Iranian" back into ancient history, which just doesn't reflect usage in English-language WP:RS, where Persian and Iranian are generally synonymous, except for linguistics or when say Medes are being discussed. The Parthian Empire is certainly Persian - as the Greeks at the time called it, and Western writers have done ever since. So no, if you continue to make erroneous edits, I will continue to revert them. Johnbod (talk) 20:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see how this issue is relevant, in any way, to what that IP had been doing on the Persian miniature article. While Iran was entirely referred to as “Persia” in the Western World, I’m pretty sure the distinction between the three founding tribes and empires of Iran was made both by the ancient Greek writers and by later western writers on many occasions. Moreover, in present-day English terminology, the use of the term “Iran” has taken over the archaic term of “Persia”, in terms of topics concerning both modern Iran and classical Iran. There are loads of English-language RS already used on the English Wikipedia that clearly recognize the distinction between the two terms. The fact that you do acknowledge the exceptions of using the term “Persian” instead of “Iranian” in terms of linguistics and certain parts of the Iranian history, and that we‘re actually talking about two distinct categories by the names “Iranian culture” and “Persian culture”, illustrates how relevant this concern is. Perhaps more editors should be involved in this discussion.
Rye-96 (talk) 05:31, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Probably - certainly there has been movement on the matter in recent decades, since the Shah expanded the English usage of "Iranian" beyond liguistic and ethnic matters, but it is just wrong to say that "Persian" is no longer used. Judg8ing by your edit summaries, you seem a poor judge of relevance. Johnbod (talk) 12:31, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure the Shah didn't write all of these documents himself, Johnbod. The decree on the official name of Iran was announced in March 1935, but as you can see, the term "Iran" already existed in English (obviously in the national sense) prior to that. It's just that a general word choice preference took place. "Iran" is a well-established English term and its usage does indeed go beyond ethnic and linguistic contexts, which themselves do matter for a category on culture and cannot be disregarded. Nobody's rejecting the use of the term "Persian" altogether; that's not what the point is. The English (and Ancient Greek) usages of "Persian" vary, like that of "Iranian". We're talking about what gives us two distinct categories by the names of "Persian culture" and "Iranian culture" and what each one of them would have to cover precisely regarding the varying definitions of the terms. If you think we can't do that, then the two categories should be merged, since you're insisting that they're all synonymous.
"...the usual usage of these terms in English (which confuses many Iranians..." - "...you seem a poor judge of relevance." — I don't understand that language, btw. I think I could report it. I'm glad you managed to read my edit summaries, at least, cause I failed to see yours on multiple occasions.
Rye-96 (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The sensible broad distinction, which we have had for many years here, is to use "Persian" for ancient and older historical matters, and "Iranian" for modern ones, with fuzzy borderlines and a deal of overlap. That is the china shop into which you have charged. Godd luck with your reporting! Johnbod (talk) 00:59, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Using "Persian" for relevant ancient historical matters is exactly what I'm suggesting we should do, Johnbod. That being said, the Median and Parthian empires were not "Persian" and this is what we know from both classical Greek and modern English resources, and the term "Iranian" does also apply to ancient matters in English resources on many occasions.
Rye-96 (talk) 14:49, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2019


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019 -

begin it with music and memories

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:25, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Landshut Wedding, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hedwig Jagiellon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Shepherd with a Flute

On 12 January 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Shepherd with a Flute, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Shepherd with a Flute has had his shirt changed, and is now attributed to Titian rather than Giorgione? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Shepherd with a Flute. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Shepherd with a Flute), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:03, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Esther before Ahasuerus

On 15 January 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Esther before Ahasuerus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after various changes to Tintoretto's Esther before Ahasuerus (shown) from the 1540s onwards, the painting now has two figures of Haman? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Esther before Ahasuerus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Esther before Ahasuerus), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Legit content?

Could you check it? Seriously it sounds dubious to me. --Wario-Man (talk) 08:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, probably Johnbod (talk) 15:50, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's really odd. How these Timurid buildings (Bibi-Khanym Mosque, Goharshad Mosque, and Gur-e-Amir) used that architecture style?! The article even claims Ilkhanate Mongols used that style. It cited two Persian books, and I didn't find that term in the linked Iranica articles. --Wario-Man (talk) 16:47, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Martin Schongauer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Snyder (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Johnbod, you are right, this item is possibly more suitable for the article Filigree. Regards, Chris OxfordChris Oxford (talk) 19:54, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

Information icon Hello, I'm Dennis Bratland. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Missal of Silos that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page.

See [1]. BTW, I do template the regulars when that’s all of my time they deserve. Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:34, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well someone else has done so. WP:OWN on a page I last made small edits to in 2013??? It was a remarkably careless mistake and I pointed this out. It doesn't seem to have dented your over-confidence one bit. Happy trails! Johnbod (talk) 22:34, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's false. You did not merely call the mistake careless, though even that is an unnecessary commentary on contributors rather than content. You insulted me directly with vulgar, schoolboy name calling, a violation of WP:NPA. You doubled down by telling me not to edit on "your" topic. That is also a policy violation. Your words were a near-perfect match for the examples at the WP:OWNBEHAVIOR policy. I know you know all this, and I also know editors with many years experience and FA credits are deaf to it. It's extremely unlikely you will be held accountable for this kind of behavior, which is why it never gets better. Guys like you have made Wikipedia notorious for obnoxious gatekeeping.

Your history shows you have a pattern of escalating corrections into unnecessary conflict, both when you correct others and when others correct you. I know a lot of people think trying to shame and abuse anyone who makes a mistake improves quality, but evidence shows it doesn't. It creates defensiveness, and conditions editors to resist admitting error. It trains everyone to hide their mistakes, and rationalize them, rather than quickly owning up to them so we can all move on to something constructive.

This superlative sat unsourced on History of paper for 10 years until I raised this question. If I had been afraid of getting bit, I'd have left it alone and it would have remained uncited for years more, in the hands of you Wikipedia royalty. You and I will both make errors in the future, and I expect when you do, you're going to get bogged down in pointless bickering. I see your example and work to avoid being anything like that. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For puzzled passers-by, I'd better explain that all I did was revert DB's removal of referenced and correct information because he had failed to read the online reference with any care at all. But clearly he is one of those people who is always in the right. Johnbod (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You fucking liar. Your edit summary was a personal attack. You are allowed to tell people to fuck off. Profanity is totally fucking fine. You are not allowed to call them motherfuckers. or "dickheads". You must think puzzled passers-by can't read a plain edit summary. What's so hard about saying "oops, sorry, I went too far"? What a fucking ego. Didn't I say you'd be deaf to this? Bye. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fuckety fuck fuck to you both. And thank you for pointing the way to a very interesting article. Now please shake virtual hands and bury the hatchet (but not in each other?). Randy Kryn (talk) 23:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Red herrings

What's "extremely silly" about moving the fish photo from the lead to the section about fish? A picture of a fish doesn't provide MOS:IMAGELEAD's "visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page", it goes against it by suggesting at a glance that the article might be about kippers. One could almost call it a (drumroll please)... --Lord Belbury (talk) 09:49, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Visitation (Dürer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Visitation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Facto Post – Issue 20 – 31 January 2019

Facto Post – Issue 20 – 31 January 2019

The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.

Everything flows (and certainly data does)

Recently Jimmy Wales has made the point that computer home assistants take much of their data from Wikipedia, one way or another. So as well as getting Spotify to play Frosty the Snowman for you, they may be able to answer the question "is the Pope Catholic?" Possibly by asking for disambiguation (Coptic?).

Amazon Echo device using the Amazon Alexa service in voice search showdown with the Google rival on an Android phone

Headlines about data breaches are now familiar, but the unannounced circulation of information raises other issues. One of those is Gresham's law stated as "bad data drives out good". Wikipedia and now Wikidata have been criticised on related grounds: what if their content, unattributed, is taken to have a higher standing than Wikimedians themselves would grant it? See Wikiquote on a misattribution to Bismarck for the usual quip about "law and sausages", and why one shouldn't watch them in the making.

Wikipedia has now turned 18, so should act like as adult, as well as being treated like one. The Web itself turns 30 some time between March and November this year, per Tim Berners-Lee. If the Knowledge Graph by Google exemplifies Heraclitean Web technology gaining authority, contra GIGO, Wikimedians still have a role in its critique. But not just with the teenage skill of detecting phoniness.

There is more to beating Gresham than exposing the factoid and urban myth, where WP:V does do a great job. Placeholders must be detected, and working with Wikidata is a good way to understand how having one statement as data can blind us to replacing it by a more accurate one. An example that is important to open access is that, firstly, the term itself needs considerable unpacking, because just being able to read material online is a poor relation of "open"; and secondly, trying to get Creative Commons license information into Wikidata shows up issues with classes of license (such as CC-BY) standing for the actual license in major repositories. Detailed investigation shows that "everything flows" exacerbates the issue. But Wikidata can solve it.

Links

If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Convicts in Australia

I'm not sure OWN is a fair accusation. User Tobby72 recently added another image that I did not touch, because it is relevant to the section and I guess there's enough room for it, although it's probably my personal preference that two images per section is enough. Three is pushing it. I like it when images stay neatly within their sections, and illustrate something in the corresponding text. I probably have a mild form of autism that accounts for this lol. - HappyWaldo (talk) 07:11, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, then Johnbod (talk) 16:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting changes

Please revert my changes instead of manually removing them. It is nice to get a notification of that type of thing. Also try to assume good faith instead of... not. Thanks ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 21:38, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You had left comments on the Signpost article. I would like to thank you here too for the comment. It is always insightful for writers to understand how readers are interpreting articles. A belated thank you. Regards. DiplomatTesterMan (talk) 20:29, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

squigglysquiggly

FYI, the syntax for referring to templates in talk is to use the {{tl}} template. E.g. if you type {{tl|Hiddencat}} it will display as {{Hiddencat}}. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:29, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Others are available: I mainly use {{tlx}} because it can display parameters, which {{tl}} does not. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:05, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks both, Johnbod (talk) 00:06, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Renaissance dance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Volta (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Perhaps you'd care the one sentence personal attack from this edit? Debresser (talk) 19:12, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- missing words, but I expect the answer is no. Johnbod (talk) 19:16, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Which is precisely what happened the last time. Which is also the reason that next time I will, again, cut you no slack whatsoever. Don't want to be a friendly editor, don't expect to have an easy time. Debresser (talk) 22:00, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't seem to be an option with you - you always get your attack in first. You should track back over your own edits sometime.... Johnbod (talk) 02:05, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Johnbod. You have new messages at Serial Number 54129's talk page.
Message added 19:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

——SerialNumber54129 19:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Legacypac

Why are you reinstating the ramblings of an LTA? Natureium (talk) 19:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]