User talk:Crisco 1492

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

For me.

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia, the greatest encyclopedia on Earth! You seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! / You may wish to review the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, as well as the avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some helpful links:

By the way, an important tip: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments.

Hope to see you around the Wiki! If you have any questions whatsoever, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

Who?¿? 08:40, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

This

this I could think of nominating... THE LAZY LA - in this translation... La Perezosa,

We don't have any of these pictures (Not everything, some of it is just crap) by Julius LeBlanc Stewart, Thomas Heaphy Edouard Marie Guillaume Dubufe ->(Edouard Dubufe) Charles Joseph Frederick Soulacroix ->Frédéric Soulacroix and possibly Auguste Toulmouche and Daniel Hernandez Morillo Daniel Hernández (painter). Will you upload them if it is possible? Some of them are quite nice, it would be fun to have more of these. Hafspajen (talk) 08:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Why would I have to do it, though? I mean, so long as these individuals died at least 100 years ago, or they died 70 years ago and their works were published in 1923 or earlier, there shouldn't be any issues. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:22, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
As for the painting: technically it's pretty good. However, its use on Wikipedia could use some work; I see nothing but galleries, and the reviewers at FPC will usually look for usage outside galleries. What if an article was written about the painting? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)


1). Because I don't. (sorry but I am not very good at anything in commons. Never cropped, loaded or did any imageig thing...)
2) Well, I never thought of that, but it is an idea. The chap is a rather unknown painter, but this woman should be part of some kind of Lazy-woman series that should be famous. But in France and South America. Although I speak French, never really botheresd about French culture. By the way the interwiki links to the French articles doesn't work, on Daniel Hernández Morillo . Hafspajen (talk) 15:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Tomorrow I may look into uploading some of those paintings you've mentioned. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:57, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • The French interwiki works for me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Lovely article! Do you want to write about this painting? Yes, the interwiki works now, probably because I changed the title some hours ago, before it it was Daniel Hernández (painter) Hafspajen (talk) 16:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
And probably it is going to be much better if you you upload them, than others. It may even became a FP!Hafspajen (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)


The Daniel Hernández Morillo translation, slightly silly

He was born in the Department of Huancavelica, Salcabamba district within the province of Tayacaja, on 1 August 1856, son of the Spanish Don Leocadio Hernández, and the Peruvian Doña Basilia Morillo. You reach Lima at 4 years of age, starting his art education at 14, in the workshop of Leonardo Barbieri located at San Pedro de Lima.1 street and whose classes takes charge when the master returns to his homeland. From this period is his work The death of Socrates (1872), which earned him recognition by the Government of Manuel Pardo, obtaining a scholarship to Europe and a commitment to grant that was not fulfilled in its entirety arriving from his trip in early 1874.

During your stay visit in Paris to his compatriot Ignacio Merino, which advises him to move to Rome; Thus it remains a decade in Italy learning Spanish painter Mariano Fortuny.2 In 1883 he returned to Paris where manages on its own merits to be the President of the society of Spanish painting residents in the city, linking with other artists as Francisco Pradilla and José Villegas Cordero, and was a member of the society of French artists, exhibited at the Annual Salon of the society of French artists, rigorous and difficult access by their severe dogma academician; It was wide and triumphant received in the seven years that arose, considered "fors concours" ("substantial competition") of the Parisian salons.3

For his famous Lazy La, was awarded the second medal at the Paris Salon, 1899. In the Universal exhibition in Paris, on the occasion of the change to the 20th century in 1900 gold medal was awarded in for his Cruel love, and The lazy earned him the Medal of the Legion of Honor in 1901. Since Hernandez was declared H.C. Honoris Causa, in all classrooms. In addition, earned the prize for painting at the Ibero-American exhibition in Seville with the work of Francisco Pizarro.

In 1912 he traveled to Montevideo, Buenos Aires and Rome, to expose their works. He returned to Paris where he lives up to the year 1918. Around that same time, his brother Inocencio, much younger, arrives to become one of the most illustrious preachers of the Dominican order in the Peru, which in turn coincides with the call receives this extraordinary painter by the President José Pardo to assume the leadership of the National School of fine arts in Limain which he contributed to the formation of new Peruvian artists, until his death in Lima from 1932. Hafspajen (talk) 16:12, 17 April 2014 (UTC)


The painting it is called La Perezosa, in Spanish. Hafspajen (talk) 16:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Sorry, it doesn't look like I'll have time today. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

cryingHafspajen (talk) 11:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Note to self: write this article... I'll try today or tomorrow, assuming my RL writing is completed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)


UH; don't know. Try to find some. Hafspajen (talk) 09:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Book Catalogue illustré du salon de ... (1899)? Hafspajen (talk) 09:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Now, that is a little bit of a problem. That painting is not in the catalog. Was looking through, can't find it. The French and Spanish article say La peresosa won 1899 medal at Paris Salon.. . Hafspajen (talk) 10:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
OK; this say 1900 (see detalj...) BUT THIS SOURCE SAY IT WAS PAINTED 1906... Trained initially at the Lima Studio of the Italian Leonardo Barbieri, the painter Daniel Hernández left Peru in 1874 to continue his studies in Paris and Rome. In Europe he achieved a degree of success in official salons with paintings that, in spite of superficial signs of renewal, remained bound in spirit to the narrative and anecdotal painting of the nineteenth century. This painting is a clear example of this renewed academicism. The pastel tones and the lightness of the facture associate it with the gracious scenes set in the eighteenth century which, in the French rococo spirit, Hernández produced in other canvases. This type of indulgent painting won him favor in Europe’s official painting circles, as well as major awards such as the Gold Medal at the 1900 Exposition Universelle in Paris. During his time in Lima, from 1918 until his death in 1932, Hernández mostly devoted himself to teaching, as the director of the School of Fine Arts. He also produced portraits and historical paintings, a genre that enjoyed brief popularity in the midst of the celebrations surrounding the centenary of Peruvian independence...

Hafspajen (talk) 10:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Hmm... Does that illustrated book have an entry for La Paresseuse? That's how it would be listed, I think. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:54, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Hmm. But if it was painted 1906...? Hafspajen (talk) 10:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • That's what I don't know. But the Google source only says Morillo won the award, not that the portrait did. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
True. The Spanish and French article say something that he won 1899 with some tired woman. Could be an other one, of course, but... Where is it then in the 1899 catalouge? Where is HE then in the 1899 catalouge? Found for ex. Matisse in the catalogue, but not Morillo or Murillo. Hafspajen (talk) 11:20, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

visi gila di nesia

Televisi idno nkneesia needs your esteemed viewing... satusuro 01:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Que? Which article? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:00, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
      • haha lucu - semua.... artikel Television in Indonesia - usual add by ip overlinked crap satusuro 06:39, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Aneh

Crisco, saya kok merasa heran ya kok tulisan yang dirasa agak berbeda gini bisa muncul di Wikipedia ? Apakah ini karena sumber aslinya seperti itu ? Lalu bagaimana caranya menerjemahkan tulisan ini ?

Sultanate of Singora#Early history

"itt were not amiss to build astrong howse in Sangora which lyeth 24 Leagues northwarde of Patania, under the goverment of Datoe Mogoll, vassall to the King of Siam. In this place maie well the Rendezvous bee made to bring all thinges together that you shall gather for the provideing of the ffactories of Siam, Cochinchina, Borneo and partlie our ffactorie in Japan. (...) this howse willbee found to bee verie Necessarie, for the charges willbee too highe in Patania besides inconveniences there; which charges you shall spare at Sangora: there you pay no Custome, onlie a small gift to Datoe Mogoll cann effect all here."

--Erik Fastman (talk) 01:53, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Bahasa Inggris sekitar tahun itu memang berbeda dari bahasa Inggris sekarang. Sumbernya online, biar saya periksa. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Betul, sumbernya seperti itu. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:10, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Trus cara nerjemahin tulisan tersebut ke bahasa lain begimana donk ? Tetep dibiarin gitu aja atau langsung disandur sama pengartian yang ada ? --Erik Fastman (talk) 04:09, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa Indonesia yang baik dan benar, dengan catatan kaki yang berisikan teks aslinya. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:13, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Featured list candidate

Halo Cris. Kalau ada waktu luang, boleh lah kiranya kasih review di FLC pertamaku. Salam :) Bluesatellite (talk)

  • Mungkin nanti saya akan lihat. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Tradisi dalam mengusulkan AP di sini

Bang, kalau saya lihat di sini, kok pengguna-pengguna di sini (termasuk abang) jika mengusulkan artikel menjadi AP biasanya sebelum itu mengusulkan artikel tersebut menjadi AB? Masalahnya, cara seperti itu, (maaf ini pendapat pribadi saya) buang-buang waktu. Kalau di WBI, jika artikel tersebut sudah cocok diusulkan sebagai AP, langsung diusulkan menjadi AP, tidak perlu lagi sebelum diusulkan menjadi AP, artikel tersebut diusulkan dulu menjadi AB (namun dalam beberapa artikel, ada beberapa artikel yang awalnya AB, namun diusulkan menjadi AP seperti Asmara Moerni, Tjioeng Wanara, Soedjatmoko, dll.). Terima kasih. Hanamanteo (talk) 10:05, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Masalahnya, di sini sistem reviewnya lebih ribet. Karena itu, lebih baik mendapatkan beberapa pendapat sebelum lanjut ke AP. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:55, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Bonus pictures III

FP?
  • Beautiful. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Any chances for any of them? We could do with some women istead of all those birds... Hafspajen (talk) 13:50, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Sadly none of them are in articles with enough EV for FP status. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:53, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
'Fww fw.Hafspajen (talk) 16:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • From a purely technical standpoint, I think Venus and Anchises would have the best chance. It just isn't used yet. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, wonder why. Hafspajen (talk) 16:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Is it not? Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Hehe, now it is. Hafspajen, do you want to do the honors? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Crisco, your expertise is wanted. At Phil's page we have on display a lot of pictures of puppies, and it has to boil down to ten-eight winners to be used in the article. And a new lead pic. You have no idea how many really bad quality pictures are out there on commons off puppies. I selected some, and removed a big amount already. Initially they were like 80 pics. Can you continue to remove some of it? and go down to 10 pics, something like that? Hafspajen (talk) 16:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Very good, just go on, remove 20-25 more. Don't be shy... We need only around 10-12 pictures to that article. there are now 47 pics. This is why we need a trained person to help us. Hafspajen (talk) 04:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

St. Simeon Stylites

Did a little editing, to clarify him as a pillar saint. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

As you're around ...

Crisco, I think I need some help with the German Shepherd article. An IP has done a lot of work on it over quite a few weeks/months - yes, some is problematical and s/he can be a touch tenditious/POV but it is generally well meaning. A slight spat seems to have blown up overnight when Hafs tried to make changes/suggestions and Hafs did correctly take it to the talk page. This morning the IP has reverted and is continuing to revert all the work they had done.

I don't know if I'm doing the right thing but I have just restored to a stable version, left a message (hopefully concilliatory) on the most recent IP number and the talk page. I know Hafspajen will see this here as well and I can understand as I agree the article does need some pruning. Sorry to pester you but I don't know what else to do? Any suggestions - or am I making things worse? SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:59, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

For some reason, I'm not managing to rstore the version of 04.14 19 April? SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I think getting discussion is good enough, so long as everybody discusses. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. It doesn't look as if that's going to happen - the IP seems to have really got themselves worked up now see User talk:49.181.236.157. I'll just let it be and see what transpires, fingers crossed that everyone cools down and common sense prevails. I guess we can live in hope? SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Robey PR

Greetings Crisco, as you know I have George Robey performing at a peer review and I would be grateful for any input should you have the time or inclination to review. Cheers! Cassiantotalk 10:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

  • I'll see what I can do. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

.

  • Now this is silly. I asked to dicuss thing and some of the things added might be worth keeping. Some not, because there were problems with it. I wanted to avoid an edit war, as so often it is the case with the new editors if you change things, and who obviously is sensitive about they write, right. Yes I think it is a heavy case of Ownership of article, not good, Crisco 1492 . The template if anyone cares to read it, says IF YOU will revert you will be in edit war, please let's discuss things. Welcome, it says, and = You may be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors, if you do not discuss your changes on the article talkpages. Does anyone care to read things properly? Now s/he is gone. Hafspajen (talk) 00:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • He/she was clearly planning to leave after receiving those notices (hence why he/she reverted all of his/her additions). Read our definition of edit warring; I don't see that happening in the page history. At most, there may be one revert. That is not edit warring. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:10, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
But I was NOT saying s/he WAS EDITWARRING: I was saying IF s/he is going to revert changes without discussion, then s/he WILL BE IN AN EDIT WAR - : if....than...editwar. That page has a heavy history on editwarring on all kinds of things, galleries, for example. Never said she was actually editwarring. I tried to stop a possible editwar. If she ´WOULD HAVE READ WHAT WAS WRITTEN; AND NOT TAKED FOR GANTED I WAS AN ASHOLE, than we could probably discuss all those heavy changes s/he made - changes that were not all that brilliant. Hafspajen (talk) 09:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm not saying that you are an asshole, Hafs. I'm just saying that said template is generally used when somebody is already edit warring. Not as a warning that you will edit war if they revert you without discussion. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Well I am sorry but I am not that good always at expressing myself in these official things so I thought I take that and rewrite sightly, and it looks like that nobody actually read that, and why would s/he get upset when nobody was trying to do that. Hafspajen (talk) 09:41, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • When it comes to defusing something like this, something that even resembles a template is almost always a worse choice than something you've clearly written yourself. Oh well, no use crying over spilled milk. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:51, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, realise that by now. I will not do this again. Hafspajen (talk) 09:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

General PotD note

You probably shouldn't use phrasing like "is accompanied by the following verses" or, worse, "bears the legend" unless those lin3s appear on the illustration. I do not crop text. While there are cases where the first phrasing might be relevant - e.g. in some books (Including the one for the Princess Ida illustrations I think), a piece of tissue paper is over the artwork, with text printed on it - but this is not always the case; sometimes, it's only made clear in the list of illustrations.

Best to save such phrasings for works like File:Archibald Standish Hartrick - Rudyard Kipling - Soldier Tales 6 - The Drums of the Fore and Aft 3.jpg which unambiguously do bear the text referenced. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Alright, thanks. So maybe "Accompany the lines" or something similar? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I tend to prefer "illustrate the lines", as it's more exact. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:49, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Alright. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Charles Joshua Chaplin

This is a place for dreamers - Victorian Spy Camera Watch

Hi Crisco, would you have few minutes to have a quick read through Charles Joshua Chaplin to give it a brief check, please? Hafs wants to nominate it for DYK and I don't know anything about painters or art so may have made some mistakes when I've tried to do the light copy edit on it for him. Do you think the hook is covered sufficiently? Also what would be the best image to include? I'll try and talk him through nominating it himself (I'm not doing DYK at the moment!). I don't want him to get a knock back again - I think he had a bad day yesterday with us all being tetchy with him wink SagaciousPhil - Chat 05:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

  • I'll try and do something after work (well, if you can call an hour's English lesson "work"...). I can give the article a quick once over, but I won't be able to review since I proposed the hook. If we're trying to do a play on Charles Chaplin/Charlie Chaplin, I wouldn't add an image. That might give the game away. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I realised you couldn't do the actual review, so it's more a 'pre-submission' once over! I've a couple of hours proper work to do now as well - school holidays here so loads to be done; this is the time of day when my dogs have had their breakfast, been exercised and settled, I grab my own breakfast before getting everything else organised. SagaciousPhil - Chat 06:26, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Alright. I'm home (got rained out; the area near my student's home "floods" [nothing too bad, maybe a foot] easily so I didn't want to take my motorcycle through that and couldn't reschedule), so I'll look at Charles Joshua Chaplin before continuing with Union Films. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Looks acceptable, I think. Some of the words are... possibly a little odd for an ESL speaker (elfin? really?) but you've been copyediting along the way so I don't think there will be any close paraphrasing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:06, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Crisco. I re-jigged any close wording I stumbled across so I hope it's okay in that respect. I managed to find a ref to replace the citation needed. I now just need Hafs to appear at my talk page so I can guide him through the (easy) nomination process before it's time limited. We have a lovely day here now the Haar is beginning to clear; still windy and chilly though, the temperature is still in single figures but at least not the frost of yesterday. It's nice to look out on as the Rhododendrons etc are just starting to bloom. SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Fog... *shudder*. Luckily I don't run across fog that often here. Usually only when driving towards Magelang (not sure why fog forms there but not in Yogyakarta... maybe the convection currents are different?) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
We get it all the time although we're about 8-9 miles inland. Sometimes it lasts until almost mid-day and I can then watch it roll back off the hill - only to return an hour or so later ... the joys of being near the North Sea. It's one of the reasons the beautiful sandy beaches are empty except for people walking dogs - to get any warmth or sunshine you have to go a long way inland. PS: Hafs, stop worrying about GSDs, it's done and dusted! Come over to my talk page and let's get your DYK nomination sorted out. SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Odd, to get any shade or temperatures below 20 C we need to go inland smile — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Constitution of May 3, 1791/archive4

Since you commented in our of the prior discussions on this subject, you may want to comment on the nomination. Please note that the last year's nomination failed primarily because not enough people voiced their opinion (whether for or against, it was decided that not enough people commented in the first place). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

United States presidential election, 1844

Could you possibly have a look at this GAN? I didn't have time to finish it, but it has a ton of problems I had hoped to work through with the nominator. As it is, because I took so long because I knew it was a monumental task, the nominator appears to think that they should ignore everything I said.

The article's full of poorly-introduced, poorly-explained concepts, and the worst thing that could happen to it was a non-careful reviewer promoting it too readily. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

  • I'm not particularly familiar with the field. In a perfect world, Wehwalt would be able to help, but I'm sure he's quite busy. If I have the time I'll try and take a look. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm better at articles that don't need a ton of fixing. If it can pass a GAN from an experienced editor, I'll gladly peer review it or contribute to the FAC. I've actually been giving some thought to doing the 1840 election ...--Wehwalt (talk) 16:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, if a Canadian can do something with this, there may be hope yet. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Crisco, I'm very uncomfortable about what has happened with this one. Adam basically disappeared from the review for a month and a half (see User talk:Adam Cuerden#Talk:United States presidential election, 1844/GA1, and I removed him as reviewer on April 15 (query on his talk page; reply on the review itself, a move he concurred with a few hours later. Today, following the above, he reappears for the second time in the review after his removal—mind, the GA nominee template lists the current review as GA2 not GA1, since GA1 was ended at the point he was removed over a week ago, and it's sitting in the review pool like all regular nominations—and then edits the article talk page to say that it's failed, even though he wasn't the reviewer any more.

My initial impulse was to revert the FailedGA: Adam stepped away, and really has no business stepping back in at this point. But I wanted your take on it first, as an uninvolved admin. If you don't want to be involved further, I suppose I could always ask Wizardman. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

  • I know the background; I visit Adam's talk page often enough to have seen the notes. I haven't been involved in GAN as much as I used to be, so I may be out of touch with this. We can, I think, consider this as having been renominated and, as a form of apology to the nominator, arrange for it to be reviewed more quickly than if left to the pool itself. We seem to have done this with articles which were failed owing to piss-poor reviews or reviews by socks, I think (not that this is either of those; rather, it should be given a quick review owing to the length of waiting).  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:21, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I did recheck, and Adam appears to have opened and quickfailed the GA2 review, not continued the GA1 review that he'd been removed from and failed it. I still think this was inappropriate. I'll let you take care of it. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Will start a GA review, once I finish this translation. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Okay, I'll add back the GA nominee template, this time with |page=3 though with the same time and nominator fields (which will create a GA3 page when you start the review). Give me a couple of minutes... BlueMoonset (talk) 03:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • K. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:45, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • You can start the review from the article talk page now. It won't show up at WP:GAN for another four minutes or so. Thank you very much for taking this on. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Okay, be right over there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:53, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, Adam Cuerden and BlueMoonset, I've started the review. Adam's right, there is some serious heavy lifting needed. I already killed 4,000 bytes with the image review. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clicking Bad (2nd nomination)

You closed the Afd at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clicking Bad (2nd nomination) as no consensus, yet nobody suggested keeping it. How can that be no consensus? --Bejnar (talk) 15:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Because there was no consensus for deletion, simply enough, for two reasons: an apparent lack of interest, and two non-marked !votes which showed hesitancy for deletion. First point, generally at least three !votes are required for a consensus at AFD. I may, occasionally, close an uncontested AFD as if it were a prod, which brings us to the second point: resistance towards deletion. Although neither Smuckola nor Odie5533 !voted keep or delete, it was clear that both considered the topic of the article possibly notable. That is enough reasonable doubt to avoid closing the AFD as if it were a prod. As is often said, AFD is not a simple vote, but a discussion. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:57, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
If there was inadequate discussion, why did you not extend the time? --Bejnar (talk) 19:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
What, for a third time, when no-one had commented in a week since you left your views? Now that would have been pointless... A "no-consensus" close doesn't prevent a renomination at AFD in due course if you're that concerned about it. BencherliteTalk 21:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Bejnar, read WP:RELIST, particularly "in general, debates should not be relisted more than twice." That's why I didn't relist. You can bring the article to AFD after a reasonable period (a couple weeks, or a month) and try again. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:08, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

This for you

Cute look.jpg The Cute puppy Award
For helping to chose the cutest puppies for the Puppy article. (The woman in the picture has nothing to do with it - she is just cute too)... Hafspajen (talk) 21:27, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks Hafs! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2014








Creative Commons License