Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:13, 23 May 2013

Emmette Hernandez Coleman is taking a semi-wikibreak and will fully return to Misplaced Pages later.

Be careful when being bold

Be very careful with edits like . Even though it's clear you have good intentions, not bolding a recommendation in an XfD comment is often a deliberate choice by the commenter and not an error. I've seen in the past commenters state that adjusting the emphasis they used (or didn't use) in the comment is the same as altering the words they used (or didn't use). Closing administrators read the whole of comments to determine consensus, whether there is a bolded recommendation or not.

While I'm here, I will also take the opportunity to mention that some of your non-admin closures are very borderline in terms of being too bold, particularly your early closures. For example closing Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 April 2#Ring-Ring as a snow close when there was only one recommendation (mine) and that did not correspond to the nomination. It wasn't wrong per se (otherwise I would have called you on it directly), but it is not a good example of when to use WP:SNOW nor of when an early close is desirable. It is not the first time either when you've been sailing close to the edge of the grey area between clearly right and clearly wrong.

I was coincidentally musing earlier on that while I would not currently feel comfortable supporting you at RfA if you were to run, I hadn't actually expressed this feedback to you so you could take it on board. I hope you take this message in the spirit of constructive feedback as I intend it (I know I'm not always very good at getting the tone of these sorts of messages right). Thryduulf (talk) 21:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Israeli cities

I just had a thought of an opening sentence which might work as a compromise and help explain more succinctly exactly what the list is. How about opening the article with:

• The following is a list of cities in Israel and Israeli administered cities in the West Bank, based on the current index of the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS).

That way we are giving a very precise and exact description of what the list is and what we mean by the title "Israeli cities". No room for any ambiguity. Dlv999 (talk) 21:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I tried that, Ynhockey said it violated WP:NC. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 21:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Tough that doesn't seem substantially different then my "The following list of Israeli cities, in this context defined as cities in Israel and Israeli-administered cities in the West Bank ". The "list of Israeli cities, in this context defined as", acide from presumably following WP:NC, merely makes explicit what was previously implied. Eather way we're using a definition of "Israeli cities" other than "cities in Israel" in the context of the list, so I'm confused at to why you would support the first but oppose the second. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 21:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)e

Because the vast majority of sources do not describe them as "Israeli cities", they call them "Israeli settlements". The "context" here is actually a minority position and we are not supposed to write articles from the perspective of minority positions. Dlv999 (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't see how that would apply to the second, but not the first. Eather way we're saying what we mean by the title "Israeli cities", the context is the same in both. Also you statement has the premence that "Israeli settlements" and "Israeli cities" are mutually exclusive. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Communist State of Antarctica

Oops i found out how to reply to you, thats fine im waiting for official documents from the "Communist State of Antarctica" as i too have herd very little about it, when i do is it ok to foward to you and let you to do the page etc? as im very new to Misplaced Pages and think ill mess it up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamrind (talk • contribs) 09:28, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Manway 15:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Berber Revolt

Hello Emmette, i don't participate on english WP but in french WP, and i need your help in this article, the sources exist, see this link or this for example and i can give more sources but in french, thank's for your help. Best regard.--Waran18 (talk) 16:44, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

What about the article do you want my help with? I don't know much about the Berber Revolt, so I might not be of much help. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk)

Thank's for your answer, for example : this source say, "a dynasty that would reign over a large part of the central Maghreb until the arrival of the Fatimids, omar toons write on the article "over the area of Tahert". And this map made by omar toons, is wrong. I take pic of the original map. The Idrissides control juste a city of Tlemcen, not all North-West of Algeria and on page 224, there is no map of Aghalibids or Idrissids, but a map of the arab conquest of Ifriqiya (East of the Maghreb).--Waran18 (talk) 10:56, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For User talk:Larry Sanger#Trout. Don't let the haters get to you. BDD (talk) 17:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

City of Greater New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Queens County

Flag of Abkhazia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Flag of Georgia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

--24.18.140.235 (talk) 15:22, 23 April 2013 (UTC)== VCR tape ==

VCR_Tape (VCR tape) redirects to VHS, but according to , there was actually a format called VCR, made by phillips, with coplaner reels. I'd never heard of it before, went to the[REDACTED] to find out more about it, but apparently the[REDACTED] doesn't know it exists? Sounds like a small-production-run thing, apparently only in the U.K., but as the first cartridge format in the U.K. seems like it ought to be notable enough to at least get a footnote on the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.140.235 (talk) 00:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC) might be a more useful link from that page - 24.18.140.235 (talk) 00:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of West Jerusalem for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article West Jerusalem is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/West Jerusalem (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.

Misplaced Pages:Files listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Misplaced Pages:Files. Since you had some involvement with the Misplaced Pages:Files redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Wbm1058 (talk) 00:10, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Palestine RM

Hi Emmette. After I read this article about Google changing "Palestinian territories" to "Palestine," I wanted to leave a notification where the last RM occurred. But I couldn't find it on the talk pages of Palestine, Palestinian territories, or State of Palestine. This was the RM shortly after the UN's upgrade of Palestine. Do you remember where that was? --BDD (talk) 20:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Palestine/Archive_13#Requested move

Hm. Not sure how I missed that. I guess I didn't think it was that long ago. Time flies. --BDD (talk) 05:19, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Flag of Bushmanland

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Flag of Bushmanland. First, thank you for your contribution; Misplaced Pages relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Bushmanland. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Misplaced Pages. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Bushmanland – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Misplaced Pages looks forward to your future contributions. Ignatzmice•talk 02:50, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

PWC

No, because you've not provided evidence that these places are somewhere else. If you have that evidence, change the name to whatever it should be; if you don't have it, leave things alone. I've never seen a list in which we challenge or require a citation for the place name; we always go with NRIS unless we find an error, in which case we fix it quietly. Nyttend (talk) 04:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that about half of the Manassas entries that I could check (by looking up their addresses in Google Earth) were not in Manassas. This casts strong doubt on the ones I can't check. What's wrong with a {{Dubious}} template here? I acknowledge that {{citation needed}} wasn't quite the right template, but {{Dubious}} is for "a specific statement or alleged fact which is sourced but which nevertheless seems dubious or unlikely. Most commonly, this involves uncertainty regarding the veracity or accuracy of the given source . This template's wording is milder than that of {{Disputed-inline}}, which indicates that the material in question is being directly challenged as being incorrect." I'm not directly challenging that they are in Manassas, I'm just saying that there is strong uncertainty. The main point of this is "to warn readers that a specific statement in the article may not be accurate". (Besides, NRIS seems to think that Manassas Park, Manassas, and even Arlington County are part of Fairfax County, so their probably not the most reliable source.) Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 04:44, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Remember that these lists routinely include things that are nearby but not within the municipality itself; we have a pile of places in Hanover County that are listed as Richmond because they're closer to Richmond than to other places, even though they're in the county and not in the city. It's not necessarily an accuracy thing; it's a vicinity thing. Meanwhile, did you consider attempting to find locations? Not asking this as a challenge but in case you'd not thought of it. Many sites aren't hard to find; for example, this city website provides the location for the Manassas Industrial School. Nyttend (talk) 04:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Update — this source puts Cannon Branch Fort in the city near the airport, while these historical markers are also plainly in the city. All that needs to be resolved, if I understand rightly, are the Manassas National Battlefield Park and Signal Hill, which somehow don't have any city listed at all. Nyttend (talk) 04:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

The ones without cities are ones I confirmed weren't in Manassas, but I don't know what, if any city their in (quite possibly some unincorporated community, but Google Earth isn't very good at showing unincorporated communities). That's an interesting point about Hanover County, but those Richmond's all include disclaimers in the location fled that they are not in Richmond. There were no such disclaimers on the PWC list, except on the Battlefield Park and Ben Lomond entries, and without such a disclaimer it is an accuracy thing. I took a que from the Hanovor County list and added the closest cities (Gainesville for the Battlefield Park and Manassas for Signal Hill). This edit removed the disclaimer for the Battlefield Park and makes it appear to be in Gainesville, and why did you remove the mile information?

This just leaves the Manassas Industrial School for Colored Youth, which is in Manassas. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 14:36, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Our practise nationwide is not to use the disclaimers unless they're in NRIS; it's not an accuracy thing. Anything in Prince William County isn't in a city, by definition, and things listed under the names of towns and unincorporated communities are not necessarily in those communities. Nyttend backup (talk) 15:19, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

You sure about that? To simply list a city with no disclaimer clearly implies that it's in that city (I'm using city in the expanded sense of the word to include incorporated cities, CDP's, etc.), and the practice at the Hanover County list would seem to go against your assertion. I've never seen any NRHP list with a broad disclaimer in the lead that the locations might be near, but not in the cities listed. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 15:34, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

(ec with following 2 comments by N and by EHC) EHC asked me to comment. EHC has good points. Nyttend is being, in my opinion, abrupt and arbitrary-seeming and non-explaining, too much so for good practice dealing with a new-to-this-topic-area contributor. The tone of this seems unfriendly, frankly, and I don't like that. N seems to be coming down hard, imposing upon this Talk page rather than discussing in the wt:NRHP discussion that EHC opened helpfully. (Disclosure: Nyttend and I have had numerous disagreements, including a recent arbitration in which we were both named parties. And interactions where Nyttend used administrator tools in actions that were eventually overturned upon appeal. EHC asked for help, and deserves to know this much, IMO. If someone wants to give a different summary, go ahead.) Anyhow, back several years now, Nyttend and I and others created the NRHP county list-tables using a computer tool that put a National Register Information System (NRIS) "location" field into that column. The location field used is kinda "descriptive" in nature, and includes cities that are "nearest" sometimes, and such cities can even be across a county border. The county location info in NRIS is far more exact, and almost always turns out to be exactly correct (except when county borders change later). In retrospect, it is arguably poor writing of ours, not to make the usage in the list-tables more clear, and/or it was poor of us not to clearly guide improvement of the information. It is not proper to assert merely that the info is what it is, and cannot be changed. It should be changed. I tend to think that the NRHP list-article column title "City or Town" needs some refinement, a footnote perhaps, to indicate if/when the locations are not locations as a normal reader would expect. Since it would be hard to word any such footnote, perhaps the contents of the column should be changed instead.

It is refreshing that EHC brings fresh eyes to this PWC list-article. Sensible corrections to make the list make sense, using current, accurate town and city and county info, should be implemented, IMO. I tend to think the correct place for this kind of discussion is in neutral territory of wt:NRHP, getting other editors' views, and it should not be imposed upon EHC's personal Talk page, where there could seem to be an assumption that EHC is at fault and out of step with consensus in some vague way. --doncram 16:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Your idea is way off base; it absolutely does not imply that. As I said, we use NRIS unless it's wrong, and NRIS provides the disclaimers for Hanover County; I cannot see why you say that it's a counterexample. If we start playing with the addresses without replacing them entirely with different sources, we're going to have chaos and make things much less accessible than they are. Nyttend backup (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

If you list something as being in a city then unless stated otherwise that implies that it is in that city, how is that way off base? If your correct why does the Hanover County list's Richmond's include disclaimers that they are not in Richmond (allot of other entires on that list have slimmer disclaimers)? I don't know what if any disclaimers the NRHP has, but their not relevant unless the the WP article has the same disclaimers. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 16:10, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Both of you, stop! There's nothing urgent here. Take a break. --doncram 16:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)