User talk:Timtrent: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:49, 30 October 2015

Start a new discussion thread

Messages for Fiddle Faddle and for Timtrent should be left here. This is the home account for Fiddle Faddle, which is both my nickname and my alternate account.
When you begin a new message section here, I will respond to it here. When I leave message on your Talk page, I will watch your page for your response. This maintains discussion threads and continuity. See Help:Talk page#How to keep a two-way conversation readable. If you want to use {{Talkback}} to alert me about messages elsewhere, please feel free to do so.

It is 5:46 PM where this user lives. If it's the middle of the night or during the working day they may well not be online

I do not remove personal attacks directed at me from this page. If you spot any, please do not remove them, even if vile, as they speak more against the attacker than against me.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

In the event that what you seek is not here then it is archived (0.9 probability). While you are welcome to potter through the archives the meaning of life is not there.

Re: A present for you

Hello, Timtrent. You have new messages at Stewartist's talk page.
Message added 18:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Guitar

I believe I've corrected the problem that had you tag my "Kiesel Carvin Signature CC 275" inclusion on Craig Chaquico's Wikipedia page. I had surrounded inadvertently made it appear as a link to an article. So what I did is I went back in and figured out how to just state the name of his guitar without it linking to an article or Website, etc... which is what, I think you were objecting to? You felt this made it seem like an advertisement for Craig's guitar? It wasn't meant to be that; it was meant to just be information for the reader of his Wiki page. I believe I've resolved this concern. Please let me know if there is something else I've done which you object to. Thank you, PilotRock61 16:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PilotRock61 (talk • contribs)

All I remember is a single link in something that was not an article, with no other text. Do feel free to create a real article about this guitar if it is notable. Fiddle Faddle 18:58, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Keith White (disabled yachtsman), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Gillingham and This Is London (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar

		WikiProject Disability Barnstar
		For lauditory work on creating and curating Keith White (disabled yachtsman). LavaBaron (talk) 05:48, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you LavaBaron. I met Keith in the Harbour in Dartmouth, where I am one of the yacht taxi skippers. He asked, not unreasonably, for assistance mooring his yacht. The wind was blowing fit to bend the lampposts and a one armed single handed sailor on a 44 foot heavy yacht was always going to need a smidgen of help. I got chatting to him and found him totally self effacing, a man small in stature with the courage of a regiment of marines, working through his disability to achieve, or try to achieve the most extraordinary things, and all for charity.

I thought "This man deserves, nay has earned, a page here. As I researched him I found him to be more and more extraordinary. I hope my DYK nomination works. He deserves his moment on the front page, too. Fiddle Faddle 08:46, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely an incredible story based on the article. I would have reviewed it myself but, since I've attracted a DYK stalker, I don't want them to follow me to it and sink it. So probably best for a rando to review it. LavaBaron (talk) 08:49, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@LavaBaron: Once we get the DYK out of the way, and his story warrants it, with one of my hooks or someone else's, I will ask the Guild of Copy Editors to look at making it a GA. I can write a half decent article. They know what is needed for GA.

I saw you had a stalker. Smile and nod and walk quietly away from the creature, trying not to disturb it. As a pedant myself I know life is too short to argue with pedants. We are always right.

Fiddle Faddle 08:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take a look at Draft:Tim Sexton?

Hey again,

I submitted this article as a paid editor (which I disclosed on the User page that I created for paid editing and in the edit history when I submitted this) and it's been sitting for a while. It seems like reviewers tend to avoid articles by paid editors who disclose, particularly since you and I both know through reviewing that (conservatively) a good 50% of the submissions are created by COI editors who don't disclose. LaMona reviewed it after it sat for about three weeks, which was great, and I edited it based on his/her comments, although some of her concerns weren't relevant -- there were no refs to blogs, non-independent or unreliable sources). However it *was* overcited (whch you may remember is a problem of mine)!

I would appreciate any edits to the article - I may have lost perspective -- but notability is clearly established, the info is verifiable through reliable sources, and I think it's neutral. (If you think it's not suitable for some reason, all good - I fully trust/respect your judgment and I will rewrite according to your concerns.)

BTW - my second and final article as a paid editor. It's too frustrating. Thank you, Julie JSFarman (talk) 14:35, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JSFarman: I think you have lost focus a little and have tried too hard. I would prune back the citations more than a little. Had I come across this in my normal reviewing I would have pushed it back with a comment about WP:CITEKILL. My view on multiple citations for a single fact is that one is ideal and the best one should be chosen, two are acceptable, three just about scrape in, but more than three make the reading experience judder. My normal advice is either to repurpose the references rendered spare by refining them, or to discard them.

I agree he seems to be notable. I could easily accept it as it is, but would prefer not to until you have taken out your pruning saw. I wold also look at paragraphs which contain lists of folk and see how best to précis them to minimise listography. After all, if he is notable then he doesn't need the lists, and he can't inherit anything from the names in them

I stress that this is just my opinion, and you are free to disagree.

I have set up the talk page with {{Connected contributor}} to reflect your declaration, by the way, and also combined a duplicate reference for you.

I'm not sure it has been hanging around because folk saw paid editing. I think it is not a simple yes or no, and folk shy away from those. I chose to put the review here since you messaged me here. Feel at liberty to copy and paste any relevant parts to the review area on the draft if you wish Fiddle Faddle 14:52, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are awesome. I will work on it this AM. THANK YOU. JSFarman (talk) 14:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JSFarman: A total pleasure. You have no need to accede to this request, but I could do with active help in a draft I have in my own userspace. I am COI involved and have become stuck by not being able to see past my COI. I have User:Timtrent/Chris W. Allen (academic) one the back burner at present and can;t see whether it can be made to show Allen as notable, or whether I am flogging a dead horse. The entry by a friendly IP editor on the tax page there leads me to think it is the latter, but I would appreciate other eyes, and, indeed, other hands on the keyboard. As you see from the talk page there, Allen and I are friends. My intent, had I been able to get further with it, was to use AFC to submit it. Fiddle Faddle 14:59, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! I have a friend (a fellow Wikipedian) who is a librarian at UCLA -- she has access to great resources. I'll ask her to do some research as well. Looks like he can pass notability to me. JSFarman (talk) 16:14, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are a star JSFarman. At present his is simply "interesting", but I believe notability can be shown. I am stuck, rather. It's far easier to wrote an article such as Keith White (disabled yachtsman), which I did in a few hours than to write one on an academic and friend. If a prof inspires his students, and some of the student reviews say he makes a deadly boring topic live for them, then he is worthy of an article. I just ran into a brick wall Fiddle Faddle 16:18, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First, I can't believe you were able to put the Keith White article in a few hours. That would have taken me days. Great article (and I'm quite taken with his story).

I added a couple of refs to your Chris W. Allen draft. I haven't had time to do more digging, but I'm certain there are more sources. I totally get the brick wall - I experience it frequently -- but his story is also cool and his mission is noble. Psyched to help you with this. I'll get back to it later today or tonight! Julie JSFarman (talk) 19:05, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JSFarman: I met Keith in Dartmouth. I'm one of a team of yacht taxi skippers and was on duty that day, and, not unreasonably, Keith needed assistance to moor his yacht when he dropped in on us. I went aboard to help him. I found him to be tough, switched on, and determined, and probably as mad as a box of frogs! I thought there just had to be an article on him. Like so many articles I've created, I found there was not. I was lucky, and sources fell into my lap. It was the standard "find references and say what they say, using them as citations" thing. But luck was a major factor, though interest in the topic helped! Trying for a DYK on Keith, followed, later, by GA, though I shall need some help for that, probably from WP:GOCE, and a little elapsed time on his voyage will do no harm

Chris Allen is genuinely amazing. I can't imagine going to Kabul to teach journalism, and not even speaking the language. He would deny it, but I find it heroic. And he has been there twice. His blog, something we can't feature, says it all. The students were in rapt attention to him and his translator. They learnt what could be, if only they could make it. Sorry, I am evangelising, but I think you can probably see why I have hit a brick wall. At your discretion, please migrate the userspace draft to the Draft: namespace, or, when you feel appropriate, to the main namespace. And thank you for the additions. I shall go and see if I can add anything.

Fiddle Faddle 19:20, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A team of yacht taxi skippers?? That's crazy! I don't even know what that means. Although I could probably find out somewhere here.

I did some editing on Chris W. Allen and moved it to the article space. I think we can add a quote from him to give the article more depth (given that it can be prefaced by something like "In a 2014 article for Unheralded Fish, he wrote:...") I wish there were more sources -- it feels like this is just part of his story! Julie JSFarman (talk) 15:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JSFarman: that is far more than I could have hoped, for which my grateful thanks. You can see why I got stuck. With good fortune others will find things to add to the article. I. of course, cannot, except via the talk page.

A yacht taxi is a small boat (we have a choice of three, one of 19 feet and two of 21 feet in length) used to ferry yacht owners and crew to and from their boats in our harbour. We have a team of about a dozen of us who do this as a part time occupation. This will show you where I am located. Fiddle Faddle 17:42, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Back to being JSFarman2

I pruned Draft:Tim Sexton as you suggested. I cut down the name-droppy lists, but it's hard to get rid of some of the citations -- he's had a looooooooong career, and there's a lot that I needed to verify. (To be truly entertained, look at the dif -- writing this article has been a process of cutting, cutting, cutting, cutting.) Hoping that it works but always willing to edit again! And not just because I'm incredibly tired of this article and want to be done with it. Aaaarrrrrg. Thank you! JSFarman2 (talk) 15:49, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update - the article was accepted by another reviewer! Clearly your advice was solid. Thank you again! Julie — Preceding unsigned comment added by JSFarman2 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@JSFarman2 and JSFarman: This is excellent news. The truism that 'less is more' almost always holds good when we hit an AFC acceptance barrier. I'm glad another reviewer appreciated your work too. We forget, sometimes, that our objective is to get a valid article into main namespace, not to create the best article we possibly can from the get go. Well done. Cutting back material is harder than adding it. Fiddle Faddle 17:38, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft check?

Hello,

Thanks for commenting on my draft and giving some guidance; it's been "few and far between"! Please look this over: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Schnitzel_Records_Ltd.

Here are my notes: Issues with quoting one sentence from each ref are that this will land me in "promotional language territory", as I'm attempting to write about a for-profit business. This issue would also happen if I was writing about a non-profit such as Susan G. Komen. To maintain Wkipedia's neutral tone, I can only invoke the references with paraphrased, bland writing ( = the first draft / the one at the top). Sure, I can go ahead and do the direct quote procedure, but it's going to end up in promo tone land. The same would happen as if I was writing about breast cancer survivors who'd been helped by Planned Parenthood, you know?

5 refs per sentence IS overkill - thanks for noticing. It was done to bring the refs to the attention of approval editors, who had not been checking.

I guess my root question is - there is very limited assistance (and zero rewrite/no other editor attempts) being given despite multiple requests for help - teahouse, live chat, peer review, afc requests, a note on the article itself, multiple editor talks - very little actual ref checking was done, this has been going on for months, and there seems very little interest in adopting the article into Wikipedia, so ... should this be abandoned? I'm trying to succeed here, and for whatever reason, it feels like it's not working out for me here. Perhaps I'm just stuck and frustrated - especially when I see articles with zero references in the "live" mainspace (check out Paper Garden Records, iirc...) or flagged with tons of issues, but still "live"? It sort of feels lopsided.

Thank you! 15tinybirds (talk) 23:49, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]