Status: Active. bd2412 T

Archives

By topic (prior to June 1, 2009):

Articles-1st/Deletion-1st-2d/Law-1st-2d-3d-4th-5th

Misc.-1st-2d-3d-4th/RfA-1st-2d-3d-4th/Tools-1st-2nd-3rd/Vandalism

Dated (beginning June 1, 2009):

001-002-003-004-005-006-007-008-009-010-011-012-013-014-015-016

017-018-019-020-021-022-023-024-025-026-027-028-029-030-031-032

033-034-035-036-037-038-039-040-041-042-043-044-045-046-047-048

049-050-051-052-053-054-055-056-057-058-059-060-061

Dispute resolution clause: By posting on my user talk page, you agree to resolve all disputes that may arise from your interactions with me through the dispute resolution processes offered within the Wikipedia Community. BD2412

Template:Florida Collaboration Notice has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:23, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

• I have no recollection of this at all, nor any current interest. bd2412 T 10:57, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

at Donald Gary Young. A browse of this article, among numerous others, might impress you of the extent of quackery this person practices, some of which are known as his own "inventions". Interested in your opinion here. --Zefr (talk) 01:08, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I just don't see how he is notable enough as a pseudoscientist to fit into the top-level category as an individual. Also, the source is thirty years old, not from a particularly high-level source or reporter, and doesn't contain the word "pseudoscience". I believe we have had BLP discussions before where the consensus has been that we don't label people as pseudoscientists (or proponents of pseudoscience) unless a source uses the term. bd2412 T 01:18, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I noticed your recent edits adding redirects from the inverse form of names usually used by encyclopedias. Is this now standard practice? Could you please refer me to the discussion? Thanks. Reply here is fine. --Bejnar (talk) 19:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not aware of a specific discussion, but we've been making these redirects since nearly the very beginning of Wikipedia - longer, even, than I have been around (see, e.g., Bush, George, created in July 2004). bd2412 T 19:27, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. So, should it be part of my people-article creation/review checklist, or is it just appropriate for certain articles? --Bejnar (talk) 20:11, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I would add it to such a checklist. I can't see a circumstance where one should not be created, for a Western name (i.e., first name, surname). bd2412 T 20:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Cable (electrical) now points at Electrical cable. I know bouncing off redirects is quick, but the latter is easier for you to type. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

• The fixes are keyed off the links on the disambiguation page. I will update this one. bd2412 T 20:32, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

You are replacing a lot of links that used to go to a disambiguation page for Ruthenian Catholic Church with links to Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church when they should actually be going to Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. Almost anything using the term "Ruthenian" to refer to people, dioceses, events, or places in Europe should be linking to the UGCC (historically known as the Ruthenian Catholic Church or the Ruthenian Uniate Church), as well as anything in Canada, or generally almost any usage not referring to the United States or (some) relatively recent references to Zakarpatia or the Czech Republic. You're actually sowing more confusion than you are clearing up. Please go back and check the changes you've made, and where necessary either switch them to the UGCC or revert them if you can't tell which one is actually right. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 16:34, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I've fixed a few of them for you, but I don't want to go back through everything you've done. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 16:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I have reverted all of the changes that I implemented with respect to this page. Up until yesterday, the article now at Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church was at Ruthenian Catholic Church - it was a reasonable presumption that incoming links were intended for the content already at the target. This is why, as a rule, incoming links to a page should be fixed before that page is turned into a disambiguation page. bd2412 T 17:39, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. It was definitely a reasonable presumption (even without the page move, but especially with it). I had assumed you were editing in good faith, if that wasn't clear. I hadn't realized that the article at Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church had recently been moved although that makes sense now that I think about it. Cheers! LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 18:10, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Food Export USA-Northeast. Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 21:23, 14 June 2017 (UTC)