User talk:SchroCat/Archive 34

DB9

Hi @SchroCat:. Hope I'm not bugging you or anything but could you possibly leave some comments on this peer review about the Aston Martin DB9 article? Thanks (and don't feel obliged to.) Best,  750h+ | Talk  18:39, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi 750h+, Thanks for the note. I'll see what I can do, but it may not be for a a few days. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks SchroCat for the response. I don't mind how long you need, I'd just like to make the FAC successful. Best,  750h+ | Talk  13:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

If you're aiming for FAC, I suggest you add the PR to Template:FAC peer review sidebar, which may help get some more eyes on it. I'll review it with FAC in mind, so it may be a bit picky and long, but it's best to get the pain out of the way at PR to ensure a smoother FAC. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, SchroCat, for your swift response. I'm happy to address the comments 😊, this being my first FA-related thing. Best,  750h+ | Talk  13:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Revert on Emily Davison

Hi, could you clarify what in the MOS you refer to? It is quite standard to capitalise when referring to the king or queen. Will Thorpe (talk) 12:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Output

Hello SchroCat, sorry for this. But would you like to leave your output on the AM DB9 nomination? (The source review and image review have thankfully been concluded). Best,  750h+ | Talk  10:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi 750+, I will do. I'm just leaving it open for others before I come in - partly because I've gone over it too recently and want to read with a fresh pair of eyes, and partly because I have promised a couple of other reviews first. I've got it watchlisted, however, and I will be there at some point (it's going to take six weeks or so to get through, so there's plenty of time!) Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh okay, thanks for the response.  750h+ | Talk  10:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @SchroCat:, note that the nomination has three supports 😁!  750h+ | Talk  17:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Excellent. You’ve got a few others lined up to look over it too, and I am waiting for the right point to weigh in, so it’s all looking very positive at the moment. - SchroCat (talk) 04:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Sapper's Wife (H. C. McNeile)

According to birth and marriage records, accessible at FreeBMD, in the third quarter of 1891 Violet Evelyn B Douglas was born; in the fourth quarter of 1914 Herman C McNeile married Violet B Douglas; and in the fourth quarter of 1916 Michael A M McNeile was born to a mother with the maiden name of Baird-Douglas. It seems fairly clear from that information that her surname was not simply Baird, but Douglas, or possibly Baird-Douglas. So referring to her as simply "Baird" is erroneous. What exactly do the Sources you quote say ? RGCorris (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Well that’s a lot of WP:OR you’ve got going on. Exactly, the ONDB says “On 31 October 1914 he married Violet Baird (b. 1890/91)”. It’s possible that, as with some families, there is a difference in the names for sons and daughters. It’s not uncommon in some social circles. My family, for example, has men using double barrelled surnames, but women have the first part of the surname as the last of their forenames, and the second part of the surname as their only surname. It’s possible this is the case here. Either way, the ONDB trumps the OR and referring to her as Baird in entirely correct. - SchroCat (talk) 19:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

ps. Is there a reason we’re having this discussion on this quiet backwater of a page, rather than the article’s talk page, where other interested parties can chip in? - SchroCat (talk) 01:52, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Second FAC

Hi SchroCat (I deeply deeply apologise for the number of messages I’ve sent) but the DB9's promotion is imminent (eight supports; I pinged the FAC co-ords to ask them if it could be promoted); David Fuchs allowed me to promote another article, and so that shall be this one, the Aston Martin Rapide. Would you mind taking a look at it? Best,  750h+ | Talk  05:46, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi 750, I’ll try and get round to it. I’ve got a few lined up to do before I can though. - SchroCat (talk) 10:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Death of Kevin Gately

Looking at the blurb at WP:TFAR. Collins (at "disorder") mentions "civil disorder", and the Cambridge Dictionary mentions "public disorder" ... do either of those work for you? (I don't like just "disorders".) - Dank (push to talk) 16:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Can we just rewrite the thing once it gets pushed over to WP:TFA? That way the final line can be dealt with too... Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Sure. - Dank (push to talk) 16:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

OK. As to your initial question, "disorder" wasn't right. Either civil or public has a legal definition attached to it (I think, but I may be wrong), so I just want to check that first. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Edward Windsor, Lord Downpatrick

Hello there! Thanks for your recent improvements to this page. Just so you know, there is another editor who keeps trying to revert the page back to a very old, outdated state. It doesn't make sense: That editor is trying to use an image from 2008 when there is a newer one from 2023, in addition to rejecting anything related to this guy's new profession (travel, not finance or fashion), according to various WP:RS. The version that you improved is the actual up-to-date one, so I'm re-reverting it to yours now. Please just be aware of the other editor, who is being non-responsive... Doctorstrange617 (talk) 16:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Here's one example of RS too: https://www.tatlerasia.com/lifestyle/travel/eddy-downpatrick-travel-interview Doctorstrange617 (talk) 16:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Well, I've asked the question on the talk page, which is always a good step. If he is still unresponsive, he can be dropped into ANI for disruptively deleting valid information on several occasions, but maybe there's a reason he's been doing it, so let's wait and see. - SchroCat (talk) 16:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that makes total sense. It's just weird to insist on using old information that can clearly and easily be updated, based on a quick Google search. Appreciate your input Doctorstrange617 (talk) 17:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Whisky_Galore!_(1949_film)

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 16 June 2024. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 2024, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/June 2024. Please keep an eye on that page, as comments regarding the draft blurb may be left there by user:dying, who assists the coordinators by making suggestions on the blurbs, or by others. I also suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from two days before the article appears on the Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work! With Gately you have a back to back TFA!—Wehwalt (talk) 23:26, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Double showing? Don't think I've had one of those before. Cheers, Wehwalt. - SchroCat (talk) 08:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Piles of stones

Morning Schrocat - hope you are keeping well. You're certainly busy! The Secretum seems to be doing just fine without my two'pennorth, but I shall offer comments re. On Her Majesty's Secret Service. If you've time and inclination, I'd very much appreciate an extra pair of eyes at the FAC for Grade I listed buildings in England completed in the 20th century. It's currently enjoying one Support, and green lights from the Accessibility and Image reviews, but comments have now slowed to a crawl. All well here, although the builders are rather distracting. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 08:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Morning KJP1, it would be a pleasure: I shall be along there shortly for a look. Great to hear all is good there, and I hope the distractions all have a silver lining! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

I had a look too (it's at WP:FLC! We get ignored and/or confused with FAC a lot, and I haven't figured out yet how I feel about that ... probably proud). It looks like you're sailing to victory, but if not, give me a ping. - Dank (push to talk) 11:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Dank - My, unpardonable, error, for which I apologise! And greatly appreciate the offer. SchroCat's comments have sparked a flurry of interest, so it should be alright, but I shall certainly take up the offer if necessary. Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 13:41, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Any time. - Dank (push to talk) 13:58, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)