Jump to content

User talk:Dennis Bratland/Archive 34

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 32Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For your work with improving articles, joining AfD discussions and standing by your !vote even though you sometimes become the victim of petty insults. Just continue doing what you are doing. Thanks.BabbaQ (talk) 23:53, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
In the last few days you have tried really hard to explain why canvassing is canvassing even though those who are approached by the canvasser does not recognize it as such. You have been met by petty insults and battleground tactics but you have kept your head high and remained composed throughout. And for that reason alone you do deserve the Barnstar. --BabbaQ (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
Well, they think it's technically within policy, and not true votestacking, and they don't care how bad it looks, or care about the drama it incites. They've had it explained to them, and they still don't care. They're going to see lots of drama at future discussions, and often, they would have gotten their desired outcome, but because of all the unnecessary drama, they get "no consensus" instead. That's self-defeating. So be it. There's really nothing more to be said. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:08, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Unexplained deletions

Information icon Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Motorcycle fork, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

You have a talk page discussion thread sitting there, waiting for you. Any time you're ready. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Who is KW? List of Pixar staff

Hi there, I saw in this edit of List of Pixar staff, you added the initials "KW" but you did not provide the name of the actual person. I assume this was unintentional, right? Can you please add that person's name to the appropriate place in the article? Thanks, - PaulT+/C 04:27, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Fixed. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 05:01, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Require your review

Hi Dennis, as you may know I have recently wrote an article on Energica Ego. Will you please review my edits and help bringing the article to better quality. I don't have much experience on editing so I rely on you guys to correct my mistakes and regulate the data I add. But this time you guys have't edited or reverted my edits. 

Thank you

-Navinsingh133 (talk) 08:24, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited National Rifle Association, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bloomberg and Mother Jones (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Sharon Calahan

On 29 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sharon Calahan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Sharon Calahan is the first member of the American Society of Cinematographers whose feature film background is entirely in computer animation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sharon Calahan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sharon Calahan), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Message

Hello Dennis, I'm not sure why you have reverted some of the links that I have added - for instance the link to Tourism Saskatoon is actually the Tourism Organisation of the town which is run by the city which is the link above it. So if the link above it is Ok then the tourism link should be OK. I don't understand the rationale unless it has to do with the fact that I added the link not somebody else. If it's not OK for me to add links then why do I have access to do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidcronk (talk • contribs) 03:27, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

You shouldn't be adding external links inside articles. The belong on references, if they belong at all. See WP:External links and Wikipedia:Citing sources.

You seem to be particularly interested in adding links to http://www.travelodium.com to many articles. Usually you add these links apropos of almost nothing. The site isn't journalism that I can recognize. It looks like clickbait, and advertising. In other words, it looks like spam. Is there a reason why you post so many links to travelodium.com? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:52, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

??

Was was wrong in my edition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KrzysG (talk • contribs) 00:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

You need to go to Talk:"Polish death camp" controversy and resolve the dispute over neutrality and factual accuracy. Once everyone over there is satisfied about what the misconception is, and it is well-cited, then you could suggest it at Talk:List of common misconceptions. As long as we are calling it a “controversy” I have a hard time believing we will also call it a misconception. But first things first. Resolve it over there. List of common misconceptions has the list criteria at the top of the editing window and the top of the talk page.–Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:28, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
OK. Thanks KrzysG (talk) 15:24, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bessie Stringfield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Social Security (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 27

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • New collections
    • Alexander Street (expansion)
    • Cambridge University Press (expansion)
  • User Group
  • Global branches update
    • Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
  • Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

"African American"

I've noticed that you keep changing my edits , I wanted to let you know Everyone who is black isn't "African American" i'm seeing many people who are of Jamaican American heritge , Nigerian American Heritage , Kenyan American Heritage, Puerto Rican , etc being falsely labeled as "African American" Please respond sir because your falsely labeling people who are Nigerian American as African American Both are Black but seperate ethnic groups — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philly2166 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:African American seems to encompass what Philly2166 believes is correct usage. However, it is a failed proposal indicating non-consensus around mandating another term. We usually go by a subject's self-described ethnicity, gender, and other identity terms, and AFAIK there is no override here. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:07, 20 April 2018 (UTC) Can you please stop chagning my edits sir Every Edit I've made has been 100% accurate , just because someone is Black, Does not mean they are "African American" Dennis Bratland keeps falsely labeling people who are not African American as African American, I'm seeing people of Jamaican ancestry, nigerian , Cuban , Kenyan etc , all being falsely labeled as African American , for example calling everyone who is black african american is Similar to calling everyone who is white Irish smh
See User talk:Philly2166. You need to go to the article talk page (not here on my talk page) and explain your reasons, and cite your published sources, and wait to see if other editors agree with you. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:15, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster

It has come to my attention that you have created a page called Draft:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster which is an unattributed copy of Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster. Take a read of Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia to see what you need to do to avoid this being a copyright infringement. I don't know why you are making this a draft, but be aware that the original page has been quite controversial, so please be careful and establish a consensus before anything major changes! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:00, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Did you even bother to glance at Talk:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster? You must have, if you're aware that it's "quite controversial". So you know about the talk page discussions, but you don't know why I created a draft. Help me out here. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:32, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
The main point was the lack of attribution. You know why you created the draft. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:06, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
OK, I put {{Copied}} on Draft talk:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster with the diffs and oids. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:12, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vehicle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Even though we have our disagreements...

I wanted to complement you on your balanced and well reasoned input on the NRA talk page. I don't agree with all of the comments but they have all been well reasoned and I appreciate that. Just thought I would let you know. Springee (talk) 18:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Turo header update

Hi Dennis. I would like to suggest a change to the Turo (Car Rental) header, it should be updated to Turo (Car Sharing) since car rental and car sharing is different. This is a different industry that includes companies like Getaround, Drivy, and Turo and it should be clarified in the header of the Turo page. Car rentals are a car rental company that rents out the fleet of cars that they own, car sharing is a marketplace made up of car owners who share their cars with travelers and car sharing marketplace guests when they need a car.

Thank you for your consideration in making this change. Christin

Christin at Turo (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

The best place to request that is the article talk page, not here. Or use the Requested Moves process, with step-by-step instructions at WP:RM#CM. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Art Center College of Design people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don Burgess (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Nextdoor

Hi,

You left a Talk comment about the article for Nextdoor. I've written a an in-depth proposal describing my complete redraft of the article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nextdoor#Request_for_Review

Would you mind weighing in to the discussion?

Thanks,

BC1278 (talk) 21:01, 3 May 2018 (UTC)BC1278

Art+Feminism, Jacob Lawrence Gallery, Saturday, May 12th, 1-5pm

Art+Feminism
For more info see
the meetup page
for Art+Feminism.
 Wikipedia is one of the most wide-reaching repositories of shared knowledge, yet a 2011 survey found that less than 10% of its contributors identify as female, suggesting an alarming absence of voices. What and how information is shared is skewed by this gender disparity. To help change this, the Jacob Lawrence Gallery is organizing a quarterly series of Edit-a-thons to improve Wikipedia's coverage of womxn artists of color.

This Saturday afternoon's gathering will focus on creating, editing, updating, and expanding pages for womxn artists from Latin America and the Caribbean. The Edit-a-thon will feature a talk by Dan Paz, Lecturer in the UW School of Art + Art History + Design, an artist, and an educator who explores the labor of digital imaging production as a collaborative site where the intersections of the image-idea and lived experience are produced and contested. Through videos, photography, and sculptural projects that query the ability of documentary processes to be manipulated—to be multiplied and replicated, stopped and started, rewound and advanced—Dan works within the impossibilities of absolute replication to question the very ability of the image to truly represent.

Everyone is welcome. Access to UW WiFi will be provided for non-UW affiliated participants. All you need to bring is your laptop, power cord, and ideas. No previous Wikipedia experience required! Childcare, snacks from local businesses, and editing tutorials will be provided. Please check the Facebook event page for updates.

When: Saturday, May 12th, 1-5pm
Where: Jacob Lawrence Gallery, Art Building #132, 1915 NE Chelan Ln, Seattle, Washington 98105
Who: Everyone is welcome.
What to bring: A laptop and power cord. Access to UW WiFi will be provided for non-UW affliated participants.

Posted by
who will assist at Art+Feminism,
Jacob Lawrence Gallery,
UW, Seattle
23:12, 7 May 2018 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

Orphaned non-free image File:1920s Ducati logo.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:1920s Ducati logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

ANI

See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Proposal:_topic_ban_for_user_BC1278. Edward Mordake (talk) 20:42, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Statue of Lenin, Seattle

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Statue of Lenin, Seattle you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Векочел -- Векочел (talk) 02:40, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Quick Nextdoor comment

Hi Dennis,

I see you are doing good research and working in good faith on Nextdoor and I appreciate it very much. I didn't want to clutter Talk with an off-topic response to your comment wondering why I didn't ask for it to be removed more quickly. When this proposed redraft of this article became a giant mess, with too many discussions going on at once, I was asked by Jytdog if I'd be OK withdrawing all the discussions and RfCs, save one, so we could talk about them one at a time. This section was not then live, as I had removed something similar sourced just to the Florida Group blog (if I anticipated there would be any chance of controversy over this, which I disclosed as COI in the edit notes and on Talk, I would not have removed it as any chance of dispute means a COI editor should never directly edit.) When it went live, I wanted to abide by the agreement to talk about one source at a time, but after a few days it was really bothering me, so I tried to talk it out with the contributing editor informally, on their Talk page. When that didn't work, I asked Jytdog what I should do in light of the prior agreement to only have one discussion at a time. They said to bring it to Talk, so I did. And that is the answer. Thanks, Ed BC1278 (talk) 21:48, 10 June 2018 (UTC)BC1278

Bad

This is bullshit. Just because a paid editor notes policy-violating content is no reason to argue to keep it. If you honestly don't understand how that is ax-grinding WP:SYN content, please review WP:SYN. Please also WP:FOC. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:38, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

FOC yourself, Jytdog. And please assume good faith. You have no reason whatsoever to make these unfounded accusation against me over a content dispute. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:51, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I posted here to address your behavior. If you continue to make policy-violating arguments responding to paid editors, I will seek a topic ban for you with respect to interacting with them. You are as obligated to follow policy as they are. That content was completely indefensible. Jytdog (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Likewise, if you continue to fail to assume good faith, I will seek to have you topic banned. Please take a deep breath and try to imagine for one second that maybe you and I don't happen to interpret policy in exactly the same way on this particular question, and our differences in interpretation are not the result of nefarious motives on anyone's part. Perhaps you don't entirely understand my interpretation of policy. Perhaps -- hold onto your hat because I'm going to blow your mind here -- you are in error. Have you ever been wrong before? Most people have. I've been wrong many times. Being wrong doesn't make you bad. It's OK to be wrong. It's part of how we learn. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I have had very difficult interactions with BC1278 at Beepi and Noah Oppenheim and I find them overbearing for a paid editor. It is a problem. But that problem is not helped by people making absurd arguments to counter him. The Nextdoor thing has become a complete clusterfuck with an overbearing paid editor on one side and people making ridiculous edits and arguments on the other. Jytdog (talk) 22:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 28

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018

  • #1Bib1Ref
  • New partners
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
    • Wikipedia Library global coordinators' meeting
  • Spotlight: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let's ask the data
  • Bytes in brief

Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Misunderstanding with a fellow human being - was: Content Gestapo?

Hello, I don't see how the content I put up is being recognized as spam in the Overlanding section. The link is cited as a reference and not in text. It adds genuine content which not only contributes to the topic but was not repeated elsewhere and the link is to a valid publishing source. The Motorcycle category is full of much more heinous pages and citations that are purely spam, yet they still exists without your "careful eye." Please explain yourself in relation to how my posting actually did not meet WIKIPEDIA guidelines...not just your own biases or irrational suspicions. Moreover, I am aware all links on WikiP are nofollow and still post anyway. There is life for information aside from page rankings. You yourself could be a long time SEO shill? How would anyone know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MotoLoco76 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Gestapo? Please go fuck yourself if you’re going to address me like that. If you had a scrap of manners I might try to help you understand the policy, but you burned that bridge. Figure it out for yourself. --Dennis Bratland (talk)18:41, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Hahahah...I see you're a rider. Being new to this I felt like I was being attacked or singled out for something I didn't really understand what was wrong. Your initial message sounded like a threat and it didn't seem justified to me. It may be worth keeping that in mind for new users in how things are phrased. You would hopefully do likewise for new riders, yes? If it really matters to you, maybe use a smiley face or something. Despite this, I still didn't use profanity. "Go fuck yourself" isn't within the civil guidelines either is it? Although you did say "please" so maybe that counts. Already asked for some thoughts from the community and am learning about the unique social structure of Wiki. Looks like if you want to be into it, you really gotta be in to it because it's not an easy or short learning curve. Either way, best of luck and sorry about my knee jerk reaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MotoLoco76 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:34, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
I changed the title but have no idea how to strike text. Please imagine any egregious comments I made are fully stricken. Or, as the editing format allows, please strike anything you found offensive. :) --MotoLoco76 (talk) 21:04, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Anti-lock braking system

Please see the recent merger on the Anti-lock braking system page. Some polishing still needed! Arrivisto (talk) 16:01, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Article needs help

Have you seen Norman Hossack? Ai yai yai. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:01, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Moto Guzzi Le Mans

Hello Dennis,

I added a link (www.vdcon.nl) to the Wikipedia Moto Guzzi Le Mans article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moto_Guzzi_Le_Mans). I recieved a message from you on 20 July 2013 about removing the link and the reason why.

www.vdcon.nl is a non commercial website, it's not personal, I'm not affiliatied to it, it isn't meant to attract people or to promote anything.

www.vdcon.nl contains a lot of interesting and usefull (technical) information about the Moto Guzzi 850 Le Mans, which is to my opinion much too extensive for Wikipedia.

So I would ask you to reconsider the decision to remove the link and again add it to the Moto Guzzi Le Mans article.

Regards,

Jan van Dooren Netherlands — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mglm850 (talk • contribs) 13:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

See WP:ELNO. We don’t advertise clubs, forums, or personal web pages, and usually avoid links to non-English content. It doesn’t matter if it’s commercial or non-profit. I hope we don’t have to keep having this conversation every... um... 11 years, 4 months. I don’t have that kind of time. If you do wish to discuss this again in 2023, I suggest going to Talk:Moto Guzzi Le Mans so that other editors besides me (particularly considering my frail age and worsening senility) can give their opinions. —14:50, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to collaborate

Draft:John Penton -- could be published with a little polishing and there's plenty of material in his Motorcycle Hall of Fame notes if nothing else. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:15, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

I’ll see. It’s been busy for me all summer. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:50, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Me too, I won't be around much in August. I just noticed de:John Penton exists. You read a little German if I recall? ☆ Bri (talk) 20:01, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the Welcome! As you can see, I am here to stay. The article cited is written by Ijeoma Oluo herself and therefore conforms to the rules.

SvengalistaSvengalista (talk) 22:59, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Ijeoma Oluo

Please stop putting incorrect and uncited information on the biography of living or dead people as you just did on the Ijeoma Oluo article. Thanks

SvengalistaSvengalista (talk) 22:59, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Statue of Lenin, Seattle

The article Statue of Lenin, Seattle you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Statue of Lenin, Seattle for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MX -- MX (talk) 00:40, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Good Article Barnstar

The Good Article Barnstar
I award you this barnstar for your fantastic work at Statue of Lenin, Seattle. Congratulations for getting this to GA status. MX (✉ • ✎) 18:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Statue of Lenin, Seattle

The article Statue of Lenin, Seattle you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Statue of Lenin, Seattle for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MX -- MX (talk) 18:41, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Good catch here. The info didn't seem weird to me because cats are of huge cultural significance in Russia. When I was there last month, I saw a bunch of cat paintings, toys, stickers, shirts, statues, etc. They are way more popular than dogs. I finally did some research when I came back and learned that cats were considered good fortune many centuries ago! Sorry I missed it in the GA review. MX (✉ • ✎) 20:53, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
    • Most of the time I can copyedit fine, but in some cases the same text has sat in front of my eyes for years, and I don't see the errors any more; I unconsciously read "cats" as "books" and have no idea it's even happening. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Congrats on getting this passed at GAN. I think it would make for good DYK nomination, perhaps with a hook about the location (next to a gelato shop and Taco del Mar), its various decorations, or its current asking price. SounderBruce 01:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you, SounderBruce! This is a busy time of year for me, so I'm reluctant to nominate anything for anything because I can't promise to have the bandwidth to follow through. So if you or anyone else wants to take the ball and run with it, please do. I'll do it myself if I can but I probably don't have time right now.

    I agree with Brian that the subversive theory in the statue's content is very interesting, and an excellent hook. I'm also fascinated by it being a privately owned work of art on private property; i.e. 1,000,000% protected by the First Amendment. It's unarguably art, it's definitely not public, and it's never been accused of being obscene. So no government agency has any say. At all. Yet it's discussed in the same context as publicly owned art on public property supported by tax dollars. To me that error is fascinating. Also the belief that it is displayed in jest or irony. Neither the original American buyer, nor his heirs attempting to sell a the statue, ever had ironic motives. But it's widely believed that is why it is there. It's fascinating how so much of this is in the eye of the beholder. Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:10, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Waiting for the Interurban is around the corner from Lenin, is highly ironic, and made by a local artist. Well, if Pateros is local; sometimes I think Eastern Washington is a different country. Anyhow I think Seattleites default to regarding art with a postmodern lens, hence the assumption of irony. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:55, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Holy smokes, found with a homeless man living inside the hollow statue? That is a killer DYK if I ever saw one. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:59, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
OMG yes. I'm so used to living in the bizarro world of this Venkov Lenin statue that I didn't give it much thought. It was waiting to be scrapped for teh metals in the Czech republic, with a guy living inside, then an American bought it, brought it to the US, died, and was again going to be scrapped for the metals, but the foundry guy felt like it had artistic merit and convinced the heirs to try to sell it, so the Fremont Chamber decided to whimsically (or for whatever reason -- we REALLY don't know why) arranged to display it on a street corner, for 23+ years. So yeah. It's a freaky statue with an interesting life. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:23, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

your accusation

Extended content

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic List of fastest production motorcycles by acceleration.

I may not be doing this right because unlike you, I've never done this before.Jackhammer111 (talk) 03:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Stop icon
Your recent editing history at List of fastest production motorcycles by acceleration shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

closed discussion page?

Who's interest are you serving by closing a discussion page? It's particularly inflammatory considering what I wrote about the recent death of the former national record holder, at 11.81, Pistol Pete Grassellli. You warn me about edit warring and tell me to use the talk page, then you close the talk page? Jackhammer111 (talk) 05:38, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Seattle Wiknic 2018
In the Seattle area?
01:22, 19 August 2018 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

Would you consider becoming a New Page Reviewer?

Hi Dennis Bratland,

I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join the new page reviewing team, and after reviewing your editing history, I think you would be a good candidate. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; the new page reviewing team needs help from experienced users like yourself.

Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR. If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message on my talk page or at the reviewer's discussion board.

Cheers, and hope to see you around, — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 07:10, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for asking! I'll take a look. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:10, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 29

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 29, June – July 2018

Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Fujifilm X series

Re: recent change. Valid. It is in the article. Appreciate your work. Flyte35 (talk) 01:36, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

added sources to avengers mc

I indeed did add the avengers to the list of outlaw motorcycle clubs.. I am neutral when posting and followed all the guidelines.

thank you. Mopar360 (talk) 05:34, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Alfa Romeo V6 engine

Its not necessary to add citation to every sentence, there is enough referecnes, and if you use so much eenery to tag all those sentences why just use that energy to add those, if you think it needs those ?. No you just force to use double amoiunt of work to that article, much easier to add refs than ask others to add them -->Typ932 T·C 11:27, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Vehicle performance claims, such as horsepower and torque, are always contentious and require a direct footnote. Considering that many of the other sources are nothing but the personal web page of some guy named Dave, I very much challenge each one. I tagged them as a courtesy, but I would prefer to delete all the unsourced performance claims. If the citation needed tags bother you, I’ll just delete the contentious content. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:06, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

Information icon Hello, I'm Typ932. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Alfa Romeo V6 engine have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. >Typ932 T·C 17:54, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, no. Totally bogus. Fuck off now, Typ932. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Attacks

Be more careful with ur postings, you started this personal attackin with ur fuck off comments. Next time Ill made official claim you might be blocked for editing -->Typ932 T·C 19:48, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

LOL. You do that. If you don't like being told to fuck off, then don't post that I "cant read" and don't call me an "idiot" and a "zero contributor". Have you ever read What is considered to be a personal attack? Disparaging me based on your assumptions about my contributions is very clearly spelled out as "ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views" and suggests Ownership of content, where you think you can exclude editors who don't meet your arbitrary standards. All serious policy violations.

Now go re-read What is considered to be a personal attack?, even more carefully. Do you see anything there about not telling you to fuck off? Do you see any policy prohibiting profanity anywhere on Wikipedia? Anywhere? Do you know what fuck off means? It means "go away". Is it uncivil to tell you to go away in salty language? Generally, yes. But when dismissing someone who has called you illiterate, an idiot, and a "zero contributor and doing nothing good here", "fuck off" is very much the best way to say it. You earned your "fuck off", bud.

You did all this based on the absolute nonsense opinion that a personal web page, often crowdsourced or simply-self-published, in any way can be cited as a reliable source based solely on the fact that some Dave guy who made the page put in a footnote with the title and author of a book he says he got his information from. You blindly copied Dave's citation without having any idea what the book "Complete Handbook of Automotive Power Trains, Jan Norbye, 1981" says. All of that will be laughed out of Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard in a heartbeat. You probably need to get yourself a copy of Norbye's book and verify you're not making an even bigger fool of yourself. Dishonestly pretending to have read a book that you have never seen is not something you want to be caught doing.

Now, I say again to you: fuck off, Typ932. Fuck off now. It means "go away". If that isn't clear enough for you, it means "stay off my talk page". Don't post here again, at least not until you do something about your obvious misunderstanding of basic policies like WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, WP:OWN, and WP:PERSONAL. You'd be welcome to come back to my talk page if you can correct your ignorance, and (just saying) learn some minimal spelling and grammar. Calling people idiots and illiterates while not knowing how to spell "blame" or "can't" or "your" is not a good look.

If you think you've got something to report to some noticeboard, you go right ahead. What you won't do is post here again, because you've been told: fuck OFF. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:45, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

The Stranger

Hi Dennis, I'm not sure if I'm doing this right, but I'll give this a try. I saw your comment (and then your reversion back to the prior version) of my addition of "left-wing" to describe The Stranger. I believe you objected because there was no sourcing or reference to back up that description. I have a question and a comment. First, how would one find an objective source or reference (besides the publication itself) describing its content as "left-wing"? What would satisfy this requirement? That seems problematic. No one would seriously challenge the assertion that The Stranger is a left-wing publication...but again, I'm looking for guidance on what objective sourcing or reference would be required to make that description acceptable to Wikipedia standards. Second, I checked for consistency on your request, so I looked up Ben Shapiro (as an example) to see how he was described. I see that he was described as a "conservative" and yet there was no reference or sourcing when that adjective was included to describe his political leanings (which is accurate to state he is a conservative). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justthefactsnow (talk • contribs) 16:50, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

I’m going to copy your comment over to Talk:The Stranger (newspaper), so other editors there can give their opinions. It’s OK to post on my talk page, but your questions aren’t really about me and the other editors over there are just as concerned about this as you and me. I’ll reply further there. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Ballard Neighborhood discussion

Hello Dennis Bratland,

I believe that you removed changes I made to the Ballard neighborhood description. Your changes indicate that you consider only one source of neighborhood information- e.g. the City of Seattle- as authoritative. But wiki and knowledge in general is not controlled by the city. The purpose of the article is not to repeat what may already be stated by one group- people could simply look at the City of Seattle web pages and documentation to see what that government body "thinks". The purpose is to discuss the totality of considerations on the topic and that does include blogs.

Your changes include incorrect statements, for example implying that Crown Hill is just north of Ballard. This is not true. Even the wiki page for Crown Hill (which is incorrect*) identifies that Crown Hill ends to the west at 15th Ave NW. Since Ballard extends to Puget Sound, your current description leaves a large gap above Ballard (precisely the gap that the blog and my description described as part of Ballard).

Your edit also loses the information about those extra neighborhoods that are part of Ballard. This is an important part of Ballard neighborhood identity. Even the city implies the sub-neighborhood in its description of the council district and Ballard. I just spelled it out as was done in the neighborhood blog.

I note with amusement that your central edit- pointing to the "official" City of Seattle neighborhood map- itself contains a disclaimer " The neighborhood names and boundaries are not intended to represent any "official" City of Seattle neighborhood map." This means that your central description "The City of Seattle's official boundaries" are controverted by the link that you supply. These are not official City of Seattle neighborhood boundaries! In fact, you will be hard pressed to find official neighborhood boundaries which is partly what I was trying to show. All neighborhood boundaries are subjective and while there is some agreement there are also long standing areas of contention.

I note that at least one link of mine that you deleted was also an official City of Seattle map. The purpose of learning about these neighborhoods is not just to know what they are right now but to understand and learn from the past. The map I supplied from 1909 did just that, it provides information to interested people to see what the neighborhoods used to look like. The tone of your edits seems to imply that this is not important but I can tell you that it is exactly that type of information that I look for and I do not believe I am alone in this. For example, looking at the wikipedia article for Greenwich Village, New York for comparison the authors have noted the historical disputes and points of contention. Some points in the article are unsourced, possibly for the same reason that I used the wording "some people"- because it is local knowledge that is not necessarily published and therefore not suitable as a reference. The oversimplification that you reintroduced is not helpful and simply makes the wiki article unreliable. The truth is that the boundaries are messy and contentious.

In short, your post is clearly incorrect even taken at its current logic and arbitrarily leaves out alternate points of view that were cited.. You mention that a blog is unreliable. But you have provided no evidence that what I posted does not accurately reflect the totality of ideas about the boundaries of Ballard or that the blog is unreliable. It is an expression of ideas in the community and that is all it needs to be.

You also removed information about the Ballard council boundary- why? That is from the city of Seattle.

You also removed information about the links between the Ballard community and the Fisherman's Terminal. Yet Ballard is known as a fishing community. The purpose of those links was to illustrate some of those ties from the north and south shores of Salmon Bay. You had provided no reason for removing this either.

I ask respectfully that you reinstate my edits. If you would like to talk about alternate wording, please let me know. Thanks

I'm not quite sure how to sign the post so I'll try Rberge0108 (talk) 05:26, 21 October 2018 (UTC)Rberge0108 or Rberge0108 (talk) 05:26, 21 October 2018 (UTC)Ruth Berge

    • I'm not here to correct the Crown Hill wiki as well. I leave that to others but note that a chunk of land west of 15 Ave. NW is considered to be part of Crown Hill. Not all the land since North Beach, Olympic Manor and Blue Ridge are also west of Crown Hill and north of NW 85th.
Without fussing over every detail, I think we need to pay attention to how articles are organized. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section cover all that in great detail. So the content you want to add is (mostly) fine, but it doesn't belong in the lead. The Ballard article has a history section, broken into three parts. The past boundaries of Ballard should be described in the appropriate chronological part of the history section. It's fine for this to be mentioned in the lead section -- in summary form. The most important things in the lead are what is Ballard, what comprises it, what is it a part of. Things like connections to Fisherman's Terminal and the opinions of "some" about what the boundaries are don't belong in the lead.

I would focus on expanding the body, then bring the lead into line later. I would avoid citing weak sources like myballard.com, and using weasel words like "some people say..." If we don't know the name of whomever thinks this or that, then their opinion probably isn't significant enough to mention.

Talk:Ballard, Seattle is the best place for further discussion, since there are many other editors besides us two who are interested in this article. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 06:38, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 30

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 30, August – Septmeber 2018

  • Library Card translation
  • Spotlight: 1Lib1Ref spreads to the Southern Hemisphere and beyond
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, and a thought

Hey, thanks for weighing in at Talk:USS Fitzgerald and MV ACX Crystal collision. I had just written up much the same argument, and you did it better (and faster). But I did have one thought, about "Accusing any of us of having a conflict of interest..." If you're talking about Lyndaship's citation of "...not the place to memorialize deceased friends...", I for one certainly didn't take that as an accusation because it ends "...or others who do not meet such requirements." Maybe there's something else going on here that I'm not seeing, but I read their edits as in good faith and without accusation of bad behavior on my part. So perhaps that line is not necessary? But I do appreciate everything else you did in this exchange. Cheers. PRRfan (talk) 04:27, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

On edit-warring

I find it rather amusing that you template me for edit-warring, when I made one revert, while you've made three. You might consider following your own advice, friend. Parsecboy (talk) 20:37, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

No, two. See? It's easy to lose count and get yourself blocked for edit warring. You should quit before that happens. Seeral editors have tried to communicate with you on the talk page and you have not addressed any of our points. You keep repeating NOTMEMORIAL NOTMEMORIAL NOTMEMORIAL, but you're clearly misreading it. Note the several WP:FAs that supposedly violate NOTMEMORIAL. You should stop edit warring and listen. Go to the article talk page, and discuss it there. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:43, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
Where is my second revert? I removed the content in question yesterday (which is not a revert) and then reverted you once this morning. That is one. Perhaps you have confused me with someone else. You, on the other hand, have reverted three times.
As for who understands policy and who does not, you are mistaken. And as for FAs that violate NOTMEMORIAL, that someone else is also wrong doesn't mean you're right. Parsecboy (talk) 20:46, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
You seem to like to bicker over points that have no consequence. Please do not do that here. If you have something of substance I need to know, please post here, but not this. Go to the article talk page and see if you can do a better job of communicating with your fellow editors. Right now you're ignoring them and talking past them. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:52, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Ferry map

Thanks for creating the Washington ferry map. Is it missing the two Everett ferries? And the Kitsap Transit Seattle Pier 50—Bremerton fast ferry? ☆ Bri (talk) 22:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

One other – Ocean Shores Point Brown to Westport, which is on hiatus so I'm not sure if you want to list it. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:33, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
p.s. The Kitsap Transit fast ferry MV Finest will run by the end of the month from Pier 50 to Kingston. It's on your map already but I thought you might want to know it doesn't dock exactly at the same point as the state ferries at either end. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:52, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I suspected I was missing some. I was just sticking with the GIS data at WSOT for now. I guess you would say that this map represents all the ferries WSDOT officially recognizes. Or something. To add other routes hopefully I can do a simple join of a .shp file. If it's not that simple then the map might get janky

I think the article is clear enough when it says "there are many ferries all over Washington, and here are some examples". We probably won't always have an accurate accounting of every ferry run that comes and goes. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:12, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

The Victoria Clipper should be in here too. I'm trying to track down GIS files, KML or SHP or whatever so I can map them easily. Otherwise I have to scrape the route coordinates from Google Maps, which is tedious. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:13, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Trolling

Please do not post off-topic trolling, as you did here. If you continue to make WP:POINTy disruptions, we'll be headed to ANI. It would also be wise to avoid any appearance of WP:WIKIHOUNDing other editors. Remove this warning if you want, but consider yourself warned nonetheless. Parsecboy (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

If you want to continue making an embarrassing spectacle of yourself and draw a greater spotlight to your atrocious behavior, then please, you take this to ANI and accuse me of trolling or hounding or whatever you imagine. Might want to ask yourself if your hands are clean, though. Just saying. My addition to the GAR is not trolling and not off topic. Do not refactor my comments again. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
See here. Parsecboy (talk) 21:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Good luck with that. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:01, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Question about a category name change

Dennis, since you were involved with this category change discussion I wanted to see if you had a suggestion for the next actions now that it has closed.[[1]]. The discussion closed with no consensus. I feel that is sufficient to challenge the closing from less than a month earlier. I simply don't know the correct forum so I'm seeking advice. If this question violates your previous request to not post on your talk page please undo my edit and I will not post here again. Thank you. Springee (talk) 01:39, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

I'd let it rest a couple months at least, then see if Autos project editors feel strongly enough to push something through. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Dennis Bratland. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Dennis Bratland. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Please join us for our Cascadia Wikimedians annual meeting, Saturday, December 29, 1 PM

If you are in the Seattle area, please join us for our Cascadia Wikimedians annual meeting, Saturday, December 29, 1 PM. If you cannot attend in person, you may join us virtually from your PC, Mac, Linux, iOS, or Android at this link: https://zoom.us/j/2207426850. The address of the physical meeting is: Capitol Hill Meeting Room at Capitol Hill Library (425 Harvard Ave. E., Seattle, WA 98102) 47°37′23″N 122°19′22″W / 47.622928°N 122.322912°W / 47.622928; -122.322912

The event page is here. You do not have to be a member to attend, but only members can vote in board elections. New members may join in person by completing the membership registration form onsite or (to be posted) online and paying $5 for a calendar year / $0.50 per month for the remainder of a year. Current members may renew for 2019 at the meeting as well.

Cascadia Wikimedians User Group is a recognized 501c3 non-profit organization in the US. EIN # 47-3513818 Our mail address is Cascadia Wikimedians User Group, 520 Kirkland Way, PO Box 2905, Kirkland, WA 98083.
08:07, 7 December 2018 (UTC) To unsubscribe from future messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle, please remove your name from this list.

Discussion at Talk:Passengers of the RMS Titanic

I'd like to invite editors who participated in the deletion discussion to give their input at article talk. There was considerable interest in cleaning up this article in one way or another, but there have been few responses to my proposal to trim the passenger lists. Alternative proposals are certainly welcome as well; I'm hoping that we can build some sort of consensus for the scope and direction of the article moving forward. Thanks –dlthewave ☎ 21:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 31

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018

  • OAWiki
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dennis_Bratland/Archive_34&oldid=999203777"