User talk:Philip Cross/Archive 31
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Philip Cross. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 25 | ← | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 |
Ghislaine Maxwell
Did you mean to say ”shorty” before or after “her father’s death”? Sentence is incomplete as of this revision here. It’s been awhile since I focused on that page. I recall sources mentioning she was active in both NY and London for the time just before and after Robert Maxwell’s death but didn’t actually move there until afterward. Perhaps there are better and clearer sources available now. Kind Regards, Cedar777 (talk) 23:02, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thankyou, I missed a word. Philip Cross (talk) 23:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Talk:Rachel Cooke
Gentle reminder: Talk:Rachel Cooke exists. Kleuske (talk) 08:15, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Jack Hedley
Jack Hedley... hmmm I have a Times subscription and I can see the death notice. I have a couple of doubts. Firstly, the ages don't match up. Hedley was born as Jack Hawkins in Oct 1930, which is sourced on his Wiki page. So where does "92" come from? Secondly, he adopted Jack Hedley as a stage name, but what is less clear is if he also changed his real name. Also, the middle name "Snowdon", featured in his obituary, doesn't feature on his birth record. I have removed the death information from his page for now, because the last thing we want is to seriously violate WP:BLP by "killing someone off" by accident. I'm sure the truth will come out within the next few weeks. If this is a death notice for the Jack Hedley, then the Guardian, Times or the Telegraph are likely to release full write ups on him shortly. Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 12:24, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Points taken, I will not revert. The Times notice has begun to be used by other outlets as confirmation in the last hour or two, though possibly none are strong enough to be considered definitively RS. Best. Philip Cross (talk) 12:33, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Literally just as I wrote this message, Deadline released an obituary! I emailed them and they confirmed it's definitely him as they spoke with his third wife. They also confirmed he was born in 1929 as per the birth record they have for him. I'll go back and restore your edits. Thanks for understanding, great that this was resolved so quick also! I thought we'd be waiting for a few weeks. Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 13:09, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
British sitcom (1)
Hi. I would like to thank you for your all your corrections and ce of this article. but the holiday is over and after spending 30 hours on it I have reached the extent of the expansion I wanted to do. I hadn't got round to doing a final ce and checking all the sources that were imported with the occasional bits that I used from the parent articles - many of which were very poorly written and undersourced or the sources were no longer available.
The 1970s: some sitcoms which might be mentioned remain absent (including one or two turkeys which have not stood the test of time)
, I agree. but the article is not meant to be an anthology of British sitcoms - the creation of the article 10 years ago comprised a simple list and I think that in the way it developed the idea was to provide an overview of the impact the best ones have had while providing just a few of the less successful ones for contrast as they were often produced by and acted by people who contributed to the successes of the others. There are still some on my list, do let me know of any and I'll add them at the weekend providing I can find sources for them.
I stumbled on the article last week while looking for something on Penelope Keith and it looked like this. The holiday is now over and as a comedy writer myself, while I have a passion for sitcom it is not my main area for editing, and I probably won't be returning to the article any time soon. There is a huge amount of work waiting for someone to complete the article and go over the parent articles of the sitcoms I featured and update them (it's not something which I wanted to do at the time). I may look at it to add any recent sitcoms, but my TV viewing is limited here to just a handful of channels that can be legally watched outside the UK. I'm not an authority on the subject, but just someone who is old enough to have grown up ever since British sitcom began (in the early days, most of what we got on the single channel TV of the 50s were I Love Lucy and other US productions which I detested. (I remember the whole of our street crowding into the living room of the one family that had a telly to watch the Coronation, while others watched from outside through the living room window).
You are far more knowledgeable and dedicated to the topic than I am so please don't hesitate to continue to hack my work about and improve it. I have it naturally in my watch list. There is just one aspect that needs a mention in the article but because I have not been able to find any sources, to include it would be PoV. It goes something like this :
Until 1955 when the network was launched, British TV was limited to the single BBC channel and breakfast and daytime broadcasts did not begin until the early 1980s. ITV nationwide coverage was not complete until 1962 and there were still pockets of areas where reception was poor or not available; earlier TV sets required a 'converter' and a special antenna to receive ITV and televisions were still a luxury acquisition for many households. With the advent of digital television, by 2022 there is now a estimated total of 480 channels from digital terrestrial, satellite, cable, and IPTV providers, and in most households there are now several TV sets, computers and mobile devices. While viewing TV is always on the increase, especially during pandemic lockdowns and quarantines, audiences are fragmented among the large number of available channels which are often devoted to thematic content (news, history, drama, comedy, political opinion, etc.) and viewers are able choose exactly what type of show they want to watch..
There was this in the original article but I removed it because it had been cn tagged. I've attended several studio recordings and I think it's important. Slightly edited, this is what I would include now if I could find a source:
"In the 20th century, most sitcoms in the UK were taped before live audiences to provide natural laughter. Scenes recorded outdoors, traditionally recorded in advance of studio work, are played back to the studio audience during live recording of the episode and their laughter (often on illuminated 'Laugh now' prompts) is recorded for the broadcast episode. Other comedies, such as The Royle Family and The Office, which are presented in the mode of cinéma vérité rather than in the format of a traditional sitcom, do not feature any audience laughter."
Thank you for your time. Best, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Request
Hello, I've been talking to people who consider you controversial person and a propagandist. I obviously don't agree with them, though. I was curious about inner workings of Wikipedia, and your own character, and also I was considering becoming a Wikipedia editor. Would it be possible to contact you and talk for a while? Vic2137 (talk) 19:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- I have no idea who you are, so decline your request. By all means work on Wikipedia, the voluminous policy documents on this website should resolve any queries you have about how Wikipedia works. Good luck! Philip Cross (talk) 19:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Important Notice
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
––FormalDude talk 12:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
British sitcom (2)
Could you please join the discussion at Talk:British sitcom. You are more knowledgeable about it than anyone. I will not be editing the article again nor commenting on it further. I feel I've done all I want to for it and I'm off to enjoy some semi-retirement. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 48
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 48, November – December 2021
- 1Lib1Ref 2022
- Wikipedia Library notifications deployed
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
IP user comment
Make your only positive contribution to the world and Wiki and vanish, pathological liar...Your RW paymasters won't stop the truth, no matter how hard you try — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.225.99 (talk) 05:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- Above IP address blocked for a fortnight (running from last Sunday) for "Persistent addition of unsourced content; incivility". I hope you can begin constructive editing when you are able to return. Retained as a warning for anyone browsing talk pages who wishes to spread abuse. Philip Cross (talk) 12:47, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Jimmy Dore edit
In the personal life section of the Jimmy Dore page he says he is an atheist. 24.44.73.34 (talk) 19:41, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- My mistake. Reverted. Philip Cross (talk) 19:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Beryl Vertue
On 14 February 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Beryl Vertue, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 05:02, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Mary Coombs
On 14 March 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Mary Coombs, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 13:55, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Unacceptable edit - Nazaneen Ratcliffe
Please DO NOT ever censor my comments again.
What you did is outrageous and will not go unchallenged.
Who do you think you are censoring other users? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.148.186 (talk) 11:48, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- See WP:NOTFORUM, part of the section I directed you to in my edit summary: "bear in mind that article talk pages exist solely to discuss how to improve articles; they are not for general discussion about the subject of the article, nor are they a help desk for obtaining instructions or technical assistance. Material unsuitable for talk pages may be subject to removal per the talk page guidelines." On that page it states: "Stay on topic: Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions focused on how to improve the article. If you want to discuss the subject of an article, you can do so at Wikipedia:Reference desk instead. Comments that are plainly irrelevant are subject to archiving or removal." Feel free to report me, but edit is unconstructive. Philip Cross (talk) 12:05, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Absolute nonsense fella. The whole purpose of the comments to to appreciate that bias exists on both sides and we should avoid assuming one party is telling the truth and the other is not.
I will thank you to leave my comments alone in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.148.186 (talk) 12:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- I have responded to your section at Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard, although the correct page to use would have been Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Philip Cross (talk) 12:52, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, i seem to need to set up an account for the noticeboard which seems a bit of a pain. 188.222.148.186 (talk) 12:56, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 49
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 49, January – February 2022
- New library collections
- Blog post published detailing technical improvements
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Category:Nazi personnel who resisted the Holocaust
You may be interested in the discussion at Category talk:Nazi personnel who resisted the Holocaust#Correct title?. Sincerely, HopsonRoad (talk) 14:11, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
John Blake (journalist)
Kean, Danuta (12 September 2002). "Gentleman John". The Bookseller. Archived from the original on 12 April 2016. Retrieved 15 February 2020.
ITN recognition for Kay Mellor
On 18 May 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Kay Mellor, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:51, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 50
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 50, March – April 2022
- New library partner - SPIE
- 1Lib1Ref May 2022 underway
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC) (UTC)
Friendly notice
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Fasscass. Thank you.— Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 04:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, Mhawk10. Philip Cross (talk) 05:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Proposed merger of Western Electric articles
I have proposed a merger of the Western Electric (tube manufacturer) article into the main Western Electric article. I have posted a thread on Talk:Western Electric (tube manufacturer) to discuss the proposed merger. I invite everyone's thoughts on the idea.
It seems confused about not all labels owned by UMG. Anything you can do to help would be kindly appreciated. 121.120.234.48 (talk) 02:42, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Two years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:17, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
BLP discretionary sanctions alert
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Levivich[block] 15:35, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- You have again violated WP:BLPRESTORE, if you do not self-revert I will be seeking a BLP ban. nableezy - 05:35, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
- As Dr Petra Marquandt-Bigman was an authority on the area under discussion, I believe the source is legitimate. You are welcome to disagree, of course. Philip Cross (talk) 05:39, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
- I will see you at AE then. nableezy - 05:41, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
- As Dr Petra Marquandt-Bigman was an authority on the area under discussion, I believe the source is legitimate. You are welcome to disagree, of course. Philip Cross (talk) 05:39, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
Please see WP:AE#Philip Cross. nableezy - 05:54, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
Jack
Much better that way round, thanks. I should have seen that! (And I know we should not get involved with stuff we are editing but, sheesh, what a hopeless dreadful sad person ... really.) Cheers DBaK (talk) 19:03, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Priyamvada Gopal article
Hi Philip Cross, I noticed you changed my edit in the Priyamvada Gopal article. I think more should be said about her public engagement. She has contributed to several media outlets and is well-known for her work in the media, so mentioning it in the introduction seems reasonable. Thoughts? LumumbaX (talk) 06:33, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
- Your suggestion first needs to be developed in the main text using reliable sources. The comment I removed from the summary ("and her work has appeared in a number of online and print publications") is a little too generalised even for a summary and, as I mentioned before, can apply to all academics. At present, direct citations of Professor Gopal's opinions are underdeveloped, but quoting any subject directly from a primary source can be problematic (see WP:PST). Philip Cross (talk) 07:03, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement block
If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.
Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."
Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction
The following sanction now applies to you:
Philip Cross is topic-banned from living people who are significantly involved in politics, broadly construed (including, but not limited to, candidates, activists, and political journalists or commentators)
You have been sanctioned per discussion at AE (permalink).
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Editing of Biographies of Living Persons#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you.
I do want to stress, the point of "significantly" here is not to allow a bunch of testing of the limits, but rather to keep you from getting blocked because you copy-edited some actor's article without realizing that they endorsed Obama in 2008 or tweeted in support of Brexit once. It's a safety valve, not a loophole, and I would encourage you to act as if the "significantly" requirement isn't even there. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 20:45, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 51
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 51, May – June 2022
- New library partners
- SAGE Journals
- Elsevier ScienceDirect
- University of Chicago Press
- Information Processing Society of Japan
- Feedback requested on this newsletter
- 1Lib1Ref May 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 52
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 52, July – August 2022
- New instant-access collections:
- SpringerLink and Springer Nature
- Project MUSE
- Taylor & Francis
- ASHA
- Loeb
- Feedback requested on this newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)