This is an archive of past discussions with User:Philafrenzy. 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.

Looks like I should have created a redirect as well, when I started Mike Thresh. Edwardx (talk) 15:06, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Merged them to yours. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:08, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

That's very decent of you. With these new obit stubs, starting new articles has never been easier. Edwardx (talk) 18:23, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

And a few of them have had worthwhile expansions already. There should probably be some sort of obit project or taskforce to ensure that every one from a major newspaper is picked up. Some of the stories are brilliant. There's huge DYK potential but alas only time to do the stubs right now. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:54, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

You're right that we can at least "redirect" our readers to the newspaper obit. I wish there was more time. As you suggest, if they stay under 300 words, they are still all easily turned into 5x DYKs. Edwardx (talk) 16:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

If I may--I would be careful--Martin Chalmers sounds like a nobody for example. He might not be if you are able to add more referenced info which shows how significant he was, but as it stands, this stub would not survive AFD. I know it is time-consuming to create starts, but I do think we should try to do that.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes that one lacks the vital additional information that he was awarded the Schlegel-Tieck prize which in the opening would protect it from an AFD nomination from a user who wasn't prepared to read the sources. Even without that it would survive an AFD, however, because it could be adequately expanded before the close. But you are right. X was Y is not good enough, they all need X was Y who did/was awarded Z. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi again. I am trying to work on Xavier Valls, although I am finding it a little boring. Anyway, are you able to move some of these paintings to Wikimedia Commons please? Or are they completely copyrighted?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:18, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

The general rule is copyright for 70 years from death so yes, copyright. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:25, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

It would be good to find a way around it. His son is the French PM.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

There is no way around it unless you write a detailed commentary on one of the paintings in which case we could make a claim to fair use for that particular one. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:47, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

On 22 April 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Marc Harris, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that money launderer Marc Harris started his accountancy firm with a $5000 advance on his credit card? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Marc Harris. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), 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.

Thanks for your help Victuallers (talk) 22:02, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Romie Tager is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Romie Tager until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bencherlite^Talk 09:17, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carroll Group, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Receivers. 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) 09:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

On 26 April 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article David Marchant (journalist), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the investigative journalist David Marchant was responsible for exposing the Ponzi scheme at First International Bank of Grenada? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/David Marchant (journalist). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), 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.

Harrias ^talk 08:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I have noticed that you added some youtube links to the Carroll Group article. I've never seen that before on youtube. Is it allowed? I would like to add this to David Nazarian, but I am not sure if I can.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I see no reason why not as long as the video is itself a RS for what you want to reference. YouTube is only another website after all. The Carroll ones were to a Sky News documentary over three parts. I have also linked to Google Street View for a specific location and date. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:11, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello. Tentatively, may I ask--are you interested in working on luxury hotels in London, especially Mayfair and Knightsbridge? Quite a few need to be created, but mostly the history sections need to be expanded and fully cited. Let me know if that would interest you, or if I am on my own for this. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:43, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Aren't we all on our own in the end when the sweet embrace of death grips us? I can confidently offer somewhere between 0% and 100% support, depending on what else I have to do, and that is absolutely firm. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

You did nothing about the Bulgari Hotel and Residences as I recall...which reminds me, I need to take a picture of it!Zigzig20s (talk) 18:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Did I promise to? You should be aware that any promise I make to work on an article has to be seen in the context of a 100% certainty of 0% payment. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:23, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Coincidentally, I've just done a bit of work on two 5-star hotels in Docklands, when I added owner info, after having created the page for their billionaire owner, John Christodoulou. Many Cypriots in the UK have done well in property considering how few there are. Edwardx (talk) 19:00, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Immigrants are highly motivated to improve their lot - no doubt about it. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:23, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Details on how they got a foot in the door/started? Generous parents?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

No money is required. All you need is brains and motivation. Take the Ugandan Asians for instance. They weren't allowed to bring any money when they came here, now look at them: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/aug/11/race.world Philafrenzy (talk) 22:07, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

"Though Amin took their possessions, they had not lost their skills, university degrees or network of community contacts that would see their businesses rise from the ashes." The answer to my question seems to be nepotism, but it is still murky. Who are those "community contacts" who helped them get their first jobs, etc?Zigzig20s (talk) 23:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I suspect their "community contacts" were each other and that they either started businesses or got menial jobs to pay the bills and then started businesses, bought property, made sure their children were well educated etc. It was a long term effort over a couple of generations. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:59, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Not very inspirational. I like the "he had $50 in his pockets and built his own empire" rags-to-riches type of stories better.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:10, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Their children disagree with you. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:08, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm an individualist. Families are a form of (private) collectivism. Let me know (also User:Edwardx) if you come across real individualist success stories in the STRL--I need some inspiration.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I think you will find that in order to be really successful you will need other people, if only to work for you and to sell things to. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, staff and consumers are necessary evils.Zigzig20s (talk) 20:01, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Have you considered one of the caring professions such as nursing or social work? Philafrenzy (talk) 20:05, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Haha. I've considered philanthropy!Zigzig20s (talk) 21:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Speaking of philanthropy, you may be interested in Arthur Gilbert (real estate developer), whose art collection is at the V&A. He made his first fortune by marrying a dress designer and selling her gowns. Can't find much about his parents. A fascinating fellow.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

You have done a very thorough job on him. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I've requested a redirect for Gilbert Collection, which I only found on google today and should be merged with the philanthropy section on his page. Anyway, this should give me a reason to visit the V&A again soon!Zigzig20s (talk) 23:44, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

A redirect will be fine at present as the article does not discuss the actual contents of the collection. If it did it would be a valid stand alone article. You could consider expanding it instead. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:51, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Since he collected all those objects, can't we have a lengthier 'philanthropy' section instead? I think that would make the most sense.Zigzig20s (talk) 23:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Ideally we would have both, philanthropy and basic details in his bio and a separate detailed article about the objects in the collection. If you are happy to keep the separate article just use the V & A website to describe the collection. There's plenty of material there. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I would like to find out what he built in LA County and which boarding school he went to and how come his parents could afford to own land in Israel prior to statehood. There are too many unknowns. I doubt his art collection could ever reach GA status.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

This http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/t/the-rosalinde-and-arthur-gilbert-collection/ could definitely be a GA. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Nice article. Edwardx (talk) 11:34, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

User:Edwardx: Thank you. It was a fluke--I came across his name while working on the Nazarians. This type of treasure hunt is often more fun than planned investigations.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:52, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

We content creators stumble across all sorts of interesting things. Edwardx (talk) 00:23, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Che piacere vederti! We both created articles on Italians today! Gareth E Kegg (talk) 00:08, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Who would have guessed that the writer of A Clockwork Orange would give a lecture that was "poorly received by an audience of Catholic priests"? Not me. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:19, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm with her. Why should writers ever be taxed? They never use the NHS after all. They just look it up on Wikipedia or something. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 09:26, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

In Ireland writers do get a special deal http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/reliefs/artists-exemption.html#section1 Elsewhere too I think. But it rains a lot more in Ireland than Monaco. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of notable record collectors, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harry Smith. 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) 10:19, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Are you able to find a link between Somers Limited and the Baron Somers?Zigzig20s (talk) 05:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Bermuda used to be called the Somers Isles. Try these:

• http://encyclopediavirginia.org/Somers_Sir_George_1554-1610
• George Somers
• Somers Isles Company
• http://www.bsx.com/CompanyDisplay.asp?CompanyID=137

Philafrenzy (talk) 09:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Were they really only formed in 2012? They seem very large in that case. Perhaps they only floated or reorganised in 2012? Philafrenzy (talk) 10:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure. Btw, there should probably be an article like List of companies listed on the Bermuda Stock Exchange. Oh, I have just created Michael Richardson (investment banker) and I can imagine that you might want to put in as much effort here as you did with the Carroll Group...Finance, politics, alleged corruption...Zigzig20s (talk) 10:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I like to write long pieces where probably nobody will ever do it if I don't. Carroll Group and Betty May are perfect examples. Cutting through the mass of disinformation on Carroll Group was a particular bonus, though it still doesn't appear in Google, hence the DYK. Maybe that will lift it. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

On 7 May 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carroll Group, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Carroll Group, once one of the largest private businesses in Britain, collapsed in the early 1990s amid allegations of fraud? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carroll Group. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), 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.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll let you work on Jamie Ritblat--let me know when you are done, so that I can see if I can improve the article. Incidentially, why don't you start those articles in a userpage to avoid edit conflicts and general messiness at the beginning?Zigzig20s (talk) 06:03, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Well new articles aren't on anyone's watch list at first so there aren't generally any edit conflicts, and the messiness usually gets fixed fairly quickly. I do sometimes use userspace but generally prefer to just get on with it live. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:41, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

L'Homme au doigt has been started. Perhaps, DYK that a pointing man is worth more than a walking man? Edwardx (talk) 10:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Indeed but it won't have a pic unless you can get over there quick to take one. That is the problem with sculpture even if the artist is 70 years dead (which he isn't). Philafrenzy (talk) 10:27, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I could create a generic photo of a man pointing. The absence of an image will be a shame, but there are always too many photo hooks for the one spot anyway. Edwardx (talk) 10:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks. Edwardx (talk) 10:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I think it needs to discuss the different versions and make clear - is it about the series or that example? The series presumably. If it is the series then we might find a free photo on Commons. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for creating this. Are you able to find a history of the church buildings on the British History website please? All I can find is this, which is off topic. I will add a referenced list of the listed buildings, however. 46 Charles St is not listed apparently.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Have a few more left to add. It could be rephrased as some of it can be repetitive, but the problem is they're not all the same height and were not listed at the same time. Looks like they were built by John Phillips and George Shakeaspear for the most part. I would like to take some pictures, but is it safe with so many CCTVs in this country? I am creeped out by them tbh.Zigzig20s (talk) 07:27, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I did look for 46 but it is one of the less important new buildings apparently. Agree, that's a lot of listed buildings. I would select just a few key ones as examples. On pictures, I use a small pocket camera and just point and shoot. I dress like a tourist and have never had the slightest problem taking a picture in a public place. We have freedom of panorama and the legal right to take such pictures. Philafrenzy (talk) 07:33, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

No, I don't think we should remove referenced information about listed buildings, but perhaps rephrase the section...but that's not an absolute priority--it will become clearer how to do that once more info has been found/added. Lol, I'll let you take some pictures then...I know it's legal, but I don't want to look weird taking pictures of random buildings.Zigzig20s (talk) 07:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

The long list adds nothing really since they are mostly the same type of building. It's detail for its own sake and not what we should be doing in this type of article. Why not move them to a separate list article: Listed buildings in Charles Street, Mayfair"? You seem to have an awful lot of hang-ups. How do you manage to get anything done? Philafrenzy (talk) 08:00, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I have taken 1000s of photos in London and only had someone say something once. That was when I took photos for 1 Palace Green. I forgot that it was next door to the Israeli Embassy. An armed police officer was very polite, and encouraged me to get permission for anything in Kensington Palace Gardens beforehand next time. Edwardx (talk) 08:21, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Because it is too short to move any of it to another article...the point is NOT to create lots of stubs, but lengthy articles (the ambitious goal is featured articles). Besides, details are the best part of life. But the list could be rephrased--that will come in due time. And yes, I need to buy a smaller digital camera.Zigzig20s (talk) 08:26, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

It's detail for its own sake though, without any explanation of why it matters. You should be discussing the builders and architects etc and then using that detail in support of that discussion. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:39, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, one could say, "Numbers ..... were listed as Grade II by English Heritage on ..... Numbers.... were listed as Grade II* by English Heritage on ... " etc. But the thing is, it would look confused. At least the order is house numbers at the moment. I don't have an immediate, satisfactory solution for this conundrum. Some of them are listed at Grade II* listed buildings in the City of Westminster (1–9). The goal may be something like Adelaide Crescent.Zigzig20s (talk) 08:48, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

My suggestion would remain as parking them in a list article and selectively referring to them as part of a discussion of the building of the street. Long lists inside articles are generally a bad idea I think. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

It will be rephrased, but not immediately, Phil! Btw, there may be a Hambro connection to Waverton Street because Richard Hambro's country house is named Waverton and consequently, there is also Waverton Investment Management. The Barings lived on Charles St and so it is possible that the Hambros lived on Waverton St. To be verified...Zigzig20s (talk) 09:01, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, I think it could be rephrased in the "history" section I've just added. Do you know who Lord Berkeley was? I'm not sure if it was Augustus Berkeley, 4th Earl of Berkeley. I would imagine he developed Berkeley Square as well. The family probably owned the land and he decided to develop it by hiring John Phillips and George Shakespear. But we need references. I can't find an article on this street on the British History website.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:17, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you read The London Encyclopaedia in the refs? Philafrenzy (talk) 10:31, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Just did now. We should use it more. Usually I assume cited sources have been maximised in terms of content creation. But it does not say which Lord Berkeley...Zigzig20s (talk) 11:28, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you find the page for Berkeley Square in the book? Philafrenzy (talk) 12:12, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Oh, idk. This is getting tiresome. Btw, renovation project if you don't feel like travelling this summer.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I walked along Charles Street this afternoon. Didn't see a sign for "Mark's Club". Just double-checked on Google Street View and I don't see one either. Isn't this strange?Zigzig20s (talk) 17:34, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

No. That's the English establishment for you. Those who need to know, already know where it is. Its here. Did you take a photograph (assuming you found it at all)? Philafrenzy (talk) 18:26, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I was looking for a sign (or wealth management-type bronze plaque). I actually walked past The Only Running Footman and considered having a drink there, but didn't. So no, no picture.Zigzig20s (talk) 20:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually in Perth, a group of Wikipedians would go together and take pictures of specific listed buildings/historic places on a given day. Sometimes they would take a train together to do that in specific small towns. Perhaps HQ could look into that for London or England. I would probably go. The train fare could be covered by a Wikimedia grant perhaps?Zigzig20s (talk) 08:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

These sort of things are a good idea, with the caveat that everyone ends up taking pictures of the same thing. I meant to suggest something of the kind to EdwardX yesterday but forgot. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, everyone takes a different street...Zigzig20s (talk) 10:18, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I've had this idea before and we tried it in November 2013, Wikipedia:WikiProject London/Wiki takes the Tube. Three of us turned up, but it was just Jonathan Cardy and me for most of the time. As heavy rain was forecast, we chose stuff near Albertopolis and spent a fair bit of time in the V&A weathering the storm. Even with just two, careful organisation is needed to avoid everyone photographing the same stuff. There has also been "Wiki Takes Chester", which I recall went well. Edwardx (talk) 10:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Well I am sure we could organise something around the West End. There are so many streets and buildings without a good photo, or any photo. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

How many people were there yesterday and what did you talk about? Is there an event coming up before next month, at HQ or other? (But here, not in Oxford/Cambridge/Liverpool.)Zigzig20s (talk) 11:30, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

You will need to attend the next one on 14 June to find out. The next editathon is here. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:09, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

That's an awfully long time. I may have to e-mail HQ and see if I can get a grant to be a Wikipedian-in-residence somewhere in Mayfair.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

FYI. I am hungry and was going to get fish'n'chips there, but that's actually not on their menu. Not sure why the Daily Mail is calling it a "chipper." I don't feel like oysters today; will have to grab sushi somewhere...Zigzig20s (talk) 13:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you take any pictures of the building or Mark's club? Philafrenzy (talk) 13:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

The service charge on the flat is quite low for that area at £3800 PA, the flat needs a bit of updating though. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

No. Would you please do it with your tiny camera? I need to get one of those as well (not sure where). I walked alongside Trevor Square today--a bit of a letdown tbh.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Not tiny, just compact, like this. You can get them anywhere for c. £100. I can't do it until I am next in the area, and since I have never visited that street in my life, that may be never. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I think I've seen some tiny ones, but I can't remember where. I'm surprised--you've created so many articles about Mayfair, I thought you would be a regular like myself. Whoever you are...hahaha.Zigzig20s (talk) 19:33, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

There's a website named after a river in South America - can't remember the name now - you use a credit card and they send you stuff by post. London is a big place. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I have been put off by going to Canary Wharf for networking events because it is so far away--I have never been to East London. Soho is my idea of East London.Zigzig20s (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Re: this request, I assume you're referring to Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by article count? It's not a very fun report to generate. I've been maintaining Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits since 2011 (or since 2009 if you include the page history of User:MZMcBride/Sandbox 3). I'm not sure I want to indefinitely maintain another database report, but maybe you could convince me? What are you willing to trade? :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 05:36, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't think I have anything to trade. Like most of us, I only know how to do one thing. This is why we rely on you. I hope you are taking good care of your health. :-) Philafrenzy (talk) 08:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Do you think academics are notable?Zigzig20s (talk) 14:06, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, as long as they meet the criteria below or other notability criteria. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:27, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Dominic Rathbone may not survive a speedy deletion. I would highly recommend creating starts whenever possible and not having bare URLs as references... This is not a personal attack on my part btw; I would just hate for you to be disappointed if some articles got deleted.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

He's president of the Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies which is a very prestigious post for an ancient historian and therefore meets criteria 6 of WP:PROF "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society." Philafrenzy (talk) 18:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Phil, it's complicated. For example, I suspect John Tomasi is notable enough to have his own page, but I am not sure how to prove it yet, so I have not created his page. I did create a page on one of his books, Free Market Fairness, however, because it was widely reviewed and could be expanded further.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I would view him as definitely notable. Has he won any awards? Philafrenzy (talk) 10:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Please don't create a one-liner. Robert P. George is notable, but not just because he has won awards...Zigzig20s (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I had no intention of creating it. I thought you wanted to. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I may. I will probably start a userpage at some point and then eventually move it to main space.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:01, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Please review WP:PROF; you have created numerous BLPs in which you have not established notability (and for which none is readily apparent). Please stop, since this kind of work creates a LOT of unnecessary work for other editors. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:22, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I am aware of WP:PROF and looked at their body of work before creating them. The title Professor is not so devalued at the University of London as it is in the U.S. where almost anyone can have it. Clearly any stub requires more work Sandy, that doesn't mean that we should not create them. It is a service to the community, not a burden. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:27, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:50, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Please don't create articles, especially on living people, that fail to make any assertion of their encyclopaedic merit. Simply stating that someone is an academic at some institution, is not a claim of notability. Thanks. Guy (Help!) 08:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

At least two have been deleted that met criteria 6 of WP:PROF. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:34, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

They all also meet NAUTHOR, and , a claim of notability is not needed to pass speedy, just a claim of plausible significance, which is much lower. Stating that someone is "an academic at some institution," is not necessarily a claim of plausible importance; stating someone is a professor at a university is. And we have almost never deleted any articles on full professors at research universities in at least the last 5 or 6 years.

But what I came here to say, Philafrenzy, is that in my opinion Rathbone seems to have a somewhat weaker publication record than the others, unless there is more than you listed, -- and I am not entirely sure that we would consider Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies a sufficient position for automatic notability.

My advice to you., Philafrenzy, is not to argue further--enough has been said. JzG and Sandy are in my opinion obviously not in accord with the current interpretation of WP:PROF, and JzG is misunderstanding DeletionPolicy. (Sandy is not wrong to place a notability tag if they doubt the notability; it's the deletion which was improper), Either JzG or someone will revert the speedies, or I intend take them all to deletion review, where I expect a speedy overturn, and, if an afd follows, a speedy keep.

I urge you in the strongest terms to create many more articles on notable historians--in fact, every one of them who is a full professor at a major research university and has published 2 or more books by important academic publishers. I have always intended to do this in my own field, but I've never had the time. But I also advise you not to concentrate too much on one specific institution or specialty. DGG ( talk ) 16:39, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. I will let it calm down a bit. I did less on Rathbone because of his position at SPRS which I thought quite an important post in his field. It might not be as important as I think of course but there is still all this. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I would recommend highlighting/summing up what research contributions they have made to their fields; this is why I suggested you take a look at Robert P. George; or even Judith Butler. Those two have made so many research contributions that they are public intellectuals at this point. One is not simply notable for being a full professor at "major university" (whatever that means--a university for lazy undergraduates with rich parents?).Zigzig20s (talk) 18:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Agreed but even if not public figures they may, and often are, notable by virtue of their scholarly research and publications. These were mostly University of London professors with significant research profiles. I think the reference was to "major research university", which the University of London is. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:47, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Phil, so many careerist academics publish to please their deans/departments chairs and get promoted, and there is nothing to it!Zigzig20s (talk) 19:00, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Also agreed, but I don't think you can get a professorial post at a major university by publishing worthless papers. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:40, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I know you can.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:30, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

No doubt it happens occasionally, the professors I have met however seemed to justify their title. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:33, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Just saw your message. What do you suggest we do? Is there a better source to use? I do think it is significant that so many buildings on that street are listed, but it does need rephrasing and potentially trimming.Zigzig20s (talk) 14:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Here is the original and the RS: https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list I am not suggesting that you change them all now, just that the original be used in future. I think that article is dead with that huge list in it. It could be moved to a separate list article where it would be harmless or just trimmed. I would probably say something like "there are X listed buildings in Charles Street, including: ..." and then mention the main ones and why they are significant. Philafrenzy (talk) 16:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Are they not significant if they are listed? Otherwise they wouldn't be. I don't think English Heritage lists for the sake of it.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

They might list ten identical houses in a row to prevent them being altered but the correct approach here would be to treat those as a unit. You need to single out particularly significant ones or group them in some way. Otherwise it is just a lot of useless data. You need to explain the significance of the data. EH don't list for our benefit, they list so people can't knock the houses down or alter them too much. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:32, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

There are a few things i could explain better over the phone. DGG ( talk ) 07:24, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I doubt Laura Gowing would survive an AFD. It is under construction, so I am looking forward to seeing how it turns out! Btw, I don't think you can add her profile on Academia.edu...That's like an academic facebook profile (I have one).Zigzig20s (talk) 21:19, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Its an external link, not a reference. I know a lot of people have one but she has added a great deal to hers. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I closed the DRV listings as snow overturns. Please do follow up as you suggested here and work on them up to the level of at least a proper stub.

While our coverage of notable academics is indeed poor and starting articles on such people is valuable, academics are usually fairly low-profile people. BLPs of low-profile people tend to go underdeveloped and unwatched, and yet unavoidably become a significant part of their subjects' online presence. If you plan to continue working on this kind of article, please be sure to include enough information to do the subject some justice. Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I certainly will. I don't see them as low-profile people, I see them as high-profile, perhaps that is where I am at odds with the world. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

FYI.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw the reference to Mount Street in my Standard but hadn't got round to doing anything with the information. If you know which house it was, you could expand the article. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure. It is a little unsettling because: LGBT rights in Qatar.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:23, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Deplorable, but I don't really see how that is relevant to the article on Mount Street. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you watch the video?Zigzig20s (talk) 22:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I didn't see anything about LGBT rights. Did I miss it? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

There should be. Seems very heteronormative not to mention it.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:58, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I just watched all 2.01 minutes of it and saw nothing remotely related to LGBT issues. You will need to enlighten me. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:05, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Apparently, they own The Connaught (which is in desperate need of in-line references!). Compare this to the boycott of the Sultan of Brunei's Beverly Hills Hotel. Yet no boycott here. Is Mayfair more homophobic than BH?Zigzig20s (talk) 23:08, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Now how was I supposed to make that connection without reference first to the Beverley Hills Hotel article? I can only conclude that people in London feel differently about the Qataris than people in Beverly Hills do about Brunei. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Ironically, there is now a "gay Mass" near the Connaught... Ooh la la.Zigzig20s (talk) 00:12, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Philafrenzy,

You are receiving this message because you have a one-year subscription to Adam Matthew through the Wikipedia Library. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:

• Please make sure that you can still log in to your Adam Matthew account. If you are having trouble let me know.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, to include citations with links on Wikipedia. Links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
• Do you write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let me know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate it if you filled out this short survey. Your input will help us to facilitate this particular partnership, and to discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you, Wikipedia Library Adam Matthew account coordinator HazelAB (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The article Eighteenth-Century Ireland (journal) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases (ERIH is not selective, it suffices to be peer-reveiwed), no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 19:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jamie Ritblat is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Ritblat until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 03:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi,

I notice you removed the fair use image File:John Menzies shop (fair use).jpg from the John Menzies article on the basis that a free image had been included in the article.

The problem here is that the alleged replacement image *isn't* remotely a functional equivalent for the non-free one.

The shop image was intended to provide a typical example of Menzies (once relatively widespread) retail outlets, and I was unable to find an acceptable quality free image that serves this purpose. The free "replacement" shows a van related to Menzies' current distribution business.

I appreciate that it is preferable to replace non-free images with *equivalent* free ones where possible and to keep use of the latter to a minimum; nevertheless, the two images served clearly distinct purposes, and the free one is not a satisfactory replacement (though it *is* a good illustration of the distribution business).

If you can find an acceptable quality free image that clearly shows a John Menzies shop, I'd be grateful, as I couldn't find one(!) But please take care when replacing non-free images that they are actually a satisfactory replacement.

All the best, Ubcule (talk) 16:12, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I take the point. I found one without distortion on Google. It's not very good either but overall I think it is a small improvement. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Stewart Ford is another fraudster (alleged) and upcoming DYK that you might be interested in. Edwardx (talk) 10:04, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, but I can't do anything but stubs until after 2 June due to other commitments. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:14, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Philafrenzy. Carlton Tavern, Kilburn, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated  to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 16:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I have added a 'speedy deletion' tag.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I have opposed it. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

It is potentially illegal.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't see how - it just repeats the reporting. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:57, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Scott's (restaurant) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 21:22, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

On 4 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carlton Tavern, Kilburn, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the only building in its street to survive the London Blitz (pictured) was demolished by property developers, who have been ordered to rebuild it "brick by brick"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carlton Tavern, Kilburn. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), 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) 00:56, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for thanking me. I look at your contribution log and I'm amazed at the amount of content that you have created for the encyclopedia. Thank you for all of your work and if you have any advice on how I can try to make the red part of my contribution circle get bigger, let me know. Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  14:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

You seem to be doing well. I don't think I can offer much advice in your subject area but you could consider creating articles about professors at major universities in your field. Even important scholars are often missing here in my experience. Good luck. Philafrenzy (talk) 14:20, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Great minds think alike? I hadn't thought about the NPP angle - Wikipedia talk:Did you know#7 day requirement and NPP Edwardx (talk) 19:33, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, the only problem I envisage is reviewing 5,000 or 10,000 character articles rather than 1500. Or maybe they will be the same length, just older. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:07, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

On 5 June 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Scott's (restaurant), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Scott's restaurant in London was the favourite of the James Bond author Ian Fleming? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Scott's (restaurant). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), 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.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:07, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello. Are you able to find much about Solomon Hougham? I am not, but it looks like he could do with an article. Perhaps nothing's been digitalised yet but there is plenty of info in books?Zigzig20s (talk) 21:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I will take a look in a few days, unless you get there first. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

?Zigzig20s (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

The article Central and Eastern European Review has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any major selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 19:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)