DYK for Golden Retriever
On 3 February 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Golden Retriever, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that all Golden Retrievers (example pictured) descend from a golden-coloured Flat-coated Retriever named Nous and a Tweed Water Spaniel named Belle? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Golden Retriever. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Golden Retriever), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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. |
— Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Hook update | ||
Your hook reached 23,425.5 views (976.1 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of February 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Stop reverting
You are going to end up being t-banned if you don't stop stalking and reverting my edits. Atsme 💬 📧 02:43, 8 February 2022 (UTC) Added omitted word. 18:16, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
- This is the Cavalryman I remember, and it is not the same person we're dealing with today. Unfortuantely, the behavior has gotten worse. I don't want this to escalate but I'm of the mind that it has become an issue for T&S. I hope you will step away, and do some serious introspection about your behavior after failing to get consensus for your proposed merge. I'm asking you as a teammate to please stop interrogating me, WIKIHOUNDING, casting aspersions that include outright character assassinations at the GAR, the tag bombing and TE. Your merge will likely not happen ever because too many articles depend on Bull and terrier for historic reference. GARs are for the purpose of fixing a GA, but they won't fix a GA that isn't broken. GAR is not there to settle a content dispute, and the criteria actually discourages tag bombing. Your best option is to take your issues to WP:NPOVN, or call a formal RfC on the respective article TP. Whatever you choose, I'm asking you to please stop the disruptive behavior, the aspersions, PAs, and bad faith interrogation; consider Hanlon's Razor because that is likely what caused the citations to be misplaced when I was pasting blocks of text into the article that I prepared offline in a TEXT program. All you had to do was bring it to my attention on the article TP, or simply fix it. Atsme 💬 📧 18:16, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Atsme: this is the editor I wish I was collaborating with, but sadly instead this, this and this is illustrative of your conduct lately. It is sad to see, particularly immediately after being released from a TBAN for displaying all of these same behaviours. Cavalryman (talk) 20:32, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
Staffordshire Bull Terrier has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Review of Article
Hello dear Cavalryman! Upps i did it again ... and wrote a new artcle in en:WP, see Unditching-Beam. The article is based on a far more extended text in de:Bergebalken which popped up last week in context with the war in ukraine. Would you like to give the article in en:WP some first aid? Sorrowly i had a special Follower earlier this year, who liked to kick[1] parts of my work. Thus the new article from my side was created as stub and could need some support. Best --Tom (talk) 06:21, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Tom, when I get a chance I will try to find some sources. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 22:19, 28 March 2022 (UTC).
- Tom, I have added a few more sources, a little bit more information and have moved the article to comply with English Wikipedia's conventions on capitol letters (Unditching beam). I am sure there are many sources still out there with more information. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 01:27, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Date of British ban on military calibre weapons for civilians in India and Sudan
Hello Cavalryman,
In 2015 you added a paragraph on the early 1900s ban on civilian usage of centerfire rifles in calibres in British military service. I recently covered that issue in Gun law in India#History with some more examples, and added some wikilinks to there, but while doing that I noticed a discrepancy in sources: a couple of them claim that the actual date was 1905, not 1907. I also found several old forum threads on the subject:
- One of them claims that only the possession of ammo was banned (1909 is mentioned, by the way), not the rifles themselves, even though the latter are useless without the former.
- Another one states that the 1907 is merely a "cut-off date for India", and the actual ban was implemented already in 1899-1901.
- Yet another one presents a counter-example of T. Roosevelt importing a .450 weapon in Sudan after 1907, and in response one of the users describes a story that looks more like a very restrictive licensing rather than an outright ban.
So, who is right? Are there any contemporary sources available? Ain92 (talk)
- Hello Ain92, my understanding is the ban came into effect in 1907, this article by Terry Wieland and Cartridges of the World say as much. But it probably would be good to find a better source. I will have a better look when I have a chance. Regards, Cavalryman (talk) 21:39, 29 March 2022 (UTC).
Wolfhound
Hello there, I was wondering whether you think the Irish Wolfhound page is better with an ‘extinct’ infobox or keep it as it is now, leaving the breed’s status out of the lead. Also I would apologise to you as well for earlier incivility… Wase134 (talk) 21:12, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Wase134, I believe the infobox should probably speak about the modern breed and the article's history section should discuss the historic breed of the same name, the lead should summarise both. Cavalryman (talk) 21:41, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Poodle GA?
I've been chipping away at Poodle lately with an eye to bring it to GA once I've sourced everything I can, stripped out everything I can't, and covered the few remaining gaps. Just wanted to drop you a line as the most recent significant contributor and a much more experienced content editor than me, especially in this area -- happy to hear any thoughts on what it still needs! Rusalkii (talk) 02:05, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Rusalkii, I think there certainly are the sources available to bring the article to GA standard. When I get a chance I will have a look and give you my thoughts. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 09:36, 8 April 2022 (UTC).
Orphaned non-free image File:Société Centrale Canine.png
Thanks for uploading File:Société Centrale Canine.png. 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. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 15:04, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Please stop
This has gone on long enough. You have not gained consensus for those tags, and are now being disruptive at SBT. At least 11 editors have disagreed with you. It won't be me taking you to ANI. Atsme 💬 📧 22:27, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of bloodhound packs of the United Kingdom for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bloodhound packs of the United Kingdom until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
AusLondonder (talk) 07:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Old Berkeley Beagles
The article Old Berkeley Beagles has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:ORG, lacking significant coverage in multiple reliable sources.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. AusLondonder (talk) 14:02, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of hound packs of New Zealand for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hound packs of New Zealand until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
Ajf773 (talk) 10:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of hound packs of Australia for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hound packs of Australia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
Ajf773 (talk) 10:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of hound packs of Ireland for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hound packs of Ireland until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
Ajf773 (talk) 10:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Duke of Buccleuch's Hunt
The article Duke of Buccleuch's Hunt has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:ORGCRIT as lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject"
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. AusLondonder (talk) 12:21, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Old Berkeley Beagles for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old Berkeley Beagles until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.
AusLondonder (talk) 12:26, 7 May 2022 (UTC)