Jump to content

User talk:PamD

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page. If you want me to reply elsewhere, tell me why.
01:39 Wednesday 6 August 2025 - - - - WELCOME TO MY TALK PAGE

Please click "New section" or "Add" above to leave any new message, and please sign your message (just type ~~~~).

If you leave a message here, I will reply here, to make discussions easier to read. If you really want me to reply elsewhere, tell me a very good reason why I should do so.
If you reply to a message here, please indent (start the line with ":") and sign your message.
If you are discussing any particular page, please provide a link to it - it makes life easier for me and anyone else seeing this page.

Thanks. PamD


Nomination for deprecation of Template:EngvarB

[edit]

Template:EngvarB has been nominated for deprecation . You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page.

Nomination of Gianna Bryant for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gianna Bryant, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gianna Bryant (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AWOC

[edit]

Hello PamD, it's me again. I have drafted a page on a very interesting organisation. User:Balance person/Ageing Without Children (AWOC) It's not exactly 'women in red' because childlessness and ageing affect everyone but....I wonder if you might have time at some point to have a look at it? No hurry of course and if you are too busy just say? Thanks! Balance person (talk) 11:52, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quick reaction is to point out that the abbreviation shouldn't be included in the title (though a dab page at AWOC for this and the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee will be necessary - there should already be a redirect but isn't!)
It's a bit too near the bone, TBH - I'm not sure I want to spend a lot of time on it (as a septuagenarian IVF failure). Ref 4 needs tweaked, and 5 and 6 seem to be the same so need to be named and re-used. ISSN isn't needed for a major newspaper like the Guardian. Use {{Official website}} in External links. And then why not just go for it and move it to mainspace, where other people can chip in to improve it. It looks probably notable. Good luck! PamD 12:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! Thank you PamD for commenting despite the topic. It's kind of you. I will do all the tweaks you suggest. Many thanks. Balance person (talk) 16:16, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

[edit]

I may possibly have created redirects from Fran Buss to Fran Leeper Buss and from Ageing Well Without Children to Ageing Without Children. But they don't look quite the same as maybe they should! I used the the automatic box on the redirect help page. Balance person (talk) 13:14, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, @Balance person, I've been reading things in the wrong order and have left you a vast essay about redirects on your talk page before reading this! But you've got the basic idea and made two nice useful redirects at Fran Buss and Ageing Well Without Children. Well done!
I've also just created the dab page at AWOC which seemed necessary (the agricultural lot already had a redirect, but nothing from their abbreviation, which seems quite heavily used). And a redirect from AWWOC, which seems unique (so far). PamD 13:51, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @PamD for all your help. And for the dab pages too. I found a number of help pages on redirects and one was more helpful than the others! Hee Hee! Balance person (talk) 15:21, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nouns in apposition

[edit]

For curious talkpage watchers: this is about this edit to Raynor Winn PamD 07:45, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]


A bit surprised to be reverted by a fellow Brit for a correct usage. Here are a few examples of nouns in apposition:

  • Printer paper (not Printer's paper)
  • Jam saucepan (not Jam's saucepan)
  • Estate car (not Estate's car)
  • Water cooler (not Water's cooler)
  • Executive summary (not Executive's summary, nor even Executives' summary)

There are, of course, thousands of others: it is a standard construction. As is "The BBC report", or for that matter "The Observer report". All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:31, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap But "the" was italicised, so was part of the newspaper title, unlike in your example directly above. That makes all the difference. Yes, taking "the" out of italics would have left the sentence ok. PamD 21:57, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It makes it more awkward, yes. But I see the statement was describing the same event as the previous sentence, so I've removed it. This sort of mass-editing with multiple first-time users is a party game. I hope it quietens down soon. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:52, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Overdale, Telford

[edit]

Hello, PamD. This message concerns the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Overdale".

Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with our draftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission, and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions here. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 17:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As above - happy to see this disappear. The redirect I created at Overdale, Telford has been reinstated so all is well. PamD 18:48, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Salt Path

[edit]

WP:BRD. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:08, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap But perhaps you Boldly undid my quite normal editing, and I Reverted? Anyway, let's see if anyone else chips in. PamD 19:54, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For talk page watchers: see The Salt Path. PamD 19:54, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so: you Boldly edited, I Reverted, and you tried again without Discussing... I then restored the status quo ante, issued an informal note, and started a talk page discussion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:00, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chiswick Chap Be that as may, uou should not have called my edit vandalism! Enough. Discuss on the talk page. PamD 20:24, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry you think that, but I never said so, I just mentioned BRD which isn't the same thing at all. If it carries any such implication, I'm sorry for my ignorance as I still don't see the connection. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:27, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Chiswick Chap "rvv" = "revert vandalism", as far as I know. PamD 20:32, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Edit summary legend.PamD 20:35, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah no, in my book it means "revert revert (plural)", i.e. do more than one reversion, that's all. Many apologies for the confusion. Chiswick Chap (talk) Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:50, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. "Every day a school day" as they say - always something new to learn about Wikipedia. And OK, I probably shouldn't have reverted your reversion of my addition, per BRD: I was just a bit surprised and disagreed wholeheartedly with your reasoning. Let's see how the discussion goes. PamD 07:17, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]


June 2025 WikiProject Unreferenced articles backlog drive – award

[edit]

Citation Barnstar

This award is given in recognition to PamD for collecting more than 33.0 points during the WikiProject Unreferenced articles's JUN25 backlog drive. Your contributions played a crucial role in sourcing over 9,500 unsourced articles during the drive. Thank you so much for participating and helping to reduce the backlog! – DreamRimmer Alt ■ 15:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd completely forgotten about that backlog drive - did some interesting work with categories and PetScan to find unreferenced articles in interesting areas (Lancs/Cumbria, English women biogs). PamD 16:12, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 July 2025

[edit]
Endowment tax form, Wikimania, elections, U4C, fundraising and a duck!
And how do we know?
Five-year journey comes to healthy fruition.
Wikimedians from around the world will gather in person and online at the twentieth annual meeting of Wikimania.
As well as "hermeneutic excursions" and other scientific research findings.
The report covers the Foundation's operations from July 2023 - June 2024
A step towards objective and comprehensive coverage of a project nearly too big to follow.
Drawn this century!
How data from the Wikipedia "necessary articles" lists can shed new light on the gender gap
Annual plans, external trends, infrastructure, equity, safety, and effectiveness. What does it all mean?
Rest in peace.
Wouldn't it be nice without billionaires, scandals, deaths, and wars?
If you are too blasé for Mr. Blasé and don't give a FAC.
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:50, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

100 women

[edit]

Hello! I see from the teahouse that there is talk of a list of 100 biogs of women being prepared by e.g. you and Victuallers to celebrate the WiR project. I have looked for it but can't find that particular 100 list. Could you poss provide a link? Thanks! Balance person (talk) 07:50, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Balance person It's at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/100 Women. Very much Victuallers' list; I've just done some copyediting. PamD 12:27, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where in the teahouse is it discussed? I couldn't see it on a quick skim of contents list. PamD 13:04, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the link PamD. I saw it mentioned in my watchlist Teahouse but I now can't find the item. Sorry! Disappeared! Balance person (talk) 15:40, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zardeloleo77 = ARTEBIENALSUR

[edit]

Hi Pam, in response to your edit summary, the issue is quite simple: an art biennial employee (ARTEBIENALSUR (talk · contribs) and his sock Zardeloleo77 (talk · contribs)) has been adding material about his organization (called BIENALSUR) and their artists to both the English and Spanish Wikipedias. He has already been sanctioned on the Spanish Wikipedia, so out of common sense, I opted to remove the promotional content here from the employee in question. I won't revert your reversion, but I'd like to make it clear that this employee will continue adding the promo here if nothing is done. Best regards. Taichi (talk) 19:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Taichi The issue is "quite simple" to you, but you left no informative edit summary to tell other editors why you were deleting sourced information. You have left no message on the talk pages of those two editors to point out WP:COI, WP:PAID, inappropriate username, etc. If you believe Zard... is a sockpuppet of ARTE..., then please report this in the appropriate way, rather than just stating here on my talk page that they are a sock.
If I see appropriate-looking content, sourced to an apparently WP:RS (even if a bare URL), removed with no explanation I will usually replace it, assuming that the removing editor has no good reason to remove it but perhaps believes that a bare URL is not a valid reference or that a sentence with a red link in it is not worth including. Please explain your edits to other editors. Thanks. PamD 20:56, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

24 July 2025

[edit]

PamD, why have you been bothering me non-stop today? Thank you for you contributions. I get some of my edits are my fault. But, its creeping me out. I am trying to build an encyclopedia not vandalize it. CostalCal (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CostalCal I can see that you're trying to contribute positively, but removing content because you can't see immediately a source or removing maintenance tags like {{cn}} isn't helping to build the encyclopedia. Creating lots of redirects prematurely looks as if perhaps you're over-keen to get the credit for starting an article when eventually some else does so: I didn't comment on all those 2028 election redirects, though they seem pretty questionable.
It's quite usual, once one sees a problematic edit, to have a look at that editor's other work, and comment appropriately. But I'll try to avoid creeping you out. Just edit carefully, tag as uncited rather than remove, and please remember to explain all your edits in edit summaries. Happy Editing! PamD 16:19, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: A/b: Auto/Biography Studies (July 26)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MediaKyle was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
MediaKyle (talk) 12:13, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, PamD! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! MediaKyle (talk) 12:13, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red August 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | August 2025, Vol 11, Issue 8, Nos. 326, 327, 344, 345, 346


Online events:

Announcements:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

--Rosiestep (talk) 14:51, 30 July 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Every day a school day

[edit]

Just sharing with my talk page watchers something new I've learned from Wikipedia today: that Americans use Esq as a suffix for a lawyer of any gender. When I saw Francine A. Brookins, Esq. listed as a bishop in African Methodist Episcopal Church#Current bishops and assignments I thought it was some sort of sexist vandalism (digging around for better sources for her female colleague who is at AfD, I found one source about a female preacher being locked out of her church by her congregation), or that maybe she was a man despite a usually female forename, but I now know better! PamD 09:32, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments re small categories!

[edit]

Greetings, I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciated your clear-headed comments in the RFC for SMALLCAT back in 2023. Not surprised to learn that you are a librarian. :) Unfortunately, I was dealing with family health issues at the time and missed the whole thing.

I only just learned about it in the course of engaging in a lonely effort at CFD over the last couple of days, in a bunch of CFD's for single-article cats (much like your Category:Nigerien architects) that I am defending because they are "part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme." The onslaught (which has been under way for some time) is being waged by a 2-man team led by User:LibStar, and of course, his reliable accomplice Marcocapelle. Nobody else bothers to comment these days. So it was truly heartening to come across your comments on the issue in that RFD! Best regards from California, Anomalous+0 (talk) 13:21, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anomalous+0 Marcopelle is not my accomplice. calling this an "onslaught" waged is bordering on personal attack. LibStar (talk) 23:31, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Church image for Milton Keynes?

[edit]
Milton Keynes parish church

Is this more what you had in mind?

Seriously though, the domed church is right in the centre (316 Saxon Gate, Milton Keynes MK9 2ES)

The collage had a thorough discussion a couple of years ago, see talk:Milton Keynes#New infobox collage. The most important message is that CMK is not MK, merely first among equals. So top billing yes but not dominant.

So what did you expect? Concrete brutalism? (none, the major influence is Mies van der Rohe) Sink estate per East Enders (they had to film that in London). I'm intrigued to know what your mental map says? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:48, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't know: if that church (Cornerstone) is something which says "MK" to those who know the area (like Leeds Town Hall for Leeds), then fine. The whole topic of collages and representative images is fraught. But I think people need to be reminded about mobile users, and the importance of the choice of that first landscape-format image (I wish I could remember where it was that I saw the exact algorithm for choice of the mobile banner image). PamD 19:09, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is a major feature in CMK (and its dome used to dominate the skyline until surrounded by later multistory buildings). It is one of the main things people would see when moving up the slope from the Central station. It has a clever design for the cross: six (8?) arms so that you see a cross from every direction. Obviously the shopping building (G2 listed) is the most substantial architectural feature but not very photogenic. That is wby the second CMK pic is of the gallery: unique recent architecture and shows some of Campbell Park.
Yes, I agree that a 1/2/2 layout with a panorama pic on top would be ideal but the landscape topology doesn't help. I think it would need someone with a good drone-mounted camera to do it justice. One taken orthogonally to the ridge indicated by the 107 metre contour on this pre-MK map would do the job, I think. This is far too high: in trying to do everything it delivers nothing meaningful. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:57, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
For your many Women in Red articles! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 00:54, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PamD&oldid=1303889595"