Jump to content

User talk:JMF

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
History of Milton Keynes Milton Keynes Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 John Ogilby Robert Hooke

Your thread has been archived

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hello JMF! The thread you created at the Teahouse, How to undo a page creation, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:14, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Futura in "usage" section

[edit]

After fewer vandalistic edits (1, 2, 3 and 4) reverted as unsourced material, should we removed some trivial sections (which is unsourced) from Futura (typeface), unless if is sourced. 124.217.87.71 (talk) 13:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What about for Gill Sans in "usage" section that fails WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS? 124.217.87.71 (talk) 15:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree in both cases but the question needs to be put at talk:Futura (typeface) and talk:Gill Sans , not here. Maybe even generically at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Typography. Most of the entries that are cited have "citations" that are not valid, they are OR (editor observes a typeface to be in use and decides what it is) or WP:PRIMARY (source self-declares). Please raise it at one or all of those talk pages. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:46, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brick

[edit]

Do you ever feel like you're just talking to a brick wall? Perhaps it's just me. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is even a WP for that: WP:IDHT (and maybe WP:ILIKEIT). 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:55, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What's next, I wonder. A video of his children, calling Order the cat, on the University of Essex's Official Facebook page? It's a little exhausting. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cheer up, it could be the Taylor Swift page. [deliberately not wlinking!] 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like there have been 32 Alternative Christmas messages on Channel 4, since it started in 1993. I'm not sure how many of those are still available via Channel 4, or YouTube, or Facebook, or Twitter... Martinevans123 (talk) 11:15, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
and in any of them will the contributor have made an exclusive substantive statement that will make it the best (or only!!) citeable source. I'm thinking of a number that requires no fingers to count. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:21, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Luckily Stephen Fry already had a RS review source. But the others...? have not dared to look yet. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:30, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Misunderstood...

[edit]

Dear senior editor, may ask you to exercise some assumption of good faith?

"...and you have been an editor for long enough to know about WP:NOTORUM, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:RGW and WP:ADVOCACY "

I included enough evidence for the topic you deleted to warrant some negotiation about the severity of this summary judgement: WP:NOTORUM, WP:SOAPBOX, WP:RGW and WP:ADVOCACY


~~~~ Janosabel (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at the WikiProject talk page. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:23, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Acts of Union 1707, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Convention Parliament.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 February 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * Sent manually via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:45, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Related to Page CE Marking

[edit]

Hi!

I've realised that my revisions of the content is accepted but my reference to guidance paper related to CE Marking Guide was deleted. I'm sorry that I couldn't use RefToolbar properly which I'm not familiar, but I'd like to explain the reason to the external CE marking guide which answers more questions and state detailed information, related to missing modules in addition to general informations which are very frequently asked and searched by the interested parties, for example technical file, prices and terms. Even if we are a certification provider company, we didn't mention to our services in the Guide which is purely prepared for information seekers, so there is not any direct advertisement to our services.

On the other hand, there are other references which links to other guidance papers which provides different informations from our guidance.

Therefore I beleive our guideance paper is worth to be added to references for many reasons which provides important, rigth and true information that is not mentioned in the main page.

Thanks for your time.

İlker Sertifike (talk) 08:13, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sertifike:, there are a few policy issues that stand in your way.
  1. Am I correct to infer that the similarity of your user name and the name of the website means that you are connected with it? If so, you must first study and respond to policies WP:Conflict of interest (and possibly WP:Paid editing?)
  2. A WP:self published source, such as this one appears to be, is generally not accepted as a wp:reliable source and thus may not be used as a citation.
So it is not obvious that your website can be cited in any case. You may continue to improve the article using your knowledge but any additions or changes you make must be supported by citing a reliable, independent, third party source that says so. (So I will have to look in more detail at your revisions as I only noticed your 'stray' reference.--𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:35, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Storm Éowyn - Impact vs Effect

[edit]

I manually undid your edit on Storm Éowyn. "Impact" is correctly used. In this case, "impacts" refers to the severe, disruptive consequences of Storm Éowyn, such as fallen trees, power outages, and transport disruptions across the UK, Isle of Man, Ireland, and eastern Norway, emphasising the immediate and significant effects on daily life; whereas "effects" is a more general term that encompasses all outcomes, both minor and major, without highlighting the intensity or disruption caused by the storm. Please do not use "effect". TattooedLeprechaun｜🗣️💬 17:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TattooedLeprechaun: What provoked my edit was the word impact was grievously overused, even two or three times in the same sentence. Using the verbs impact (though that is an Americanism) , strike, affect and the nouns effect and impact makes the text easier to read as well as livelier. Perhaps with that in mind you might review and find a middle way? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There was no need to change it. "Impact" was used to clarify the intenseness of the situation. TattooedLeprechaun｜🗣️💬 20:56, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TattooedLeprechaun: If a word is overused, it loses its impact. (No pun intended). 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:17, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then change it to another word like "impact", but not "effect" as "effect" is too light of a word in this situation.
If you want, you can change them to these below or something similar:
  • Repercussions – Emphasises lasting negative outcomes.
  • Consequences – Highlights cause-and-effect relationships.
  • Destruction – Suitable for severe damage.
  • Devastation – Conveys large-scale harm.
  • Toll – Often used for human, financial, or structural losses.
  • Damage – Direct and widely understood.
  • Aftermath – Good for discussing longer-term effects.
  • Ramifications – Highlights broader, sometimes unexpected outcomes.
These still convey the seriousness and damage Storm Éowyn did, but they don't use "impact".
TattooedLeprechaun｜🗣️💬 13:17, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unicode: CR control char

[edit]

Sorry, but now the sentence is plainly wrong. "End of Line" in classic Mac Os and other old OSes is signalled by a CR not foolowed by LF. Treutwein (talk) 16:29, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Treutwein: yes, fair comment. I have tweaked the text to remove the error. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:47, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've renamed to "Minor edits 2025" on my Talk

[edit]

My Talk page has an old section "Minor edits" so I've renamed the section you started User talk:Pol098#Minor edits 2025. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 21:20, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And many thanks indeed for your offer to set up archiving my Talk page, now implemented. I should have done this long ago ... Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 March 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:05, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Draft

[edit]

Hello JMF,

I have been working on a Draft: Paul J. Maillet. I recognize edits are needed and that improving the draft will take time. But I have reached my limit in working on the draft on my own. Can you possibly provide feedback as to whether the draft, with eventual necessary edits, has any value to continue to be prepared for possible publication as an article? Also, what further steps would be needed to improve (whether possible) the draft? Your recommendations and guidance would truly be appreciated. (This will also help in the preparation of 2 other drafts that I hope to begin soon, that are historical in nature.)

Thank you for your time and consideration. M0RPHEMEZ00 M0RPHEMEZ00 (talk) 19:45, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@M0RPHEMEZ00: At a simple functional level, it looks ok apart from MOS:CAPS on section titles.
More significantly, there are two tests that you need to 'pass': WP:Biography of living persons and WP:notability. I have never done a biography so I am not really one to advise. Can you study the article about the Fritzl case to do a "compare and contrast". It is critically important that anything you write is cited twice over, because of the risk of being sued for libel. As for notability, it would be a good idea to ask for advice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Brunswick or even Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Canada. Perhaps someone there might help you with the draft because it is way outside my comfort zone. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:49, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tariff

[edit]

Honestly should have added "tax" after duty. Thank you for your edit. Eteethan (talk) 10:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no problem. In fact I already did exactly what you did (pipe trick) as per normal. Difference is only that I spotted the side-effect earlier. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 April 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Waist-to-height ratio

[edit]

Hi Sir, I’d like to suggest a small addition to the “Public health tool” section of the Waist-to-height ratio article. There’s an online calculator at https://humanbodycalculator.com/waist-to-height-ratio/ that allows users to quickly calculate their WHtR and see how it relates to their health. It could be helpful for readers to have access to such a tool directly from the article. Please let me know if this addition would be appropriate. Thanks! Armanalimolla (talk) 05:07, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Armanalimolla: No, it would not. See WP:ELNO. The calculation is trivial and is already more than adequately covered in the article.
See also WP:conflict of interest. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:20, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JMF&oldid=1286872003"