User talk:BarrelProof

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Thanks.

[edit]

Appreciated, thank you. Springnuts (talk) 19:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. (Apparently a response to this comment at Talk:Duke lacrosse case.) —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 January 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MR or RM?

[edit]

In the interest of not cluttering what is likely to be a long discussion I'm posting here. Regarding this comment, that RM was closed on procedural grounds less than 7 days (which is the minimum required). Instead of trying to take that to a WP:MR, asking it to be re-opened, its less WP:BUREAUCRATIC to just start a new RM. And in this case, the RM is only started after a WP:RFCBEFORE[1].VR (Please ping on reply) 22:24, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vice regent: Someone responded to my remark, pointing out the specific rationale for the previous discussion being rapidly closed, so I have withdrawn my remark. I was off-base. I should study the background more carefully before making such a remark. I think it is fine for this to proceed as an RM, although I still haven't studied the history very carefully. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:26, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kabaddi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Midlands, England.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 February 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * Sent manually via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:44, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops

[edit]

Thanks for catching this. I didn't think to check for the form with dots. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 19:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the note. Yes, the dots make a difference. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect 2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 26 § 2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation) until a consensus is reached. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 12:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:26, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

About my comment

[edit]

Hey, I just wanted to let you that I didn't set my comment at the top. When I replied, it defaulted to being at the top rather than actual me placing the reply there. Rager7 (talk) 21:43, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks for responding. I didn't realize the reply function operated that way. I generally don't use it (but I'm trying it now!). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:46, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BarrelProof No worries, it happens to me whenever I comment. Rager7 (talk) 21:48, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WT:MOSCAPS accounting

[edit]

We edit-conflicting on updating the top-of-page mini-noticeboard. As your most recent changes were more or less duplicated by some of mine, I didn't bother with nitpicky edit-conflict merging. If that ends up being flagged as a "revert" please ignore it. There wasn't anything wrong with your edit, I'm just late for something and didn't want to bother tweaking it precisely. :-)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:45, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 March 2025

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

WP:PDAB#Other articles with no other standalone article

[edit]

Hi, thank you for your contributions. I note your recent revert here.

Veny and Lioness Asuka are both standalone articles. Including Asuka in this section is misplaced. 162 etc. (talk) 16:26, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Whether topics have standalone articles or similar-looking titles or not makes no difference. The question is not whether articles have similar names, but whether the topics discussed in the articles have similar names, including alternative names and other considerations. See WP:DAB, which says disambiguation is "because [a title] refers to more than one subject covered by Wikipedia, either as the main topic of an article, or as a subtopic covered by an article in addition to the article's main topic". The topic's identifier does not need to be identical to the article's title. For albums and songs, there is a special agreement about articles being stand-alone, but even in that case the stand-alone title does not need to be identical in order for a topic name to be considered ambiguous. If a topic has (or has had) an alternative name, that needs to be considered as well. While the other articles have been renamed to unambiguous titles, the term "Asuka (wrestler)" remains ambiguous with their subjects. Having observed your editing for quite a while and your very-apparent level of experience and familiarity with the Wikipedia norms, I am surprised to see you taking this view. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:43, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't necessarily agree with your definition of WP:PDAB, but my specific concern is the placement of this entry. "Other articles with no other standalone article" should mean that there is no actual article, which Lioness Asuka and Veny definitely are.
I stand by my original interpretation, which is that Asuka (wrestler) is not partial disambiguation. However, I won't argue about it. If it is to be included, though, it belongs at WP:PDAB#(cricketer), (footballer), other sports players, not its current placement. 162 etc. (talk) 20:00, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think I agree with that last sentence. I don't know how it got put into that section. There are clearly other articles that have, as their main subject, a wrestler who has been called Asuka. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:12, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it's not that uncommon in wrestling, where ring names change often. Kane (wrestler) / Stevie Ray, Trinity (wrestler) / Naomi (wrestler), off the top of my head. The article titles however, are not in the form of Foo (wrestler) / Foo (bar wrestler), which is what PDAB is trying to address. 162 etc. (talk) 21:17, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe a PDAB title is any title of the form Foo (bar) in a case where some other bar is (or has prominently been) called Foo. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:37, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 April 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gulf of Mexico

[edit]

Articles suggesting that Mexico's Gulf Coastline is 1,743 miles all trace back to a flawed 'Scripps News' article from early January, 2025. In that article, the author mistakenly credits Mexico's entire east coastline to the Gulf when more than 250miles of the 1,723 is actually on the Caribean Sea (leaving Mexico with less than 1,500 miles of Gulf Coastline).

Mexico's Gulf coastline ends at the Cabo Catoche Lighthouse located approximately 21.604710, -87.103079) - https://web.archive.org/web/20161020064540/http://www.iho.int/iho_pubs/standard/S-23/S-23_Ed3_1953_EN.pdf

"It [Mexico] has a 9,330 kilometer coastline. Out of this length, 2,805 kilometers [1,743mi] face the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea. The remaining kilometers face the Gulf of California and Pacific Ocean." - https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-longest-coastlines-in-north-america.html Sccarney (talk) 16:30, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sccarney: That would help explain my remark that said "It's funny – when I look at it on a map, it looks like the US portion of the gulf coastline is longer than the Mexican one. Is that just me?" —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to message directly, but as an infrequent editor, I lack permission to join the talk. In any case, the links I provided predate the January chaos. Sccarney (talk) 17:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"worldatlas.com does not seem like a high-quality source"?
Seriously? Wikipedia already cites WorldAtlas.com 682 other times, and their page on the topic predates the controversy by over 6 years.
Meanwhile, current wiki numbers trace back to: https://www.scrippsnews.com/politics/can-trump-rename-the-gulf-of-mexico-to-the-gulf-of-america
Written by: Digital Content Creator: Taylor O'Bier Sccarney (talk) 19:51, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That could be an incorrect impression. I'm thinking that we need a very high quality source if we choose to believe such a source in preference to sources that seem to be mainstream reliable sources such as"
O'Bier, Taylor (January 7, 2025). "Can Trump rename the Gulf of Mexico to the 'Gulf of America?'". ABC10. Associated Press.
I guess that's the same article you're talking about. That says "Approximately 1,743 miles of Mexico's coastline borders the gulf". Obviously, the Associated Press is considered a good source.
I just did a little looking, and found Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 286#worldatlas.com, which seems to indicate no problem. It looked a little spammy to me at first glance.
Unfortunately, that worldatlas.com article does not break down how much of the coast is considered to be on the gulf and how much is on the Caribbean Sea.
—⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the only thing the AP did was reprint the scrippsnews article. By indicating as such in the byline, they abdicated responsibility for its content.
As for the Caribbean shoreline, the straight-line distance from the Cabo Catoche Lighthouse to the Belize border is over 240 miles. A 3-segment distance (Cabo Catoche-Cancun-Playa-del Carmen-Belize) pushes the distance over 250 miles. Any claim that suggests Mexico's Gulf Coast exceeds 1,500 miles is without basis in fact. Sccarney (talk) 20:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 May 2025

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Philippe Ouédraogo (cardinal), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Burkinabè.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]