User talk:MichaelMaggs

This talk page is automatically archived by lowercase sigmabot III. Any sections older than 120 days are automatically archived.

Subscriptions are at User talk:MichaelMaggs/Subscriptions

Good article reassessment for Berkhamsted

Hi. A page you have contributed to, Berkhamsted, has been nominated for a 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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:08, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable non-free use File:The Highway Code, cover to 2022 edition.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:The Highway Code, cover to 2022 edition.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 廣九直通車 (talk) 05:26, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September music

Thinking of you on St. Michael's Day: on top of The Company of Heaven and a Bach cantata, I show a collection of DYK around people called Michael on my user page ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:20, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice, thank you. MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unity Mitford

I see you reverted my addition the the Popular Culture section on Unity Mitford's page, when I added details of her frequent appearances in the novel Munich Wolf, on the basis that the book is insufficiently notable. I would suggest this might be revisited. The book may not be high literature, but it is at least as notable in its way as, say, Outrageous, the TV series which is included. The author, Rory Clements, has sold more than one million books to date, published by major publishers such as Penguin, making him one of the UK's most popular current authors. Some of his books are currently being adapted for TV and the author himself has appeared on the Sunday Times bestselling list and has twice won the CWA Ellis Peters Historical Fiction Award. Munich Wolf itself is available via every major bookseller and, on Amazon, its reviews are in the thousands. Wikipedia itself states that 'Self-published content, books almost no-one has heard of' should not be included, but 'Popular television shows and best-selling books' should be considered. Clements, and Munich Wolf, are clearly much closer to the latter category than the first. On that basis, I think the entry should be included. If you still disagree, perhaps the question should be placed on the discussion page for a wider range of views? Neilinabbey (talk) 12:01, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, MOS:POPCULT makes it clear that Cultural references about the article's subject should not be included merely because they exist. Cultural aspects of the subject should be included only if they are supported by reliable secondary or tertiary sources that discuss the subject's cultural impact in some depth. The mere appearance of the subject in a film, song, video game, television show, or the like is insufficient. In order to include the book in the Unity Mitford article, you'd need to find some reliable source focused on Unity Mitford that discusses the importance of the book to an understanding of Unity. That's what's crucial, not the other way round: the importance of Unity to the topic of the book doesn't matter here.

The fact that some of the entries in the list may be bad isn't an argument for adding more. I haven't looked at existing entries, but some others may need to be cleared out as well.

You've argued that the book itself should be considered notable. That's not crucial here, as we're not creating a new book article. If we were, we'd need to consider WP:NBOOK, requiring significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Volume of sales, reader reviews, popularity, or the notability of the author aren't in themselves enough; the requirements are much more specific than that. MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:47, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Birth Years

I'm not sure if it notifies you when I responded on my talk page so I decided to put it on your talk page, too, to make sure you see it. I'm very sorry for violating the rules. I'm not well-versed in them so, to be on the safe side, I'll stop adding birth years altogether. I genuinely appreciate the warning and reversions. GamerKlim9716 (talk) 18:38, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did get a notoification when you replied on your talk page, but thanks anyway for your reply here, too. All the best, MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:41, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you MichealMaggs, for thanking me my edit from The Forsyte Saga (2002 TV series). 🍀🍀🍀 Eru719 (talk) 09:48, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]