User talk:TNstingray

Mount Rushmore revert

Your edit summary asked "What is this" for the addition "ksh:Bersch Rushmore". What that was was someone attempting to add an interlanguage link to the list of other language Wikipedia versions, and doing it wrong - that gets added on Wikidata. I've gone ahead and taken care of it. Oddly, there seems to be a bunch of short Mount Rushmore articles being created in obscure-language Wikipedias by one or more IP users - this is the second attempted add I've seen in the last week. Peter G Werner (talk) 00:50, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Makes sense, I initially wondered if it was something foreign language-related but I couldn't see what it was actually doing in the article. TNstingray (talk) 01:13, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi TNstingray. Thank you for your work on Iosactis vagabunda. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

not mentioned in target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:07, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

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) 00:50, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

"Pope Trump" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Pope Trump 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/2026 April 12 § Pope Trump until a consensus is reached. Skemous (talk) 22:42, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

Harry Potter RfDs

Thanks for doing these as well, I just wanted to let you know that before nominating these, you should check the redirect history to see if it was ever an article and then blanked and redirected (WP:BLAR) and/or merged into another article. If so, this introduces complications as there might be salvageable content and/or copyright attribution issues. Do note that some editors may have not properly followed the guidelines for merging and attribution, especially decades ago. If so, this needs to be fixed.

If it appears that there was no merge into another article, you can summarise the pre-BLAR content to justify why it's not worth salvaging, usually by stating that it was unsourced. See some of the previous RfDs listed at the various talk pages for examples. Fork99 (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

Composers

When I joined Wikipedia (in 2009), composers had no infoboxes. It became a hot topic, but - if you ask me - calmed down, and by now most composers have one. A small group of editors doesn't like them, and - as you may have guessed - the principal author of RVW is among them. The discussion on Classical music resulted in this, - a hidden notice not to add an infobox without prior consensus was removed. You could just add a box and see what happens. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:35, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your response! Crazy how "principal author" is something we have to deal with on a collaborative project! I'll add one and see how it goes... TNstingray (talk) 12:49, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

I should have known from reading through the RfC link you provided at Talk:Ralph Vaughan Williams#Infobox that this wasn't going to go well. TNstingray (talk) 18:46, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for the effort. - It was a nice surprise to see Bizet's Les pêcheurs de perles, by Brian Boulton, principal author of Imogen Holst, on the main page where we had Bach's Es erhub sich ein Streit, BWV 19 yesterday, - see stories. I saw the opera last year, see music. - I would like to see the conflict end, - it's just a waste of time, and not good for editor relations. But I - regarded by many as the key problem in the matter (and why they didn't tell me) - am certainly not the right person to begin peace talks. - I added to the Holst discussion, saying the same in other words. There is no contentious topic "infoboxes", there is only a contentious topic "featured articles by a small number of editors", basically three editors, and a number of articles involved below 100, possibly not even 30. They could be put under some kind of protection - as a museum of old-style article writing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:41, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

The main page pointed me at Carl Nielsen today, - I had forgotten that we had an infobox discussion for him (featured article by 4 authors, quite unusual) in 2023! In the end, the nominator said that 2 weeks passed without further input, and added the reverted thing back. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 3 October 2026 (UTC)