User talk:SchroCat

Articles seeking peer review
before featured article candidacy

• February 11: List of Neon Genessi Evangelion characters
• February 20: Driving in Madagascar
• February 23: NDA (song)
• March 20: 1919 Copa del Rey Final
• March 28: Reputation (album)
• April 2: Entre a Mi Mundo
• April 2: Skullgirls
• April 4: McDonnell Douglas Phantom in UK service
• April 12: Air Board (Australia)‎
• April 14: Protactinium
• April 18: Philippines
• April 26: Julius Nepos
• April 26: Ministerial by-election
• April 29: Resolute desk
• May 11: Stargazy pie
• May 12: Dietrich v The Queen
• May 19: Phoolan Devi
• May 23: Theodore II Laskaris
• May 28: Florence Petty

Unanswered peer reviews here.

New FAC and PR

To any friendly talk page watchers, I have:

• Edward Dando at FAC
• Private Case at PR

If there is anyone who fancies commenting on these, I would be grateful. Cheers - SchroCat (talk)

Boulton and Park

A very fine article and enjoyable read, well done. Mackensen (talk) 13:26, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, that’s very kind of you. - SchroCat (talk) 14:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Boulton and Park

Can you please explain exactly what's the matter with my commas copy editing? There's no tag regarding what wording style it must be used, so I can't know if you're referring to a manual of style that support the current use of commas; however, my view is that they were indeed an improvement in readability. So unless the article is written in a clear style, which prescribes the current commas usage, that is not indicated in any tag (e.g. British English, Oxford spelling, etc.), I maintain that they were improvements. In most cases, it appears there is a lack of commas, which also improve visual aesthetics by having it before a reference. In some cases, such as "The judge, Sir Alexander Cockburn, the Lord Chief Justice", there is a clear abuse of commas, so how exactly is "The judge Sir Alexander Cockburn, the Lord Chief Justice", is not at least a minor improvement in clarity and readability?

Or what about this: "When they appeared at Bow Street Magistrates' Court the morning after the arrest they were still clothed in the women's dresses from the previous evening"? No comma at all! I think comma in these two latest examples also helps clear ambiguity. Again, I may well be wrong, as English is not my first language, but all the comma copy edit I did—I've seen many good articles here using the same style I adopted. So either this article is using a specific style that, however, is not specified at all, in which case I would adapt myself to it and accept it, or you didn't give a valid reasoning to revert my edits other than "I don't like it".

P.S. How is "the Liberal Party Member of Parliament" not a WP:SEAOFBLUE violation? It may also be a WP:COMMON violation, as unlike the first link, which may be useful, that's a common word that do not add anything and is not relevant to the article the same way "homosexual" is, which I believe, if I am not mistaken, that you delinked—again, I can only guess, on WP:COMMON grounds, and I have no issue with that. But there must be consistency, and I would like to hear a clear explanation and reason for why my commas copyediting are not an improvement, especially regarding readability (that phrase without a comma at all is hard to read) and ambiguity clarity. Thank you very much, no hard feelings. Davide King (talk) 18:43, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for coming here with your comments. Comma use is flexible in many circumstances and differs between EngVar usage, old school/new school and 1,001 other things. It’s one of the areas where if an article has a set style (limited use of them, for example), there is not necessarily a need to add them. The two examples you give above are both correct, although there are other ways they can be framed using either less or more commas. Don’t forget that FAs have been through several reviews by numerous people to judge on—among other things—grammatical precision, clarity and readability, and this article is no exception.

In terms of the ‘sea of blue’, the guidelines are just that: guidelines. They are not set in stone, particularly with such flexible wording as “if possible”. Having the wording in a sensible flow but with two links is better than semantic acrobatics to separate the links, or leaving something arguably pertinent unlinked.

Thanks - SchroCat (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

And Boulton and Park again

Meant to congratulate you while the Victorian Era’s Hinge and Bracket were on the front page. But, for reasons I can’t bear to go into, I’ve just got home after spending 7 hours in a Morrisons car park in Denbigh. Anyways, well done! KJP1 (talk) 23:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks KJP1. And all from a chat we had in the pub one day! The car park sounds terrible - I hope you had something to help you pass the time. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 06:22, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

hello, need help

could I ask you for help with something? Lord Midkowitch the first (talk) 21:56, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

I’m not sure how you landed on my talk page with your first edit, but you can always ask for help. SchroCat (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

okay good. can you get fandom staff to unblock my IP address cause I was blocked for no reason and I can't get a response from them, I haven't even done anything wrong there. you know what fandom is right? you know the website? Lord Midkowitch the first (talk) 22:33, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

I’m sorry, but I don’t know which website and what your circumstances are. I doubt I’d have any pull with anyone on any website in getting blocks lifted. Sorry I can’t help. - SchroCat (talk) 22:37, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

it's okay. thanks for responding! Lord Midkowitch the first (talk) 22:42, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Terrific

I loved this article Emily Davison. Outstanding and complete in every way. Such an interesting person. Bruxton (talk) 01:28, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you - that’s very kind of you. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 05:32, 3 June 2023 (UTC)