User talk:Keivan.f

This is Keivan.f's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 31 days

Welcome to Keivan.f's talk page. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your talk page (or the article's talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or let me know where specifically you'd prefer the reply. I will try to WP:PING you as well. Conversely if you are replying to something I've said on another talk page, reply there and include {{ping|Keivan.f}} to alert me.

Please don't template me! Everybody makes mistakes, and this user finds user warning templates impersonal and disrespectful. If there's something you'd like to say, please take a moment to write a comment below in your own words.

It is 2:01 AM where this user lives. ^(Purge)

@Keivan.f As we all know, Catherine recently penned a letter to the Irish Guards of which she is the Colonel. Should we include it under the Health subsection of the Personal life section or is it insignificant in the longer term? Looking forward to know your thoughts on this. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 07:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's absolutely trivial and nothing more than WP:NOTNEWS. Keivan.f^Talk 07:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Have you reviewed any FAC in the past? Just asking since both Gog the Mild and Tim have previously said that reviewing other nominations at FAC helps in gaining reviewers for one's own nomination. No wonder there is a nominations-to-reviews ratio on the FAC statistics page, which is undoubtedly an important metric.

Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 08:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On other Wikipedia editions, yes; on English Wikipedia, no. Frankly it's quid pro quo. You review one article and they might review yours and it overall helps with decreasing the backlog, but it still doesn't guarantee that you'll get support votes. You article has to be genuinely good. Keivan.f^Talk 15:38, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f Well Catherine's going to be attending the King's Birthday Parade that is the Trooping of Colour tomorrow. Do you think it should be included within the career like "She returned to the public..." or a similar phrase. She has also spoken of returning to public duties this summer. Looking forward to your response. Regards MSincccc (talk) 17:02, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, I'm not opposed to including a sentence on this development but it should be noted that this does not mean that she'll be carrying out engagements every week. It's going to be in a limited capacity. Keivan.f^Talk 17:08, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously she has herself stated that she will be carrying out only a few engagements apart from her appearance tomorrow. What should be a suitable sentence or should that be done tomorrow (because she has never missed the Trooping the Colour except for in 2020 and 2021 since her wedding). Looking forward to your response. Regards MSincccc (talk) 17:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment she has said she "hopes to join a few public engagements". This is not definitive. We have to wait until she starts carrying out engagements before including any statements in her article per WP:CRYSTAL. Tomorrow, it can be mentioned in the article that Trooping the Colour in June 2024 marked her first public appearance since the beginning of her medical issues (or something along those lines). Keivan.f^Talk 17:20, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are the citations I have added fine as they are (from the CNN and BBC News)? The sentence can be added tomorrow. Looking forward to your response. Regards MSincccc (talk) 17:26, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, they're fine. You can find more up to date references from the same sources once she has made an appearance tomorrow. Keivan.f^Talk 17:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then I will replace the references. What else? Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 17:33, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f Its an official statement now coming from the Princess herself. We are not speculating her; she has confirmed her attendance tomorrow. Why should we hide the references then? Regards MSincccc (talk) 17:33, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're essentially putting in sources in anticipation of an event that is yet to happen. You have to understand WP:CRYSTAL, which is a policy that must be followed. Yes, it is confirmed that the Royal Family will attend Trooping the Colour yet Charles could drop dead tonight and the whole thing could get cancelled. This is why we don't put statements about future events in an article and adding the references there is nothing more than clutter. At least keep one of the two new ones in the article's body if you are absolutely hellbent on having an updated source. Keivan.f^Talk 18:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is what WP:CRYSTAL says-Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation, rumors, or presumptions. Wikipedia does not predict the future. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred. Furthermore, anticipating something like the King dropping dead tonight is highly unlikely at this moment. By the way, what do you mean by-...which is a policy that must be followed. Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 18:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CRYSTAL is a policy. Wikipedia policies have to be followed under all circumstances; violating them would result in sanctions, blocks, etc. We 'anticipate' that Trooping the Colour will happen tomorrow. It is verified and widely reported in sources. However, we are also talking about two cancer patients (Charles and Catherine) and they can have ups and lows. Until such time that the event has happened I would refrain from adding anything to the prose. I would also introduce only one new source for the moment. As I said, once the event has happened and Catherine has made her appearance you can update the article with a sentence and a reliable source. Keivan.f^Talk 19:03, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When are we going to get Catherine's article peer reviewed? MSincccc (talk) 19:10, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the midst of my studies and work I have not found time to read the book I have on her. A more up to date book by Robert Jobson is coming out this August or September. You should also consider reading a book and introducing new citations from print sources. Once that is done then the article can be sent for peer review and hopefully it will get promoted at FA afterwards. Keivan.f^Talk 19:51, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you buy a book on her or are you referring to the Internet Archive sources? The latter allows you to read an entire book for free after registration. By the way, which book would you suggest me to read? Looking forward to your response. Regards MSincccc (talk) 02:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f I do require a little more time before getting the article peer reviewed. That would most probably take place around the first few weeks of July. Hopefully we can get this wrapped before autumn. Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 08:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in no rush. In fact, I'm bombarded with so many things in my life at the moment that I would rather proceed slowly here. With regards to your earlier question which I forgot to answer: I already had Nicholl's biography on her but as I said I'm waiting for a more recent biography to be published. Then I will expand and restructure the article using these sources if I find some spare time. Keivan.f^Talk 08:24, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f I don't think that a complete rewrite is required in this case. By the way, the traditional British sources like The Times, The Guardian, BBC News and The Daily Telegraph should be retained as they are of a high quality given that her article does not contain any political facts. Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 09:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not against using those sources; they are used in many other featured articles. Regardless, I have to see if more context can be provided for some of the information that is already in the article, like her trips; something that you can see in Elizabeth II's article for example. And by that I don't mean mentioning every single trip and where in the country they specifically went, but rather how the trip was received in the hosting country, etc. We have to make sure that arguments that parts of the article read like a "laundry list" don't come up again. Keivan.f^Talk 14:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f Are you suggesting that I leave out mentioning some of her and William's trips abroad? If so, I'll take care of that sometime this weekend. Also, what should I do if I can't access a book source on Google Books or Internet Archive? Is there another option? I look forward to your response. MSincccc (talk) 15:07, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I wouldn't remove anything at this juncture. If more relevant info can be found on these tours in print sources then they can be contextualized rather than removed.

Try this tool which is a good start. Use the book's ISBN to locate it across multiple platforms. You can always get some books temporarily from local libraries or rent/purchase online versions (ebooks) from whatever website it is that you usually get your books from; could be Amazon, or if you hate its owner Jeff Bezos you can try BookDepot or Blackwells, etc. These all depend on what format you prefer, where you live and whether they ship to your area, what your budget is, whether they actually have the book that you're looking for, etc. Try consulting with some of the people around you who are actually into buying books. Keivan.f^Talk 16:20, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have trimmed down the article by removing a lot of the "She did this; She did that.." material and will continue to do so. Also I have added a sentence each related to the response and aftermath of a number of events/tours covered under the "Public Life" section. Shall I list it at PR then? Regards. MSincccc (talk) 05:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f Will you allow me to proceed as sole nominator once I am done with preparing the article if you are going through time constraints? You can put forth your suggestions anytime given our past collaborations. Looking forward to your response soon. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 07:28, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can put the article up for peer review any time you like. There is no limit as to how many times an article can be peer reviewed.

I would rather be on board as nominator. As a major contributor to the article I cannot comment on its prose or advocate for its promotion during any potential FA nominations (and I don't think the article is ready for it at this juncture anyway). Keivan.f^Talk 11:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f No worries here. I would include your name as co-nominator, in any case, given your contributions to the article over the past decade. But I would really like to know your opinion on the content added by me recently. I have covered the public response and outcome for almost all major tours listed in the main article and expanded her "Public image" section.

Comment: Article has been listed at Peer review.

Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 18:11, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at the article over the weekend. Keivan.f^Talk 02:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are the number of books cited in Catherine's article fine for an FAC? I had to drop a lot of material under the "Charity work" and "Public Life" section to lay more stress on her more significant activities. Looking forward to your response. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 07:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]