The Signpost: 27 January 2020Edit

"A Line (Blue) (Los Angeles Metro)" listed at Requested movesEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the requested move of A Line (Blue) (Los Angeles Metro) and other Metro pages. Since you had some involvement with pages related to A Line (Blue) (Los Angeles Metro) and others, you might want to participate in the discussion if you wish to do so. Lexlex (talk) 11:33, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Spliting discussion for [[ Member state of the European Union ]]Edit

An article that you have been involved with ( Member state of the European Union ) has content that is proposed to be removed and move to another article ( Member states of the European Union ). If you are interested, please visit the discussion at Talk:Member state of the European Union#Splitting proposal . Thank you. Doug Mehus T·C 23:33, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Assistance Requested on Kentucky Colonel ArticleEdit

I noticed your comments on the Wikipedia article Kentucky Colonel and know you understand the commission and the honor well. I am one of the editors for the page and a commissioner for Kentucky Colonels International. There has been a lawsuit filed against us for using the term "Kentucky Colonels" as part of our name, the Honorable Order of Kentucky Colonels has trademarked the term as their own and are making its use exclusive for their commercial use and profit (the purpose of trademarks right?). There is more information about this on our website Kentucky Colonels International and information can also be found in the Google news headlines. Problemsmith (talk) 02:28, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. That's pretty interesting! I would have thought that term would be well established to be in the public domain or under the control of the governor rather than the HOKC. After all, AFAIK the governor can bestow that title legitimately on whosoever they see fit, and the HOKC has no special recognition enshrined in law (and various others who have no affiliation with HOKC have also used the term – e.g., the Eastern Kentucky Colonels). —BarrelProof (talk) 04:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
There is a new article that came out, apparently the new Governor has made an unethical alliance with the HOKC and now the public (anyone) can now nominate a Kentucky colonel, it is no longer a privilege reserved for Kentucky colonels, this was confirmed in a news article that came out on Google News search last night by Marty Finley, Reporter at Louisville Business First. The trademark that the HOKC filed is dated February 17, 2020, our organization Kentucky Colonels International became legitimized on January 30th. As we understand though if they get their day in court next week a "gag order" will be issued against us to civilly defend our constitutional rights, we have mined a plethora of information that shows that this is a term which belongs in the public domain on our website, unfortunately though the motion filed in Federal Court yesterday comes after our website and the information we are sharing that all predates their existence. Unfortunately most of the information only exists in the Internet Archive and the Library of Congress, sites the public is not very apt to be able to find, I will be working on a new search in a day or so, to publish additional links there. You will probably want to see also the section we developed with links about First Colonels under our History section it shows that the HOKC has manipulated substantial facts in history to show deference to specific governors going all the way back to 1813. Thank you for taking an interest, I cannot consider myself an objective editor at this moment. I have also notified Berean Hunter on his talk page relative to this to see if he can take an interest as a Wikipedia editor. Problemsmith (talk) 09:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
I have a few questions. I see that the Louisville Business First article that you referred to says "KCI especially took umbrage with former Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin requiring a donation from Kentucky Colonels to nominate someone for the title, calling it 'unethical' and 'unjust'." My first question is who was Bevin requiring such donations to be given to? Was he requiring donations to the HOKC or to some other entity?
The article then says "Crose confirmed the donation component under Bevin, but she said Gov. Andy Beshear has changed the nomination process to allow those who are not Kentucky Colonels to nominate someone through an online form." My second question is whether there is still a donation requirement under Beshear. The Crose remark about a change of the nomination process doesn't seem to answer that question.
I think the question of who can nominate someone seems somewhat irrelevant. The governor has the discretion to bestow the honor, and as far as I know, the governor has the full authority to decide who can nominate someone or whether there is even a nomination process at all.
As a comment, I would think that a donation requirement might also be within the governor's discretion as well – as long as the donations are going to charity rather than into the pocket of the governor or their friends.
As a further comment, all of that is separate from the question of whether there are really some valid trademark rights to dispute and whether an organization of KC's that is different from the HOKC is allowed to exist or not. There seems to be several distinct issues that are getting confused in the coverage.
BarrelProof (talk) 19:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 March 2020Edit

Sorry for bothering you, but...Edit

New Page Patrol needs experienced volunteers
  • New Page Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles. We could use a few extra hands on deck if you think you can help.
  • Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; Wikipedia needs experienced users to perform this task and there are precious few with the appropriate skills. Even a couple reviews a day can make a huge difference.
  • If you would like to join the project and help out, please see the granting conditions and review our instructions page. You can apply for the user-right HERE. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 20:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

About the source for Diamond Princess casesEdit

Please recheck this source as it actually contains information about Diamond Princess cases. Scroll down further until you see a green table that shows the numbers of cases in Diamond Princess.

The reason why I added this source is that its content is updated everyday, so that we wouldn't have to replace the source link when we update information. Many Wikipedia editors don't update source links even when they update the numbers, so I thought it'd be easier for everyone. 27.147.201.144 (talk) 17:16, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I see. I don't know why I didn't see that before. Maybe it was the page translation tool I was using. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:50, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

A Boy was BornEdit

Do you have no more serious problems, than writing a composition not as the composer published it? Lucky you. You hurt me, by revert and edit summary, but perhaps you are not aware of that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:31, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

I had no intention for harm, although I did react negatively to discovering that after five years you had come back and quietly overturned the outcome of the extensive discussion. —BarrelProof (talk) 13:46, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
I was harmed all these five rather seven years, as you might have known. Most of the participants of the discussion seem to be not active, so o longer interested. Have a good day. I'll unwatch the article which to have created on the composer's centenary, and presented on DYK on Christmas Day, was one of my better ideas and contributions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2020Edit