User talk:Casliber/Archive 37

Thanks!

Thanks for participating in my RFA! I appreciate your support. Zagalejo^^^ 06:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Gray-crowned Rosy Finch

Gray-crowned Rosy Finch - after the last edit I am completely confused about the hyphen and capitalisation of the bird's name, the article name doesn't go with the first bold name, and perhaps the lowercase "finch" was intentional as an alternative ??? I care about the bird pictured in my archive ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Gerda, some composite names are flitting back and forth on wiki, reflecting the birdwatchers discussing these issues. Thus, here it is two capitals and no hyphen...... Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Flitting seems nice for birds ;) The German WP told me to write Yogo-Saphir, I told them not as long as it's Deutsche Radio Philharmonie Saarbrücken Kaiserslautern, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:08, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Broad-billed Fairywren

Re: Wiki=Malurus grayi # IOC=Chenorhamphus grayi ## Wiki=IOC=Broad-billed Fairywren

All the other birds in the genus have compatible names, but this bird has got a different binomial names on the Wiki and IOC. This genus is on the WP Birds main page under "Groups of articles heading towards featured topic (FT)". I note the taxonomy controversy briefly described in the article. As far as I am aware, the IOC tend to have names when a split is suggested and the Wiki does not follow IOC taxonomy. Has the taxonomy become any clearer recently? Snowman (talk) 11:48, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Aha, yes there was a recent paper on this, which was very interesting reading. I will link. Ah, I see the paper is already mentioned and IOC have followed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I hope an update based on a single paper is suitable for the Wiki. It is not on IUCN yet. I hope I did not prompt you to rush at it. Snowman (talk) 15:54, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

It's one of those that has been considered a species before so is not a radical departure. We can still have notable and distinctive subspecies pages too if needed, but I think this one will stick. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Can sockpupper or meatpuppet nominate or votes on RfA? If no, what are the solution? Best regards. --Dede2008 (talk) 16:13, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Can you let me know what situation this refers to? Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:09, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I have 21 sockpuppet account, used to ads, the socks were blocked by Elockid, and I blocked 2 weeks. --Dede2008 (talk) 12:06, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Any editor is limited to one vote in RfA. I am still not sure what you are proposing. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Circinus

 — Crisco 1492 (talk)) 08:04, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Tammar FAC

Hello, can you please review the tammar article for MOS and comprehensiveness? LittleJerry (talk) 17:10, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad you reminded me as I had a system of moving from oldest to youngest and I missed it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. LittleJerry (talk) 21:15, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

<whispers>

Hello. You have a new message at User talk:Keilana's talk page. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 16:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Casliber. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Secret ^account 03:01, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Peer review

This issue has come up in the peer review for the giant anteater article. Do you think this is a good enough source for a FA article? LittleJerry (talk) 03:31, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Nosing around, the site owner and author is a Paul Smith, who has published a Field Guide to Birds of Paraguay apparently. I'd lean "yes" but can see a "no" argument. Safer course would be getting fulltext or source mentioned in that pdf to source statement. I can help get some of them. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:45, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Casliber. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Corona Australis data.
Message added 04:47, 7 July 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 04:47, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Your note

I noted your note on my talk page. I have no "primary" account. Furthermore, without being rude, I must say that I have no disputes, so the services of the arbitration committee seem to be unneeded by me. But have a nice day! Cookies93 (talk) 09:10, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Cookies93

I was going to post this at ANI and then thought maybe I shouldn't. Please look at this edit and do what you think best. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 09:17, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

A couple more diffs you might not notice: [1] (notice the edit summary), followed by [2]. I haven't reverted those because the arbitration clerk has been understandably touchy about messing with that page.--Bbb23 (talk) 09:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment at Ya Kun Kaya Toast's ongoing peer review!

Since you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer interested in food and drink articles, would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia by giving a thorough review of the short, but interesting, article about Ya Kun Kaya Toast, a multinational kaya toast chain and Singaporean cultural icon? Thanks! 谢谢！Terima kasih! நன்றி! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:47, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Bipolar disorder

Please see: Talk:Bipolar disorder#cite regression. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 13:46, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

I know that there were some positive edits in there. But re-applying them is far less work than restoring all the other stuff. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 14:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Feel free to cut any of the merged bits you don't like. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 02:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Hydnora triceps

Some small referencing issues. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:32, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

dang, forgot that last bit - added now. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Wheels, big

Re big wheels' keep on churning -- I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be turning Nobody Ent 19:40, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Yup :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Paul McCartney FAC

The Paul McCartney article has now been thoroughly copyedited top-to-bottom by numerous editors including User:Lfstevens, who is a member of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. If you can find the time in your busy schedule, please consider stopping by and taking a look, and hopefully, !voting. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:47, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Chrysophyllum oliviforme

Yngvadottir (talk) 08:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Pheasant Coucal

Re: Pheasant Coucal. This Australian bird looks rather distinctive, and I was pleased to find an Creative Commons image of it on Flickr earlier today. Is there anything about it that you could make a DYK for it? Snowman (talk) 13:42, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, at 96 words of prose by Dr PDA script that's an easy 5x expansion. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:45, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Corona Australis

Hey, I added some stuff to the mythology of Corona Australis from Julius D.W. Staal's The New Patterns in the Sky. Hope it helps! I'll add anything else I can find. :) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Cool! Thanks! Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:57, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Corona Australis

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Great job!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:00, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Thx :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:06, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:11, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom question

Hi Casliber! I have one question about editors involved in cases. To be precise, I saw this case where initially there only 5 editors listed under List of users affected by or involved in this amendment. Later on, few editors added other names following few statements. So my question is that if a case has begun, then is it possible to add names later like this? Or was this addition not proper? Also, can anyone remove their name from the list himself? Please clarify. Thanks!  — TheSpecialUser ^(TSU) 15:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

• commenting here as I am one of the 2 users whose name are added. I was not a party to this case as the nominator Magog had only mentioned 5 names [3] After getting the notification on of the involved users TopGun has wrongly dragged me here by adding 2 more names[4] to make this a soup and distract the case using 11 month old diffs of unrelated incidents.--DBigXray 15:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

This is an amendment request not a case and the list also includes users which may be affected, hence has different criteria to setting out a case. Hence they are not "parties" as such. I have no reason to consider the subsequent adding of names as problematic in this (or any) amendment/clarification issue. The most likely action will not be editor-specific anyway.Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:52, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Mergers of moth stubs

Acrolepia oxyglypta, Acrolepia niphosperma, Acrolepia nodulata, and several others in the Acrolepia genus are being created, with no substantial information provided, and I've seen this with other species. IMO this is a cheap way to rack up edits, and I think these articles could be merged into something like List of species in the genus Acrolepia, we currently have a list in the Acrolepia article, which itself is a one sentence stub. Thoughts? And thoughts on creating these stubs in the first place, when to be honest these moths (and several other subspecies of various other genus I'm assuming) vary very little from one another? Albacore (talk) 01:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Each species is inherently notable, so AfD would be fruitless. You could propose a merger, but merger proposals generally attract little interest and all it would take is two or maybe even one oppose and it would be sunk as no consensus. They are all expandable as any organism has to have a reasonably detailed diagnosis to be made a species, and hence each could be fleshed out. I wouldn't waste energy on this as it would most likely not succeed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Tireless contribution or, as some might say, cheeky cheating for e-fame. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:09, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh bloody hell I'm knackered now.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:21, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Article creation

Going for an Australian 4 millionth article? Good luck :) I'm at Wikimania in Washington DC at the moment with a couple of others, madly monitoring the statistics page! -- Chuq (talk) 14:10, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I ambushed it a bit early I think....oh well.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Hydnora triceps

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

ping

Hi Casliber. I hope you do not mind my contacting you here. I noticed your comment on one of the proposed finding of fact for ARBFLG2, and wrote up some thoughts in reply here. I hope this is of some value. Regards, Homunculus (duihua) 19:23, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Corona_Australis/GA1#GA_Review

I have left the review. I'll again take a look at it once these are addressed. Happy editing! — TheSpecialUser ^(TSU) 06:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Microscopium DYK nomination

Hi Casliber, I've reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Microscopium and left a comment/suggestion in relation to the hook's wording. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 11:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

I was too lazy to photoshop the Reviewer's barnstar and the Space barnstar together, so this will have to do. You've reviewed a whole bunch of my constellation articles and gotten hooked on writing them also, and I wanted to thank you for being a wonderful fellow constellation junkie writer and an amazing reviewed. So, have a shiny! (I'll give a peer review for CrA soonish, and will try to snag some Polynesia-related mythology at the Field Museum library for you.) Keilana|Parlez ici 03:06, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - no rush as I have two sets of review comments to wade through....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:07, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

No worries, it'll be after I've started to deal with the Field sources, so after Thursday for sure. If you want, I could wait until FAC. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 03:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I've got a busy few days, so I doubt it'll go to FAC before thursday....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:24, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the wikigods aligned our schedules then. I think Auriga will probably head thataway around the end of the week, the poor FAC reviewers will be inundated with constellations! Thanks again for the excellent review on Auriga. Hit me up if you need anything! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 03:31, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually when you do go looking, anything you find on Canopus or crux would be a bonus...they are two articles I intend buffing at some stage. They both need a lot of work though....Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, can do. "They need a lot of work" seems to be the refrain with the constellation articles... Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 16:29, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

My email address

I can be reached at this address: gtownhoyasdc@gmail.com. I'll probably add and remove citations where needed tomorrow. LeftAire (talk) 01:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:RfAr/Fæ

You seem to have skipped voting on this remedy, perhaps because of the messiness of the PD ...  Roger Davies ^talk 09:14, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I haven't skipped, nor have I voted on the other ban motion. There are a couple of things I need to think about before voting on those two. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:32, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I'm sorry.  Roger Davies ^talk 09:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I won't be too long....Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK

I would like to submit a DYK hook for Deception: Betraying the Peace Process. Seeing as it is a controversial topic, I could do with some assistance in writing a neutral submission. Thanks. Ankh.Morpork 11:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Interesting....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Good suggestions. Thanks. It is an interesting read as it addresses an unfamiliar dimension; one doesn't have to necessarily agree with its conclusions to find it thought-provoking and informative. Ankh.Morpork 12:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hook suggestion? Ankh.Morpork 11:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Bloody hell, that's a hard one. I'd be wary of anything too inflammatory....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll have ago, please advise on its suitability. Ankh.Morpork 12:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Dang, this is hard - I think it's fascinating and there are some interesting facts, but are they too confronting for DYK? I think the best thing is to get a consensus view so I've opened it up for discussion here. Have you read the book - are there other factoids within which are hook-ey? Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

suspicious ip a likely sock

I noticed that you were a checkuser, and since several editors are currently having an issue with an ip that surfaced recently and went straight ahead to the task of disruption and harassment. Is there anything that can be done sans the massive amount of evidence required to suggest an ip be checked as a potential sock/disruption account? I have two or three editors who I think may be good candidates for the master, but I won't name them here until I here back from you with your advice. Thanks. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Gabe - can you point me where this is happening? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Of course, thanks Casliber. They have been most active at Talk:The Beatles, Talk:Paul McCartney and User talk:Andreasegde. This and this, where they filed an AN/I report within 70 lifetime edits. They are just two of dozens of examples I could dig up in terms of their imtimidating editing habits. Thanks for taking the time to help, its much appreciated. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:19, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

This is just another one of many instances of GabeMc trying to silence the "opposition" in his quest to rid Wikipedia of the dreaded capital 'T' in "The Beatles"; to save time and grief, I'll just point you to this this request for mediation. If you'll look at his contribs, you'll see that he's filed several AN/i reports, has started conflicting "straw polls" at different Beatles-related articles and canvassed opinions, and has generally be uncivil towards any one who disagrees with his opinion and with the way he's been conducting himself the past several weeks. Someone should have put a stop to all of this by now. Radiopathy •talk• 02:54, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Someone did put a stop to "all this". ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 08:16, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Radio, if you were wrongly accused than wouldn't you want the true master to be found so that you could be vindicated? Everyone knows this is a sock, the only question that remains is whose sock is it? ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:00, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• Any updates Casliber? ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:00, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Would you prefer that I ask someone else about this? ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

This looks more complex than I thought, and my time is really patchy at the moment. I am not an experienced CU or sock investigator. If you are concerned that established editors are behind the socking and feel that there will be some delicacy with logging an on wiki SPI, then emailing the functionaries or checkuser mailing list might be more prudent. Sorry, I've been meaning to write something like this for the past day or two, but stuff has come up.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

• Can confirm this is not a sock and I believe it is the same person from the first edits at the end of June. Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:06, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks for the ideas and help with the snowberry page! Jgreeter (talk) 23:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Aah yes, thanks for that. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Pelican

Thank you for asking me to be a co-nominator; however, I would decline the offer of being one of the nominators at this time, partly because I would like to focus on images and making small semi-automated edits to a number of pages and partly because I might not have much spare time for editing on the Wiki over the next few weeks. The artwork on the pelican page looks good. Actually, the short video of the pelicans diving into the water is one of my favourite video illustrations. Snowman (talk) 10:32, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

That's fine - I am impressed that this has been the most collaborative collaboration for a while and I felt a lot of people have been responsible. I love the gallery. Pelicans are so photo- and video-genic. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Right whale

Have you made any progress on it? The FAR's growing mold. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 15:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

(groan) I've been a little busy in the past week or so - I'll take a look....Casliber (talk · contribs)

DYK for Microscopium

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Brown Thrasher article edits done until further noticed

I've done all of the editing that I could for the article that I felt needed it. You can assess the article now, and I'll be around to make changes. LeftAire (talk) 19:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Lots of chores but should get to it in next 24-46 hours....Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Casliber. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 21:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Ankh.Morpork 21:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi!

Hey bro,

How are you? Long time no see. :D

Regards,

Spawn Man (talk) 12:51, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Spawn Man. I'm doing ok. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:07, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Shining Bronze Cuckoo

Re: Shining Bronze Cuckoo. A bird found in Australia. Unreferenced text in the article says it lives further south than any other brood parasite. If this is true, is it interesting enough for a DYK? Snowman (talk) 14:03, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes I think that is interesting enough for a DYK - lots of stubby cuckoo articles it turns out.....I can sense an expansion coming on....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:06, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Advice

Hello Some people recently complaining that my English is not good enough.Can I consult you from time to time how is best to present certain sources in proper english?--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 07:25, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. I'd be happy to help. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you care if I post our agreement at WP:AN/I [5]?--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 11:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

You've been here since 2006 actively contributing without a problem. I don't think you need to deign providing a response to this uncharitable suggestion. If you need help, I'd also be more than willing. Ankh.Morpork 11:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Shrike, I'd rather not be dragged into a conflict in any binding capacity as any sort of mentor. I (and others it looks like) am happy to look at specific edits you make and copyedit from there. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:16, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

No worries

Hi Cas, Don't worry about the fugue article. It exists already as fugue state. I don't know how I missed it before but I have now made the link to it from Shell shock that was necessary. Cheers, Whiteghost.ink (talk) 07:33, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Signpost interview

Hi Cas, I was wondering if you'd be interested in being interviewed for the Signpost by me and Crisco 1492. We're trying to revive the practice of interviewing prolific/prominent FA writers, and you definitely fit the bill! Thanks for your consideration. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 16:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah sure! Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:26, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Awesome, we'll work up some questions and get going in the next couple days. :) Thanks very much! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 20:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay - will await....Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:41, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi again! We've written up some questions here. Wanna take a crack? We may add a few more, but that's if either of us come up with any. Thanks! :) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 14:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

• Check it out. I probably have to trim it further (has some modifications already, hope you don't mind). If you could indicate stuff you consider less important that would help me out too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That is really well-written and in fact is pretty brilliant. I am impressed good sir! • Jesse V.^(talk) 17:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, Casliber. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Australian Cattle Dog

There is a ongoing discussion about content in the Australian Cattle Dog article that suggests salient information about the dangerousness and aggressiveness of the breed is being left out of the article -- while a significant amount of thinly-sourced, anecdotal puffery regarding the breed's temperament is advanced (e.g., "When on home ground, the Australian Cattle Dog is a happy, affectionate, and playful pet."). In the discussion, the article's FA status is being used to defend the current status of the article as fixed... and to remove new content citing the breed's dangerousness from the intro and even the Temperment section of the article. This seems completely backwards. Editors of a FA article should be open to improving the article. It's my understanding that in order for an article to reach FA status, it needs to reflect a neutral point of view. One may debate whether Pitbulls are in fact dangerous, but it would be remiss for an article on pitbulls to bury vetted information that throws a more complete light on its history. How can an article on a dog breed such as the ACD reach FA status when it fairly minimizes the breeds salient tendency toward aggressiveness, while highlighting the it's "happy, affectionate, playfulness." Can you please review the recent edit history and the recent discussion -- and re-evaluate the FA status. Perhaps your independent viewpoint can be useful here. I appreciate your feedback.842U (talk) 03:23, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

If you like you can add this userbox to your collection.

This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.

```Buster Seven Talk 07:00, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I knew it was a-coming....thanks :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:38, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I just wanted to say thanks for the assistance along the way on the process of the article becoming GA! It probably won't be the last article dealing with birds that I'll edit for GA/FA status, so you might see an article I significantly contributed to as a nomination again!LeftAire (talk) 21:18, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I can already see Northern Mockingbird gathering steam.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:40, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Follow-up after direct question

Pointing out that what I posted here included some criticism of what you said (or rather what you didn't say). I don't normally get frustrated over things like this, but you did ask me a direct question, and I thought you were willing to listen to what I said and reply. Anyway, I thought it was only fair to let you know in case you had genuinely forgotten to check back on that page. Carcharoth (talk) 00:58, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I had forgotten - I'll answer there. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:18, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

CORE drive editors

Is it okay for editors to partner up and share the work and "prizes"? What are the prizes? If they're in EUROs and not easily sent and converted to another currency in Paypal account, they don't do people in non-Euro countries much good. I'm really not interested in the prizes anyway, must making an article better.PumpkinSky talk 02:38, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

yes you are welcome to double up. It is equivalent in Amazon vouchers (last time it was 250 pounds sterling divided among 6) Casliber (talk · contribs)

So how are people who don't live in a Brit-lb spending country going to use it? Here I'm mainly curious and I'm sure some are very interested in this question.

Amazon is international, so I suspect a voucher value with them converts readily across countries and major currencies - ask Guettarda (talk · contribs) if he had any issues with his. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Paypal does that, so it's possible.PumpkinSky talk 12:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Related thought- would a three-person collaboration on battlecruiser be eligible? Ed <sup>[talk] [majestic titan]</sup> 09:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Interesting - I don't see many military articles at all...if Tank is on Danny's Core list, then how much more broad is that than battlecruiser I wonder? Black Kite told me that the original list harvested top-importance articles, but I just noted that Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment#Statistics doesn't have importance for generic milhist articles, so is it possible these were missed.......I'll ping Black Kite.Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Ed - I know zip about military stuff, but I would point out that one gets greater kudos and more points for improving articles in a shoddier state, and battlecruiser is starting to shape up ok maybe (??? - formatting looks ok at first glance)....for instance, look at gun, weapon, Soldier (christ, that one you could get a 5x DYK expansion!). In fact.... Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Milhist doesn't use an importance parameter, that's why. ;-) Tank is broader, and battlecruiser isn't in terrible shape, but we're working in the context of the OMT project. Also- that article list may be a bit off... North Dakota (or any US state, or Detroit, Michigan)? War of the Austrian Succession? Wars of the Roses? Eleanor Roosevelt (important, but not Holocaust top important)? Loire (river)? Just my thoughts; overall it isn't terrible but may suffer from Western bias. Ed <sup>[talk] [majestic titan]</sup> 19:45, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Cas, Gerda Arendt and I are thinking of doing Franz Kafka. It's B class, not in great shape, and on the vital list. Would that be a good choice? Gerda is watching this thread too.PumpkinSky talk 12:06, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Certainly looks pretty patchy, especially the lead and some sections. Yes that could be improved significantly. I don't see much discussion on his work in it, so not a bad choice. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Eucalyptus rhodantha

It's been two weeks since you posted that you'd get to this one "soon". Can you please respond on the template page to let us know where this stands? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Pheasant Coucal

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Please ignore...

...my latest edits to your submission page. I'm muddling my months. J Milburn (talk) 15:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

aah ok. no probs...Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:51, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello Casliber. I just wanted thank you for your observations and support with the History of Mars observation article. It has been promoted to FA. Regards, RJH (talk) 18:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Well done. too long between drinks FAs..Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:52, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Khufu

Hi.^^ I got a lil´ problem: the article is candidating for a "good"-nomination. During this week I had planned to work down the critics (as seen on discussion page), but - phew! - itz a lot! And my English is possibly not good nuff to clean ALL up. Therefor I wanna beg for yer help. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 15:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Need a rapid checkuser

Can you run a check for sleepers on Jarryn2012? This user vandalised {{PREVIOUSMONTH.YEAR}} (permalink) with an admission of being Earth Exploding Live. I just found similar vandalism to another template (which one it was I don't know), which was performed after Jarryn was blocked; see WP:AN for other comments. Nyttend backup (talk) 16:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Oops, you can't see WP:AN, because it too is obscured by vandalism. My message is as follows:

While I was editing St. John, Indiana, someone vandalised a template that's on the page to blank the entire page. Since I was only on the page for a few minutes, it's definitely one of the template edits below, which I copied from RecentChanges:

Extended content

(diff | hist) . . Template:Albanians‎; 15:59 . . (-33)‎ . . ‎79.160.40.10 (talk)‎ (For consistency and avoiding redirect.) (diff | hist) . . Template:Sidebar‎; 15:59 . . (+330)‎ . . ‎Frietjes (talk | contribs)‎ (Undid revision 505116282 by Ham Cork Fest (talk)) (diff | hist) . . Template:ConvertAbbrev/ISO 3166-1/alpha-2‎; 15:59 . . (+598)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (new designation for Kosovo) (diff | hist) . . N! Template:Db-negublp/doc‎; 15:58 . . (+2,083)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Substitute {{db doc/sandbox|G10}} - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:New York Jets roster navbox‎; 15:58 . . (-24)‎ . . ‎The Writer 2.0 (talk | contribs)‎ (Otah trade voided) (diff | hist) . . Template:Sidebar‎; 15:58 . . (-330)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (change) (diff | hist) . . Template:TOC top‎; 15:58 . . (-598)‎ . . ‎Frietjes (talk | contribs)‎ (Undid revision 505116024 by Ham Cork Fest (talk)) (diff | hist) . . Template:NRHP style‎; 15:58 . . (+574)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (more parameters) (diff | hist) . . Template:New York Jets roster‎; 15:57 . . (+23)‎ . . ‎The Writer 2.0 (talk | contribs)‎ (Vacant) (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/eng&cell-id2dot-id‎; 15:57 . . (+1)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Abbr‎; 15:57 . . (+427)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (minor switch in coding) (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's handball game B5‎; 15:57 . . (+6)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics women's field hockey game A6‎; 15:57 . . (+45)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:URL‎; 15:57 . . (+598)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (remove excess whitespace after #titleparts) (diff | hist) . . m Template:Valrep‎; 15:56 . . (-40)‎ . . ‎RioHondo (talk | contribs)‎ (Renamed per Philippine LGU naming convention. See WP:MOSPHIL.) (diff | hist) . . Template:Designation/colour‎; 15:56 . . (+599)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (change color settings) (diff | hist) . . Template:New York Jets roster‎; 15:56 . . (-41)‎ . . ‎The Writer 2.0 (talk | contribs)‎ (Otah trade voided) (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:56 . . (+51)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . m Template:TOC top‎; 15:56 . . (+598)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (changing tr to wikitable tr, documentation modification) (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-u1/log/doc‎; 15:55 . . (-34)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Remove {{Twinkle standard installation}} template - doesn't look like it applies here) (diff | hist) . . Template:Infobox settlement/impus‎; 15:55 . . (+598)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (*/ Usage */ expand usage info) (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:55 . . (+1)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Album ratings‎; 15:55 . . (+598)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (add up to rev25score, per request) (diff | hist) . . Template:Coat of arms‎; 15:55 . . (+32)‎ . . ‎Ssolbergj (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . N! Template:Flag usage advice‎; 15:55 . . (+750)‎ . . ‎Kevin McE (talk | contribs)‎ (At the moment, not proposing for use, simply for discussion at WT:Manual of Style/Icons#A related debate is raging elsewhere at this stage) (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:55 . . (+3)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . m Template:Airlines of Bangladesh‎; 15:54 . . (0)‎ . . ‎Ahnaaf (talk | contribs)‎ (Adding planned airline section) (diff | hist) . . Template:Bio icon2‎; 15:54 . . (+598)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (#ifeq) (diff | hist) . . m Template:Bio icon‎; 15:54 . . (+598)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (#ifeq) (diff | hist) . . m Template:Airlines of Bangladesh‎; 15:54 . . (+83)‎ . . ‎Ahnaaf (talk | contribs)‎ (Adding planned airline section) (diff | hist) . . Template:New York Red Bulls squad‎; 15:54 . . (+71)‎ . . ‎UncleTupelo1 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Redirect template‎; 15:54 . . (+599)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (*/ Template category */ fix small error) (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:53 . . (+1)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-u1/log‎; 15:53 . . (+75)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Switch to {{documentation}} template - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:Did you know nominations/James Huckle‎; 15:53 . . (+764)‎ . . ‎BlueMoonset (talk | contribs)‎ (promoted to prep 4) (diff | hist) . . m Template:Arka Gdynia squad‎; 15:53 . . (-531)‎ . . ‎Marekchelsea (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Did you know nominations/Schleswig horse‎; 15:53 . . (+127)‎ . . ‎Montanabw (talk | contribs)‎ (Format alt 1 hook (I'm a co-nom, not a reviewer, needs a reviewer)) (diff | hist) . . Template:Infobox settlement/metric‎; 15:53 . . (+608)‎ . . ‎Ham Cork Fest (talk | contribs)‎ (*/ Usage */ expand section information) (diff | hist) . . Template:Did you know/Preparation area 4‎; 15:53 . . (+210)‎ . . ‎BlueMoonset (talk | contribs)‎ (+1) (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-u1/log/doc‎; 15:53 . . (-6)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Formatting) (diff | hist) . . m Template:Valenzuela City‎; 15:52 . . (+49)‎ . . ‎RioHondo (talk | contribs)‎ (Renamed per Philippine LGU naming convention. See WP:MOSPHIL.) (diff | hist) . . Template:Le Mans FC squad‎; 15:52 . . (+14)‎ . . ‎Footballfollower89 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:52 . . (+82)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:2008 Summer Olympics men's volleyball game C2‎; 15:52 . . (+56)‎ . . ‎Leesw616 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:51 . . (-127)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (rm err check again) (diff | hist) . . Template:Developments in Sri Lanka‎; 15:51 . . (+3)‎ . . ‎CoolGin (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . N! Template:Db-u1/log/doc‎; 15:51 . . (+1,794)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Substitute {{db doc/sandbox|U1}} - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:2008 Summer Olympics men's volleyball game C1‎; 15:50 . . (+27)‎ . . ‎Leesw616 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Did you know nominations/Schleswig horse‎; 15:50 . . (+248)‎ . . ‎Montanabw (talk | contribs)‎ (Alt 1 hook) (diff | hist) . . Template:Coat of arms‎; 15:50 . . (+32)‎ . . ‎Ssolbergj (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . m Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:49 . . (+143)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (err check) (diff | hist) . . Template:Zendaya‎; 15:48 . . (-8)‎ . . ‎76.92.92.16 (talk)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/testcases‎; 15:48 . . (+10)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's volleyball group A standings‎; 15:48 . . (+4)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-gfdl‎; 15:48 . . (-23)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Switch to {{documentation}} template - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:RT programs‎; 15:48 . . (0)‎ . . ‎Yk Yk Yk (talk | contribs)‎ (update) (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's volleyball game A5‎; 15:47 . . (+137)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/testcases‎; 15:47 . . (-10)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-gfdl/doc‎; 15:47 . . (-5)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Formatting) (diff | hist) . . N! Template:Db-gfdl/doc‎; 15:46 . . (+2,321)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Substitute {{db doc/sandbox|G12}} - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . m Template:RMS Titanic‎; 15:46 . . (+63)‎ . . ‎MatthewHaywood (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's volleyball game A5‎; 15:46 . . (+56)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . m Template:FC Dynamo Kyiv squad‎; 15:46 . . (+59)‎ . . ‎T-resh (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . m Template:Tourette syndrome‎; 15:45 . . (-45)‎ . . ‎QuasyBoy (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:45 . . (-8)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . m Template:Colonial Governors of Rhode Island‎; 15:44 . . (+52)‎ . . ‎Robert 68 (talk | contribs)‎ (ad german language = de:Vorlage:Gouverneure der Rhode Island Kolonie) (diff | hist) . . Template:Braille cell/core‎; 15:44 . . (-135)‎ . . ‎DePiep (talk | contribs)‎ (rm err check) (diff | hist) . . m Template:Philippine legislative districts‎; 15:44 . . (-7)‎ . . ‎RioHondo (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Zendaya‎; 15:43 . . (+74)‎ . . ‎76.92.92.16 (talk)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Pittsburgh Pirates roster‎; 15:43 . . (+1)‎ . . ‎75.135.68.171 (talk)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Footer Olympic Champions Judo Half Middleweight Men‎; 15:42 . . (+77)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:KidsTVBlocksUSA‎; 15:42 . . (-11)‎ . . ‎72.49.35.66 (talk)‎ (ABC Kids was listed twice (once by itself only and once combined with "Disney's One Saurday Morning". Alphabetically "Toonami" should probably come before "Toonami on Kids WB".) (diff | hist) . . Template:Coat of arms‎; 15:42 . . (+24)‎ . . ‎Ssolbergj (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Coat of arms‎; 15:42 . . (-127)‎ . . ‎Ssolbergj (talk | contribs)‎ (Undid revision 505114001 by Ssolbergj (talk)) (diff | hist) . . Template:Coat of arms‎; 15:41 . . (+127)‎ . . ‎Ssolbergj (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Texas Rangers roster‎; 15:41 . . (-9)‎ . . ‎75.135.68.171 (talk)‎ (diff | hist) . . m Template:Philippine legislative districts‎; 15:40 . . (-101)‎ . . ‎RioHondo (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Le Mans FC squad‎; 15:40 . . (+20)‎ . . ‎Footballfollower89 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-fpcfail‎; 15:40 . . (+75)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Switch to {{documentation}} template - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics women's field hockey game A6‎; 15:39 . . (+47)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's handball group B standings‎; 15:39 . . (0)‎ . . ‎130.138.227.11 (talk)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-fpcfail/doc‎; 15:39 . . (-7)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Formatting) (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's handball group B standings‎; 15:39 . . (0)‎ . . ‎130.138.227.11 (talk)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's water polo game A6‎; 15:38 . . (+108)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . N! Template:Db-fpcfail/doc‎; 15:38 . . (+2,053)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Substitute {{db doc/sandbox|F2}} - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:Luton Town F.C. squad‎; 15:38 . . (+64)‎ . . ‎Haruman215 (talk | contribs)‎ (Dean Brill) (diff | hist) . . Template:The Get Up Kids‎; 15:38 . . (-29)‎ . . ‎Rwiggum (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's water polo group A standings‎; 15:37 . . (+4)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Uncle Kracker‎; 15:37 . . (+30)‎ . . ‎71.72.138.94 (talk)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics men's water polo game A6‎; 15:37 . . (+111)‎ . . ‎Kante4 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-spamuser‎; 15:37 . . (+74)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Switch to {{documentation}} template - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-spamuser/doc‎; 15:36 . . (-7)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Formatting) (diff | hist) . . Template:BC Neptūnas roster‎; 15:36 . . (+135)‎ . . ‎92.20.38.106 (talk)‎ (diff | hist) . . N! Template:Db-spamuser/doc‎; 15:35 . . (+2,022)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Substitute {{db doc/sandbox|G11}} - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:Latest preview software release/Tribler‎; 15:34 . . (-10)‎ . . ‎Skype565 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Latest stable software release/Tonido‎; 15:32 . . (-2)‎ . . ‎Skype565 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Chicago Cubs roster‎; 15:32 . . (+5)‎ . . ‎BravesInsider13 (talk | contribs)‎ (Braves traded Arodys Vizcaino and Jaye Chapman for Paul Maholm and Reed Johnson.) (diff | hist) . . Template:Latest preview software release/Shareaza‎; 15:31 . . (-2)‎ . . ‎Skype565 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:New Orleans Saints roster navbox‎; 15:31 . . (-44)‎ . . ‎Eagles247 (talk | contribs)‎ (update) (diff | hist) . . Template:Coal Chamber‎; 15:30 . . (+20)‎ . . ‎Digital0000 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-hoax‎; 15:30 . . (+75)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Switch to {{documentation}} template - see Template talk:Db doc#Too complicated?) (diff | hist) . . Template:New Orleans Saints roster‎; 15:29 . . (-11)‎ . . ‎Eagles247 (talk | contribs)‎ (DL Akiem Hicks activated) (diff | hist) . . Template:Tekken series‎; 15:29 . . (+57)‎ . . ‎Kokoro20 (talk | contribs)‎ (Undid revision 504849890 by MrWii000 (talk)) (diff | hist) . . Template:2012 Summer Olympics football convenience template navbox‎; 15:29 . . (+9)‎ . . ‎Lejman (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Cincinnati Bengals roster navbox‎; 15:29 . . (-23)‎ . . ‎Eagles247 (talk | contribs)‎ (Clements activated) (diff | hist) . . Template:Latest preview software release/Opera‎; 15:29 . . (-2)‎ . . ‎Skype565 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Latest preview software release/Opera‎; 15:28 . . (-82)‎ . . ‎Skype565 (talk | contribs)‎ (diff | hist) . . Template:Db-g3/doc‎; 15:28 . . (+77)‎ . . ‎Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs)‎ (Fix category) (diff | hist) . . Template:Cincinnati Bengals roster‎; 15:28 . . (-11)‎ . . ‎Eagles247 (talk | contribs)‎ (CB Nate Clements activated)

Please fix it and block/protect/everything else necessary, since I'm busy and don't have the time right now. Note a recent thread at WP:HD ("What's going on over at Current Events?") and the recent protection of {{PREVIOUSMONTH.YEAR}}. Nyttend backup (talk) 16:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 July newsletter

We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees Cwmhiraeth (submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees Grapple X (submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees Muboshgu (submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's Ruby2010 (submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Right whale

If the work is that daunting, wouldn't it make sense just to let it de-FA instad of running yourself ragged trying to keep it FA? Ten Pound Hammer • <sup>(What did I screw up now?)</sup> 00:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Courtesy note about Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration motion regarding Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.2FIndia-Pakistan

[6] Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:46, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Eucalyptus rhodantha

Yngvadottir (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Core judging

Need another judge for the Core Contest? I could help with that. Binksternet (talk) 01:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes please! We were musing over the need for a fourth person, so you're it XD Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'm on the job. Binksternet (talk) 04:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

WP Fungi in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Fungi for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 00:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I've sucked a few eggs, that's true ...

[7] ... but then so have you. My idea quite literally was that whatever I did couldn't make things worse, but I struggled for a structure. What I decided on was to deal with each of the elements of IT separately (information storage, retrieval etc.), try and pull the whole thing together later, and add aspects such as ethics that were simply ignored. I have no idea whether it's all going to come together or not, but any suggestions you have would be very welcome. Malleus Fatuorum 03:40, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay/my bad - you seem to usually have a firm idea on where you're going with an article but, yeah, these ones which really have no parallel can be tricky...I've just looked again and jot some notes...Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

It may seem like that, but I struggled for ages with workhouse for instance, until I got the necessary kick up the arse. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 03:50, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I know - it's funny how some come together and others....just don't and it can be really hard to figure why or how. Looking back at IT, I first thought, "fuck, where does one start"...but actually I think it could be really fun. Google books would be a good place to throw up a few search terms...and getting the 1958 paper. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I've done loads of searches, but it's difficult to write on a subject you know more about than many of the sources. I haven't found even a single decent introductory text, and curiously Britannica doesn't even have an article on IT. I'll do what I can, but I really think the whole area is a mess, and not just on Wikipedia. Malleus Fatuorum 04:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Well look at it this way, the worse the article to begin with, the better the kudos.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:18, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Orogeny

I learned a new word today which is very funny considering what I'm trying to do. I started on the flora section first but to be honest I don't really know any of it except the history, so will be very interesting. I laughed when I saw your comment - orogeny, huh? Truthkeeper (talk) 04:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Making mountains....yeah....from the greek ορος....Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm about to give up. All I can find are papers so technical I can barely read them ... or ... g-books has books from our many subpages about the orogeny of the alps - none of which are sourced. It's very disturbing to me for some reason to see that. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:08, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

How do you mean books are unsourced...or the wiki daughter pages aren't using g-books....? Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The books are bound copies of our daughter articles - none of which are sourced. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Aah yes, I know the sort.....sighCasliber (talk · contribs) 00:54, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Five

Stop by for a tasty glass of wiki-iced tea at the Teahouse, today!

Hi! Welcome to the fifth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

• Guest activity increased in July. Questions are up from an average of 36 per week in June to 43 per week in July, and guest profile creation has also increased. This is likely a result of the automatic invite experiments we started near the end of month, which seeks to lessen the burden on hosts and other volunteer who manually invite editors. During the last week of July, questions doubled in the Teahouse! (But don't let that deter you from inviting editors to the Teahouse, please, there are still lots of new editors who haven't found Teahouse yet.)
• More Teahouse hosts than ever. We had 12 new hosts sign up to participate at the Teahouse! We now have 35 hosts volunteering at the Teahouse. Feel free to stop by and see them all here.
• Phase two update: Host sprint. In August, the Teahouse team plans to improve the host experience by developing a simpler new-host creation process, a better way of surfacing active hosts, and a host lounge renovation. Take a look at the plan and weigh in here.
• New Teahouse guest barnstar is awarded to first recipient: Charlie Inks. Using the Teahouse barnstar designed by Heatherawalls, hosts hajatvrc and Ryan Vesey created the new Teahouse Guest Barnstar. The first recipient is Charlie Inks, for her boldness in asking questions at the Teahouse. Check out the award in action here.
• Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania! The Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania this past month, where editor retention and interface design was heavily discussed. Sarah and Jonathan presented the Teahouse during the Wikimedia Fellowships panel. Slides can be viewed here. A lunch was also held at Wikimania for Teahouse hosts.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. SarahStierch (talk) 08:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Little Black Cormorant

Hello! Your submission of Little Black Cormorant at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Peter.C • talk • contribs 19:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:CROWN/NOM

A gentle reminder. —Vensatry <sub>(Ping me)</sub> 08:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Will do a bit later tonight. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:19, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration for the Richard Dawkins article

Dear Casliber,

We seem to have an endless fight over RD's article on whether to keep/remove criticisms in general and in the special case, Dawkin's statement after 9/11. You may take a look at what each side says in the last two sections of the article's talk page. Your help is appreciated.--Kazemita1 (talk) 01:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Language Q

Hey Cas, in your FA recipe box, you say "See in GA reviewer suggested "bonus stuff" to work on before FAC". Do you mean "See in GAN if reviewer suggested "bonus stuff" to work on before FAC"? Ed <sup>[talk] [majestic titan]</sup> 08:29, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

D'oh! Yes you're right....good catch...Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:55, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I thought so. ;-) Thanks! Ed <sup>[talk] [majestic titan]</sup> 09:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the mention in the article- it's appreciated :) J Milburn (talk) 11:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

It's a pleasure - there are quite a few more I'd have liked to add but space etc. It got chopped up a bit as it was. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:59, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• That being said, I was glad we could keep so much of the interview. Usually I keep it at three questions (like with Wehwalt and JJ Harrison. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

• So was I ...(chuckle) Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

right whale

I fix up the right whale article some more. All thats needed is the lede to be expanded. LittleJerry (talk) 23:37, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Great! I'm glad someone's interested. I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Do you still think that it should be delisted? LittleJerry (talk) 05:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't think so. Just let me take another look.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:32, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Betelgeuse FA?

I noticed that you have Betelgeuse "on the radar". I’d be interested in taking the article to "FA status" with you. In reviewing it briefly, I notice that nomenclature is an issue. In fact, pursuant to your feedback on Talk:Pleione (star), I realized that nomenclature is an issue in the design of all star articles. So I decided to invest the time to fully research it. If you have a moment, I’d be interested in your reaction to the ideas put forth. And let me know when you’re ready to start with Betelgeuse. I’m ready when you are. Sadalsuud (talk) 13:23, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Cool. I will tidy up a few things first and let you know when ready. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:06, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty psyched to work with you on this. So I already decided to do some cleanup. The Starbox really needed some work. So that's now all up to date with refs included. Also I created a personal sandbox and imported the latest version to completely redesign the article's structure. There is not one single word changed in the article itself — just moved a few blocks of text, added headings and sub-headings, and repositioned some pics. I think it works better. If you have a chance, take a look at the redesign and let me know if you think it works. You can find it at User:Sadalsuud/Sandbox.

Sorry to jump the gun on you. I won't do anything more on this until I hear from you. Sadalsuud (talk) 05:47, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks cool. I have the Richard Hinkley Allen book and the Kuntzisch book to get the etymology right - I also have a longer oxford dictionary (with magnifying glass). Will pull out books and go from there in the next 24-48 hours. Feel free to tweak and/or add any bits of text you can. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:51, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Great! I'll update a few things, copy it over and post a short note on the talk page. I'm not sure about the sub-headings for Observational History, but that section was so big, it needed some structure to it. We can modify the sub-headings as we go along. Sadalsuud (talk) 07:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I had a few minutes spare now so was doing a bit of copyediting to make the lead a bit more snappy. I will look at all the etymology stuff tonight. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:12, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Sounds great! I'm going to call it a night. Tomorrow, I'll look at expanding the Visibility section. I just cut and pasted the last two paragraphs from the former "Characteristics" section. It needs to be massaged a bit. Sadalsuud (talk) 07:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I've copied the existing "Visibility" and "Properties" sections to User:Sadalsuud/Sandbox and will focus on just that for the next 48 hours with the idea of transporting a coherent block of text back Betelgeuse in the next few days. Right now I'm doing a lot of reading. There's a lot of information on this star. So I'd like to give myself a couple of days to pull all the elements together. That way, I hope to have both these sections flow properly. Before I do this "block transport", I'll let you know, so you can offer any suggestions.Sadalsuud (talk) 13:11, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

That's good. I am focussing on the etymology stuff at the moment. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:21, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I've managed to come up with two new sections that are ready for transport to the main article. You can review them here: at the "New Visibility Section". I put them in context, so you can see what the article looks like. As I indicated a few days ago, I won't make the transfer until you've had a chance to review first. Let me know what you think.

My main concern is the ESA copyrighted information at the bottom of the Visibility section. Let me know if that is handled appropriately. There is still much more work to do. I have quite a few more sections planned, but decided to at least get these two ready for prime time. If you think they work, I can copy them over later today. I await your thoughts.Sadalsuud (talk) 19:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks great - I was just thinking something along these lines about how to find it and our theories on how far it is have evolved over the years. Stick it in and we can continue copyeidting from there. I am not sure which bit is copyrighted - can you highlight? Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:36, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

It's the very last paragraph in the The enigma sub-section — right under the VLA satellite dish picture. I introduce the copyrighted info with these words: "According to the information provided on ESA's website...." Just click HERE! and you'll see it there in bold as well. What follows is almost verbatim (with a few tweeks), then as you'll notice there's the ref #36 which, if you click on it, takes you to the Reference section where you can click on the web-link called "Gaia overview", which of course takes you directly to the ESA source material.

If you scroll down a bit on this ESA page, right under the section heading "What's special?", you'll see where I got my information. Now here is where the copyright concern comes in. Scroll down all the way to the very bottom. See the black line? It says "Copyright 2000 - 2010 © European Space Agency. All rights reserved." So I don't know what that means in terms of this Wikipedia article. If I tell the reader in the body of the article that this information came from their website, then provide a reference, and then a link right to the information, is Wikipedia covered insofar as copyright concerns?

I thought about simply paraphrasing the essence of the ESA information, that way avoiding any copyright infringement. But frankly, it was so well written and informative that I thought it would be a more honorable gesture to copy it verbatim and provide the reference.

What do you think? Should I rewrite this section "in my own words"?

Just so you have a little context, what I love about this sub-section "The enigma" is I noticed with every single article I read on the internet all these conflicting quotes on Betelgeuse. My first reaction was "That's bizarre! Everybody's got a different story to tell" It was at that point that I really saw an opportunity to do a great job and explain why all the information on Betelgeuse is so conflicted. The essence is that we still haven't quite figured out how far Betelgeuse is. So this section from ESA is a perfect conclusion to the section. The Enigma section starts with the distance estimate of 56 parsecs in 1920, does a fair job of explaining what has happened in the interim and then concludes with "What's next". So that's why I definitely want the ESA information in there. It pulls all the pieces together for the reader.

In any event, I'm glad you liked it. I'm pretty happy with it myself, although it would be great if we can get an astronomer like RJHall to make sure everything works. As I see it, I'm a pretty good "guinea pig" for this sort of thing, as I try to understand the subject form the layman's perspective. Having an astronomer looking over my shoulder wouldn't hurt.

One last thing. I got your note... All systems go... I'll be cutting and pasting into the main article shortly. As each new section matures, I'll let you know. Sadalsuud (talk) 03:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I too love actually spelling out who says what and why rather than just presenting facts as facts. There are similar issues in taxonomy, botany etc. and very often the answer is just not so clear cut. I will look at the copyrighted material in a minute. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

New Visibility sub-section

Hi Calisber. I've got a new section for you to look at. To be honest it's not quite finished. But given my commitment to have something ready within a day or two, I've produced a "condensed" version for prime time. There are two more additional paragraphs that I am still working on. I will try to include them soon.

Like last time, I have imported the most recent version of Betelgeuse into my User page so you can see the new section in context. It can be found by clicking: HERE!. That will take you to a new Visibility sub-section which I've entitled "Rhytmic dance" — an effective metaphor, I think, for the star's oscillating character. Consistent with comments made a few weeks ago at Talk:Pleione (star), I'm using standardized terminology for "major headings" and descriptive terminology for "sub-headings". I think it works. Let me know your thoughts.

If you wish to see the other sub-sections I'm working on, you can click: Here!. You will notice an extensive Contents Box and think I've possibly gone mad! No need for alarm however. I just found that I needed to bring some organization to the drafting of these sections, so I'm using the Contents Box as a kind of outline tool. That way, when I read an article, I have an idea where the new information fits, I can cut and paste for future editing, and then come back to it later. I hope you find this Contents Box helpful in understanding how I'm trying to tackle this project. If you have any idea as to how it can be improved, let me know.

The two additional paragraphs I'm working on for Rhythmic Dance you will find by clicking on the Rhythmic dance sub-section. I gave them an olive colored font, so they stand out.

The scope of this project has turned out to be far more than I ever imagined. There is so much information to absorb — kind of like putting together a giant jig-saw puzzle with 10,000 pieces. What I'm finding is you can't just work on one section at a time, as every piece is interconnected, and you need to have a sense as to where all the pieces fit. In any event, you'll see how each section is coming along. Some sections are more advanced than others.

I'm enjoying the challenge of it. I believe the goal of completing the different sub-sections by mid-August is still achievable. Let me know if you think the condensed version is ready to be transported over to the main article. Sadalsuud (talk) 03:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Interesting - so the version you want to import is the condensed one above the olive text? Looks good - I find it easier to work with when I see it in the article, so bring it in. I think the olive bit is worth bringing in sooner rather than later and working from there. The prose can probably be tightened a bit - that will be easier to acheive once read as a whole. My approach is generally get all the content in first, then do the copyedit. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I just imported it and refined it further. Click HERE! for the latest. I actually included 4 out of the 6 paragraphs that I'm contemplating. The extra 2 paragraphs I will add in the next week or so as I gather more information. This first import holds together pretty well by itself, I think, and may not need the extra paragraphs. The extra information will simply discuss additional variability issues like periodicity. It's always a judgement call as to what constitutes "too much information". We'll see. What makes Betelgeuse so challenging is there is a lot of conflicting information out there — just like all the conflicting information I saw regarding distance. My intent is to at least cover the different findings and put them into perspective. Sadalsuud (talk) 11:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Importing chunks 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8

Hi Calisber. When you have a chance, I've got a few new "chunks" for you to look at. Click HERE to see comments.--Sadalsuud (talk) 06:08, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Angular diameter/distance... whatever?

Hi Calisber. In notice you've been busy the last few days. When you have a moment and have been able to review the "chunks" enumerated above, your thoughts on what to do here would be really helpful. Click HERE to see comments. Thanks again.--Sadalsuud (talk) 12:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC) --Sadalsuud (talk) 15:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Observations on Import #3

I finally got most of those "chucks" cleaned up over the weekend and, pursuant to your suggestions imported them into the main article. Also, I've posted some observations related thereto for your insight and comment. When you have a moment, click HERE to see comments. To see recent changes, simply go to the Betelgeuse article. I look forward to your thoughts and any ideas you have for GA review submission.--Sadalsuud (talk) 15:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Reconsidering strategy

Hi Casliber. When you have a chance, I've posted some recent thoughts on the future direction of the Betelgeuse article, and would value your insights. Click HERE to see comments.----Sadalsuud (talk) 00:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

System launch + GAN?

Hi Casliber. The "Star system" section is close to complete. Just needs a few refs and xrefs, I think. Click HERE to review and post any comments or concerns. Thanks again for your focused attention. --Sadalsuud (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Just completed the import if you'd like to make any changes. Click HERE to view.--Sadalsuud (talk) 17:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Angular rework

I've reworked the Angular anomalies section to create a more balanced argument. When you have a chance, please review HERE and let me know your thoughts.--Sadalsuud (talk) 15:20, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I think it is more sequential and hence clearer. I'd go with the rewrite. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:23, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Steps toward FA

I've gone ahead and included the revised "Angular anomalies" sub-section with a few additional improvements. When you have a chance, your insights on a few other issues would be helpful. You can find them HERE.--24.203.198.172 (talk) 17:49, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Copyright?

Hi Casliber. Your suggestion to post a question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy produced a very useful result but also triggered a copyright violation requiring some attention. Your insights as always would be valuable. You can see my comments by clicking HERE.----Sadalsuud (talk) 17:19, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Circumstellar Dynamics Done

Hi Casliber. I think this section is finally done. Though it's a bit of a rush job, I think it will stand up. Click HERE to see comments and get to the latest version in the sandbox. Thanks again for your on-going support of this project. I'm pooped! Fortunately, we're almost there.--Sadalsuud (talk) 12:22, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Concerns at the crossroads

Getting close to the finish line. There are a couple of concerns, however. When you have a moment, can you review comments HERE? Thanks again.--Sadalsuud (talk) 14:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Pleione GA

Hi Casliber. Just a short note to say that I've had to divert my attention to the Pleione article, as you probably guessed. I noticed your contributions, and in fact, provided some xrefs, which I believe are accurate. I hope to have all the GA improvements done by Saturday. If you have a chance to give it a quick lookover in a few days, that would be great. This weekend, I'll try to get the "Organizational history" section up to standard, get your thoughts, and then propose the article for GA review.--Sadalsuud (talk) 15:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'm done for now with Pleione (star), at least until Modest Genius has a chance to review the latest revisions. Hopefully, it will pass the grade. If you'd like to take a last look, that would be great.--Sadalsuud (talk) 08:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Don't know if you noticed, but we got GA status on Pleione. Now I can come back to the Betelgeuse article in earnest. There's only a few minor edits needed after which I'll finally submit the article for GA review. The only missing element is a discussion of stellar mass. When mass was originally addressed back in July, I simply referenced Jim Kaler, though now I recognize the conversation to be more complex. Once addressed in earnest, it will clear up any confusion from the Fate section which quotes a different metric. Bottom line? Hope to get all this done in a few days and submit. Any last thoughts?--Sadalsuud (talk) 05:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I have been pretty busy IRL lately. I am more than happy to let you take the dirver's seat WRT mass as you have a handle on all the mass calculations - will try to follow with copyediting ideas and/or observations and boring format fixes. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Understood. With the summer now behind us in Canada, I too have become very busy with work and other stuff. We'll at least get this to GA soon and then we can plan from there. Thanks.--Sadalsuud (talk) 05:46, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Organizational history upgrade

I've now turned my attention back to Betelgeuse and decided to post a new section on the talk page Major surgery on Observational history section?. Given that this section was the focus of early contributions, I have intentionally avoided editing "other people's work", focusing as you know on adding new sections. But as I point out, the job needs to be done for various reasons and I thought it would be useful to put everyone on notice and invite comments. The last thing I want to do is create an edit war. Any thoughts?--Sadalsuud (talk) 08:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I've gotten started. Check out Herschel's discovery section for recent edits. As I point out on the Talk page, I'm trying to keep most of the early contributions while giving the whole section a "historical" focus. I think it works. Your insights however would be useful.--Sadalsuud (talk) 10:04, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Finally nominated for GA

Hi Casliber. Just a short note to let you know that Betelgeuse has finally been nominated for GA review. Updated observations HERE! Thanks again for your on-going participation in this process.--Sadalsuud (talk) 19:54, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

GA corrections complete?

I noticed you were able to make a few corrections pursuant to the GA Review. The review was clearly quite favorable. I made a few other changes and responded. Let me know if you see anything missing. You can see my comments Here!. Thanks again. We're finally getting there.--Sadalsuud (talk) 03:17, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Sasata Review

Noticed that Puerto Rican Amazon is Todays Featured Article. Congrats! Getting Sasata to participate in taking Betelgeuse to FA was a real coup. Thanks. Nothing like detailed insights.--Sadalsuud (talk) 04:41, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

FAC Readiness

OK. I've been able to get to most of the issues raised at FAC readiness and Betelgeuse redux. I liked your idea of color coding. So I expanded it a little to distinguish between 1) done, points that were relatively straightforward and I believe have been adequately addressed (though you might some other ideas here), 2) Discuss, points where I would appreciate your advice and possibly Iridia's help if needed, and finally 3) need to research, items that will require more work to complete. When you have a moment, can you look over some of the Discussion points upon which we can put these items to bed. Thanks. Once we have them out of the way, I'll be free to focus on the research questions, after which I'd like to address a few remaining issues, which I've been compiling. Almost there... huff, puff. Thanks again for your continued effort on this. It's been a big project.--Sadalsuud (talk) 10:19, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I'll take a look. I did have one last project to double check some folklore stuff etc. to help tidy up that section as well. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Last step before FAC

It seems like most of the issues at FAC readiness have been addressed. Just to update you, my focus has now shifted to the following: 1) Complete FAC Readiness. I'm researching the need to research tags, of which there were three and making appropriate changes, 2) Starbox research. I want to make sure that all the info in the Starbox and the Properties section are up to date, 3) Final issues. I'm compiling a list of what I think are the final issues that need to be addressed in the article, which I will post, once I've finished my research. Hopefully, I'll have that done in a week. Hope you're doing well. I notice you've been quite active with the star's mythology. Impressive!!! Found some interesting info on Deneb. Looks like it's got a luminosity of 196,000$L_{\odot }$ instead of the 54,000$L_{\odot }$ that Wikipedia and Kaler were reporting. I was pretty surprised by this, so if you have a chance you might want to look at the article's abstract here, just to make sure.--Sadalsuud (talk) 13:58, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

• Thinking about all the work you've done on mythology recently, I think it deserves its own section. This will lighten up the Observational history section, allowing it to be primarily of an "observational" or scientific nature, and by creating a separate heading for "Mythology", it allows the reader to go directly to this section if they wish. Also, it tends to tie in well with Etymology section. So as to not muck up the article itself, I created a parallel article in my sandbox. You can see it here. Since the word "Name" is no longer representative or the section as a whole, I'd like to suggest we come up with something else. As you know, I tend to like the word "ethnology" as it means the "study of culture" rather than just "culture" itself. So I propose here "Ethnological attributes". I wasn't around when it was decided to get rid of "Ethnological influences", so I don't know what the discussion was around that, if any. Other possibilities are "Cultural significance", "Cultural attributes", or possibly "Cultural impact". You may have other thoughts. As I see it, issues having to do with name, spelling, etymology, mythology and legacy are all cultural phenomena. All in all, it looks pretty tight. Let me know what you think.--Sadalsuud (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Organising these sections is always a headache, as there is some material you want to put at the beginning and some at the end but ideally it'd be all together. I had the same problem at Sirius many moons ago....Your organisation looks line. Agree about broadening of section header from name to something like Ethnological attributes or "Cultural significance". I like the former but could be construed as a tad esoteric maybe. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
    • I see your point. I made the changes as discussed. Let's see how everyone responds. "Cultural significance" is firmly established, so I'm OK with that too. If you think that will be better understood, change at any time.--Sadalsuud (talk) 21:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

List of final changes

OK. Looks like we're almost done. You can see the list of final changes here. If you have time, your review of these items would be great. I'm just finishing up the Notes section right now, but everything else is done. As soon as I'm 100% complete, I'll post you here. In the meantime, you'll notice that the Ravi/Townes ref produced some meaningful changes to the article.--Sadalsuud (talk) 05:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• DONE! Wow! Finally! Just reworked the notes section, specifically Note2. I think that's it. I look forward to your comments on the List of final changes. The only other tiny item I can see is a tag at the bottom on Note 7. I'll have to go back and study my spreadsheets from 2 years ago. Aside from that, it all looks pretty good.--Sadalsuud (talk) 08:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Details, Details!!! OK, I think we're ready for FAC. I've exhausted every tiny detail I could think of. So, except for some minor tweeking here and there, I don't see anything else to be done. You can see my final observations at Details, details.--Sadalsuud (talk) 14:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Data requested yonks ago, lately retrieved with many apologies for delays from the wikiwankingwonk.

Couldn't for the effing life of me find that vol which contained the info on star names in Japanese dialect you asked about until I stumbled across it this morning while cleaning up where my disrespectful cat cocked its leg, on a pile of TLS's near my desk. I tremble to add these details because, with my rotten reputation as someone who is always looking for a political angle, it ain't going to help that Obama must be mentioned.

In Japanese dialects Betelgeuse or α Orionis is configured with Rigel β Orionis as the opposite sides of Orion's Belt

Thus, in the dialect of the coastal village of Obama in Fukui prefecture, the two were called wakiboshi or 'sidestars' because they lie on either side of the belt. In the dialect of Ikishima (壱岐島) island in Nagasaki Prefecture, the pair were known as ēte-boshi (相手星, standard Japanese = aiteboshi or ‘opposing stars’) in the phrase kanatsuki no ēteboshi. Here kanatsuki is equivalent to karatsuki, and thus the phrase meant the 'opposing stars of the Belt of Orion'. The same idiom existed in Wajima (輪島) dialect further north in Ishikawa Prefecture.

In 1950, a quite distinctive and archaic dialect term for the two stars was retrieved from the dialect of Yokokura village (横蔵村) in the Ibi district of Gifu Prefecture. There Betelgeuse and Rigel were denominated respectively by two famous clan names. The two clans were the Taira, otherwise known as the Heike, and the Minamoto, or Genji. These two clans conducted an epic struggle to wrest control over Japan during the historic Genpei war of the early medieval period, a devastating conflict that was memorialized in the The Tale of the Heike, an early masterpiece of Japanese literature. The crest of the Taira is red (揚羽蝶/Ageha-chō or 'swallowtail butterfly'). The crest of the Minamoto is gentian blue (笹竜胆/sasa-rindō, or 'bamboo gentian'). Thus, in Yokokura, the red supergiant Betelgeuse was called Heike-boshi (平家星, the Heike star) and the blue supergiant Rigel the Genji-boshi (源氏星, the Minamoto or Genji star), corresponding to the the respective colours of the two stars. The reference is Nojiri Hōei,Nihon no hoshi, Chūkō Bunko, Tokyo 1976 pp.243-245. Nishidunny aka Nishidani (talk) 14:51, 12 April 2011 (UTC)This is really intresting!

Fantastic. I will read and digest and add once I have finished off a couple of other chores...Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:32, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Betelgeuse

Hey, so I was looking through your userpage like a good wikistalker, and noticed that you'd put Betelgeuse on your to-do list. I have a bunch of astronomy-related sources sitting around my room (thanks to the lovely Andromeda), and put 2 and 2 together. If you're not too busy, would you be interested in a collab? Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 00:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Aha, funny you should ask. Essentially the situation is this - Betelgeuse was always on my to-do list but my hard-core astrophysics knowledge is a bit lacking. Then Sadalsuud (talk · contribs) turned up and was a real juggernaut in buffing it up to the max for a GA nom and pass. Since then Sasata (talk · contribs) did a really thorough look-over and that's where things stalled. I wanted to tighten up the folklore/mythology bit at the end and Sadalsuud has been inactive. I was planning on asking Sadalsuud if he was still interested and then double checking the physics/maths with some of the more technical-minded editors at the astronomy wikiproject before letting loose at FAC. I am happy for 2- or 3-way FAC noms (as collab editing is what we're all about) and staking this baby through the heart off my to-do list would be great. So have a look at the article and I'll ask away at the wikiproject and see what sadalsuud is up to. Nishidani was kind enough to find some folklore stuff which I can't remember if I added or not. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll go take a look then! Betelgeuse is one of the first variable stars I observed and thus is close to my dorky, astronomy-loving heart. :) I'm always up for a collab, whether it's this or something else. (Funny note, I was just working on Aquarius (constellation) for a bit and thought for just a moment that Beta Aquarii was somehow editing.) Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 01:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Right, review done. Once it's all scrubbed shiny and ready to go, I'd also think sending an email to a few of the people whose papers are cited in the article to ask them to come look-see would be a good idea. We can ask User: Mike Peel for UK-based folk as well. That's worked nicely before. Iridia (talk) 04:29, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'll get onto it a bit later. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Corona Australis and Crux

Hi! So I found some stuff for you yesterday. Mostly consists of constellation names, but I did manage to turn up some mythology. There were a couple books (one on Andean astronomy/mythology and one on Polynesian astronomy/mythology) that I didn't get through, so I can give you those names if you want. I'll try to hunt them down elsewhere or go back to the Field to find them eventually, especially because I know (from a cursory look) that both catalog pretty much every constellation from each culture with lots of mythology and helpful things. I can either email you my notes and the bibliographic information, or just stick it in myself. Which would you prefer? Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 15:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

If you could just stick it in that'd be wonderful - right this second I am juggling loads of things (see my contribs) and have stayed up way later than I intended (I have an action-packed saturday full of wonderful RL chores... :P .....bleh) Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:44, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll get going on that today, I've got absolutely nothing to do the next few days! Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 17:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

wish I could say the same....chores chores chores.... :( Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:25, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

sadface, have a beer! alcohol always makes chores better Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 21:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Rodrigues Solitaire

Hi, I've been working on the Rodrigues Solitaire article, getting it to GA, and I was thinking it could go to FA. J Milburn, who reviewed the GA, suggested I should ask you to look over it. Does it look alright? I see you're busy, so no hurry. Cheers, FunkMonk (talk) 14:18, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks good at first glance - will drop some comments - good work on all the extinct bird articles - I find them too depressing to work on generally....Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, and yeah, I can understand that, but I personally find them important to improve, since they might spread some awareness of human induced extinction. I got interested in extinct bird as a child when my mom told me about the Great Auk and the Pied Raven, two extinct birds from her native Faroe Islands. It made me quite angry. FunkMonk (talk) 12:57, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Double-crested Cormorant

Thanks for locking this article until the issue concerning the vulgar term "nigger goose" is resolved. I would, however, request that you revert to the page before where the term was reverted. I don't know the rules concerning locking pages that violate the three-revert rule but this page dodn't have the term in it for many years and it has only been added by a very new anonymous user in the past few days. Is this possible? If it is indeed deemed to be inappropriate why keep it there for any length of time? Cheers. Dger (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I see your point, yet it looks like consensus is leaning to keep it in. I'll drop a note there. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes it does and that is very disappointing. I think this reflects badly on Wikipedia and its editors. Many web-based providers copy the information from Wikipedia and that just spreads the term more widely instead of it dying out gracefully. Dger (talk) 00:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll drop a note on the village pump and anywhere else I can think of. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, more input could tip the balance. Dger (talk) 16:43, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

• I see you unprotected the article. I would like your input on what I would like to do. The support group is longer but appears to be mainly based on not censoring rather than whether it is an appropriate common name. I would like to remove the whole list because none of them are strong common names for this species.

Crow-duck - could find no good sources

Lawyer - could find no good sources, ridiculous name, how would you know what was meant if used in speech

Shag - is a name for any cormorant, it would need to be placed in every cormorant article

Taunton Turkey - local, with no good reference, one that was suggested, was listed as out-of-date in the referenced dictionary

Dger (talk) 02:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• I decided to remove Crow-duck, Lawyer, and Shag for the reasons mentioned earlier. I have left Nigger Goose and Taunton Turkey but the latter should probably go too. I checked on the references given and they did not pan out. The Merriam Webster dictionary says it is no longer contained in its free dictionary and my 1977 edition of the Audubon guide does not include it. Cheers. Dger (talk) 14:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Conversely, discussion of common names can be quite extensive - see Boletus edulis for an example. I still haven't looked much into this one....and I need to get to sleep as it is late here (in Australia...) cheers/good night, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:25, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. Sorry to keep you up. I made a final plea and have decided not to continue participation in the discussion. Someone else will have to make the final decision or indecision. This was an upsetting debate. When I mentioned this name to people in Canada they uniformly cringed. My daughter told me not to use it around her two-year old. My wife is giving me a series of books on the use of racial and gender negative words. Are you aware of a wider debate in Wikipedia articles about such usage that could apply here and in similar articles? It was interesting to read in Brazil nut whether Nigger Toes should be included. After a decision was reached and implemented some anonymous user erased the statement and it has yet to return to the article. So much for reaching and using concensus. No worries. Dger (talk) 15:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

ec

There was an edit conflict. It looks like your comments disappeared in the middle of it. My apologies. Obviously please feel free to place in chronological order. - jc37 14:00, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

no worries. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:01, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

your help with Dissociative identity disorder is gravely needed!

Hi,

I know you're busy with all sorts of things, but a clear eye is desperately needed on Dissociative identity disorder! It would be so helpful. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 01:28, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

(groan) I knew it was only a matter of time before I was going to be dragged into this...it might take me a couple of days to get there.... :/

oh, thank you, thank you, thank you! MathewTownsend (talk) 11:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

• Nevermind, its hopeless. Two guys control the article and drive others off. Doc James tried to help but he's unable to stop the ugly behavior. So I'm not going to work on the article anymore. Thanks anyway. MathewTownsend (talk) 23:42, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for coming to help Casliber!!!!! I wish Doc James would come back too! This article is desperately in need of attention! :) ~ty (talk) 16:29, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Casliber,

DID is now at peer review: Wikipedia:Peer review/Dissociative identity disorder/archive1. However, I fear the scrutiny the article needs will not be forthcoming regarding content. I don't believe DID holds together as a diagnosis. But the article (to me) comes across as a sledgehammer against it, without actually explaining the psychodynamics, concentrating more on the political context. My mind is whirling trying to put together a plausible explanation but I don't have access to journals etc. I think the whole article should be hacked down to a brief description, rather than allowing what is there now.

Is there any way to get help? Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 19:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

• DID is getting out of hand. Peer reviewer is gone on vacation I think. I'm afraid to continue for fear I'll lose my cool. There's a person who says she has DID editing massive amounts on the talk page. I moved some of her stuff from the peer review to the talk page for fear of overwhelming the peer reviewer. What to do? Should I just be realistic and give up? MathewTownsend (talk) 01:00, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

• • Sigh. I find these pages heavy going. The volume of communication is such that it makes it difficult to know where to start. Part of the problem about a peer review is that then there are two places where dialogue is happening rather than one, making it doubly difficult to follow. By all means, if you're feeling yourself getting too worked up, take a break, and also maybe post at WT:MED that you're taking a breather. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:33, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

• • • I know how you feel! Please see my last comment to you at peer review.[8] with links to comments by WhatamIdoing[9] and [10] and Worm on the editor's talk page.[11], all of which got nowhere. Is there a process that should be used? MathewTownsend (talk) 14:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
      • I actually started reading some of the material last night before bedtime. I'll read some more today. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:10, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

I enjoyed reading the Signpost article about all you've contributed - thanks!!!! SPhilbrick(Talk) 12:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Heh, thanks :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Canopus

Hey there, after I finish periodic table, do you want to do a joint improvement of Canopus? I noticed it was listed on your userpage under things to do. StringTheory11 (t • c) 00:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Oooh, there was a really interesting book at the Field Museum on Polynesian astronomy that had a whole bit on Canopus, when I go back there I'll track it down for you. Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 02:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes please! (to both) big team hug.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:12, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Go team! I think I can hunt some stuff down in the notes I took the last time. I should be back there in about 3 1/2 weeks; will let you know. Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 03:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the timing is alright. I still have to get pelican over the line and see if/when Sadalsuud (talk · contribs) has time to be around for Betelgeuse.....the other on that looks interesting the more I read about it is Arcturus...lots of mythology, a single star (always easier than writing about star systems) and maybe extragalactic in origin....Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Mmm, I pulled a bunch of stuff from archaeoastronomy conferences on Arcturus in Native American mythology/astronomy - it was quite important around 100BC apparently. I'm going for Auriga (constellation) at FAC right now, once I get that through I may push Bootes, not sure. I may need to take a break from constellations and write about something else. If that's the case, I'll definitely go for Arcturus or Canopus, both are fascinating and a push to FAC could be really fun. I'll leave that up to you. :) Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 03:31, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Awesome! I'm open to either Arcturus or Canopus. Sounds like a lot of editors will be working on whatever article we choose. StringTheory11 (t • c) 00:10, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Little Black Cormorant

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Tree

I don't believe any consensus has been reached on which version of Tree to retain. Mark Marathon has returned the page to its original version. A helpful suggestion you made for resolving the matter has been edited out of the talk page. I can't help being amused that a statement that he keeps banging on about on the talk page, "A young tree is called a sapling", also appears in the original version. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:08, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Peter Damian, Duns Scotus and Core Contest

Partial unblock of Peter Damian at AN/I - since you're in charge of the thing.VolunteerMarek 16:14, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I as well would appreciate your comments on this, as it was Peter Damian reaching out to you as a sockpuppet evading his community ban. Regards, — Moe ε 19:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

sigh. Yeah I figured this was coming....Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:39, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I was actually already doing what you suggested, ironically. I've left out the WMUK stuff, the WMUK meetings stuff, the 2010 Signpost article, and the 2011 Signpost article. Uncle G (talk) 22:36, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Dorset

Hello Calisber. Thanks once again for the copy edit and the comments you left at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dorset/archive1. We have taken them on board and done our best to incorporate them into the article. It appears that the review is drawing to a close now and I wondered if you had any further advice or comments to make? All the best--Ykraps (talk) 07:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me...I have fond and all too brief memories of driving round Dorset.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Varied Thrush

Heyya Casliber,

I'm working on a sandbox for the article Varied Thrush, and've gathered some sources on the talk page. Since you contribute a lot to this kind of area, what sections should be added to bird articles (i.e. taxonomy, range, ecology, and behavior)? The part at WP:BIRDS wasn't very specific. Thanks. Editio princeps (talk) 17:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry about a sandbox as these articles are usually pretty quiet. Just do it in mainspace where it is. I'll show you the sections. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Core Contest judging procedure

Can you tell me the procedure for wrapping up the Core Contest at the end of August? Is there an on-wiki venue for judge discussion, or will emails be sent back and forth? Binksternet (talk) 20:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

What we did last time was after the end of the time (in this case Aug 31/Sep1), look at the diffs of before/after versions, each independently rate them using broadness, state of article and size of improvement, and email each other with conclusions of best to worst. Interestingly, we were all very similar. There were a couple of emails discussing and then agreed on a ranking and posted. Was fairly straightforward really. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. Binksternet (talk) 20:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

RE:Triple Crown

Much Delayed Thank you! I was on a wikibreak, hence replying now. Cheers, Around The Globe<sup>सत्यमेव जयते</sup> 16:51, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for cognitive vulnerability

Hey! This nomination template has been looked over and since the reviewer suggested a hook, ONLY THE HOOK needs to be looked over by another new reviewer. The rest of the article has been surely taken care of. If you have the time to just check it out, please do so. Thanks. Khyati Gupta (talk) 19:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Australian Cattle Dog

Hi Cas, I've been asked to throw some cold water over the dog-fight here, please have a look at my comment on the talk page and let me know what you think. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see this too Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh dear....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:20, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Cas, there is a proposal on my talk page, which might at least give a way for me to end the war. Would you be prepared, as a voice of sanity, to support that suggestion? If so, could you reply on my talk page rather than here so that your views are visible to the warring factions? Thanks, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:04, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Shining Bronze Cuckoo

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Canis Minor

Hey Cas, I was wondering if you're at all interested in FA-ing Canis Minor. I just added some Inuit mythology I had found at the Field library, and did a little ref cleanup to standardize them all to your format. I would be happy to do more if you want me to; it's a little constellation with not that many stars or deep-sky objects, so I don't think it would take too long. If not, that's totally fine, just thought I'd ask. :) Anyways, happy editing/arbitrating! Best, Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 00:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes! Sounds good. I was just trying to 5x expand Piscis Austrinus for DYK, waiting for Sadalsuud to finish a couple of things on Betelgeuse and musing on what else to do with Corona Australis. I was thinking myself that Canis Minor would be good to go GA/FA. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:54, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Ooh, I have a bunch of information on Piscis Austrinus and Corona Australis, I'll make Canis Minor and Bootes my first priorities but take a look at those two. I'm moving and getting access to a gigantic library in a couple days; how about I add everything I can find on CMi and we move from there? Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 01:21, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Yep, sounds good. I'll look over CMi again soon. Corona Australis only needs a tiny bit of buffing before FAC (glaxy stuff), though I couldn't find any more chinese info....Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Yay, sounds excellent! I think I have some CrA stuff sitting around - Levy's Deep Sky Objects and Staal's The New Patterns in the Sky may have info on galaxies and non-western astronomies, respectively. I'll take a look tonight/tomorrow/after I move Wednesday. I'm sure there's something in my new ginormous library too, I can start with CrA when I get there if you'd like. :) Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 01:34, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay - looking at CrA, I've added just about everything I can possibly think of, so if you want to do one last scouring of sources and add a bit, I think it is then worth nomming. Happy to co-nom. While that is sitting at FAC, we can brush up Canis Minor for GA nomination. I've lost interest in Piscis Austrinus which is looking mighty tricky for a 5x expansion and I was never that enthused about the constellation anyway....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good, I'll let you know when I've finished adding everything. Probably around Thursday or Friday, if that's all right. Canis Minor looks pretty close, I'll get some of that archaeoastronomy information in there too. Piscis Austrinus...meh. I agree, DYK is probably a no go, but I don't think it's terribly far from GA. Let's focus on CMi and CrA for now - that plus Auriga and Bootes is plenty for me! :) Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 16:33, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Just a heads-up, I think Corona Australis Molecular Cloud would be a great DYK candidate; I gave it a brief mention in the section on deep sky objects. It's pretty interesting, lots of ghits, and I think we could easily get 1500 characters. Let me know if you're interested? Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 17:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Great idea! Also lots of amazing pix of it online - I wonder how much overlap with the Corona Australis Nebula, if synonymy which is the preferred term....Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:20, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering the same. Not sure if one is a part of the other or what...I'm moving tomorrow but I should be able to hunt something down by the end of the weekend. There's quite a few redlinks in CrA right now, maybe while we wait for FAC comments we could DYK some of those too? It's not too difficult, I did NGC 2080 and N44 (emission nebula) in about a day. Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 16:38, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

The more I read about them and molecular clouds the more I see they are the same thing, so have rejigged the article thusly. The Corona Australis Molecular Cloud would be an easy DYK, but individual stars and some galaxies can be tricky unless there is a paper. NGC 6768 was very hard to find anything written about it at all! Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm that makes sense. And yes, some are pretty difficult but still doable. I've found a bit of information from Astronomy so I'll keep going with that. Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 20:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

WRT Sourcing

What is WRT sourcing?842U (talk) 11:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

An abbreviation of "with respect to" sourcing. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:08, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Casliber. You have new messages at Talk:Australian Cattle Dog.
Message added 13:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

If you have a moment, could you please clarify which version you reference when you say, "This version." Many thanks. Ebikeguy (talk) 13:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

File mover rights

Hi Casliber! If you have time, could you take a look at my request for file mover rights? Thank you, anyway! Felipe Menegaz 23:19, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Felipe Menegaz 03:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Apology

Hi, Calisber. I sincerely apologize if I have unintentionally canvassed over at WT:FILM. It was a good faith mistake on my part, and I did not intend to be disruptive or break Wikipedia protocol in doing so. I promise that it never happens again. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:13, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

my bad. slip of fingers on smart phone Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

No worries. :) Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:46, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Please check DYK prepare area times before promoting

Casliber, I appreciate that you do the unpleasant and time-consuming job of moving Prepare areas into Queues, but please give those prep areas a minimum of a couple of hours for people to have a chance to see and edit them. I was just going to edit a hook in Prep 2, which I had finished assembling 40 minutes before, only to discover that it was already promoted. This means, unfortunately, that none of the usual crew (mostly non-admins such as myself) can do fixes on this set. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, you want to tell me what you want to fix and I can do it pronto? Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

All's well: I put it on the talk page, and it was taken care of pretty quickly. (There was another admin-only issue, so I combined them into one post.) Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok cool. Ping me if I'm around if you need admin stuff in future. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24

Hi. When you recently edited Persoonia hirsuta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John White (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

please see!

See my post to Fainites: [12] Subtly changing an article in tiny ways to say the opposite of what is meant - is this vandalism? e.g.[13] MathewTownsend (talk) 14:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Since when is editing a page vandalism. You are grasping at straws to try and ban me Mathew - just so I don't edit the DID article. I find this quite sad. Please stop hounding me and following me all around WP. Read up on attachment theory and you will see I am correct, even if I am not, any editor can go in and change it. It is not vandalism. It is not my POV. It is what I have read many times. I am not going to battle with you over that page. The page is a good one and does not need the conflict. In my free time I read through articles that interest me and correct what I see wrong. Since when is this a crime. If I have time and interest today I might add a reference to that, if not then someone else there might or they might remove it. I think that article is excellent! I have no problem with that one word there or not. I feel I am being attacked and stalked just so I won't ever be able to edit the DID article. Tanya ✫♫♥ 14:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Tanya, most of it is stylistic and fine. I did like the mdashes which made the flow a little clearer but not really fussed either way, but I am familiar with attachment theory (did contemplate forking out $3000 to learn the AAI but never got 'round to it....sigh) and couple of quibbles. I'll raise the odd one on the talk page. I do like attachment and am generally more psychodynamically oriented than average...I had a really hard couple of days at work and am pretty brain dead so reading stuff like work is ...well...like work...but we'll get there. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflit)

Thank you Casliber. You are a dear. I appreciate your help. :) Tanya ✫♫♥ 15:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I edited Attachment theory before you did, so I hardly "stalked" you there. It's on my watchlist. For example, changing modified to a less "all or nothing" approach to modified to an "all or nothing approach." is changing the meaning. And has such advantages today to has similar advantages today. Also, I think the original spelling should be retained e.g. "organised", "emphasised and not Americanized to "organized" and "emphasizes". MathewTownsend (talk) 15:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

No harm was intended. I will not edit anything but the DID page until this is all settled. I don't want to be hounded and attacked. Tanya ✫♫♥ 15:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Sources

I think CrA is getting close. I found a bunch of sources for the Corona Australids and I'm going to go see what I can find in the new library today. I know there are several papers about the molecular cloud, so I'll be adding to that, along with a couple online sources about the Corona Australids. Basically...I haven't forgotten about it and will be doing some heavy duty work today. :) Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 15:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Plenty of stuff to do - was seeing if I could expand Phoenix (constellation) 5x - was 200 words to begin with so not far off now.....

NB: this thesis I just discovered is in the uni library about a 5 min walk from where I work two days a week...coincidences....Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

If I have some time before classes start, I could try to do a little on Phoenix too, I have some good stuff on the various Phoenicid meteor showers. Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 19:16, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

(grunt....groan) only....41...more...words.....to.....go......to....5.....x......expansion......Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:21, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I feel awful dropping in like this, after getting such a laugh seeing the above in my watchlist, but I'm afraid I have some unfortunate news. Since 5x is based on the article's peak, regardless of how good that material was (the only exception is for copyvio, which can be discounted), DYKcheck is going to see that peak, which was on December 2, 2008, and came in at 2302 characters, or 384 words. With the article now at 5866 prose characters, or 1002 words, it still will have to approximately double from where it is now to satisfy the expansion rules. Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

aah I see, it was this edit where some stuff got trimmed...now I wonder what SLM is.....this segment is actually true and specific to the constellation but unfortunately written in an essay-like style. I wonder......Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:08, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

damn, added by an IP so can't ask them easily :/ Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

@Bluemoonset - [http://books.google.com.au/books?id=_GUDis0bETgC&pg=PA521&lpg=PA521&dq=star+names+meaning+phoenix&source=bl&ots=6TZbKSSFOh&sig=hECg6uZfryd_FTKa4_PXDcnd9Fo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=onk5UOmNIe-4iAeY6YDoDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=star%20names%20meaning%20phoenix&f=false copyvio it indeed is - see para 2 on p. 336 of this book and compare with added and subtracted segment above. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Whew! I'm so glad. You'll need to point it out on your nomination, but the copied text was 210 words totaling 1197 characters, giving the December 2008 non-copyvio total of 174 words and 1105 characters, below the 200 words and 1184 characters of August 16 of this year, your baseline for 5x. (It was introduced on April 3, 2006, and finally excised on December 14, 2008.) I hope I didn't give you too bad a fright! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Triple crown

Hi, I noticed you award triple crowns. I was told that the nominations page is pretty inactive. I nominated myself for the regular triple crown at Wikipedia:Triple Crown/Nominations, as I meet all the criteria. Can you take a look to see if I can be given the award? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi again. I hate to bother you so quickly after you just awarded me the standard crown, but I just had a new piece of featured content promoted, and now qualify for an upgrade. Whenever you find the time, could you take a look at Wikipedia:Triple Crown/Nominations? Thanks again, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Refs in CrA

Hey Cas, I've been doing some work on CrA and I was wondering if you'd be interested in converting the refs to {{sfn}}. I've used it on Andromeda, Aries, Auriga, and Bootes, and I think it's a pretty great format. You're the lead on this, so I wanted to ask before going all bold on your future FAC! I just think sfn would make the article a little more accessible. Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 19:11, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I haven't gotten up to speed with new referencing so go for it! Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:52, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Sweet, I'll start now. :) Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 21:57, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Franz Kafka CORE

Cas, no one has posted to us about Kafka's article since you did in the beginning over at CORE#Entries. Can you give us some input before we run the last leg of the race? Thanks, PSKY und Gerda. PumpkinSky talk 20:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Southern Screamer 1 Canis Minoris Common Rosefinch Plethodontohyla alluaudi 14 Canis Minoris Little Waterhouse Island Valenticarbo Egg Island, Horseshoe Reef 11 Canis Minoris Stereodmeta Northern Screamer Gamma Canis Minoris Nankeen Night Heron Delta3 Canis Minoris Epsilon Canis Minoris Bolam's mouse Leslie Christidis Boardgame Players Association Australasian Bittern

Cleanup Steve Goodman Rancidification Common Starling Merge List of North American birds Loon Small Prespa Lake Add Sources Gular skin List of Birds of King Island Great White Pelican Wikify Wil Tirion Attachment theory and psychology of religion Spillcam Expand Chicoreus thomasi Equuleus Tea

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Dostoyevsky

Hello,

if you are interested in literature articles, could you do a GA review of Dostoyevsky? If not, what people do you recommend? Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 20:29, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I see that User:Wadewitz has become active again, I'd ask her. Not sure who else comes to mind. Malleus? Hmmm......I'm not big on literature....Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:35, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Given the options of a PhD in English literature and me, I think GreatOrangePumpkin's options are clear. Malleus Fatuorum 21:03, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Core contest question

Are we supposed to be getting these ready for reviews? I'm seeing a lot of activity and it's making me very nervous. There's no way I'd ever think of going to a review without a strong collab with the geology department and that can't happen in the time-frame of the contest. Truthkeeper (talk) 22:10, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily. I hadn't given it much thought the first time around, but I guess the nest thing about a GA review is some feedback to work on and improve the article still further. I guess you could place a note on the page of WP France/Switzerland etc. and WP Geology and ask for feedback and see what happens. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Well a couple of geology editors have looked and given feedback. But I think I'm confused - for some reason I thought we were working on these alone. Anyway, I'm very burned out, so it has to stand as it is. Or if I get a second wind I can go around asking for feedback. Thanks anyway. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:38, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, if a person gives you some suggested improvements and then you go do them, they count as you doing them, so take a breather and see if yuo can do waht they suggest. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:08, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Cas, haven't been feeling great and my question above wasn't clear. Yeah, the changes have been made (multiple rewrites of the section) so that's all fine for now. I think I agree with Johnbod's statement that some of these topics are so big that it's hard to take them to review; certainly I don't feel that I've done a full literature search or have the time to do so, but I realize I've been pressuring myself unnecessarily. Hope this makes a little more sense. I'm taking a breather. Truthkeeper (talk) 18:38, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Dodo FAC

Hi, thanks for your help with the Solitaire article, I will try to get Dodo to FAC next, but I'm currently waiting for a copyedit. I've expanded the article to many times the size of the original GA (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dodo&oldid=179049346), so it could be nice to see what could be improved. Not asking you to read the entire thing, which is pretty long, just if you see any glaring issues at first look. Thanks. FunkMonk (talk) 01:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:18, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The_Core_Contest/Entries#Marie_Curie

I am done with my stage one expansion. For more, I'll have to actually get a book or two :) I've nominated the article at WP:GA. Any comments would be appreciated (as would a proofreading by a native English editor :). --<sub>Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</sub> 16:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I hope you get a reviewer. Maybe review someone else's....I'll offer some comments if I can but can't Review per seCasliber (talk · contribs) 23:59, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Feline or felid?

Hi, Casliber. Since you've had some experience writing about big cats, I wonder if you'd take a look at this edit request which has been open for over two weeks. I'm afraid the subtleties of taxonomic nomenclature often elude me. Rivertorch (talk) 19:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea - my initial impression is that "felid" is safer but "feline" more accessible iff it is applicable....Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:59, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for tidying up Attachment theory. Fainites <sup>barley</sup>scribs 21:51, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Sigh - the least I can do - have been meaning to weigh in on Dissociative identity disorder but just too much talk page material to digest....Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:59, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I was afraid to! Sorry I made a mess Fainites - it was not on purpose - I just wanted to know more about the subject so it was calling me and when I read I just naturally edit!

Casliber, I know what you mean about doing the same sort of thing on WP that you do at work - it get's old. I write about nature all day, so I enjoy the change of pace here. I think you do exactly the opposite - you enjoy writing about nature for that change. You should enjoy what you do. There is a peer reviewer coming to work on the DID page and in the meantime everyone is finally being patient - more or less. Please don't feel obligated to work on something that you just don't want to get in the middle of. We all still think you are awesome. :) Tylas ✫ ♥♫ 20:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess to explain myself - there's wiki-editing that I find fun and relaxing and then there is stuff that is more of a chore for various reasons. I've had an insanely busy time at work and home in the past several weeks with patchy free time at best, and it is easy to do stuff in the former category than the latter, but I try every now and again......Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Enjoy life! A man as busy as yourself should not add extra stress to it. I would find WP a chore if I had to edit things I do not want to. Certain things just draw me at certain times - as I am sure they do you too. When you feel the desire to wade through the mud at the DID article - you will, but don't feel any pressure, please! To help, I did clean up my talk page at least. ;) Tylas ✫ ♥♫ 21:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Phoenix (constellation)

Yngvadottir (talk) 00:03, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Boötes, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Draco and Virgo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

D&D monster list

If you are concerned about preserving information on D&D monsters, you may be interested in joining the discussion at Talk:List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. BOZ (talk) 21:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Narmer

Hi. Could you please keep an eye on tis article? Some guys are keeping removin´ the new pharaoh´s boxes... Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 22:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 August newsletter

The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

1. Grapple X (submissions) once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
2. Miyagawa (submissions) led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
3. Ruby2010 (submissions) was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
4. Casliber (submissions) finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
5. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article (Bivalvia) and one good article (pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
6. Muboshgu (submissions) was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
7. Dana Boomer (submissions) was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
8. Sasata (submissions) is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle: GreatOrangePumpkin (submissions), Ealdgyth (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions), Piotrus (submissions), Toa Nidhiki05 (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), The Bushranger (submissions) and 1111tomica (submissions). We hope to see you all next year.

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

CORE time goof

See Wikipedia_talk:The_Core_Contest/Entries#Pencils_down.21 PumpkinSky talk 00:32, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

See this. I truly enjoyed working on Kafka. PumpkinSky talk 11:04, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Greenwich uh-oh

Wups, I wrote up a bunch of diffs assuming UTC when you specifically wrote at the top of the contest page that it was based on Sydney time. I'll take another stab at it tomorrow. Binksternet (talk) 01:15, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Assume is the key word there. Didn't you read the rules? PumpkinSky talk 01:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Two items

I accidentally rolled back your recent edit at WT:DND. I have a new smart phone and the rollback button is apparently the easiest thing for my fat fingers to hit on the touchscreen. Sorry about that. Also, congratulations on making to the next round of the WikiCup! Very impressive work. —Torchiest <sup>talk</sup><sub>edits</sub> 03:42, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I've done that myself - having rollback on a smartphone is somewhat risky.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just did the same thing myself tonight (and not the first time, either). As careful as one can be, the rollback seems to engage at precisely the moment you are scrolling up to get to the lower portion of the watchlist; and it hits that one button, and lets you know you've done it it. "Shit! Hang on a second..." The friends I was with IRL were like, "Oh, did you miss something on your precious Wikipedia?" while I'm scrambling to rollback my rollback (while the smartphone catches up). What a world... Doc talk 06:39, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, sign of a wikipedia addict...sitting on a train as reverting is about the only easy thing to do (other than reading and digesting FACs) Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:45, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Persoonia hirsuta

Orlady (talk) 08:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK credit

It's not terribly important, but do you know why I was credited twice for Autographa sansoni on my talk page?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 16:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Weird - a template thing...? Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Could be...and I noticed that editing it shows a devil face in the edit window with editor help (or something) enabled despite not being shown in the template.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 15:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Razorback

Just watching now. Jesus ye australians are fucked up. ps [14]..."I knew that prick was my fucking dad from a video of crime-watch my mother had". Ceoil (talk) 14:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I really liked the film of Razorback, Iva Davies did the soundtrack too.....that's a nice ditty :) How about this charming bloke Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh I know Kevin well, he was a big hit here when I was about 16 or so, and always makes me laugh. Closest we have is this dude [15], and then these guys [16] who are just funny as hell, highly recommended.[17]. Ceoil (talk) 17:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Heh, John Cooper Clarke was popular here too...I was trying to find an unbowdlerized version of chickentown the other day to explain to my kids the cleverness of lyrics. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:13, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thank you so much for your support on the Stephen_Hawking FAC. It was much appreciated ;) Cheers! Fayedizard (talk) 14:46, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

BURP ....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:54, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 18:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Six

Hi! Welcome to the sixth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

• Teahouse serves over 700 new editors in six months on Wikipedia! Since February 27, 741 new editors have participated at the Teahouse. The Q&A board and the guest intro pages are more active than ever.

A lovely little teahouse nestled in Germany from Wiki Loves Monuments

• Automatic invites are doing the trick: 50% more new editors visiting each week. Ever since HostBot's automated invite trial phase began we've seen a boost in new editor participation. Automating a baseline set of invitations also allows Teahouse hosts to focus on serving hot cups of help to guests, instead of spending countless hours inviting.
• Guests to the Teahouse continue to edit more & interact more with other community members than non-Teahouse guests according to six month metrics. Teahouse guests make more than twice the article edits and edit more talk pages than other new editors.
• New host process implemented which encourages anyone to get started as a Teahouse host in a few easy steps. Stop by the hosts page and become a Teahouse host today!
• Host lounge renovations nearing completion. Working closely with Teahouse hosts, we've made some major renovations to the Teahouse Host Lounge - the main hangout and resource space for hosts. Learn more about the improvements here.

As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. EdwardsBot (talk) 00:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Bird Island Nature Reserve

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Eucalyptus denticulata

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Sooty Oystercatcher

Yngvadottir (talk) 16:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Casliber. You have new messages at Talk:Boötes.
Message added 03:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Keilana|<sup>Parlez ici</sup> 03:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

ygm

Hello, Casliber. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

MathewTownsend (talk) 22:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Abortion article titles

I commented. I'm sure it's not what you wanted to see, but frankly I've had enough of a lot of the people involved in this subject and given that I'm only semi-active at the moment due to IRL it would be pointless me volunteering my services. Closing the Muhammad Images RfC was chickenfeed compared to this shambles. Black Kite (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

ok point taken. can sympathise re RL Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:20, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sea Acres National Park

Hello! Your submission of Sea Acres National Park at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Maile66 (talk) 12:15, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Windy Nook GAR

Thanks for reviewing this article; it has been hanging around for a while now and I was starting to wonder of it would ever be reviewed. Much appreciated :) Meetthefeebles (talk) 16:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

No worries...I like these little town ones....Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Your advice please...

Hi mate, I see you are a regular admin-contributor at WP:RPP. Was wondering if you might be able to give me some advice. Author and professor Karen Leigh King yesterday released details of the Gospel of Jesus' wife (I created the second page). Given the subject matter, I can see both very quickly becoming battlegrounds for non-NPOV contributors. We have already seen one vandalism edit to the first article and I'm sure we'll see more. I didn't want to jump the gun and go straight to RPP when there has been no significant vandalism and PP might actually be disruptive given subsequent edits to the second article have been from an IP editor who has made some very good edits. My concern is that both pages might be of interest to outside users, especially in the next few days, and any vandalism could have a very detrimental effect on outside readers. Would appreciate your advice. Cheers, Stalwart111 (talk) 03:08, 19 September 2012 (UTC).

As an indication, page-views for Karen Leigh King have gone from a dozen-or-so a week to almost 1000 in the last 24 hours. Cheers, Stalwart111 (talk) 03:14, 19 September 2012 (UTC).

Intriguing. I am sort of inclined to semiprotect her article and buff the Gospel of Jesus' wife for Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates or WP:DYK. Then lots of editors' eyes will be on it so vandalism should be reverted quickly. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, whatever you think is appropriate. Note you SPP'd King, so thanks for that. Would be great to have a few more people to keep an eye on both (would actually be good to get some experienced editors to contribute to both!). Thanks for your consideration and advice. Cheers! Stalwart111 (talk) 12:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Sea Acres National Park

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Agastachys (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Nigel Barker

Cenarrhenes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Nigel Barker

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

CORE apologies

I must apologise for my apparent lack of involvement in the current CORE contest. There are two reasons: first, some messy off-wiki business which is limiting my time here, and secondly my (over-)involvement with one of the candidate articles, namely Franz Kafka. The Kafka expansion has been huge and well worthy of recognition, but the article still has considerable problems that I am discussing with the main editors. This has left me little time to consider the merits of the other candidates. In the circumstances, given the article's importance I feel I should continue my efforts to improve Kafka, and that I should bow to your and the other judge's opinion as to the final rankings, with the plea that Kafka, if it is not thought actually prize-worthy, should get an honourable mention. Brianboulton (talk) 14:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Telling me that my article got featured in Did You Know. I never guessed that the article I created would get to 7600 hits, or that it would explode so quickly. I guess that just happens. Right? That makes me want to make more articles.

Cool! Now get cracking.... :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Quick note

Just a note that I've taken your name in vain here. – iridescent 00:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Abortion titles RfC

Hi Casliber. Apologies for not responding sooner to the note you left on my page re the above RfC. I've had very little time for actively participating in Wikipedia over the last few months and that seems likely to continue to be the case over the short to medium term. I stand by an earlier commitment I made to stick with the RfC and I've been keeping up with the discussion on a periodic basis, but while things have been going round in circles I've felt that there would be little point in my contributing. My views are already on record - that I believed the best way forward was for the then-closers to draft a second RfC - but that never really took off. It does seem that opinion is moving towards a second RfC of some sort; I hope the focus will be the structure of the topic and scope of the articles, because until that's settled I believe choosing actual titles is irrelevant.

I've noted the general dissatisfaction with the previous close and ongoing comments about the closers, and accept that my mostly hands-off approach may have been the wrong way to go about things and has possibly given an impression of disinterest (not helped by my general lack of editing activity). Given my reluctance to actively interfere with the process, and the other calls on my time, it may be best if I recuse from further participation.

Best regards, EyeSerene<sup>talk</sup> 20:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

(Belatedly) look, thanks for investing time thus far and being up-front about involvement from here. We'll work something out....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:29, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Rogelio Bernal Andreo

Hi Casliber,

I finally posted the bio on Rogelio Bernal Andreo that I had been working on for a month. Within minutes it got an ugly banner. Many of the tags just seem malicious and frankly lacking serious inquiry. What do you suggest?--Sadalsuud (talk) 05:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your input.--Sadalsuud (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Syzygium fullagarii

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Consult

For reasons unknown to me my Arbitration appeal was archived as decline by a clerk. Even though I know that the clerk didn't follow the proper procedure as I learned about the closure 3 hours after when I saw it on my watchlist I have no hopes of it coming back. I have three issues that I'd like to consult you on. First one is a false accusation posted by an involved admin on my appeal. I was accused of calling someone "retarded" and when I pointed out this to be wrong I got no acknowledgement in return. I believe this to be a major disruption especially as it comes from an admin. Second one is also about false accusations. One of the arbitrators (not you) claimed that there is no evidence that I acknowledge the topic ban as a result of my actions when I explicitly word it in my appeal and comments that my actions were wrong and that I was not contesting the topic ban itself but it's duration. I can't make sense of this vote and personally feel unfair that such a misinformed vote is counted. Third one is the fact that I take some of the arbitrators and involved admins arguments as being completely unfair and out of line. I want to pursue this case further not because I'm dying to make an edit in that article topic but because I see this indefinite topic ban for a single incident that I caused when I was a very new editor as an injustice. I feel like I'm being treated as a mass murderer my crime was harassment. What other action can I take over this? Is there any higher authority?

In case you wonder, I'm not sending this message to you because you didn't outright declined my request (which you actually did initially) but because when I pointed out an issue that you were mistaken you acknowledged it and we moved on. TheDarkLordSeth (talk) 03:45, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

TFA considered

I suggested Armillaria luteobubalina to be considered for TFA, please feel free to join the discussion, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:30, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Controversial AfD

Do you have an opinion on the notability of this guy? Tijfo098 (talk) 10:45, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Interesting.....I'll take a look. Just discovered a stack of housekeeping tasks to do upon archiving this page. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Gospel of Jesus' Wife

Hi mate, this one again. Has now been subject of multiple edits which are almost pure Synth OR - one particular editor introducing links to other theories and history completely unrelated to the subject based on their own opinions. Have reverted basically the same edit 2-3 times in 48 hours but am trying to steer clear of 3RR. Continued reintroduction of a claim that a 2008 source justifies a link to a subject that became public knowledge only a few days ago. The content comes with multi-para "citations" which repeat content from other articles the editor believes are related. Myself and another editor have left notes on his TP but they have been ignored. He has also refused to engage in any of the discussions on the article TP. Your attention would be appreciated. Cheers, Stalwart111 (talk) 13:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC).

DYK for Acacia riceana

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Threatened species

When I made my comment on the DYK thread, I didn't notice you had already nominated a preferred hook, so my apologies if my comment sounded inconsiderate. For the record, I wasn't keen on the last two hooks because they struck me as potentially divisive politically, and I thought it would be better for an important topic like the world's most threatened species if the political angle was omitted in the hook. I might have been wrong about that of course, but that's the issue that struck me at the time. Regards, Gatoclass (talk) 06:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I hadn't actually seen your input there. I didn't feel hugely strongly about it, just glad the article is on the main page really. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Sheriff Hill FAC

Good evening Casliber.

Having taken three days away from this place to reflect on how this review descended at the back end of last week and my own response/contribution to that, I'd like to apologise for my over-reaction and thank you for the forebearance you showed in dealing with that over-reaction. I don't think I've behaved like that for about twenty years. Thank you again for taking the time to comment and helping me improve the article. Meetthefeebles (talk) 22:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Aaah don't sweat it/no worries, I can see why you got frustrated. Wikipedia is fascinating for this sort of stuff. Sorry about the talking, I basically mentioned it on MFs page hoping that more of us would end up looking at it given that it failed due to lack of attention the first time around. I'll have a look at the FAC again soon (juggling too much ++++) Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:52, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Cenarrhenes

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Rogelio Bernal Andreo

Hello! Your submission of Rogelio Bernal Andreo at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

While you're at DYK, also check out a minor issue with Agastachys, Persoonia gunnii, Persoonia muelleri. Sasata (talk) 02:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, saw all these - Will get cracking. Felt knackered and went to bed early and got up late which eliminated much tweaking time.

PS: Sorry I forgot about the book, was preparing for China and just come back from a week in Shanghai. I can get the book on thursday and we can milk it for DYK....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:47, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Shanghai Botanical Garden

You must review another article to help this nomination pass the "quid pro quo" requirement. You may try one of articles in WT:DYK. --George Ho (talk) 05:26, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Yep - been flat out today. Meant to do it, will get to it in the next few hours. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:39, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Ahmad Shah Massoud

Hello Casliber, you promised some further input on Talk:Ahmad Shah Massoud about a week ago. Can we still expect some? The protection has expired in the meantime and, predictably, no further progress has been made. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:11, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes. I had alot less free time than I thought. I should be able to read up in a few hours and provide some input. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I am impartial to the subject (military history is one subject I have not much interest in in general) so am happy to put admin hat on in these debates. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Golden-winged Sunbird at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --SGCM (talk) 11:30, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion

Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Betelgeuse.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any .

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 21:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.

DYK for Agastachys

Yngvadottir (talk) 00:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Persoonia gunnii

Yngvadottir (talk) 00:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Persoonia muelleri

Yngvadottir (talk) 00:04, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Telescopium

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Future Perfect at Sunrise

Dear Casliber, there is no way a collaboration with Fut.Perf. is possible. He only knows his way or no way. We have had two objections to his changes (in the lead, removal of some quotes, etc.). The Webster University book has clearly been said to meet RS, yet he tagged it. You said explicitly disputed, complicated bits, to which the lead undoubtedly belongs, should be discussed on the talk first and you were yet to comment on my comments, so was DS who still wanted to provide further reasoning. Yet Fut.Perf. is again starting an edit war. He should be banned from editing that article. In fact, he never edited that article before he had a dispute with me on an image deletion discussion, in which consensus was against him and he was noted as "unecessarily bitter" towards me and making use of administrative rights in a way that questioned his ability to do so.[18][19] After that he hounded me to the Massoud - and several other[20] - articles and ever since has created edit wars there, failing to accept opinions different than his own. He did the same with DS after DS had had a content dispute with him. When DS got a DYK promoted by several established editors reviewing it, Fut.Perf. hounded DS to the relevant article - which FP again had never edited before - and immediately discredited it including all those that had reviewed it.[21][22] FP is interested in getting me and probably others like DS banned by starting edit wars, rather than being interested in that article. I am willing to work with you, Dennis Brown, or any other cooperating person on that article as I had already started to improve the article by rewriting the "Early Life" sections and other things - before Fut.Perf. started this recent edit war.[23][24][25] JCAla (talk) 07:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Casliber, will you topic-ban JCAla yourself or would you prefer me to go to WP:AE first? It's high time. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:22, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

If someone needs a topic ban, then it is Fut.Perf. Btw, he was noted as "involved" by many editors in the arb. You, Cas, laid out the rules for unprotection of the article very clearly: "Regarding more complicated bits, discussion should take place here." Fut.Perf. didn't follow this, he simply went back to edit warring even though the most recent discussion on the complicated bits hasn't been resolved. He also tagged a source which according to consensus is reliable as unreliable. I have asked User:Salvio Giuliano to have a look at this case also, he knows the history. Hopefully, he isn't fed up with this already. JCAla (talk) 07:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I've taken this to AE now. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:07, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. At least there will be more eyes on it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:32, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Jack Reacher

Casliber, you semi-protected Jack Reacher (film) recently. There is a push to mention actor Alexander Rhodes, who plays an unnamed role in the film, prominently in the article. It's based on an Internet community's inflation in popularity of the actor's IMDb page. There is an IP who keeps trying to make a proposal to this extent on the article's talk page. I've removed it a couple of times as a joke discussion, but the person has restored it, insisting that it is a "serious" proposal. What do you think? Erik (talk | contribs) 11:40, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Not as the IP was putting it originally. I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 September newsletter

We're over half way through the final, and so it is less than a month until we know for certain our 2012 WikiCup champion. Grapple X (submissions) currently leads, followed by Sasata (submissions), Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and Casliber (submissions). However, we have no one resembling a breakaway leader, and so the competition is a long way from over. Next month's newsletter will feature a list of our winners (who are not necessarily only the finalists) and keep your eyes open for an article on the WikiCup in a future edition of The Signpost. The leaders are already on a par with last year's winners, but a long way from the huge scores seen in 2010. That said, a repeat of the competition from 2010 seems unlikely.

It is good to see that three-quarters of our finalists have already scored bonus points this round. This shows that, contrary to criticism that the WikiCup has received in the past, the competition does not merely incentivise the writing of trivial articles; instead, our top competitors are still spending their time contributing to high-importance articles, and bringing them to a high standard. This does a great service to the encyclopedia and its readers. Thank you, and good work!

The planning for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Some straw polls have been opened concerning the scoring, and you can now sign up for next year's competition. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 19:49, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Your question on Jimbo's user talk

Can you please explain?--Tznkai (talk) 12:03, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

this - I was about to open up with "Hands up everbody who is happy for Tznkai, Skomorokh and Happy Melon to be the three in charge of this again." Hence were you guys thinking or talking about it already. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:10, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Skomorokh is unavailable, as per my last information. Dunno about Happy Melon. I don't think I'd be "happy," barring an Electoral Commission or similar body/person in place for my peace of mind, but I would probably Election Admin again anyway.--Tznkai (talk) 20:06, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Don't release CORE deliberations

I advise against releasing the CORE deliberations. I think it would only lead to unececessary complaints and drama. You guys volunteered to make some tough calls and you made them. That the decision was 3 weeks late tells me it was not easy. Releasing them could even embarrass some people, potentially. Let the chips fall where they may.PumpkinSky talk 22:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Agree. While I (and I'm assuming others) would always appreciate specific comments on how we could improve the articles that we worked on, releasing the full deliberations can only lead to drama. No one is alleging judicial misconduct, so the only outcome that I can see of releasing the full discussions is hurt feelings. Dana boomer (talk) 23:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Agreed.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:12, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I have some general thoughts and will open up a discussion on what/how we do this next year soon. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

RFC Clarification

Holla. In the Civ rfc, you replied to my comment at section 11 with a question about percentages, but I'd mentioned "10%" further below in section 14, so I'm not sure if you were asking me about that?

To (perhaps) clarify: My only certainty is that "it's complicated", and "anyone who claims to have a simple solution is probably overlooking oodles of edge cases", type thing...

But i would be seriously worried if someone who had made 900 productive edits had also made 100 inflammatory comments... (I realize/assume you were using "90%" as a placeholder number, but numbers are tricky beasts, 'specially in rfcs..)

Feel free to clarify (and/or move) your question, or other action. I'll respond wherever you prefer :) —Quiddity (talk) 01:57, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I meant more time than edits. If there was a total of two days' acrimony in 6 months of productive and more or less incident-free editing. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but, I was mainly making a semi-pedantic quibble over using any specific number.

eg. 6 months = 180 days. 10% = 18 days. 1% = ~2 days.

Again, I totally get (and agree with) where you're coming from: context is critically important, and the layers of the onion go down further than many participants realize (there are dozens of factors that need to be considered and balanced, from editor-retention to conflicting cultural demographics that just need better translation/mediation (I've spent many hours trying to help a few older-ESL-grumpyseeming editors communicate with other editors who had been misinterpreting/misunderstanding some of their intended nuances)). Summarizable only as "It's Complicated!" and "Making it work well, requires constant effort from us all, not new strict rules"

eg. If someone were slightly uncivil for 18 days out of 6 months, that would have its own complications; as would the case of someone who was incredibly uncivil for 2 days out of 6 months.

(Do you want me to refactor our discussion here, and your question in the section 11 subthread, down into a collated thread in the section 14 area? (I will, if you agree it might be helpful.) I feel awkward just letting your question hang unanswered, in section 11 though!) —Quiddity (talk) 20:43, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah ok, sure, move it over. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:55, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Casliber. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 06:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Rschen7754 06:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Bands that inspire Coldplay

Hey Casliber, given your FA efforts and your interest in music would you be interested in giving the OK Computer FAC some feedback? It's got two supports right now and I'm close to supporting myself, but another perspective wouldn't hurt, be it positive, negative, or simply constructive. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:49, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok. But my wife and son like Radiohead and Coldplay more than I do. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Kafka at FAC

See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Franz Kafka/archive1. Since you were the CORE lead, I thought you'd like to know. Comments and improvements welcome. Thanks for the work at CORE. PumpkinSky talk 22:33, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Please, have a look here

Hello, I made a entry, normaly I´m only on the german wiki and I´m realy shocked, what is going on here. I such things never happen to me on the german site and this is realy insulting. here please. I´m not a nativ speaker so it not always so easy for me to find the right words. Thanks a lot. --Brainbug666 (talk) 05:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

FYI

Hello C. You protected the List of incomplete or partially lost films on Sept 28. The IP hopping editor from California, rather than engage in discussion on the talk page, waited until the protection expired and went right back to adding the incorrect info. Looks like we might need to protect it again. I came to you first since you are familiar with the situation but if you would rather that I file another report at RFPP just let me know and I will be happy to do so. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 20:12, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I protected it for a month. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:22, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks. It is frustrating when they won't even discuss the situation. Happt editing. MarnetteD | Talk 04:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination for Pyxis

Hi there, Casliber. I just reviewed your DYK nomination for your expansion of Pyxis. You did great work, but it's not quite past the 5x threshold. (It's a little above 4x right now.) Maybe a little more content could be added? (For example, the history section is intriguing and could definitely be expanded if there's more information out there.) Salaam, groupuscule (talk) 02:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Do you have this book?

Shepherd CJ, Totterdell CJ. 1988. Mushrooms and Toadstools of Australia. Melbourne: Inkata Press. Would appreciate you checking something for me if you do. Thanks, Sasata (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I know the book but don't have it. This was written by Queensland authors so different view which is good. I can get it from library either today or thursday (next door to work on these days). Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I was hoping you'd be able to tell me what it says about Mycena chlorophanos for an article about a similar (bioluminescent) species M. chlorophos. Don't go out of your way to get it, there's no rush, and many other articles to work on in the meantime ... thanks! Sasata (talk) 01:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah ok. Today was tricky for a number of reasons so was unable to get there. Thursday will be doable. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Constellation task force assessment

Certainly Assessment boxes like the one for the cardiology task force are made by User:WP 1.0 bot. Just post to talk there and it can make your box easily. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I've not used bots in my time here. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)