User talk:CatherineMunro/Archive5

Talk to me!

I will answer on your talk page, but may copy or summarize here so I remember what we talked about.

Archive 1 - Archive 2 - Archive 3 - Archive 4

Help with article

Hey can you help me improve the quality of William Randolph. It is an article i started like a few weeks ago and would like to expand it to featured status. Considering the importance of the family, i might make a page called Randolph family. This would be easier because there are sooooooooo many prominent and important members of the family.(Thomas Jefferson etc) Jobe 6 23:37, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Clans

I saw your name as a part of the Scottish clans project. I'm new, is this still going? There are many notable clans without pages still. My primary focus is elsewhere now, but I'm interested in helping in any case in some time after "a year and a day" ;-) Khirad 12:12, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aha!

I saw you hadn't edited for four days straight three days ago. This isn't terribly long or anything but I was worried. Anywho at the medcom would you like to take a case? R e dwolf24 (talk) 01:47, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: mediation ... greetings!

Catherine:

Greetings! I hope you're well. Thank you for agreeing to mediate this issue; it has been wholly frustrating and I hope it gets resolved satisfactorily fairly soon!

As well, I wanted to inform you of a recent development: in response to what I would characterise as ... badly worded, subjective contributions by Vlad Patryshev today (whom Nixer has cited as a supporter) (as well, for example, also see here, negative vote #9, for what another user called his "rant", I edited them (my apologies!), and Nixer reverted them.

To that end, Catherine, I hereby request that steps be taken (as per (1) of the mediation request) to caution or prohibit all edits to the global city article (by Nixer, et al., myself included? :() until this is resolved.

Please let me know if you've any questions. Thanks again! E Pluribus Anthony 13:36, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Periwinkle (plant) query

I've answered (two months late!!) your query at Talk:Periwinkle (plant) - MPF 21:45, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the news

Tell me when you're done; no hurry. Also, I have some more citations at User:Ral315/In the news that you can add; I just don't want to mess up your citation layout. Ral 315 W_S 23:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Belated thanks

Hi, I just saw an article you very kindly copy edited for me years ago (well actually a year ago last May) (you did several for me) when I had a different user name and was very green indeed, and realised while I am still here writing often frenetically I never see your name about. I just wanted to check you are still here. I'm glad to see you obviously still are, and edit a great deal, and we just obviously move in different circles. So I'm just here to say "Hi" and "best wishes". So here is Anthere's wikithank flower given as she intended, to thank you for being nice to a "newbie" a long time ago. Giano | talk 20:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the news - November 21

You might report on the CNet article (linked on the Tip Line). The Wiki's down, but the 3-part article is really interesting and probably deserves a mention on ITN. Thanks :) Ral315 (talk) 15:50, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stoltenberg

Talk:Jens Stoltenberg All I know is found in that page. Lotsofissues 20:11, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Lovely Bones

Happy Thanksgiving and thank you so much for the compliment. As the creator and primary author of much of that article, it really means a lot that someone with administrative privileges comes down, takes a look and likes what she sees.

I'm encouraged. Think it could go for peer review? Daniel Case 01:28, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page citation

See User talk:Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason#Citation variables. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 03:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it looks like we're done at MediaWiki:Cite text. Thanks, and good job! Titoxd^(?!?) 04:29, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, do we need to add the copyright information to MediaWiki:Cite text? After all, that information is available by clicking on Copyright at the bottom of each page. Tito xd^(?!?) 22:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, no, I'm fine with them, I was just wondering where the idea had come from. But now, I'm trying to make them work... every time the extra div is added, Special:Cite completely breaks down... and I don't know what's causing it. I'm working on the problem, too, though... Tito xd^(?!?) 22:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I replied here about a way to search within the textbox of Wikipedia. [1] Gflores ^Talk 02:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:CatherineMunro#Daily_Deeds:

Picture of the day and the Signpost are overlapping, at least in 800x600 and 1024x768. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 20:40, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So sorry if this violates WikiEtiquette! I am just writing to say I tried to clean up the article on Lake Bled. Take a look. I've never taken the "This article reads like an advertisement" notice away from an article before. I think I've neutralized the Lake Bled article. What do you think? Mr Frosty

Catherine, you might not remember me but...

You welcomed me as a new member back in July, and I was just promoted as an administrator here at Wikipedia, the most important online information resource! You were virtually the first editor I asked for advice and you gave me a nice welcome that I was not expecting. And good advice. That set a nice tone for me, as an editor, and since I have always watched your user/talk page for vandalism. I'll try to live up to what I have seen in your work, namely, a very high standard. Hamster Sandwich 02:05, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the news

I just put a story on Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-11-28/In the news, and then noticed that the article appears under your byline. Should I not have posted it? Feel free to delete/rewrite/whatever. TIA, -- Mwanner | Talk 01:01, 5 December 2005 (UTC) (BTW, if the article is not open to general authors, it would be good to protect it or note its closed nature in a comment.)[reply]

Actually, there's another Wikipedia story in today's NY Times [2] based on an interview with Jimbo, and an AP story that they reprinted on the same subject [3]. It must be getting hard to keep up... -- Mwanner | Talk 00:08, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I missed your request for help-- I would have been glad to. The whole thing has me wondering, though, why the weekly format? Why not just a live, continuously updated piece, with stories being deleted when they're seven days old? That way, you don't face the deadline pressure, and stuff that appears early in the week gets covered promptly, not almost a week late.

Anyway, if you need help in the future, don't hesitate to ask-- I'm generally around, off and on, 8am to 6pm, East coast US time (but I'll be away Jan. & Feb.). -- Mwanner | Talk 13:54, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Find-A-Grave links

User:UninvitedCompany has placed comments at WP:AN/I and at Wikipedia talk:Find-A-Grave famous people raising the question whether the links to findagrave.com be deleted from articles. You may want to participate in the discussion. -- DS1953 18:36, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

News coverage

If you're doing "In the news" this week, you might take a look at my article to see what I did. Mine is obviously a summary of the high points, so if there's some coverage that I omitted or that you think is worth mentioning in the general article, feel free to duplicate my efforts. For example, I didn't get to the NY Times business editor's email that Wikipedia is not supposed to be used for fact-checking. And since stuff was coming in at such a heavy pace, I tried to keep track of non-Seigenthaler stories on the suggestions page, hoping that might be useful. --Michael Snow 07:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

Hello Catherine! I was wondering if your current case is active? Please get back to me. R e dwolf24 (talk) Attention Washingtonians! 08:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! As the instigator of this mediation, things have stalled ... but not without substantial movement here and there. I believe we are at a precipice, and I'm unsure what to do from hereonin if the other party doesn't agree (as may be the case). Disengagement is also an option, but arbitration is not (I think). Anyhow, let me know if you've any questions. :) E Pluribus Anthony 08:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Roleplaying stubs?

Hello Catherine. You seem to be experienced at Wikipedia, and made a quick fix to the Gamemaster article I merged yesterday, so probably have some interest in Role-playing games. Could I bother you to look at a couple of short articles I wrote:

and say whether in your experienced opinion they should be marked "rpg-stub"s or if they're long enough to be considered full fledged, if short, articles? I want to know what to shoot for, should I want to reduce the number of Category:RPG_stubs. I know it's a judgement call. I'll take any miscellaneous criticism too. Thanks, GRuban 22:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I think you've shown by example. Will try to follow your model. GRuban 17:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re: promo photos

I think I talked to you a long time ago about promo photos. In the past I always assumed I was to get permissions before uploading even a promo photo. The other day I found a promo photo that had been uploaded a couple of months ago into a music article I help edit. The person was a new member whose talk page had had warnings from an admin about improper photo tagging. The person used the "promotional" tag, which seems ok to indicate it's a promophoto. (I had been using the "promophoto" tag but it's the same idea.) But the thing that I wondered about is that this person clearly had not sought any permission from anyone for uploading it. He just took it from some media site that he listed the url for (a page which is no longer online but from a valid domain, and likely he did get it from there), and posted it with a link in the photo description page to the page he took it from. It has the record label's logo at the bottom, so one might assume this makes it a "promo photo" without even asking the label for permission. I have since asked the label a permission question but they may never get around to replying; maybe they could care less about the band involved (since the band hasn't worked together in two years) or about Wikipedia, whatever. Should I just not concern myself with getting permission on the photo (which I did not myself upload) since the record label logo is at the bottom right in the photo? The logo's appearance would seem self explanatory that it's a promo photo. Should I just go and add a link to the label's websites into the photo description page and leave it at that? Or should I be concerned with "permissions" like I have in the past? It's a small size photo that seems to meet fair use standards. We're not talking about a large photo or a licensing situation, just fair use promo. Who should I ask this question, by the way? Is asking you good enough or is there a photo tag and licensing guru admin? Emerman 16:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply and info left at my page. I have tried to add more detail to the photo description and have also contacted the website from which it was supposedly taken just to learn as much as I can about the photo source. I think the logo on it alone qualifies it for promo status but it's nice to check everything out the best I can. Emerman 20:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

how can I become an admin?

December 26 issue of "in the news"

I should be able to put some time in on it. Enjoy your holidays! -- Mwanner | Talk 21:58, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome, and Duran Duran

Hi, Catherine: thank you for your welcome, and your interest in me and my page. I enjoyed reading about your vision of Wikipedia; in fact, I agreed wholeheartedly with what you had to say. About your Duran Duran article: I would happily read it out. I'm not the biggest Duran Duran fan, since I'm more into experimental folk like Beck, but I can see that the article was researched and compiled meticulously, and surely that fact, coupled with their global significance, merits them a spoken article. However, since I have had quite a nomadic life, I never really picked up the Brummie accent as my own. I can speak Brummie like a second dialect, if you wanted, but not as fluidly as I could speak in Ulster Scots or Scouse, for example. (My usual accent is a mixed-up rhotic one.) If you still want me to read it, then I'll get at it right away; if not, I could be able to get a 'fully' Brummie-speaking friend of mine to read it out.

Happy holidays to you also! iinag 14:21, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will start work on it tonight! Iinag 23:26, 25 December 2005

Why am I here

I put your Why am I here? text on my meta user page useful links. It is a remarkable essay. Thank you :) villy ♦✎ 22:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!!

Wikipedia press mention

Hello! I noticed that you did last week's "In the news" portion for the Wikipedia Signpost. I had an instance of this to add to this week's article. The 'Pedia was mentioned in the Discover (the year-in-science Special Issue) article "Beyond Google" (p. 16). The article opens with a quick discussion of Wikipedia as one of the most news-making websites of 2005. There are some pros and cons, and then the article moves on to discussing other website models.

Anyway, I thought this might help. If somebody else is doing the "In the news" section this week, could you please forward this to them? Thanks.

Best regards,
King of All the Franks 01:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Smith and Anderson

Smith looks fantastic to me. Excellent work! Tedernst | talk 23:19, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that - excellent work on both. If you get a chance, have a look at Roman. Much of the cleanup I did has been undone by a few page-owners. The idea that Roman surface needs to appear on that dab page doesn't really work for me. | Klaw ¡digame! 01:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LoBbN

_ _ Hi, CM, & tnx for yr excessively kind wds. There are two or three reasons why the method you just described for learning the ropes is probably a good one (tho i certainly don't want to prescribe that as the Official Way to function on LoPbN):

I've been learning as i go (for 2 years now), or repeatedly changing my opinions about what the Only Sensible Approach is, with no end in sight.
I'm not that good at enunciating clearly what principles i'm applying in a way that seems to me to hopeful for the creation of an MoS (LoPbN).
Discussion at Talk:List of people by name is pretty damn diffident, probably bcz of 1 and 2 above, and my status (as IMO pretty fairly described by one of WP's longterm pests) as a "grammatical hurricane". I.e., i can seldom make my points to my own satisfaction without talking a colleague to death, or i guess fairly literally driving them to distraction.

_ _ I was not surprised to see a note from you in light of the obviously big effort you made in the last week to add and improve entries. My visibility to you is almost certainly the result of my main WP activity, reviewing Related-changes of User:Jerzy/Links to Most Cleaned LoPbN Pages, a list of pages that slowly grows as i find a chance to go thru pages not yet on it and "clean" them. (Tho i also add entries, esp'ly from Dab pages, and i've announced i'm abt to remove the commas before the vital stats, and i subdivide pages and sections when they (or the page ToCs) seem too big, and i'm working on making that kind of structure more maintainable and monitorable, and i'm getting close to deciding to make all names-pages look like the ones listed on User:Jerzy/LoPbN Pilot Pages. And i do some very tangential things like Wikipedia:Title pairs for future redirects.) The level of "cleaning" to get onto that list is roughly

getting rid of lks other than the one on the name the entry is alphabetized by, and
getting rid of any detail, beyond a standard name/DoB&DoD/nationality/occupation-that-produces-notability format, that doesn't seem likely to contribute to keeping a user from going astray on the route from "i think my target's name might be XYZ" to viewing the bio of their target. (E.g., IMO the name of the band is pointless unless there are two musicians in different bands with names that could be confused. And the office and constituency of a politician is not only usually pointless, but can produce false negatives: no one including me remembers which US pres said something like "There is no right to strike against the public interest", nor does anyone but me remember that he was mayor of Boston at the time. But that was his most notable moment. So labelling him as "American president" is counterproductive for anyone who runs across "Mayor so-and-so" and wants more info.)

_ _ At the risk of fixating on one detail of LoPbN lore, "St. Lucian" (while, as a nationality, it fits the format) is IMO unlikely to be more helpful to anyone than "Caribbean", and "Caribbean" will limit the scope to a small fraction of the world for a lot of people who've never heard of St. Lucia before. In the hope of turning that detail into a really broad principle that might be useful to you, i'm convinced i'm not smart enough to write foolproof rules for writing LoPbN entries, and dumb enough to follow rules too far, so any sign of my de-facto rules going astray is my excuse to break it (in a way that will inevitably leave the result depending on the quirks of my fairly odd brain). But IMO the rules i stick to are pretty sound most of the time, and the exceptions are few enough that the quirks are insignificant (compared to the error rate, and especially the omission rate, of the list), even if they don't necessarily do more good than harm.
_ _ (BTW, nice catch on Bill Andersen, speaking of small longstanding errors!)
_ _ I'm as always saying too much. I'll close by saying don't hesitate to ask me why, or tell me why not. I probably won't be offended if you can't bear to absorb the answer to a why, and i might say something useful. I'll certainly listen to a why not, i want more feedback than i get, and i think more people find me simply odd than intransigent.
--Jerzy•t 11:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Hi

Nice to hear from you Catherine. I would be happy to help out on the mediation committee. I would also like to edit on topics relating to dispute resolution. This does not currently seem to be a strong area (no entry for community mediation, for instance). I don't know how the ArbCom election will come out. I saw the the newbie issue coming. The issue of "subject matter expertise" vs. "process expertise" is common in ADR circles. I'm pleased with the support and comments registered so far.--Edivorce 22:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Thanks

You're welcome on the help, anyway that I can be in service, I do :-). --Shaunnol 05:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply Clans, Castles and pictures

The pictures are taken from both official and unofficial clan pages. Most of the pictures are shared around the net, the same pictures being repeated on many other sites. There is no copywright infringment here.

Keyboard shortcuts

Thanks, that works! Though oddly the instructions on the page vanished once I had added the text to User:Nfitz/monobook.js. Nfitz 19:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help! I Can't Log In!

I'm in a bit of a bind and as a newbie, I've no idea what to do. Perhaps you can help.

I created a Wikipedia account as "OldSkoolGeek" (previously did edits as anonymously) and now not only did I forget my password, I didn't have the opportunity to put in an e-mail address for my profile so I can't e-mail a reminder to myself!

Is there any way to salvage the situation? I rather like my chosen nom de Wiki and am very loath to give it up.

Thank you!

Signpost

Hi, I am writing to you after having a look at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-01-23/News and notes, which mentions you as a contributor. I am absent on both IRC and the mailing list; I primarily use Signpost for getting news abt Wikipedia. You shd probly mention in the next week's signpost that Jimbo Wales was blocked by Celestianpower for a token 1 sec during a debate on Category:Living people. Nice work, by the way, --Gurubrahma 13:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the News at Signpost

I looked at the article at newsroom and you may want to consider an incident in Germany last year, when a person inside the parliamant edited a biography belonging to a political rival during an election. This resulted in a scandal (The person responsible was never found) SYSS Mouse 03:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

London Free Press

The last paragraph in that article reads, "To address this issue, Wikipedia has implemented a time-delay system, where popular entries are reviewed before being posted to the website..." Maybe we could mention something about that. If you don't bother correcting the media's crazy statements that's cool too, I know there are plenty :D I really enjoy reading signpost by the way :D - cohesion★talk 07:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nomura's jellyfish

Hey cat, the deletion was an oversight on my part and not intentional. Thanks for adding it back. Coldbourne 20:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I love your work

...on the Signpost. Thank you! --James S. 18:47, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How I cam across your page... I was looking for examples of the way the other people had formatted their user pages and somewhere along the page I came across yours. I refer to it occassionally to see what work you’re up to. I like the portal page you designed. As I was looking at the page I realized that no one had ever said thanks – so there you are! Keep up the great work! evrik 23:22, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby award CatherineMunro this Barnstar of Diligence for her tireless work and dedication to Wikipedia.
evrik 22:44, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Her name is Rio and she dances on the sand

How many featured articles do yuo have to your credit? --evrik 18:33, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Finn

Thanks for the great cleanup you did on Jon Finn. Before your cleanup I couldn't even tell if he deserved an article, now it looks and reads great. --Martyman-(talk) 06:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Birthday

Thank you very much! —Kirill Lok s hin 14:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First edit day

Congratulations on three years of Wikipedia! Here's a little champagne to celebrate the occasion. —Kirill Lok s hin 01:10, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From me too! Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 01:16, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia mentioned by Detroit Free Press

Ron Dzwonkowski in an opinion piece in yesterday's Detroit Free Press [4] cited the Wikipedia article Muhammad cartoons as a place to see the offensive cartoons since the Free Press will not print them. Robert Happelberg 22:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia mentioned by Philadelphia Inquirer

There was an editorial about Wikipedia in today's Philadelphia Inquirer. Wikipedia Vandalism An Internet dream is hacked to pieces [5] evrik 22:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]