User talk:Espoo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Java

Hello Espoo.

You have been invited to join WikiProject Java, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the Java-related articles on Wikipedia. You received this invitation due to your interest in, or edits relating to or within the scope of the project or the Java Portal. If you would like to join or just help out a bit, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of project members.

You may also wish to add to your userpage:
{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Java/Userbox}}
and to the top of your talk page:
== WikiProject Java (announcements) ==
{{Wikipedia:WikiProject_Java/Announcements}}

Know someone who might be interested? Please pass the message to others by pasting the code in their talk page:
== WikiProject Java and Portal ==
{{Template:WikiProject_Java/Welcome|~~~~}}

Thanks,
AlainR345Techno-Wiki-Geek 00:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Contents

TU 154 M LUX (101)[edit]

Espoo wrote: "Please do not add unsourced wild speculation to Wikipedia such as this: However the evidence might point out that the Polish TU-154M LUX airplane was controlled and deliberately flown to ground, not as in many typical accidental crash cases by the pilots errors, but by the soviets in and deliberate "coup d'etat" and with knowledge and... --Espoo (talk) 05:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)"

I can NOT reveal my confidential classified sources! Check the location of my IP it might help you to guess... I might ONLY provide you with some internet links ...

Apparently you are very young, inexperienced, very naive, with huge chip on the shoulder (an observation not an insult!) Man do NOT talk about unsourced allegedly wild speculations if you know bull, and do not understand foreign languages! You are putting to early an ax over head of others, instead investigating the matter. You should ONLY get involved with the things you know the best, and not with the issues you have no idea about it. Consider that some of us are experts in the field about which you and many wikipedia cops, know nothing, and we the experts, not you have the right to voice it.

In 1990 ties in the town of Bawashiha near Moscow, there were special trainings for the serviceman of FDB (previously prior to 1991 KGB) who supposed to specialize in organized assassinations of the heads of foreign governments.

The retired (for cause)on 28 of August 2008 Commanding officer of Polish 36 Special Squadron of Aviation Transport Colonel Tomasz Pietrzak, ex pilot summarized in several interviews the events related to the risks, operational procedures and disclosed some of the issues pertaining to the alleged "accident".

The fact that there is lack of evidence (in English)is NOT an evidence. Majority of evidence is in either POLISH or Russian language, while reports by western journalists are frequently written by classical airheads with no knowledge and understanding basics of events in this political assassination.

There was a TAWS (made by Avionics Systems of Tucson, Arizona) system on the plane which by the directive of 36 squadron piloting the VIOPs should be for operational reasons disabled.

The role of Russian IL76 is also crucial to generating artificial fog at Smolensk, and [meaconing] of TU 154M LUX (101). Meaconing is the interception and rebroadcast of navigation signals.

ref.  Satellitennavigation  by  Hans Dodel, Dieter Häuptler

Polish government is already officially conducting an investigation as the coup d'etat, except that the head of an investigation Premier Donald Tusk together with soviet ambassador Vladimir Grynin, based on existing evidence are believed to be guilty of conspiracy to kill President Lech Kaczyński.

I do speak fluently at least four (4) languages and can provide you with the sources in foreign languages. You might to attempt to translate them using http://babelfish.yahoo.com ]

I personally knew assassinated Polish President Lech Kaczyński and we know more about than many of you.

(very poor automatic babel fish translation)

P.S. The members of the Chechen forum confirmed that behind the name “Georgiy Gordin” is the hidden Proshyn Sergey son of Alexander, the vice-consul of Russian Federation in Stanbul'. Forum is cleaned, communication about [Gordine]-[Proshine] was preserved in the cache Of google according to this reference:

Some excerpts:

Such phrases as: "calm down" “[uspokoysya]! ”, “do not kill us!”, “look to it into the eyes! ”, “give pistol!” immediately the passengers of liner could pronounce only after catastrophe in the Polish language. But, here command in the Russian language: “Everything back, we depart from here! ”, could return only the commander of that special unit, which shot the wounded Poles.

The Poles survived in the catastrophe, understood that the soldiers “in the black” (on video) arrived to kill them and they fired back. This audibly on the film. The executors of the instructions Putin “worked” with the mufflers. But video recording with the sound and the image as attacking, so survived, re-played all their craftinesses.

Official version - “during the catastrophe perished all”. Expert report: the probability of the general loss of all people in the aircraft of the Polish President the same as, if water from the open crane would flow not downward, but upward - directly to the ceiling. I.e., the probability that in this catastrophe perished all of 96 people on board the aircraft Tu-154 - zero.

From the fourth correction the conclusion that, in any event, on the Polish liner had to be the survived and even surviving passengers. Them it could not prove to be exclusively in one case - if special unit finished them already after landing.

We can even name the number executed (finished)[dostrelyannykh] - their quantity varies from 10 to 21 people. According to the estimation of the most experienced experts, in this catastrophe not identified they could remain (to become the not identified mash or very strongly to be charred) maximum 10 of 12 people. Not all during the catastrophe were located in the nose section of the liner. They rapidly extinguished the flame. Most likely, not really identified of the remains on the spot of drop it was extremely little or them it was not generally.

So that the remains “only genetic material from 21 people” on the version the FSB, and are the number, in reality, the survived people after catastrophe on board the presidential aircraft Of Lech [lekha] Of Kaczyński's [kachinskogo]. The soldiers of Russian special unit finished them, and then they exported and converted into the pieces of burnt meat in order to hide the tracks of crime.

Correction the fifth. How they did arrange the wreck of the liner of the Polish President? Experts to us explained, which is elementary. The aircraft brought down Russian intelligence agencies, at the low altitude, after changing the parameters of landing. For this there are several methods. For example, per-second manipulation with course glide system at not a high altitude before landing itself.

Or electromagnetic pulse on the longitudinal or by-passes of control of aircraft (controls, ailerons) before the landing. Pilots saw everything and they understood, but to make already nothing they could. Time was not sufficient. For this very reason in order to hide the tracks of crime, survived crew members and those, who could hear their negotiations, it was necessary to finish on the earth.

In what were counted the executors of the order Putin, so in the fact that among those survived the armed and brave people, which even in this position showed efficient resistance, proved to be. Special-group could not without difficulty shoot the wounded Poles for the established limit of time. It was necessary to be detained on the spot execution and there their [zastukali] the run up people, in the first place, Andrey [Menderey] Mienderiey, who removed proceeding into the camera.

Everything which was then, between other, it went accurately according to the plan outlined in the Kremlin. They surrounded crash site, no one they released, they exported those been killed in the avia to catastrophe and shot down on the earth. The tracks of attack and violence removed. Why Putin did decide to commit crime in his territory? Experts assert that thus to bring down aircraft and to ensure the reliable cover of act of terror, it is possible only in the completely controlled to Russian intelligence agencies territory.

To execute [dostrelyat] those survived, to tear on the part and to burn the pieces of the body of the shot down passengers of liner and crew members. To ensure “mysterious disappearance” of evidences, for example, of that weapon, from which fired back the survived in the catastrophe guards Lech [Lekha] Kaczyński's [kachinskogo] and servicemen.

Lech [Lekh] Kaczyński's [Kachinskiy] was found in the relative safety until Putin looks new “Polish [Yanukovicha]” - the tightly thinking “friend of Russia”, Polish premier Donald Tusk. This was that boundary, after which the State Security Agent top of Russia studied only one question - as to clear road to its marionette or to its adherent of the same company “of the friends of Russia”. Knowing habits, and the previous affairs of Putin, it is not difficult to surmise, what methods they planned to make this. What also as they made, the entire world learned on April 10 in the morning.

From the seventh correction the conclusion that the rate of the Kremlin to “Polish [Yanukovicha]” - Donald [Tusk], his associates and electorate neglected the mechanism of the physical elimination Of Lech [lekha] Kaczyńskiego [kachinskogo]. It is desirable, together with its brightest adherents. Methods - most usual of the arsenal of Putin and his comrades on the KGB.

In the Kremlin, until now, they consider that no one will believe, that the leader of the Russian Federation could be decided to similar. To bind its subordinates to organize the murder of the President of another state in its territory! It will not believe, including its eyes and ears. If we to politicians and for Burgers the satisfactory countries produce the unquestionable proofs - nevertheless they will not believe.

From the eighth correction the conclusion that Putin always killed people, which were considered its enemies. And always in this case it risked, carrying out the most sensational special operations, including abroad. Lech [Lekh] Kaczyński [Kachinskiy] was in the first troika of the enemies of Putin and only, it could suffice to whom. Here still and “Polish [Yanukovich]” was screwed tighter.

From the eleventh correction the conclusion that Putin always placed his autograph under the organized and carried out act of terror. He placed it and now.

I will not astonish, if we soon again see together two general partners in the affair of slaughtering [ubieniya] of the President of Poland. Putin and “Polish [Yanukovicha]” - Donald Tusk. And both will into two throats tell one and the same Kremlin subject about “achieved results of joint investigation” and “indissoluble friendship between the Russian and Polish peoples”.

Therefore the murder of the President of Poland and substantial part of its political elite to now become serious testing for many countries of Western democracy. You have plenty of references you need to know and understand the sources of references and the foreign languages! Without it you can eat the crap.

http://sympatycypis.pl/forum ]

       prof. dr hab. Jacek Trznadel
       Przewodniczący Rady
       Polskiej Fundacji Katyńskiej
It is perfectly OK to add translations of information from non-English sources as long as these are reliable. It seems you have not looked at Wikipedia:Verifiability at all - otherwise you would not have such blatantly wrong ideas about using Polish sources and about other more important aspects of writing an encyclopedia. I've copied the most important parts you haven't read/understood for you here:
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true.
All material in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source to show that it is not original research, but in practice not everything need actually be attributed. This policy requires that anything challenged or likely to be challenged, including all quotations, be attributed to a reliable source in the form of an inline citation, and that the source directly support the material in question. --Espoo (talk) 20:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Alveolo-palatal[edit]

I realized after my last edit that it might be more appropriate to discuss this in a talk page than by revert warring. If I haven't convinced you with my curt edit summaries then let's discuss our disagreement. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 22:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

  1. most WP users are incapable of understanding what "voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative" means
  2. most WP users would prefer to get an easy to understand explanation in the article on the corresponding letter instead of having to go to the page explaining the corresponding IPA symbol
  3. "similar to the /ʃ/ of English sheep" is unnecessarily imprecise, especially without additional info about how it's different
  4. "(thought actually longer)" is not only sloppy in terms of spelling but also adds more imprecision because the longer length is not the only or even the essential difference
  5. "voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative" is the way a linguist says how this sound is produced i.e. is a how-to guide for professionals and (some) educated people but this is incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo to most WP users
  6. the article currently attempts to explain that mumbo-jumbo in the following complicated and more or less incomprehensible ("place of articulation") way, which is clearly a how-to guide: "Its manner of articulation is sibilant fricative, which means it is produced by directing air flow through a groove in the tongue at the place of articulation and directing it over the sharp edge of the teeth, causing high-frequency turbulence."
  7. my suggestion was already much more comprehensible and did not sound much more like a how-to guide: produced by keeping the tongue in the position used to say // ("EE") and instead saying a long /ʃ/ ("SH")
  8. WP and other encyclopedias try to avoid sounding like how-to guides, but exceptions are necessary when the result is either mumbo-jumbo or unnecessarily complicated or difficult to follow by normal users
Would this be acceptable to you?:
Produced by directing air flow through the kind of narrow space used when saying // ("EE") and directing it over the sharp edge of the teeth, in other words by keeping the tongue in the position used to say // ("EE") and instead trying to say a long /ʃ/ ("SH"). --Espoo (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


Your wording "unnecessarily imprecise" caught my attention; I don't think we need to be explicit about the phonetic peculiarities of the sound at shcha. Certainly at voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative we ought to. Saying Щ is similar to English SH will satisfy most readers and those who want to know more can click on the relevant link. So I can see how saying that it's longer is confusing and you're right that we should take it out.
It's true that, by itself, the phrase "alveolo-palatal fricative" is opaque, but you seem to be ignoring the description already at voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative and at alveolo-palatal consonant: "articulated with the blade of the tongue behind the alveolar ridge and the body of the tongue raised toward the palate." What you've pointed to as the existing description (which is actually a description of what sibilance means, not alveolo-palatal) doesn't sound like a how-to guide. Think about it, if you told someone, "excuse me, sir, could you direct air flow through a groove in your tongue and direct it over the sharp edge of your teeth?" they would not know what to do. It's a description of the articulation as well as the acoustics, not a how-to guide.
I think another problem with what you're trying to do or the wording you're providing is that it doesn't really make it any clearer. A reader may, in following the instructions, say [iʃi]. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 21:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Capitalisation of game titles[edit]

I don't agree that the question of capitalisation has a clear (negative) answer. I am currently working on our coverage of card games, and all my books that I have just checked capitalise all games; not just in headings but in normal text. This includes Poker. One of my sources is the scholarly book on the history of card games by David Parlett, published by Oxford University Press. --Hans Adler (talk) 20:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I suggest that you start a discussion at WT:WikiProject_Board_and_table_games, making a proposal to cover this in WP:WikiProject Board and table games#Style guide for game articles. --Hans Adler (talk) 20:28, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

As to "no reliable sources", apart from those I mentioned there is also Encyclopaedia Britannica. I haven't checked a recent edition, but see wikisource:1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Old_Maid, for example. (The title is in all caps, but it is repeated at the end.) --Hans Adler (talk) 20:31, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I wrote "no reliable sources" - in any case, what I meant was that "reputable sources" i.e. "most r.s." use lowercase. Modern dictionaries and encyclopedias record the current most common usage, and they are quite unanimous on the question of lowercase for games as shown here and here and here and in today's Britannica. The 1911 Britannica is not a reliable source for current English usage. --Espoo (talk) 20:41, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Looks like you are right, and since you obviously care about these things and were on the side of reason in the Beatles war, I am inclined to trust your judgement. Nevertheless I guess it makes sense to mention this in the games style guide, as it isn't obvious.
By the way, in mathematics there is a saying that concepts named after a person are capitalised (e.g. Boolean after George Boole), with the exception of very important concepts. It would seem to me that that's just a special instance of a much more general rule. E.g. a name of a group of musicians like The Beatles would stay capitalised in ordinary text except if it's very important. This might be something to mention to the fans if it comes up again. --Hans Adler (talk) 21:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

"Act" - footnotes may be more suitable for wiktionary[edit]

Hello. Leaving aside any question of whether I agree with them, I feel that, if they are to be retained, the footnotes that you have added to Act of Parliament, Act of Congress and Acts of Parliament in the United Kingdom ought to go in the Wiktionary entry for "Act" or "act" or whatever rather than in those articles because Wikipedia is not a usage guide, and it appears to me that that is what those footnotes are: see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary#Wikipedia is not a usage guide.

Can I take it that you agree that I have interpreted this guideline correctly? James500 (talk) 16:11, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Many WP articles have notes, sometimes even an entire section on usage or etymology when this is important for the article and the user. Since many users will be quite surprised or even upset about lowercase here, (especially many lawyers - look at the baroque spelling in most EULAs) we definitely need to add some kind of explanation, but please feel free to edit the info if you feel it is too long and/or dictionary-like. --Espoo (talk) 16:17, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Tampere[edit]

Hi, don't you think you were a bit strict and harsh in deleting everything in the trivia section? Are you an expert on Tampere? I'm not saying the article necessarily needs such a section, but much of the info that was there is nontrivial cultural info about Tampere and at least as well known in that city as most other info in most other articles about major cities, most of which is just as unreferenced. Wikipedia:Trivia_sections explains how to deal with trivia sections. --Espoo (talk) 11:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm not an expert on Tampere – are you? I just am familiar with a couple of guidelines on Wikipedia, the most important here being WP:REF and WP:TRIVIA. The items weren't sourced, and highly dubious as well. If you think you can add the following back into the article with appropriate sources, go right ahead. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 13:12, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Tampere has been compared to the English city of Manchester, which is the third largest city in the UK (Tampere being the third largest city in Finland). The term Manserock (rock music originating from Tampere) is suggested to have derived from this.
  • A briefly used and much less common nickname for Tampere is Nääsville, a portmanteau between the old Tamperean dialect word nääs (meaning something like "you know") and the American city of Nashville. [citation needed]
  • A local food speciality is mustamakkara, which resembles black pudding of northern England.
  • The asteroid 1497 Tampere was named after the city by its discoverer, the Finnish astronomer Yrjö Väisälä.
I'm not an expert on Tampere either, but I know enough about it to be pretty sure, as i already said, that much of the info that was there is nontrivial cultural info about Tampere. Which items did you feel were dubious? I sent you the same link, and that specifically says Trivia sections should not simply be removed from articles in all cases. It may be possible to integrate some items into the article text. Some facts may belong in existing sections, while others may warrant a new section. Integrate trivia items into the body of the article if appropriate. --Espoo (talk) 13:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
First off, except for the last bit about the asteroid, none of these are sourced. Unsourced claims can be removed without question, the tag has been up there long enough. All other items can be considered dubious without a source. Second, why don't you just do it yourself?. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 12:25, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
You deleted that info because it was in a section called Trivia, which was a bad decision because it's not trivial, and for the most part not even dubious. If you use only the criterion of a missing source for deciding when to delete something, you could delete most of Wikipedia, which would be serious vandalism. Only one item was tagged, so that's the only one that should have been removed. Better and more constructive would have been to instead move that item to the talk page and ask someone with more expertise than yourself to judge if it's nonsense or in fact correct info that simply nobody has yet had time to find a reliable source for. WP:SOURCE says Material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source, but it implies that you should know at least something about the topic to have at least some reason for believing something is not correct. I understand and share your concern about preventing WP from becoming a collection of incorrect hearsay, but please concentrate your efforts on the many blatant cases and avoid situations where you are in fact speculating. --Espoo (talk) 19:16, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
That's the ever-on going discussion on Wikipedia, isn't it? Should everything be sourced, or just the information that might seem dubious? When should something be sourced? I read in an another discussion that another Wikipedian insisted to have a scientific medical source to the claim "the common human has five fingers". Even though I do not agree with your point of view, in the future I first shall move all information listed under a trivia section to the corresponding talk page. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 18:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
As promised :-). --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 10:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

SWAT[edit]

It is a SWAT team. Special Weapons and Tactics. Just like SRT is Special Reaction Team. These are TITLES of teams. They are proper names. They should be capitalized. It is as much a proper name as the Marine Corps, Boy Scouts or Democrat National Committee. What Websters fails to realize is that in many agencies, it is used as a PROPER NOUN. And you aren't considering that either. Niteshift36 (talk) 11:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's a SWAT team, which means a special weapons and tactics team. The indefinite article shows it's a common noun, which should definitely be spelled lowercase, as shown by the sources. For example the Bigtown SWAT Team is a proper noun, so if its official name doesn't use (only) the acronym, it's the Bigtown Special Weapons and Tactics Team. --Espoo (talk) 11:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

  • I disagree and you've violated the 3R by reverting yet again. Apparently you aren't willing to discuss things before reverting myself and another editor. Oh well, I tried to discuss........ Niteshift36 (talk) 11:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I hope you agree it was OK to add the sources, which the other editor apparently hadn't seen, so I wasn't actually reverting. You'll have to find a source for your opinion, and the two biggest US dictionaries prove you're simply wrong, although many people erroneously think all acronyms should be uppercased when written out, so you've often seen it wrong in less reliable sources. --Espoo (talk) 11:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
  • When did Bartlby become one of the 2 biggest? Random House certainly qualifies as a major one: "a special section of some law enforcement agencies trained and equipped to deal with especially dangerous or violent situations, as when hostages are being held (often used attributively): a SWAT team.". You know what? I'm not going to debate it with you. Obviously others are starting to take issue with it too. I'll let them argue it with you. Niteshift36 (talk) 11:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Bartleby publishes American Heritage Dictionary, and the other source is Merriam-Webster; both are definitely among the most reputable. When they spell something that way, you can be sure that most of the huge number of citations from reputable sources they have in their databases spell it that way. Modern dictionaries describe current usage; they don't dictate it. When usage changes, they change their entries too. --Espoo (talk) 12:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
  • I see you finally changed to reflect that you are talking about Am Heritage. Fine. But I see others are starting to disagree too. As I said, I'll let them get into it. I have nothing further to say on the matter. Niteshift36 (talk) 12:10, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Spiritualism v Spiritualism (religious organization/movement)[edit]

I saw a dicussion you were involved in a while ago. I agree with your view. I think I will be proposing to move Spiritualism to somewhere else soon. I am trying to organize everything belonging somewhere under Category:Theories. I think the general term for the theory belongs without parenthetical title, and particular instances of it can be clarified with parenthetical titles. Furthermore there is a category Category:Spiritualism to think about as well. Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

KJV Bible[edit]

I have reverted your link the ABS text of the KJV Bible. There is already a link to the Wikisource text for this work; there is no point in having two, Wikipedia is not a directory of web links. In addition, you may not have noticed that the site you linked to (not unusually for biblical sites) omits the books of the Apocrypha - and consequently does not provide the full KJV text. TomHennell (talk) 23:52, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I have quite a bit of experience in editing Wikipedia articles, but i must confess i didn't even look at the Wikisource link. The problem with the Wikisource text is that it is confusingly presented as "has original text related to this article", which most users and even some experienced ones think means some but not all of the text. In addition, it isn't searchable. I'm no expert on the Bible, but it seemed to me that the site i found by accident was much better than those listed. I hope you agree that, at the very least, the StudyLight.org link shouldn't be listed first since most users are not looking for a version with spelling that they cannot handle.
And since Wikisource isn't searchable, i still believe the Bartleby link provides users with a valuable service not provided by the current links. If we can find a searchable online version including the Apocrypha, that would of course be better than the Bartleby site. --Espoo (talk) 08:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I take your point about labeling the Wikisource: though I am not sure how readily it can be remedied. The Studylight.org site is for the present the best of the biblical comparitor sites - it provides a very wide variety of versions in English across a range of dates, plus a number of the key comparitor texts from versions in other languages. For the KJV it provides both the 1611 (original spelling) edition, and the 1769 (standard spelling) edition; which is also the text on Wikisource and your ABS site. For that reason it is understandable that it should be listed first (at least unless a better site becomes available). The ABS site that you linked to claims to be searchable, but fatally undermines this by not providing a full text. Hence if the verse you are looking for is from the Apocrypha (e.g. "let us now praise famous men") the ABS site won't find it. There are indeed some Christian traditions that so reject the Apocryphal books that they prefer not to find their texts on a biblical site, but Wikipedia should be edited from the perspective of a general reader. TomHennell (talk) 09:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Your solution to the ambiguous Wikisource label is good. I hope you agree that the Studylight link to the 1611 version should be replaced by this one which is apparently the 1769 standard text you're referring to, though it doesn't say more than "Authorized". Most users will be looking for this version, not the 1611.
Interestingly, "my" site doesn't seem to say anything about what the version is and from what year. Instead, it confusingly or perhaps purposely misleadingly says "the culmination of English translations of the Bible, the Bartleby.com publication of the American Bible Society’s King James Version", which sounded to a layperson like me as if it's some modernised version, and that misleading/incorrect hype is only compounded by saying it's from 1999 here. --Espoo (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Well the 1769 text is not what I tend to be looking for, but then I cannot claim to be a typical user. I will leave it to other editors to see which configuration of Studylight.org they prefer. Don't be annoyed if your proposal is redacted again, but then all of us have to become familiar with that experience. TomHennell (talk)

American and British English Differences[edit]

Would you kindly point out the sources which you claim I'm missing? I could very well be overlooking something and reverting by mistake. As it stands, however, the article is a poster child for WP:OR and needs serious cleanup; more sources and inline citations, especially. Radiopathy •talk• 08:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, as explained in the edit summary, the sources are in references 23 to 27. You removed the entire section beginning "In conditional sentences, US spoken usage..." even though these references are clearly included in that section. Similarly, there is no reason to remove, for example, the section Recently, the American use of just with simple past has made inroads into BrE, most visibly in advertising slogans and headlines such as "Cable broadband just got faster". unless you have serious reasons to doubt the existence of this ad and, in fact, the honesty of whoever added this information. In addition, at least some of your {fact|date=June 2009}} additions seem to be uncalled for and at the very least exaggerated. --Espoo (talk) 08:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
First of all, this article has a major problem with regard to the lack of inline citations; there seems to be an internal logic to the way the article is referenced that only a handful of regular editors seem to understand. I can't make heads or tails of it, or I would help with the cleanup myself. This is what makes the article vulnerable to accusations of original research. For an example of an article with proper inline citations, I present this silly bit of pop culture . All articles have to conform to this, not just the low brow ones!
Second, this isn't about trusting someone's honesty, or believing that a particular advert actually exists. Please read up on WP:RS and WP:V; if someone wants to include a mention of a particular Americanism that has crept into British English, he needs to present a verifiable, reliable source to back up his claim, otherwise his contribution can be removed. Radiopathy •talk• 04:31, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
The information in those parts of the article that i've read and the history seems to indicate that almost all of the information in the article is correct and that there are several people with a lot of knowledge about the topic taking care of the article. Since many seem to be experts or very knowledgeable on the topic, they unfortunately have usually not bothered to provide sources for their edits. You're right that the article can be improved a lot in that sense. Please take a closer look at the links you provided because you don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water. Your newest edits in fact partly follow the policies quoted below, so thanks for changing your approach and thereby helping to improve Wikipedia instead of just deleting valuable information (which was an especially bad idea since 1) the entire section on conditionals you'd removed did and does have sources and 2) a simple Google search would have provided you with a reliable page [BBC] with the exact words in the ad). I'll quote some of the most relevant parts here, which should ensure that your legitimate concerns are dealt with without causing edit wars and wasting a lot of your and other people's time and destroying valuable information:

Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed, but editors might object if you remove material without giving them sufficient time to provide references, and it has always been good practice, and expected behavior of Wikipedia editors (in line with our editing policy), to make reasonable efforts to find sources oneself that support such material, and cite them.

Please use http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Cable%20broadband%20just%20got%20faster%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a and http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3646825.stm to show your goodwill and your expertise in how to provide and quote sources (and indicate that the BBC doesn't even consider it necessary to mention it's quoting an ad or comment on the "Americanism".)

If you want to request a source for an unsourced statement, consider tagging...

Be cautious with major changes: consider discussing them first. With large proposed deletions or replacements, it may be best to suggest changes in a discussion, to prevent edit warring and disillusioning either other editors or yourself (if your hard work is rejected by others). One person's improvement is another's desecration, and nobody likes to see their work "destroyed" without prior notice. If you choose to be very bold, take extra care to justify your changes in detail on the article talk page... --Espoo (talk) 06:07, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Hochschule für Musik Leipzig[edit]

Next time you want to move or rename a category please discuss it first, if you don't mind. Hochschule means, literally "high school", so if you want to be precise, the word "University" wouldn't be the precise word. Also, keep in mind, that until recent times, German hochschules offered only one official academic degree (Diplom) - something between a bachelor and a master -, and that other post-diplom courses had no official value. Also, there's a german word for university Universität. I am reverting your changes. If you want to chamge the name, please discuss it first. --Karljoos (talk) 02:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

This is all nonsense; please look at that discussion page. --Espoo (talk) 06:00, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Move of Capability Maturity Model Integration[edit]

Hi, I was taken aback by the move of this long standing page without any talk page discussion. This is a trademarked name with the SEI referring to the standard in title case in every publication it produces. Using the WP guide "Acronyms and initialisms" does not seem to override the correct case of trademark names. Could you please move the page back to its original name and discuss the matter on the talk page first?—Ash (talk) 21:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

On plug-ins[edit]

I would appreciate it if, rather than commenting out my additions to the "Plug-ins and extensions" section of the Plug-ins article, you would raise any specific concerns you have about it, and in general, notify anyone whose non-trivial edits you effectively undo. Please note also that by adding HTML comments, you've caused odd spacing issues for readers.

Given your edit summary and the comments you've inserted into the article, I believe your concerns are the following:

  • I did not add anything to the article.
  • I removed important information from the article.
    • I removed succinct definitions of "plug-in" and "extension" with regards to web browsers.
    • I removed the link to the Plugins category at addons.mozilla.org
  • I linked to kitchen sink, which is a disambiguation page
  • I replaced the link to feature creep with the above link
  • I used the abbreviated "NPAPI" without an expanded form first

I will address these here.

Foremost, the definitions of plug-ins and extensions have been changed from the following wording:

Plug-ins differ from extensions, which modify or add to existing functionality. Plug-ins rely on the host application's user interface and have a well-defined boundary to their possible set of actions[14]. Extensions have fewer restrictions on their actions, and may provide their own user-interfaces.

First, the entire first sentence is appropriated verbatim from the AMO page on plug-ins. Even if you were to immediately follow that with the citation—which I'd like to stress isn't even the case here—you'd run afoul of plagiarism by the standards of more than a few. It's not enough to merely cite the source for verbatim copying, but again, even that's not done until after the next sentence; you need to clearly delineate those words from the rest of the text to indicate that it's not original wording, e.g., by using quotation marks or a blockquote. However, that won't do here, because it's the topic sentence of the first paragraph of a section.

Second, simply put, the given definitions for extensions and plug-ins are terrible, which isn't rare. Differentiating the two is hard, that's why even the AMO page author struggles for a good definition. One of the first things I want to do is just throw out contrasting extensions as having freer reign than plug-ins, because it's either wrong or misleading, depending on how sympathetic you are. Sure, plug-ins have a concrete interface with which they may interact with the browser, but in the end, plug-ins have access to the disk, and it's exercised regularly. Eliminating that leaves us with only the following to discern the difference between the two:

  • extensions modify or add to existing functionality (presumably, this is supposed to be distinct from plug-ins)
  • extensions may provide their own user interfaces

This won't do. "Modify[ing] or add[ing] to existing functionality" is certainly one way to describe extensions, and it's not incorrect. But the same statement could easily be applied to plug-ins. QuickTime and MPlayer add the functionality of playing various video containers and codecs. The Flash player adds support for Flash. Adobe Reader adds the ability to view PDFs, and so forth. However, "modify" is good. Modifying is ultimately what's at the heart of extensions. Of course, "adding" is one kind of modification, so plug-ins, too, could be be said to modify. We need to find a way to describe the "modifying" behavior of extensions that plug-ins don't have in common.

Similarly, the interfaces line is odd, because, well, what does it mean? Generally, the only new interface that extensions add is that of their configuration dialogs, and that's just by consequence. So that's a bit of misdirection.

Ultimately, any differentiating definitions between plug-ins and extensions need to include the following:

  • Plug-ins are usually third-party, binary components that handle new content types
  • Extensions are integrated with the browser, modifying its own application logic

Unfortunately, that definition for plug-ins can be applied to extensions as well, as nearly all extensions are created by third-parties, and it is possible for them to contain binary components, though it's rare and this, by far, describes common practice. Potentially these can be even more well-defined, but certainly it's an improvement to two interchangeable definitions which are supposed to be mutually exclusive and one erroneous or misleading factoid.

I did link to kitchen sink, but I did not remove the link to feature creep; they were both present. The kitchen sink page was exactly the article I was looking for; it just functions doubly as a disambiguation page and a definition for the "kitchen sink". However, I have now realized that linking to the Wiktionary page is much more in line with what I was trying to accomplish, and so should have been done the first time around.

The link to AMO was misplaced in the text, so the inexplicable link was removed. It is now in the article, in an appropriate place, and correctly using the ref tag. Similarly, the Netscape Plugin API is now introduced properly.

If you feel that this revision excludes anything that the old revision doesn't, do bring it to my attention, or add it yourself, but don't simply retransform something in a poor state to an even poorer one. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 22:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Espoo. You have new messages at TreasuryTag's talk page.
Message added 21:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

╟─TreasuryTagbelonger─╢ 21:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Espoo. You have new messages at TreasuryTag's talk page.
Message added 07:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

╟─TreasuryTagconstabulary─╢ 07:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Karate#Allegations_of_Political_Motivation_in_Lead_Paragraph[edit]

Hi! I've started a discussion about the quality of the source. I would like to hear your opinions. jmcw (talk) 15:01, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Copyedit Backlog Elimination Drive[edit]

Hi, as a member of the Guild of Copy Editors you're hereby notified of and invited to participate in the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/May 2010. Please help us eliminate the 8,000+ copyedit backlog! Participating editors will receive barnstars and other awards, according to their level of participation. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 00:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Polish nobility/Szlachta[edit]

Hi. You tagged Polish nobility with {{db-move|Szlachta}}, and I made the move, thinking it was agreed and I was being helpful. I have now been asked by Piotrus (talk · contribs) to undo it. Can you please discuss with him, if necessary with a wider discussion on the article talk page to reach a consensus? I have no opinion on the matter myself, and will undo my move if that is what is agreed. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, this is what i replied to Piotrus's email (and i will start an RM discussion as soon as i have time):
As you can see by clicking on the search results in your link, even the academic literature presents the terms as "the Polish nobility, the szlachta,...". In other words, though only the Polish term may be used later, the English term is used first even in academic literature, and "szlachta" is never used without first being explained. It is not English and cannot be used as an article title in an encyclopedia meant for the general public. There is no reason to violate one of the most important WP policies, to use English terms as article titles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ENGLISH
See also all the other articles on European nobilities in WP - they have English instead of foreign article names, like it should be: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:European_nobility
And Norman Davies specifically says here that "/szlachta/ should be translated as 'nobility'" --Espoo (talk) 21:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Sounds plausible; anyway, I will do nothing unless presented with consensus from a discussion. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Your revision to Cladistics[edit]

I'm not convinced that your revision to Cladistics is actually "better", as you claim. Your revision defines a clade as consisting of "an organism and all its descendants". The original had "all the descendants of an ancestral organism, including that ancestor." Now it's true that in terms of logic these are the same, but in terms of focus they're not. Your definition puts the ancestor first, i.e. makes it the focus; the original puts the descendants first, making them the focus. Since in almost cases the ancestor is hypothetical or extinct or both, the original definition is more meaningful, it seems to me. I haven't reverted it (yet). Peter coxhead (talk) 11:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, they're not logically the same because "consisting of all the descendants of an ancestral organism, including that ancestor" is illogical since descendants cannot include an ancestor. I was trying to get rid of that illogical "including" and deal with the other editor's claim that the original definition ("consisting of all the descendants of a common ancestor and that ancestor" by the University of California Museum of Paleontology that i'd added) "could be interpreted as a hybridization of the ancestor with itself", which i don't believe any reader would think. How about the newest attempt? --Espoo (talk) 12:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Grab some glory, and a barnstar[edit]

Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the {{copyedit}} tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 14:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

'Airport' edit links[edit]

You placed a request on the WP:BUNCH talk page for someone to look at the Airport article. I've done some work on it if you want to take a look. HarryHenryGebel (talk) 17:32, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive Wrap-up[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks to all who participated in the drive! Over 100 editors—including Jimbo Wales—signed up this time (nearly triple the participants of the May drive). This benefited the Guild as well as the articles in need of copy editing. You can see from the comparison graphs that we increased the number of completed copyedits substantially. Unfortunately, we were not able to meet our goal of completely wiping out 2008 from the queue. We also were not able to reduce the backlog to less than 6,000 articles. We suspect people were busy with real life summertime things, at least in the northern hemisphere! We were able to remove the months of January, February, March, April, and May from the backlog, and we almost wiped out the month of June. We reduced the backlog by 1,289 articles (17%), so all in all it was a very successful drive, and we will be holding another event soon. We'll come up with some new ideas to try to keep things fresh and interesting. Keep up the good work, everybody!


Stats
If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you edited in the May 2010 GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive, your word totals are cumulative for barnstars (not the leaderboard). Over the course of the next week or two, we will be handing out the barnstars.

GOCE backlog elimination drive chart up to 31 July
  • Eight people will receive The Most Excellent Order of the Caretaker's Barnstar (100,000+ words): Chaosdruid, Diannaa, Ericleb01, Lfstevens, Shimeru, S Masters, The Utahraptor, and Torchiest.
  • Bullock and Slon02 will receive The Order of the Superior Scribe (80,000+).
  • The Barnstar of Diligence (60,000+) goes to Derild4921, GaryColemanFan, kojozone, and Mlpearc.
  • The Modern Guild of Copy Editors Barnstar (40,000+) goes to A. Parrot, AirplanePro, Auntieruth55, Bejinhan, David Rush, and mono.
  • Nobody will receive The Old School League of Copy Editors award (30,000+).
  • The Tireless Contributor Barnstar (20,000+) goes to Backtable, Cindamuse, dtgriffith, Duff, e. ripley, Laurinavicius, NerdyScienceDude, and TEK.
  • The Cleanup Barnstar (12,000+) goes to Brickie, Casliber, cymru lass, December21st2012Freak, Nolelover, TheTito, Whoosit, and YellowMonkey.
  • The Working Man's Barnstar (8,000+) goes to Bsherr, Duchess of Bathwick, HELLKNOWZ, Mabeenot, noraft, Pyfan, and Richard asr.
  • The Modest Barnstar (4,000+) goes to Adrian J. Hunter, Airplaneman, Annalise, Camerafiend, Cricket02, Fetchcomms, Gosox5555, LeonidasSpartan, Paulmnguyen, Piotrus, SuperHamster, Taelus, and TPW.


Gold Star Award

Gold Star Award Leaderboard
Articles Words 5k+ Articles
1. Diannaa (248) Shimeru (200,392) Shimeru/Ericleb01 (13)
2. Slon02 (157) Diannaa (164,960) Chaosdruid (8)
3. GaryColemanFan (101) Chaosdruid (130,630) Derild4921 (7)
4. Torchiest (100) The Utahraptor (117,347) GaryColemanFan/Slon02 (6)
5. Shimeru (80) Ericleb01 (114,893) Bejinhan/The Utahraptor (5)


Coordinator: ɳorɑfʈ Talk! Co-coordinators: Diannaa TALK and S Masters (talk) | Newsletter by: The Raptor You rang?/My mistakes; I mean, er, contributions

Writing Magnifying.PNG

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Utahraptor at 22:09, 3 August 2010 (UTC).

GOCE Invitation[edit]

Writing Magnifying.PNG

There are currently
2,329 articles in the backlog.
You can help us! Join the
September 2010 drive today!

The Guild of Copy-Editors – September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive


The Wikipedia Guild of Copy-Editors invite you to participate in the September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive will begin on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on 30 September at 23:59 (UTC). The goals for this drive are to eliminate 2008 from the queue and to reduce the backlog to fewer than 5,000 articles.

Sign-up has already begun at the September drive page, and will be open throughout the drive. If you have any questions or concerns, please leave a message on the drive's talk page.

Before you begin copy-editing, please carefully read the instructions on the main drive page. Please make sure that you know how to copy-edit, and be familiar with the Wikipedia Manual of Style.

Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GoCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.

Thank you; we look forward to meeting you on the drive!
ɳorɑfʈ Talk! and S Masters (talk).

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Espoo. You have new messages at Ronhjones's talk page.
Message added 23:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Grave accent[edit]

My apologies. For some reason the link was dead when I tried it before, but now it works fine. Perhaps it was a problem with the diff page. — Eru·tuon 15:22, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit summary - talk back[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Espoo. You have new messages at Amakuru's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GOCE copy edit drive[edit]

Writing Magnifying.PNG Greetings, the Wikipedia Guild of Copy-Editors invites you to participate in the November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive will begin on 1 November at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on 30 November at 23:59 (UTC). The goal for this drive is to reduce the backlog by 10% (approximately 500 articles). We hope to focus our efforts on the oldest three months (January, February, and March 2009) and the newest three months (September, October, and November 2010) of articles in the queue.

Sign-up has already begun at the November drive page, and will be open throughout the drive. If you have any questions or concerns, please leave a message on the drive's talk page.

Before you begin copy-editing, please carefully read the instructions on the main drive page. Please make sure that you know how to copy-edit, and be familiar with the Wikipedia Manual of Style.

Awards and barnstars

A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants, some of which are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.

Thank you; we look forward to meeting you on the drive!
The UtahraptorTalk to me/Contributions, S Masters (talk), and Diannaa (Talk)

November 2010 backlog elimination drive update[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Backlog Elimination Drive!
Writing Magnifying.PNG

GOCE November 2010 backlog elimination drive progress graphs

We have reached the midway point in our backlog elimination drive, so here is an update.

Participation report — The November drive has 53 participants at this point. We had 77 participants in the September drive. In July, 95 people signed up for the drive, and in May we had 36. If you are not participating, it is not too late to join!

Progress report — The drive is quite successful so far, as we have already almost reached our target of a 10% reduction in the number of articles in the backlog. We are doing very well at keeping our Requests page clear, as those articles count double for word count for this drive.

Please keep in mind the possibility of removing other tags when you are finished with an article. If the article no longer needs {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, or other similar maintenance tags, please remove them, as this will make the tasks of other WikiProjects easier to complete. Thanks very much for participating in the Drive, and see you at the finish line!


Your drive coordinators –The UtahraptorTalk to me/Contributions, S Masters (talk), and Diannaa (Talk)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Utahraptor (talk) at 15:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC).

Luthier[edit]

In case you hadn't noticed, I'm with you about the "hardly anyone says 'luthier' when they mean violin maker" business. I will continue to assume good faith about that. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 23:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, i realised that. I see on your user page that you're a violist from the States like myself, so i guess it's a question of actual knowledge, not just a question of good faith, though perhaps i misunderstood what you're saying here. --Espoo (talk) 11:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
These days one of my favorite instruments is a 16" viola with octave strings, tuned the same as a cello, and played with a cello bow. The C string on that one will rattle your collar-bone and make you grin...
I am a luthier. I get paid to set up and repair violins, violas, cellos, and basses. I also rehair bows, recamber them, and refurbish their grips. I agree that in spoken English, certainly the US variety, "luthier" is not used as often as "maker" or "builder" or "repairman" or "string tech", at least not by folks in the business. The difficulty is this: that usage falls right at the borderline of "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth", in an area where reliable sources are skimpy and hard to find.
"Small improvements are our bread and butter." I will be keeping an eye on that page (as if I could keep myself from watching it ;-)) and hoping that the coolest heads will prevail. Live long and prosper, __ Just plain Bill (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback from Paradoxian[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Espoo. You have new messages at Paradoxian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GOCE elections[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG
GOCE Coordinator.png

Elections are currently underway for our inaugural Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, Friday 1 December – 23:59 UTC, Tuesday 14 December. All GOCE members in good standing, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are six candidates vying for four positions. The candidate with the highest number of votes will become the Lead Coordinator, therefore, your vote really matters! Cast your vote today.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors via SMasters using AWB on 01:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Backlog Elimination Drive!
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We have reached the end of our fourth backlog elimination drive. Thanks to all who participated.

Stats

GOCE November 2010 backlog elimination drive graphs
  • 58 people signed up for this drive. Of these, 48 people participated in the drive.
  • Although we did not eliminate the months we planned to (January, February, and March 2009; and August, September, and October 2010), we did reduce the backlog by 627 articles (11.2%), which was over our goal of 10%.
  • 49 awards will go out to 33 of 48 participants. Check out the complete list of barnstar winners here.

Barnstars

If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you participated in the September 2010 backlog elimination drive, you may have earned roll-over words (more details can be found here). These roll-over words count as credit towards earning barnstars, except for leaderboard awards. We will be delivering these barnstars within the next couple of weeks.

Our next drive is scheduled for January 2011. In the meantime, please consider helping out at the Wikification drive or any of the other places where help with backlogs is needed.

Thank you for participating in the last 2010 backlog elimination drive! We look forward to seeing you in January!

Your drive coordinators –The UtahraptorTalk to me/Contributions, S Masters (talk), and Diannaa (Talk)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 23:36, 2 December 2010 (UTC).

GOCE Year-end Report[edit]

Season's Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG
AnimatedWreath.gif

We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2010. Read all about these in the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report.

Highlights
  • Membership grows to 503 editors
  • 2,589 articles removed through four Backlog elimination drives
  • Our encounter with Jimbo Wales
  • Guild home pages reorganized and redesigned
  • Report on our inaugural elections
  • Guild Plans for 2011
  • New barnstars introduced
  • Requests page improved
  • Sign up for the January 2011 Backlog elimination drive!
Get your copy of the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report here
On behalf of the Guild, we take this opportunity to wish you Season's Greetings and Happy New Year. See you in 2011!
– Your Coordinators: S Masters (lead), Diannaa, The Utahraptor, and Tea with toast.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE drive news[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors January 2011 backlog elimination drive
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors January 2011 Backlog elimination drive! The drive is halfway over, so here are some mid-drive stats.

10yrs-contributing k.svg
Participation
GOCE January 2011 backlog elimination drive progress graphs

So far, 43 people have signed up for this drive. Of these, 25 have participated. If you signed up for the drive but haven't participated yet, it's not too late! Try to copy edit at least a few articles. Remember, if you have rollover words from the last drive, you will lose them if you do not participate in this drive. If you haven't signed up for the drive yet, you can sign up now.

Progress report

We have eliminated two months from the backlog – January and February 2009. One of our goals is to eliminate as many months as possible from the 2009 backlog. Please help us reduce the size of this part of the backlog if you haven't already. Another goal is to reduce the entire backlog by 10%, or by 515 articles. Currently, we have eliminated 375 articles from the queue, so if each participant copy edits four more articles, we will reach that goal.

Thank you for participating in the January 2011 drive. We anticipate it will be another big success!

Your drive coordinators –S Masters (talk), Diannaa (Talk), The UtahraptorTalk to me, and Tea with toast (Talk)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 20:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC).

GOCE January Backlog elimination drive conclusion[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors January 2011 Backlog elimination drive
Writing Magnifying.PNG

GOCE Jan 2011 drive.gif

Greetings from the January 2011 Backlog elimination drive! We have reached the end of the month and the end of another successful drive; thanks to all who participated.

Statistics
  • 54 people signed up for the year's first Backlog elimination drive. Of these, 40 participated.
  • One of our goals was to reduce the size of the backlog by at least 10%. We managed to reduce the backlog by 633 articles, or about 12%.
  • Another goal was to eliminate as many 2009 months as possible from the queue. We eliminated January, February, March, and April—4 out of 12 months is not bad! In addition, we eliminated 37% of all remaining 2009 articles from the queue.
  • Chaosdruid copy edited Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya for 32,711 words, which is the largest single article completed in one of our drives so far. This article counts as six 5000-K articles, and Chaosdruid wins the "most 5000-K articles" leaderboard category. Way to go! A complete list of individual results is here.
Barnstars

If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you participated in the November 2010 Backlog elimination drive, you may have earned roll-over words (more details can be found here). These roll-over words count as credit towards earning barnstars, except for leaderboard awards. We will be delivering the barnstars within the next couple of weeks.

Thank you for participating in this year's first Backlog elimination drive! We hope to see you in March.

Your drive coordinators –S Masters (talk), Diannaa (talk), The Utahraptor (talk), and Tea with toast (talk)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 15:08, 5 February 2011 (UTC).

WP:RS[edit]

Hi, Please read WP:RS again and there is no need for an edit war on Good Friday. I added a fact tag to the 2nd item, it has no source at all. And Yahoo.com is not WP:RS, neither is that fellow's personal web site. No need for an edit war here. History2007 (talk) 15:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hope you're happy with the explanation in the edit summary showing you had wrong ideas about both sites. One's simply hosting a very reliable source and the other is quoting from very reliable sources. --Espoo (talk) 16:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
This is amazing, such a trivial issue, such a useless debate. I will seek a 3O anyway. And please consider this an "edit war warning", given that it should really be discussed on the talk page, not reverted. History2007 (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand. You thought the American Heritage Dictionary quote was a Yahoo creation. I pointed out it's the real thing. Do you agree American Heritage is a reliable source? --Espoo (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
In printed form, absolutely. On Yahoo, who knows.... History2007 (talk) 16:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
You can be 100% sure it's the original text because it says "Provided by Houghton Mifflin" at the bottom, and the publisher of AH would not let Yahoo change even a comma... --Espoo (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
That is speculation and this discussion is an amazing waste of time. A trivial point now that you added OED. History2007 (talk) 17:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Capitalization of Sacred Harp[edit]

Hello Espoo,

Look, book titles are normally capitalized; you'll find this in almost any style manual. Also, if you read the published books about Sacred Harp, you'll also see that it's standard practice for scholarly work in this area. Lastly, please discuss an edit this extreme on an appropriate Talk page, to obtain consensus, before launching in on it. Sincerely, Opus33 (talk) 15:51, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Espoo, I must agree with Opus33 and ask you to stop revising the articles on Sacred Harp singing and Sacred Harp music. While you may have copyedited numerous articles, I ask you to defer to the consensus of literature on this subject. Sacred Harp singing is singing from the Sacred Harp songbook, a book whose title is The Sacred Harp. The single source you cite for your eccentric style at http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/xbsdd is from the Texas State Historical Association, and can hardly stand against the great body of authoritative works on the subject. Finn Froding (talk) 18:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
MOS says to avoid unnecessary capitalisation. Before changing an uppercase article title that is not a proper noun to a lowercase title, i nevertheless first check if any reliable sources are provided in the article and see what they do. The Texas State Historical Association is exactly the kind of objective, nearly encyclopedic source whose spelling usage we should be following. Even if most aficionado sites and books use uppercase, we should use lowercase according to MOS if at least some reliable sources do so too - even if some or many scholarly books use uppercase.
And just because sacred harp music got its name from a book with the title "Sacred Harp" does not at all mean we should uppercase the music.
Do you know who is behind the website http://www.folklib.net/folkfile/s.shtml#sacred_harp ?
In any case, i hope both of you agree we should at least move Sacred Harp to Sacred Harp music because the current title is very unprofessional, unencyclopedic and downright confusing, misleading, and fanboyish. If the article had been at Sacred Harp music, i would have discussed the move and the ones it made necessary before carrying them out.
According to http://fasola.org/ the article name should be changed to shape note singing or merged with shape note: Technically, our style of singing is “shape note singing” because the musical notation uses note heads in 4 distinct shapes to aid in sight-reading, but it is often called “Sacred Harp” singing because the books that most singers use today are called “The Sacred Harp,” with the most prominent of these being the 1991 Denson edition. --Espoo (talk) 20:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (and Grove Online) has subject entry "Sacred Harp singing", and this is the usual term and spelling in such references as Cobb, The Sacred Harp: A Tradition and Its Music, Steel & Hulan, The Makers of the Sacred Harp, Bealle, Public Worship, Private Faith: Sacred Harp and American Folksong, Miller, Traveling Home: Sacred Harp Singing and American Pluralism, and G.P. Jackson, The Story of the Sacred Harp, 1844-1944, comprising much of the recent scholarly literature on the subject and all published by high-quality university presses employing professional copyeditors.
While the Texas article uses your style, the New Georgia Encyclopedia http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-549 refers to "Sacred Harp singing" and "Sacred Harp singers", as does the State Library and Archives of Florida at http://www.floridamemory.com/OnlineClassroom/sacred_harp/photos.cfm and the Mississippi Arts Commission at http://www.arts.state.ms.us/crossroads/music/music4.html.
The resource at http://www.folklib.net/folkfile/ is clearly by Toronto folk music enthusiast Bill Markwith, dated 1997, as claimed in the resource itself.
I would not agree that the title should be changed to "Sacred Harp music" since there is no such thing--nothing that distinguishes Sacred Harp songs as a whole from those in other books. A better term would be "Sacred Harp singing" which denotes a tradition of singing, and distinguishes it from other forms of singing and from the use of other songbooks.
What fasola.org says is "The best way to learn about Sacred Harp singing [sic] is to sing it yourself by attending annual or local singings." Note the capitalisation. I understand and agree with WP:MOS on the principle of restraint in the use of the upper case. I ask you to understand the conventions within this field and acknowledge that procrustean applications of general rules may not be appropriate in all cases, and that those who have been editing these pages have been following the best practices of scholarship in this area. Finn Froding (talk) 00:51, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
You misunderstood what i said. I was trying to show that my change was not idiosyncratic or Procrustean but based on the best sources. The problem was that i found mostly aficionado sites in the article's online sources and that the only online source i found in the article's references that looked like the kind of serious, encyclopedic source whose spelling usage we should be following was the Texas State Historical Association. I did not notice the New Georgia link. Please add the New Grove!
We should definitely move the article to Sacred Harp singing in following the usage in the best sources, including those you just cited. The current title Sacred Harp is very unprofessional, unencyclopedic and downright confusing, misleading, and fanboyish.
In addition, we should consider moving it to shape-note singing or fasola singing because these are called synonyms by the New Georgia Encyclopedia and because they are less confusing and misleading than "Sacred Harp singing". You have to remember that this topic is linked to from other articles, and their readers would get a wrong idea and would be confused by Sacred Harp singing unless they click on the link and read the lede, which most will not do. But "Sacred Harp singing" is definitely a much better title than what we have now. --Espoo (talk) 04:32, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello Espoo. I think you are somewhat confused. Web sites are virtually never the "best sources" when there exists a scholarly literature, peer reviewed and published by academic presses. The works of Jackson, Cobb, Beale, and Steel, cited above by Finn Froding, are references of this type and should serve as the primary source for Sacred Harp editing, including the question of what to name the field and how to capitalize it. I have read these books from cover to cover, and I would not be surprised if Finn Froding has as well. Have you? If not, I suggest you come back with your suggestions after you have done so. The same goes for any topic on the Wikipedia -- editing should come after reading and study. For more on this question, please consult WP:VER. Sincerely, Opus33 (talk) 05:46, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

No, you're confused. The reliable sources Finn Froding cited use "Sacred Harp singing", not "Sacred Harp" alone, which is very unprofessional, unencyclopedic and downright confusing, misleading, and fanboyish. This article doesn't either seem to ever use "Sacred Harp" alone to mean "Sacred Harp singing", in contradistinction to some of the aficionado sites. "Sacred Harp" used alone is the name of the book, as you know, so i can see no reason why you would want to object to my proposal to move the article to Sacred Harp singing, and none of you have provided any reason.

I never said that online sources were the best sources. I simply pointed out that i used the best of the online sources provided by the article to decide how to fix the simply impossible current title "Sacred Harp". Apparently i should have added that of course i and most other readers do not have any except online sources (specialised in this topic) at our disposal when we first stumble across an article that needs copyediting. Your exhortation to go to the library before i start editing a WP article shows that you're profoundly confused about the basic pillars of WP.

Of course online sources can and should be used, one just has to make sure they're reliable. As you know, lots of junk is published on paper too; it just doesn't usually end up in the library, and it doesn't have a reputable publisher. Checking whether a website is reputable is exactly the same thing as checking whether the publisher of a book is reputable. In addition, since the quote from New Grove supports my proposal, your exhortation to read WP:VER is actually quite tragicomic. Looks like you've caught the disease described at WP:OWNERSHIP, which will also help clear up your confusion about what WP is. --Espoo (talk) 10:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think we need an argument about who is confused or who "owns" the article. I do think we need to take this discussion to Talk:Sacred Harp, where the contributors can express their views. I think we've demonstrated that capitalisation is no longer the issue. I've expressed a willingness to consider renaming the article to "Sacred Harp singing"--this accords with the scholarly literature, and it happens to be the first three words of the existing article. There may be a downside to this that I haven't considered. But I'd like to hear from others. I intend to raise the issue on the Talk page, with a xref to the present discussion. Finn Froding (talk) 15:19, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter[edit]

Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors – May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive


The Guild of Copy Editors invite you to participate in the May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive began on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). The goals of this backlog elimination drive are to eliminate as many articles as possible from the 2009 backlog and to reduce the overall backlog by 15%. ! NEW ! In an effort to encourage the final elimination of all 2009 articles, we will be tracking them on the leaderboard for this drive.

Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.

We look forward to meeting you on the drive! Your GOCE coordinators: SMasters, Diannaa, Tea with toast, Chaosdruid, and Torchiest

You are receiving a copy of this newsletter as you are a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, or have participated in one of our drives. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add you name here. Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:19, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE elections[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG
GOCE Coordinator.png

Elections are currently underway for our Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days and ends on June 30, 23:59 UTC. All GOCE members in good standing, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. The candidate with the highest number of votes will become the Lead Coordinator, therefore, your vote really matters! There is also a referendum to appoint a Coordinator Emeritus. Cast your vote today.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive invitation[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The latest GOCE backlog elimination drive is under way! It began on 1 July and so far 18 people have signed up to help us reduce the number of articles in need of copyediting.

This drive will give a 50% bonus for articles edited from the GOCE requests page. Although we have cleared the backlog of 2009 articles there are still 3,935 articles needing copyediting and any help, no matter how small, would be appreciated.

We are appealing to all GOCE members, and any other editors who wish to participate, to come and help us reduce the number of articles needing copyediting, as well as the backlog of requests. If you have not signed up yet, why not take a look at the current signatories and help us by adding your name and copyediting a few articles. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words".

>>> Sign-up now <<<

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 08:57, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Erich Priebke[edit]

Hi. I answered your question on my talk page Fuelbottle (talk) 22:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter[edit]

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their September 2011 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy editing backlog. The drive will begin on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). We will be tracking the number of 2010 articles in the backlog, as we want to copy edit as many of those as possible. Please consider copy editing an article that was tagged in 2010. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". See you at the drive! – Your drive coordinators: Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02, and SMasters.

>>> Sign up now <<<

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:22, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll[edit]

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Professors' blogs etc. not reliable[edit]

I think that we have hydroxide under good control. As I think you've been told before, chemistry editors at least, do not find blogs to be acceptable sources. We like good old books and reviews. If you have suggestions for this fairly mature article, you might leave a note at the talk page. Thanks, --Smokefoot (talk) 21:46, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The reason why blogs are not acceptable is that they are not subject to peer review, that is, the are not reliable in the the Wikipedia sense. Even if they are written by respected authors, they might contain errors or untested personal opinions. Petergans (talk) 10:54, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Are you seriously disagreeing with what the chemistry professor and the McGraw-Hill Science & Technology Encyclopedia say? We don't need to have the blog link, but the information is very important to help readers understand this confusing naming issue. You seem to be experts, and experts often have trouble understanding the needs of normal users of WP. Since the chemistry professor feels this needs to be explained to college students, you can be sure it needs to be explained to WP users. --Espoo (talk) 15:39, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Your tag[edit]

You placed this tag without indicating what the problem was. Would you please do so? Thanks, LeadSongDog come howl! 23:35, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Done. --Espoo (talk) 09:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Capital the[edit]

Hi, I've just been reading a discussion you were involved in in 2008, to which I was referred from Talk:Paul is dead. You may like to see the changes I have made to the MoS on the subject. Then again, you may not... Regards anyway, Rothorpe (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Murder[edit]

I noticed your post on Talk:Murder and I agree with it. James500's response was not very helpful - saying things like "it's perfectly comprehensible" doesn't make it so, for example - but I am inclined to avoid commenting there right now because I have just had a similar interaction with him at another article talk page and he does not seem to respond to criticism in a helpful or constructive way. I am hoping other editors see your post and back up what you said. You can also try to make changes to the article yourself in the meantime, although be fore-warned that he may revert them automatically with the explanation that he doesn't agree or that there was "no consensus on the talk page" (meaning his own response that all your comments about the article's current state were invalid). I totally disagree with his assertion that "at common law" is a commonly-used phrase and easily understandable to the general public. I think that it may be used in UK law circles (James500 is from the UK and has an interest in law). That is not enough to warrant it being used in the article. I would suggest starting off with small edits to the article and see what happens, rather than taking the time to make detailed or major edits just to have him revert them. Let me know if you need any help or would like me to comment on the Murder talk page. I doubt that I can be of any help convincing James500, but at least it would show that you are not the only one that found the article to have issues or disagreed with his assessment.

Also, "murder" is not just a legal term and the article should reflect that.

Hopefully some other editors will comment on your post soon :-) MsBatfish (talk) 07:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Tablet PC[edit]

I reverted your edit at Tablet PC. Please take a look, and feel free to try something different or discuss. – Pnm (talk) 20:41, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I thought the explanations were incorrectly describing the same thing in two contradictory ways. What do you feel is the difference between the first two entries? --Espoo (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
The architecture and operating system. "Tablet personal computers" run Windows or Linux and have similar architecture and hardware – that's why they can be classified as personal computers. On the other hand, the so-called post-PC tablets (so-called on Wikipedia at least) like the iPad are generally not classified as personal computers. (Smartphones, also, are not personal computers.) Sources use these terms fairly inconsistently, but maybe there's a better way to help readers of the disambiguation page. (Tablet computer covers both kinds of tablet.) – Pnm (talk) 21:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE newsletter[edit]

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG
GOCE Coordinator.png

Elections are currently underway for our third tranche of Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, 16 December – 23:59 UTC, 31 December. All GOCE members, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are five candidates vying for four positions. Your vote really matters! Cast your vote today.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors 2011 Year-End Report
Writing Magnifying.PNG
GOCE Coordinator.png

We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2011. Read all about these in the Guild's 2011 Year-End Report.

Highlights
  • Membership grows to 764 editors, an increase of 261
  • Report on coordinators' elections
  • Around 1,000 articles removed through six Backlog elimination drives
  • Guild Plans for 2012
  • Requests page report
  • Sign up for the January 2012 Backlog elimination drive!


Get your copy of the Guild's 2011 Year-End Report here
On behalf of the Guild, we take this opportunity to wish you Season's Greetings and Happy New Year. We look forward to your support in 2012!
– Your 2011 Coordinators: Diannaa (lead), The Utahraptor, and Slon02 and SMasters (emeritus).

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

IPA-en[edit]

Re. this,[15] just read the source yourself. It's in the English phonology article we link to at the top of the page. (We don't need to source non-articles.) And if you were correct, the examples would be useless and should be removed altogether: the whole point of those two words is that they contrast in syllabification. — kwami (talk) 23:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Unreported employment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Moonlighting (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) 10:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

"see article on Baltic Sea and on Zealand"[edit]

None of the articles support your statement. Searching for reliable sources on "Largest Island in the baltic sea" produces numerous reliable sources that claim it is Gotland. I've added three of these as sources. None of the hits claim it's Zeeland (for the simple reason that it is not *in* the baltic sea). --OpenFuture (talk) 13:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

GOCE March copy edit drive[edit]

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their March 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on March 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on March 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate the remaining 2010 articles from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, Stfg, and Coordinator emeritus SMasters. 19:35, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

GOCE March drive newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update
Writing Magnifying.PNG

GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graphs

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter.

Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!

Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far.

Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers.

Your drive coordinators – Dianna (talk), Stfg (talk), and Dank (talk)

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

GOCE March drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive
Writing Magnifying.PNG
GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graph

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! This is the most successful drive we have had for quite a while. Here is your end-of-drive wrap-up newsletter.

Participation

Of the 70 people who signed up for this drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Special acknowledgement goes out to Lfstevens, who did over 200 articles, most of them in the last third of the drive, and topped all three leaderboard categories. You're a superstar! Stfg and others have been pre-checking the articles for quality and conformance to Wikipedia guidelines; some have been nominated for deletion or had some preliminary clean-up done to help make the copy-edit process more fun and appealing. Thanks to all who helped get those nasty last few articles out of the target months.

Progress report

During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—October, November, and December 2010—from the queue, and have now eliminated all the 2010 articles from our list. We were able to complete 500 articles this month! End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here.

When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy-editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy-editing at this time for other reasons. The {{GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators.

Thank you for participating in the March 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy-edit drive will be in May.

Your drive coordinators – Dianna (Talk), Stfg (Talk), and Dank (talk)

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

EdwardsBot (talk) 22:00, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May copy edit drive[edit]

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May mid-drive newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of 49 people signed up for this drive so far, 26 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!

Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive, largely due to the efforts of Lfstevens and the others on the leaderboard. Thanks to all. We have reduced our target group of articles—January, February, and March 2011—by over half, and it looks like we will achieve that goal. Good progress is being made on the overall backlog as well, with over 500 articles copy-edited during the drive so far. The total backlog currently sits at around 3200 articles.

Hall of Fame: GOCE coordinator Diannaa was awarded a spot in the GOCE Hall of Fame this month! She has copy-edited over 1567 articles during these drives, and surpassed the 1,000,000-word mark on May 5. On to the second million! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of 54 people who signed up this drive, 32 copy-edited at least one article. Last drive's superstar, Lfstevens, again stood out, topping the leader board in all three categories and copy-editing over 700 articles. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: We were once again successful in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog—while removing 1166 articles from the queue, the second-most in our history. The total backlog currently sits at around 2600 articles, down from 8323 when we started out just over two years ago.

GOCE Coordinator.png

Coodinator election: The six-month term for our third tranche of Guild coordinators will be expiring at the end of June. We will be accepting nominations for the fourth tranche of coordinators, who will also serve a six-month term. Nominations will open starting on June 5. For complete information, please have a look at the election page. – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:27, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive[edit]

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their July 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on July 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on July 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to eliminate the articles tagged in April, May and June 2011 from the queue and to complete all requests placed before the end of June. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 6 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in April–June 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July 2012 mid-drive newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of 37 people signed up for this drive so far, 25 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!

Progress report: We're almost on track to meet our targets for the drive. Great work, guys. We have reduced our target group of articles—May, June, and July 2011—by about 40%, and the overall backlog has been reduced by 264 articles so far, to around 2500 articles.

Copy Edit of the Month: Starting in August, your best copy-editing work of the month will be eligible for fabulous prizes! See here for details. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:33, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of 45 people who signed up this drive, 31 have copy-edited at least one article. Lfstevens continues to carry most of the weight, having edited 360 articles and over a quarter of a million words already. Thanks to all who have participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, will be available early in August here.

Progress report: We are once again very close to achieving in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog. Only 35 such articles remain at press time. The total backlog currently sits at under 2400 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We are just two articles away from completing all requests made before July 2012 (both are in progress).

Copy Edit of the Month: Starting in August, you'll be able to submit your best copy-editing work for palaver, praise, and prizes. See here for details. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:57, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

GOCE news and September drive invitation[edit]

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events:

  • The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best August copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
  • September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit the articles tagged longest ago and to complete all requests placed before the end of August. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top six in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". This drive features a much easier signup process. We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll[edit]

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

GOCE September activities[edit]

Reminders from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

A quick reminder of our current events:

  • The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight September 14 (UTC).
  • The September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight September 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin.
  • The September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is now underway! The event runs until midnight September 30 (UTC). The goal is to copy edit articles with the oldest tags and complete all requests placed before September. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who participates, with special awards given to the top five in the following categories: "Total articles", "Total words", "Total articles over 5,000 words", "Total articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 04:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Piquance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Smell (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) 10:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

GOCE mid-drive newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors September 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

  • Participation: Out of 37 people signed up for this drive so far, 19 have copy-edited at least one article, about the same as the last drive. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
  • Progress report: We're almost on track to meet our targets for the drive. Great work, guys. We have reduced our target group of articles—August, September, and October 2011—by about 44%, and the overall backlog has been reduced by 58 articles so far, to around 2600 articles. The biggest difference between this drive and the previous one is a stronger focus on large articles, so total word counts are still comparable.
  • Don't forget about the Copy Edit of the Month contests! Voting for the August contest has been extended through the end of the month. You don't have to make a submission to vote!
>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:58, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Beatles RfC[edit]

Hello, this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll here, to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band "THE BEATLES" mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

GOCE September 2012 drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors September 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of 41 people who signed up this drive, 28 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: We achieved our primary goal of clearing July, August, September and October 2011 from the backlog. This means that, for the first time since the drives began, the backlog is less than a year. At least 677 tagged articles were copy edited, although 365 new ones were added during the month. The total backlog at the end of the month was 2341 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We completed all 54 requests outstanding before September 2012 as well as eight of those made in September.

Copy Edit of the Month: Voting is now over for the August 2012 competition, and prizes will be issued soon. The September 2012 contest is closed for submissions and open for voting. The October 2012 contest is now open for submissions. Everyone is welcome to submit entries and to vote.

– Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Writers Barnstar Hires.png the Writer's Barnstar
For explaining so well what this silly dispute is all about. Thanks and cheers! ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 02:44, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

GOCE fall newsletter[edit]

Fall Events from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events:

  • The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best October copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
  • Voting is in progress for the September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest. Everyone is welcome to vote, whether they have entered the contest or not.
  • NEW!! In the week from Sunday 21 October to Saturday 27 October, we are holding a Project Blitz, in which we will copy edit articles tagged with {{copyedit}} belonging to selected project(s). For the first blitz, we'll start with WikiProject Olympics and WikiProject Albums and add more Projects to the blitz as we clear them. The blitz works much like our bimonthly drives, but a bit simpler. Everyone is welcome to take part, and barnstars will be awarded.
  • November 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in 2011 and to complete all requests placed before the end of October. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
>>> Blitz sign-up <<<         >>> Drive sign-up <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

GOCE November 2012 copy edit drive update[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors November 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

  • Participation: Out of 31 people signed up for this drive so far, 22 have copy-edited at least one article. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!
  • Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive. We have reduced our target group of articles—November and December 2011—by over 50%, and 34 of the the 56 requests made in September and October this year have already been fulfilled. However, the rate of tagging for copy edit has increased, and this month we are just keeping the size of the backlog stable. So, all you copy editors, please do come along and help us!
  • The September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest was won by Baffle gab1978 for his copy edit of Expulsion of the Acadians. Runner up was Gareth Griffith-Jones for his edit of I Could Fall in Love. Congratulations to both.
  • The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight November 30 (UTC). You don't have to make a submission to vote!
  • November 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight November 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin.
  • Seasonal oversight: We had a slight fall from grace in the title of our last newletter, which mentioned the season in the northern hemisphere and thus got it wrong for the southern. Fortunately an observant GOCE member was ready to spring into action to advise us. Thanks! In future we'll stay meteorologically neutral.
>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

GOCE November drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors November 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Thanks to all who participated! Out of 38 people who signed up this drive, 33 copy-edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. All the barnstars have now been distributed.

Progress report: We achieved our primary goal of clearing November and December 2011 from the backlog. For the first time since the drives began, the backlog consists only of articles tagged in the current year. The total backlog at the end of the month was 2690 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We completed all 56 requests outstanding before November 2012 as well as eight of those made in November.

Copy Edit of the Month: Voting is now over for the October 2012 competition, and prizes have been issued. The November 2012 contest is closed for submissions and open for voting. The December 2012 contest is now open for submissions. Everyone is welcome to submit entries and to vote.

GOCE Coordinator.png

Coodinator election: The six-month term for our fourth tranche of Guild coordinators will expire at the end of December. Nominations are open for the fifth tranche of coordinators, who will serve from 1 January to 30 June 2013. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.

– Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited French phonology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Uvular fricative (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) 11:14, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

GOCE mid-December newsletter[edit]

End of Year Events from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events:

  • The December 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best December copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC).
  • Voting is in progress for the November 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest. Everyone is welcome to vote, whether they have entered the contest or not.
  • From Sunday 16 December to Saturday 22 December, we are holding a Project Blitz, in which we will copy edit articles tagged with {{copyedit}} from January 2012. The blitz works much like our bimonthly drives, but a bit simpler. Everyone is welcome to take part, and barnstars will be awarded.
  • January 2013 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on January 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in January, February, and March 2012 and complete all requests placed before the end of 2012. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in January, February, and March 2012", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest.
GOCE Coordinator.png

Coodinator election: Nominations are open for candidates to serve as GOCE coordinators from 1 January to 30 June 2013. Nominations close on December 15 at 23:59 UTC, after which voting will run until the end of December. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.

>>> Blitz sign-up <<<         >>> Drive sign-up <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:30, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

Hi, very minor edit issue, not a living person's name or anything, but just seen the technical move you requested. On the face of it this "rarely" edit doesn't immediately seem to be supported by checking enabled-only English sources.

Best of the Festive Season, cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:52, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

GOCE 2012 Annual Report[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors 2012 Annual Report
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations!

Our 2012 Annual Report is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

GOCE mid-drive newsletter, January 2013[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors January 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We are halfway through our January backlog elimination drive.

The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

GOCE February 2013 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors February 2013 events newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We are preparing to start our February requests blitz and March backlog elimination drive.

The February 2013 newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the February blitz and March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

GOCE news: February 2013[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2013 wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of 19 people who signed up for this blitz, 9 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the six-day blitz, we removed over twenty articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, BDD and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

GOCE mid-March 2013 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors March 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We are halfway through our March backlog elimination drive.

The mid-drive newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the March drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

GOCE April 2013 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors March 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We have completed our March backlog elimination drive.

The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the April blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:00, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

GOCE April 2013 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2013 events newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We finished the April blitz and are preparing to start our May backlog elimination drive.

The April 2013 events newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the May drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 04:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

June 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Trunks (clothing) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:14, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

GOCE May drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors May 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We have completed our May backlog elimination drive.

The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the June blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 05:20, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

GOCE June/July 2013 events[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We have completed our June blitz and are about to commence our July backlog elimination drive.

The June/July 2013 events newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, BDD, and Miniapolis

Sign up for the July drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 news report[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG
  • Participation: Out of 30 people who have signed up for this drive so far, 18 have participated. If you have signed up for the drive but have not yet participated, it isn't too late. If you haven't signed up for the drive, sign up now!
We Can Do It!.jpg
  • Progress report: Thus far we have reduced the number of May/June 2012 articles to just 124 articles, so we're on the right track. Unfortunately, for the first time in GOCE history, the number of articles in the backlog has actually gone up during this drive. While all participants are currently doing a fine job, we just don't have as many of them as we have had in the past. We have over 500 editors on our mailing list, but only 18 editors who have done a copy edit for the drive. If you're receiving this newsletter, it's because you have an interest in copy editing. Join the drive! Even if you only copy edit one article, it helps. Imagine how much progress we could make if everyone chipped in just one article.

– Your drive coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:33, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

GOCE July 2013 copy edit drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

We have completed our July backlog elimination drive.

The drive wrap-up newsletter is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor.

Sign up for the August blitz! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:39, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Barcode may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s and 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

GOCE Blitz wrap-up and September 2013 drive invitation[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors August Blitz wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of sixteen people who signed up for this blitz, nine copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 26 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the September drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor.

Sign up for the September drive!
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 02:49, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

GOCE September 2013 drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors September 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The September 2013 drive wrap-up is now ready for review.
Sign up for the October blitz!

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 05:03, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

GOCE Blitz wrap-up; join us for the November drive[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors October Blitz wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of eleven people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we copy edited 42 articles from WikiProject Film's backlog, reducing it by a net of 34 articles. Hope to see you at the November drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor.

Sign up for the November drive!
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Halifax Explosion[edit]

This page has been moved a number of times in the past year between the two capitalizations. See Talk:Halifax Explosion#Requested move which occurred last February. If you would like the capitalization changed, please open a new move discussion. It has been argued that Halifax Explosion is a proper name. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 15:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

It seems we're going to have to add a separate section for this kind of issue to the MOS if this is not a clear case even for an admin. We cannot waste time rediscussing such clear cases for thousands of articles. Almost all articles in the category 20th-century explosions are lowercased and books published by university presses and other reputable publishers on the Halifax explosion use lowercase, eg The Halifax Explosion and the Royal Canadian Navy. --Espoo (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
The last move discussion went the other way, insisting on upper case. It is paradoxical that your link spells it 'Halifax Explosion' in the publisher blurb, although we do see lower case used in the text of the book. Lower case sounds right to me, which is why the verdict of the last move discussion surprised me. It's hard to tell if consensus favors your view without having another move discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 00:09, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
We can only be sure what the publisher wants by looking at what we're sure has actually been published. Blurbs are written by marketing people who are not professional copyeditors and blurbs don't go through the publisher's rigorous copyediting process. In addition it's quite possible that Google Books caused that mistake.
It's WP:NAMECAPS. 117Avenue (talk) 00:14, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, that's a very unhelpful article because it doesn't explain what a proper name is (and most people think they know but in fact don't), so it needs to be fixed. Please look at the talk page. --Espoo (talk) 00:33, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Halifax (former city), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Benzol (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) 09:12, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on this question I've posed? I could really use your thoughts on the matter. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:29, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Naming of Odón Device[edit]

I did an analysis of the spelling of the variant versions of the name at Talk:Odón Device. I hope you will share your thoughts and see if we can reach consensus or see if further input is needed. Alansohn (talk) 03:41, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013 GOCE drive wrap-up[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors November 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The November 2013 drive wrap-up is now ready for review.
Sign up for the December blitz!

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


GOCE December 2013 Blitz wrap-up and January Drive invitation[edit]

December Notes from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The December blitz ran from December 8–14. The theme for this blitz was articles tied in some way to religion. Seven editors knocked out 20 articles over the course of the week. Our next blitz will be in February, with a theme to be determined. Feel free to make theme suggestions at the Guild talk page!

The January 2014 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on January 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in October and November 2012 and complete all requests placed before the end of 2013. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in October and November 2012", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there!

GOCE Coordinator.png

Coordinator election: Voting is open for candidates to serve as GOCE coordinators from 1 January through 30 June 2014. Voting will run until the end of December. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.

– Your drive coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:25, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

GOCE 2013 Annual Report[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors 2013 Annual Report
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations!

Our 2013 Annual Report is now ready for review.

– Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978 and Jonesey95

Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 4 January 2014 (UTC)


GOCE February blitz wrapup[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2014 wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of seven people who signed up for this blitz, all copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 16 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by

March GOCE copyedit drive[edit]

Notes from the Guild of Copy Editors
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The March 2014 backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles in need of copyediting. The drive begins on March 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on March 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copyedit all articles tagged in December 2012 and January 2013 and to complete all requests placed in January 2014. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copyedits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: number of articles, number of words, number of articles over 5,000 words, number of articles tagged in December 2012 and January 2013 and the longest article. We hope to see you there!

GOCE Coordinator.png

– Your drive coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:59, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Graham (given name), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anglo-French (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) 08:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

GOCE March drive wrapup[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors March 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter
Writing Magnifying.PNG

The March 2014 drive wrap-up is now ready for review.
Sign up for the April blitz!

– Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by
Guild of Copy Editors March 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Thanks to all who participated in the drive and helped out behind the scenes. 42 people signed up for this drive and 28 of these completed at least one article. Final results are available here.

Progress report: Articles tagged during the target months of December 2012 and January 2013 were reduced from 177 to 33, and the overall backlog was reduced by 13 articles. The total backlog was 2,902 articles at the end of March. On the Requests page during March, 26 copy edit requests were completed, all requests from January 2014 were completed, and the length of the queue was reduced by 11 articles.

Blitz!: The April blitz will run from April 13–19, with a focus on the Requests list. Sign up now!

– Your drive coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

April blitz wrap-up and May copyediting drive invitation[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors April 2014 Blitz wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of 17 people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 28 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the May drive! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

GOCE June 2014 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors May 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Thanks to all who participated! Out of 51 people who signed up this drive, 33 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2,987 articles to 2,236 articles in May, the lowest backlog total since we began keeping records in 2009! Since at least 300 new articles were tagged during May, that means we copy edited over 1,000 articles in a single month. Amazing work, everyone!

Blitz: The June blitz will run from June 15–21. This blitz's theme is Politics. Sign up here.

Election: You can nominate yourself or others for the role of Coordinator for the second half of 2014 here. Nominations will be accepted until June 14. Voting will begin on June 15 and will conclude on June 28.

Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Adobe Flash[edit]

Hello, Espoo.

Counter-reverting other people without adding a considerable plausible rationale or seeking consensus is edit warring. Please take the issue to talk page and gather consensus. You will find that people here are more likely to agree with you if show a teamwork spirit.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 15:57, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Please read edits (especially of obvious non-experts like myself struggling to make the article less confusing for non experts) more carefully before incorrectly claiming completely different edits (which incorporated your helpful correction) are counter-reverts. In addition to my edit being a new edit, not a revert, my edit summary did in fact add a very considerable plausible rationale. BR, Espoo (talk) 16:49, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
"New edit"? So, you don't remember, do you? No problem. Let's assume you are right, I am wrong and I apologize for my mistake, okay? So, you made a new edit (B), I made a new revert (R) and now we are good friends discussing (D). Shall we?
Your confusion is confusing to me. Please start from the beginning and tell me what confused you. When and how you saw this Shockwave Flash and what made you think it may be confused. Then, we will plan an action. I am listening.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 16:19, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sleeping Beauty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Folk tale (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) 08:51, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

GOCE July 2014 newsletter[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2014 newsletter is now ready for review. Highlights:

– Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:27, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Calligrammes may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • De Philosophie Et D’art, October 1920], Blue Mountain Project, Princeton University</ref>]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:05, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Intellectual disability, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NHS. 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) 10:30, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

"Airway" syn. "flight path"[edit]

Dear, may I invite you to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation regarding mentioning "flight path" as a synonym for "airway" - several editors consider this incorrect. Regards, Jan olieslagers (talk) 07:15, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

GOCE July drive and August blitz[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the 40 people who signed up this drive, 22 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2400 articles to 2199 articles in July. This is a new month-end record low for the backlog. Nice work, everyone!

Blitz: The August blitz will run from August 24–30. The blitz will focus on articles from the GOCE's Requests page. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. The blitz will run from August 24–30. Sign up here!

Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2014 (UTC)