User talk:JEN9841

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

Welcome!

Hello, JEN9841, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Ohio. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Macduffman (talk) 19:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Contents

Parsec[edit]

Parsley.jpg The Parsec Award for Speedy Kessle Runs
There were no pictures of parsecs, so I made an award with some parsley. Namaste. Long live the Rebel Alliance. Theduinoelegy (talk) 09:22, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to pop this award back down the bottom of the page. Just wanted it visible in the initial instance because, you know, parsley.

University of Akron College of Business Administration[edit]

Thank you for cleaning up the URLs in the references section of the page. Please note however, had I realized they were not third-party sources I would've added the new banner to the article the same time I added the Linkrot banner. Nevertheless, the article does not currently meet the guidelines set forth in WP:N, WP:V, or WP:ORG. Simply put, sources must be found that are independent of the article's content, thus information posted from the University itself is not within the guidelines. Thank you. CaptainMorgan (talk) 03:12, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

  • "Many other pages, such as the one for the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Business Administration cite sources from internal websites. In fact, on this page, there are 6 citations from the school website, with only two from external sites. I will be adding more, later, but I currently have 3 external references for the University of Akron College of Business Administration page. I think as long as the U of Illinois-Chicago page does not have the notability banner, the Akron one should not have it either. JEN9841 (talk) 19:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)"
    • The logic used here is not sufficient for the removal of the correct banner - the very purpose the banner was created for, and the reason why we adhere to the notability guideline. Please keep in mind what was good for one page is not always good for another, even if the content is similar - in that case it's more likely the issue of someone not seeing it to make people aware. If you are aware of it, by all means, add the proper banners so either you can come back to it later, or so that someone else can fix the issue entirely... Please tell me you've reviewed the WP pages I linked to - if you did, you would see that the argument you just made is not within the guidelines set forth. As you are probably aware, whether I or you like it or not, they're there for a reason, and the reasons are fully explained. The articles you created did not adhere, simply put; had I seen the other article you mentioned I would've done the same... it's pure Wikipedia policy. However, unless I see other pages which require the banner, this issue can rest because I see that you've since added secondary and/or third-party sources to both articles, thereby adhering to the Notability guidelines, thank you. CaptainMorgan (talk) 00:22, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Craig Zobel[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Craig Zobel, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Non-notable.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 01:09, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Have you ever seen anything like this before?[edit]

[1]

This is insanity. Thanks for your efforts in improving this piece. I have edited Irish articles on rebellion pitting Protestants and Catholics, and I have still never run into a situation of determined ideologues like these human rights articles. Keep up the good work, and let's try to reach some level of neutrality.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 15:53, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of List of films in the public domain[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated List of films in the public domain, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films in the public domain. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. KurtRaschke (talk) 01:13, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Prima facie right[edit]

Hey thanks for creating the above article. Though it would help people iff you did not add brackets [ ] around your references. This is because the whole reference turns out looking like a link. So when doing your reference it is advisable that you write it like this:

<ref>http://www.answers.com/topic/prima-facie ''Answers.com'' Retrieved 25 May 2009</ref>.

Thanks. For any other queries look at the wikipedia page. NPervez (talk) 08:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Electoral reform in New Jersey[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on Electoral reform in New Jersey requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. shirulashem (talk) 00:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Jerry Warren[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Jerry Warren, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerry Warren. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 00:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

From Enhanced interrogation techniques[edit]

Jen: I edited this article to get rid of the "suggested influence" section tying the Bush admin. to the Nazis. An aburd piece, though you should know as you are also working on this article. [2]Yachtsman1 (talk) 17:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

University of Akron pictures[edit]

By all means, please do! The article needs many pictures. If you haven't set up an account at Wikimedia Commons, please do. That will make it even easier for your pictures to be used not only in the University of Akron article, but in other articles as well. Further, any pictures you take that may not be used in the article can be categorized and then a link can be placed in the Wikipedia article to that gallery (since galleries are discouraged on Wikipedia). Good luck with the pictures! Let me know if I can be of any assistance! --JonRidinger (talk) 17:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Drone attacks on Pakistan by the United States[edit]

Thanks for the message. The title is totally off, and the reason I made my statement was for the same reason you did. I agree that it should be renamed, but I do not know the mechanism for doing it to a wider audience. Any suggestions? Thanks again.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 01:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, that was certainly bold, but they moved it back. I would suggest this be placed on the NPOV notice board. The title reflects a slanted point of view, not supported by the sources.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 04:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Ironclad (film)[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

I have nominated Ironclad (film), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ironclad (film). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Eluchil404 (talk) 09:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Per your request the article has been userfied at User:JEN9841/Ironclad (film). Shereth 18:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

"Its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations"[edit]

Hi JEN9841, I'm referring to the above tag which you added to The Case of the Gilded Fly.

I rated the article "Start" class myself despite its length because secondary material on the novel has not been cosulted. The majority of the text is a plot summary and literary allusions in the novel, but there is no point whatsoever in giving page references becuase (a) the novel as such is the source and (b) I have been working from a random paperback edition—the only one I could get hold of. As far as I'm concerned, the only inline citation I could add is a reference to the novel's U.S. title at the end of the introductory paragraph.

What else / What exactly should be added?

Best wishes, <KF> 14:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Columbus[edit]

Could you explain your reasoning in editing the first line of the Columbus page concerning clean and ultra-modern? Columbus was ranked in the top 5 for cleanest cities in the country this century, and the definition of ultramodern is extremely modern in ideas or style. Columbus is extremely modern in style and ideas, concerning what the city has and is producing, and the architecture of the city. Behal Sampson Dietz, MSI, Browne Group, Design Group and an endless list of ultramodern architects and architecture are located in the city. If you like internet service and instant messaging, thank Columbus. If you like modern medical research, thank Columbus. If you like certain Academy Award winning movies, thank Columbus. If you like water treatment plants, thank Columbus. If you like female pilots, thank Columbus. If you like cruise-control, thank Columbus. If you like nuclear energy, Columbus had a role. The list is endless that qualifies Columbus for the labeling. All of the major towers Downtown have been built within the last couple decades or so, or at least in modern era, excluding the historic LeVeque Tower. Columbus is ranked as the #1 most up and coming technological city in the country. Is there a Wiki standard I am missing? All of this information is sourced and cited.

Wiki Historian N OH (talk) 13:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

List of films in the public domain in the United States[edit]

Thanks for adding all those citations. When you are finished with the sections you are working on I suppose I'll see about finally reformatting the information into wikitables (as I've been meaning to get to that since the AfD). --Tothwolf (talk) 10:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply to JEN9841: I appreciate your praising my additions, and I thank you for your advice. I’m sure you noticed the apprehensive comment that was previously on my user page, but your page provides a general design for a user page, so I recently added a few basic and non-controversial things to mine. I’ve also written some suggestions, based on my brief experience, about improvement of Wikipedia security. Inasmuch as you have a lot more experience than me, possibly you’ll express your view as to why Wikipedia permits certain things, such as users being able to alter other users’ pages. Doing that is unethical, we both agree, but how can Wikipedia justify allowing it at all? Is there a way someone can protect their user page?

Your list of pages created shows you have done a lot of work on a broad range of subjects. My main reservation about putting such a list on my own page is the possibility of targeted vandalism.

The userboxes on your page imply that your politics are generally liberal, which is okay with me. I don’t mind discussing politics with people who are liberal or conservative, provided they have wisdom to share and act as though they’re willing to learn. But I’m sure you’re aware of people who are extremely intolerant of folks with different politics, and some of them regard it their patriotic duty to take revenge by means such as vandalizing the pages of people with “wrong-headed” ideas.

If you feel comfortable posting your list of pages and views on specific political issues on your user page, then you’re braver than I am.

Among other things, I assist filmmakers by researching the copyright status of films so they can be certain they’re not running afoul of anyone else’s intellectual property right. I have several books on copyright and public domain law, as well as all of the cumulative catalogs of film copyright registrations and renewals. As I add the years, studios and nationalities to titles on your page, occasionally I come across films whose copyrights have been renewed, so I have added the facts about those renewals to the pages for those titles. Improper renewal invalidates U.S. copyright protection, but potential users ought to be alerted that further research is needed in those cases.

Your list of public domain films includes a few titles I was previously unaware of, such as FRESH HARE (1943), which doesn’t appear in the 1940s Copyright Catalog. On the page for FRESH HARE, I didn’t find a link back to your List of Public Domain Films. Several of the Warner Bros. cartoons of the late 30s and early 40s weren’t registered for copyright. Aardvarkzz (talk) 10:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Public domain film list being reformatted[edit]

On 17 September 2009, Bensin reformatted titles beginning with A and B in List of films in the public domain in the United States as a table. Based on your remarks of 5 September 2009, I infer you did not consent to this change. With your permission, I will add the following to the discussion page (or I can add it to Bensin’s user talk page) --

The 5 September 2009 remarks by JEN9841, this page’s creator, ought to be respected. There is no harm in creating, on a separate page, a table of public domain films, but by reformatting the existing page into a table (already done for titles beginning with A and B), Bensin is disrupting and cluttering the page. None of these changes indicate that Bensin has any special knowledge or wisdom to offer in the field of public domain film.

Bensin has complicated things by adding new categories of information in three columns, two of which still are completely empty. Does Bensin intend to supply the information for the empty columns? Even when information is added to those columns, the table won’t assist anyone in learning about public domain films.

The year a film entered the public domain is irrelevant unless an issue of litigation is whether a defendant using a public domain film committed an alleged infringement sooner than the film entered the public domain, and that’s very rarely (if ever) an issue in copyright litigation.

How a film got into the public domain is a complex matter on which experts sometimes disagree. If Bensin were an authority on that subject, he (I’m presuming male gender) would be aware that reason(s) for a film being in the public domain often cannot be summarized in the brief space of a table column. If Bensin has information to offer on a film’s copyright status, the best place to add it is on that film’s page in proximity to its link to List of films in the public domain in the United States, as I have done in supplying copyright registration and renewal information for certain films.

Bensin has also added a column with the film’s director, which is of little or no relevance to the film’s public domain status, and is an unnecessary duplication of credits found on each film’s main page.

[End of proposed discussion.]

Further to JEN9841 -- I presume you will broach this matter with Bensin. Inasmuch as you are a more experienced Wikipedian than myself, maybe you know (and I can learn from you) the customary way to politely inform busybodies such as Bensin that there are more productive ways to spend their time than reformatting pages on subjects in which their knowledge and expertise is decidedly limited.

Possibly Bensin will respect your request, and the above discussion will be unnecessary.

You may, if you wish, include my comments and proposed discussion in your communication with Bensin. Aardvarkzz (talk) 08:05, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia punctuation style[edit]

By this edit you said you were fixing comma errors. I've reverted the edit because they weren't errors. Wikipedia uses the "logical" style for placement of quotation marks. See WP:LQ, which states:

On Wikipedia, place all punctuation marks inside the quotation marks if they are part of the quoted material and outside if they are not. This practice is referred to as logical quotation. It is used by Wikipedia both because of the principle of minimal change, and also because the method is less prone to misquotation, ambiguity, and the introduction of errors in subsequent editing.

Although this isn't the most common style, it's the one that should be used here. JamesMLane t c 01:41, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

A Failure of Capitalism[edit]

I've added more information and citations to balance the POV. Can you find the Washington Times review? Bearian (talk) 16:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

"You Lie"[edit]

I understand that you want to add this content, as do about a hundred other people. However, your source does not say that it was Wilson, or that he said "you lie". I'm sure articles will come out tomorrow that report on this, so please revert and wait until you can add it properly. Thanks — Mike :  tlk  01:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

It's appropriate now with the AP article. Thanks for properly citing it — Mike :  tlk  01:39, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Joe Wilson (U.S. politician) article[edit]

Hello, please stop creating a controversy section on the Joe Wilson article. You are approaching the Three Revert Rule. Please see the talk page. Thanks! Reliefappearance (talk) 03:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Proud of You[edit]

Thanks for all of your great work on wikipedia. That is all. (This isn't in response to any thing in particular, but just to your general awesome work.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjwerner (talkcontribs) 05:53, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Summa Field at InfoCision Stadium[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Summa Field at InfoCision Stadium at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Materialscientist (talk) 08:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Summa Field at InfoCision Stadium[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, JEN9841. You have new messages at Navie05's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A little help[edit]

Please review articles in my edits for anything you care to add. Thanks, MBHiii (talk) 16:10, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

University of Akron and article classifications[edit]

Hey JEN- Thanks for your comments on my talk page a few days ago. I'm happy to help where I can. I did want to say thanks for adding your pictures from the new stadium. I REALLY loved the shot you got with the flag. Very cool! If you're ever able to add some pictures of the other side of the stadium, I think that would be beneficial as well. I did want to mention something about the article grade for University of Akron. I posted a little on the talk page about it. Basically, I think the best way for someone like you had had made extensive edits to a page is to request an evaluation by posting on the talk pages for the various wikiprojects the article is part of. That way you can be sure the evaluation is free from any bias or any claims of bias. The article is definitely not Start class anymore, but in reading the classifications, it seemed to fit more "C" class than "B", though I hardly consider myself completely neutral in the article since I have made my share of edits (though nothing close to the amount of great work you have put in). I have found in articles I have edited extensively, the best avenue is to move it up to the next higher class when it's at stub or start (with an explanation) and then request an evaluation from someone else who isn't really connected with the subject. Good luck and thanks again for all your efforts and contributions. --JonRidinger (talk) 04:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Please stop[edit]

Posting this sort of thing across what seems to be hundreds of articles is indiscriminate and a misuse of see also sections, which are for articles of crucial relevance to the topic at hand that for whatever reason have not been linked to in the body of the article. There are hundreds of pages as relevant as American philosophy that could be added to these articles, and none of them would be appropriate.  Skomorokh, barbarian  00:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. Ayn Rand was an important philosopher of the 20th century in the United States. The best line of argument I think you would have is that she is not "American enough", which I am not sure would stand up. Her relevance and influence in American philosophy, and the amount of time she spent in the United States I think safely lands her in this category. Ayn Rand is on the list of American philosophers and there is also a paragraph devoted to her and Objectivist philosophy in the article American philosophy. I have also posted a similar post on the talk page to see what others think. JEN9841 (talk) 00:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Further, in response to your claim that my edits adding American philosophy and List of American philosophers (and creating See also sections where they are lacking) are indiscriminate, I also am unable to see how this is the case. All of the pages that I am adding that to are philosophers who are on the page List of American philosophers. I fail to see how linking the entry of an American philosopher to an entry that provides a list of other American philosophers is thoughtless or careless. I request further clarification with regards to this allegation on your part. JEN9841 (talk) 01:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
I would also like to know why you shouldn't post that at the bottom of the page. Did you ever get a satisfactory response? Jabberwockgee (talk) 05:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness[edit]

Updated DYK query On December 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 11:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

American Philosophy[edit]

FYI Alasdair MacIntyre was British, heavily influenced by McCabe and others. --Snowded TALK 09:37, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

He was born, raised, and educated in the United Kingdom, but I have been including people such as MacIntyre because he has been living and working in American for about forty years. Many philosophers were born in and/or spent much time in other countries (Santayana), or continually traveled to other countries (David Lewis), but I believe they can still be considered, at least in some sense, "American" philosophers. What do you think? JEN9841 (talk) 18:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Most of his original work was (I think) done in the UK and looking at his page we need to get some dates right. Marxism and Christianity came out in the 70s for example. Thinking about it given the time in the US I think its OK but he is very much within a European socialist tradition which makes him a bit of an anomaly. --Snowded TALK 19:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to make any corrections you deem appropriate. JEN9841 (talk) 19:08, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I love American philosophy for the pragmatists and work in the development of abductive research techniques with due homage to Pierce. However overall its not an area in which I am an expert. I do need to tidy up Alasdair's page. The Blackfriars connection was critical and its not there.--Snowded TALK 19:12, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of David F. Haight[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, David F. Haight, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David F. Haight. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Redaktor Wikipedia 600px.png

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (2011 film)[edit]

The film premiered is set for the 23. July 2010 as part of the 2010 Comic Con International. The official theatrical release is however on 21 July 2011. But it run prior on several film festivals. (Zombie433 talk) 07:07,22 July 2010 (UTC)

Trinidad Scorpion Butch T pepper - wow[edit]

Hi JEN9841! Wow. That. Is. Just. Insane! Well done, great find. (And this is from someobody who is uncomfortable being in the same house as a bottle of Tabasco sauce, let alone the same room.) - regards, --Shirt58 (talk) 08:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

And here was me adding a "notability" tag...[edit]

Hi JEN9841 - List of songs considered the best - mighty, mighty work! Just reading it explains so much! --Shirt58 (talk) 10:16, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the removal, I was planning on asking you to re-evaluate it soon anyways. You can take some of the credit for the article though, your tag gave me that extra kick in my step to get some real work done on it!  :) JEN9841 (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

We're recruiting art lovers![edit]

Archives of American Art Wikimedia Partnership - We need you!
Collections Storage Archives of American Art.jpg
Hi! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the Smithsonian Archives of American Art and I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about art to participate in furthering art coverage on Wikipedia. I am planning contests and projects that will allow you access, no matter where you live, to the world's largest collection of archives related to American art. Please sign up to participate here, and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 00:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 21:28, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 03:04, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects[edit]

WikiProject United States logo.svg

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle[edit]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited
Seattle Public Library
  • Date Saturday, December 8, 2012
  • Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m.
  • Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104
  • Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand.
  • Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki.
  • Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration.

Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:56, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Merge discussion for List of books about philosophy [edit]

Information.svg An article that you have been involved in editing, List of books about philosophy , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Anthrophilos (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC) Anthrophilos (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of List of strongmen for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of strongmen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of strongmen until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. B (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Philosophy of science overhaul underway[edit]

Calling all active Philosophy of Science Task Force members. Your input is wanted at the Philosophy of science Talk page. -Hugetim (talk) 14:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)