User talk:Mattximus

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

Newfoundland and Labrador[edit]

I understand what you are doing and agree that is the title that article should be at, but a copy and paste move over a redirect loses edit history as a consequence. I'll place a request to delete the redirect to make way for the move. Hwy43 (talk) 04:52, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. I didn't realize that would be the case. I'm doing little things to the remaining provinces/territories that are hopefully time savers when it comes to cleaning them up properly. Thought this would be one of them. Mattximus (talk) 04:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
I've requested what I anticipate will be an uncontroversial technical move. This process is explained at WP:RM/TR. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:50, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Tiruchirappalli FAC[edit]

Hi, would you mind having another look. Vensatry (Ping me) 06:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC) From what I've read, it's pretty good. Much better than many of the other pages for cities in Tamil Nadu. Unfortunately I do not have that much time at the moment to read the whole article (it is quite long!). If time permits I will try for another section. 15:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Sure you can have your own time. But could you strike out the resolved issues, so that I can understand if everything is fixed. Vensatry (Ping me) 17:16, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I've responded to your queries there. Vensatry (Ping me) 08:11, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, but I'm very busy in real life at the moment, no time as of yet to go through the whole article. So far it looks very good! The prose just needs minor clean ups, like the ones I've been making so far in the first 3 sections. Mattximus (talk) 19:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Hope you'll re-visit when you get time. Vensatry (Ping me) 08:28, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, since your comments may have been resolved, would you mind re-visiting the page. Vensatry (Ping me) 07:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, looks like you're back after the vacation. The nomination has been sitting up for a while, awaiting your responses. Happy new year too :) Vensatry (Ping me) 10:53, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi, sorry I've not had much time here, and to be honest, it's a bit daunting to read such a large article. I do believe it's close to pass, it just needs some minor tweaks like the ones I've been suggesting. How long before it's booted off the featured list? I will try to maybe do a section or two if time permits. Mattximus (talk) 22:00, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Thanks for the response. Though I'm not forcing, you could collapse the comments if you feel that they're addressed, else there is a chance that delegates might think they're not resolved. Two of the three reviewers who had took part earlier are yet to respond. Vensatry (Ping me) 13:31, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Falun Gong (run, just run)[edit]

Trust me. It's a bad article and it'll probably never improve. I've seen user accounts deleted over this article, ip blocks established, epic edit-wars and it never really gets any better. I'd say just try to minimize the damage by removing links into the FLG article wherever you find them. Simonm223 (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2014 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Mattximus. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Carina Nebula by ESO.jpg.
Message added 06:00, 8 March 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Herald talk with me 06:00, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

DA Neuron diagram[edit]

Hi Mattximus, I'm planning on re-nominating the diagram I drew for FP again, but I was wondering if you could review it at your leisure prior to the nomination. I just noticed your follow-up comments on the closed FP nomination - Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/TAAR1-Dopamine neuron. I made a slightly different tweak to the image to expand upon its ability to diffuse through membranes and uploaded it to the unused png version: File:TAAR1 Amphetamine Dopamine.png (current annotated SVG version: {{Amphetamine pharmacodynamics}}).

Do you think I should use this version, or just move both entry points to the right side? Should only take me around 10 minutes to move everything if it's better on the right.

Also, thanks for all your feedback so far! It's been quite helpful in improving the image. Seppi333 (Insert  | Maintained) 20:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Ah, also, here's the references again just incase: my file locker. Seppi333 (Insert  | Maintained)
Yes I would think it would be most logical if all amphetamine points of entry are beside/near each other. Specifically, it would reduce the number of pathway arrows that cross over each other, since I'm assuming the amphetamine that diffuses across the membrane and the amphetamine that passes through the dopamine transporter have the same pathway once inside the cell. The changes you made already considerably improve the image, so the rest is just nit-picking. Mattximus (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Codrington Library[edit]

Hi Mattximus- I have added an alternate version to my FP nomination. I hope the crop makes the presentation of the facade less ambiguous. Thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 19:52, 6 May 2014 (UTC)


Hi, I implemented the change you recommended at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of currencies in North America/archive2, please can you take another look at the article? Thanks, Matty.007 16:32, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in Portland, Oregon and crystal[edit]

As you seem to have a thing against the "future" buildings section, note WP:CRYSTAL is not applicable. I know many people are confused about what CRYSTAL means, and generally they think it is some sort of prohibition on future things. What it really is, is a prohibition from Wikipedia editors speculating. As in I can't come up with my own ideas about the future and added them into an article (in many ways CRYSTAL is repetitive of OR). But we can regurgitate the speculation about the future found in RS, which should be clear by the very first sentence of CRYSTAL: "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation." (emphasis added) So we can have a section entitled "Tallest under construction, approved and proposed" and not run afoul of anything. Individual entries may run afoul if not sourced, but the section itself does not. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:08, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

I have went through a few of the list of tallest buildings pages and removed approved/planned not normally because of wiki crystal ball, but because they are either completely unsourced, or the source is out of date, and the projects became stale. I would say this accounts for 95% of the cases. Consider the alternative. Every architect's plan should have it's own wiki page? What criteria would you use to say a plan is worth writing about, or just one in a million of plans that never see fruition? In going through the lists for "approved" buildings written usually around 2007 I noticed almost none were actually built or under construction 5 or 6 years later. So approved is not a criterion for inclusion. Because of this, I firmly believe that unless something is being constructed, it's speculative or worse, advertisement. Mattximus (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
"Every architect's plan should have it's own wiki page?" - No, and that's not what anyone would argue except as a strawman. Instead we generally do what we always do, reliable sources from sources independent of the topic. To which, the architect's plan would not be. Should they be removed if nothing has happened after a few years, certainly. But that's not all you did on the above list, where you removed the entire section, including one in which construction had begun, just to later be stopped. By the time you removed it and the entire section it had already been announced construction would resume, and it has. Aboutmovies (talk) 03:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


Please note that the species are now listed on the genus pages. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:26, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I did see that, but if you delete them all, then it's just a stub with nothing on it. Why not keep the links there for now, until more actual content is added. This way it's useful in the meantime. Mattximus (talk) 20:04, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Review of scallop diagram[edit]

Hi, I read your comments on my illustration of neurology of a giant scallop, and believe I have addressed all of your very good points. Any chance I can get you to vote "Support" for the image now? Am hoping so! KDS4444Talk 16:11, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of municipalities in British Columbia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abbotsford. 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) 09:31, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

All and none.[edit]

Not sure I understand your reversion about lower-tier municipalities. If all of them are lower-tier, it should go without saying that none of them are upper tier, right? Like, if you have five cats and all of them are black, you wouldn't need to say no white ones are present. Or orange or anything. Because all cats that are present are black. Same deal, or no? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:43, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply InedibleHulk! I was hoping you would discuss to make sure my reasoning is correct. My logic is that since all municipalities are single-tier in the north, then they are either all lower-tier or all higher-tier. So you have a bifurcation, and that's why there is the phrase "upper-tier municipalities are not present" is present. So in your metaphor you have five cats and some are long haired and some are short haired. Sure they are all cats, but if you cared about the length of hair you would have to add "short hairs are not present" to "all the animals are cats". But you bring up a good point, would it be more clear to say "and all are lower-tier municipalities?" I would go for that change, just to get rid of the negative. Mattximus (talk) 00:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

No, you're right. Just realized I was seeing "single-tier", but reading "lower-tier". I'm not completely stupid, but when I am, I really am.
Sorry to waste your time! InedibleHulk (talk) 01:47, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
Not at all, I enjoy the collaborative aspect of wikipedia! Mattximus (talk) 01:54, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome, then. That proposed change sounds OK, by the way. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:41, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 1 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Canadian election timeline featured lists[edit]

Hi Mattximus. I've done a bit of investigating after your posts on my talk page, and it turns out that none of the lists (from what I can tell) were ever actually demoted. The demotions you are referring to appear to be related to this discussion that resulted in the delisting of a featured topic. That appears to be because a related list didn't pass FLC, not because of faults in any of the other lists. Even if they had been mentioned, a decision made at the featured topics process doesn't govern whether a particular list is featured. I also looked at WP:FLRC archives at Template:Featured list log and found no FLRC discussions for any of the lists. Therefore, they are still featured, although they don't appear to meet current FL standards. My suggestion is to take one of the lists to FLRC for a community discussion, and go on to post other lists if reviewers favor delisting. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply! Mattximus (talk) 03:07, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

List of municipalities in British Columbia[edit]

Mattximus, yeah I generally view Wikipedia using a 14"(?) laptop. As such, the images as currently laid out at List of municipalities in British Columbia (and also List of municipalities in Quebec, for example) do definitely "break" the page layout (by "pushing the list table down the page while leaving a lot of blank white space") when viewed on my laptop... So, something for editors of those pages to keep in mind – images are well and good, but WP:NOTGALLERY and all that, and it's probably best to try to design page layouts that will work on the maximum number of screen sizes (which is why I suggested switching to a {{Gallery}} at the bottom of the article)... Just thought you should know. --IJBall (talk) 05:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, we had discussed this earlier actually and decided to keep. Since you are on a laptop with a small screen, you can fix this problem by changing the zoom on your browser. The fastest way is holding the control button and scrolling one tick with your mouse wheel (or however your laptop scrolls). Then going back if you find it too small. We can't design a wiki page that's perfect for every laptop/computer screen, but this seems to work on most screens. Mattximus (talk) 16:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Minor request: Any chance you can add a picture of Victoria to the gallery of List of municipalities in British Columbia then? It seems odd that that one is missing a picture of the capital city! Thanks! --IJBall (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

They are actually in order of population beginning with the largest municipality and going to the lowest. Same format for all other list of municipalities in Canada pages. To get to Victoria we would have to add another 7 cities. Hmm possible, but I'm not sure if there are any good ones for places like Saanich or Langley. Mattximus (talk) 18:08, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Ah... point taken! --IJBall (talk) 18:47, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I did not see that you had been previously questioned about the photos, with reference to Ontario. This is obviously a project you are keeping a tight grip of, and I mean that in a positive sense, and so I will not disrupt this again. Thanks. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:00, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

TFL notification[edit]

Hi, Matt. I'm just posting to let you know that List of municipalities in Yukon – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for March 27. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 21:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

New Brunswick Incorporation Dates[edit]

Hmmmm, there's no single document that's easily found. Regulation 85-6 doesn't include the date of incorporation.

You can get the Municipalities Act from the Government of New Brunswick website, which will list the villages incorporated 1966-11-06 in one of the appendices (second one, I think), but the online version includes only the villages from that Act that still exist. The appendix does list what status each such village had before 1966. The Act and its Regulations are at

I don't have my files with me on my laptop, so I can't provide more detail than that. I can take a copy of the page home and add the dates, but with two blizzards in the next four days, it could be awhile before I get it done.G. Timothy Walton (talk) 13:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks G. Timothy Walton! I used your link and added the specific date to any village mentioned in the document, assuming that means their day of of incorporation is all the same (the year is cross-checked and should be accurate). I'm still searching for proper references for the remaining incorporation dates, but I'm wondering if you have time to take a look at List of municipalities in New Brunswick for any inaccuracies that might be present. Mattximus (talk) 02:09, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for your comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of nearest exoplanets/archive2. If you have some time I would really appreciate if you could take a look at the list and let me know if there is anything that the list would need to receive your support for the FLC. Nergaal (talk) 19:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

FLC removal[edit]

You have my permission (in case it's needed) to nominate the rest of the lists, but I recommend doing so in separate FLRCs. I'm not sure how closings would go if one giant FLRC was done for all the lists, and there's no precedent for such an event anyway. Better to have a bunch of nominations and let reviewers copy their comments if necessary. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:07, 7 April 2015 (UTC)