User talk:Pontificalibus

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

Indian Grand Prix[edit]

Source added.If more source is needed please tell so that I can provide them before unnecessarily deleting my edited article. Atanu das biswas (talk) 19:38, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Pontificalibus. You have new messages at Cerejota's talk page.
Message added 20:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cerejota (talk) 20:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Web design @ RFPP[edit]

I have overturned the admins decision. If they continue right back again, please just take a stop by my talkpage and let me know, and i'll take care of it again. Thanks, -- DQ (t) (e) 02:23, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks --Pontificalibus (talk) 20:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Tailored Fiber Placement[edit]

Hi Pontificalibus, now the article you have requested for speedy-deletion is written - how can I prevent this article for deletion ??? Ciao matthias --Erfurth (talk) 13:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Pontificalibus. You have new messages at Cerejota's talk page.
Message added 11:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cerejota (talk) 11:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

No sources[edit]

Before I could add any sources they were reverted. They all have sources now. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 19:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Great. This is why content should be added with the sources already there, especially for fast moving current events.--Pontificalibus (talk) 21:54, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


I have undone your change to the policy WP:NOTNEWS. It is not just "routine" things whose coverage may not qualify them for an encyclopedia article. Many nonroutine things, like "watercooler stories," "bear cub stuck in tree," crimes, or accidents are newsworthy but not of the enduring importance expected of the articles of encyclopedia articles. Please start a discussion on the talk page of the relevant policy page, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, to see if there is a consensus for the change you propose. Thanks. Edison (talk) 22:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, didn't occur to me but there is a discussion on this very issue already ongoing.--Pontificalibus (talk) 22:59, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Where? Link? Edison (talk) 04:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Where you said! Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#WP:NOTNEWS --Pontificalibus (talk) 06:59, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

"ANTIhuman" TalkBack[edit]

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

I don't understand why this article ANTIhuman is in line for deletion, i have provided evidence of the information on the article.

The album is unreleased but i have found much information to provide this article.

Under these search terms listed on the deletion page: ("ANTIhuman" - i found evidence in the search.

( )

( )

This is the last link on the Google search page.

Bath Forum (hundred)[edit]

Thanks for starting Bath Forum (hundred). I've added the parishes but I'm having trouble identifying articles as links for Lyncombe & Woolley - any ideas?— Rod talk 19:27, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The parishes of Widcome and Lyncombe were merged more than a hundred years ago, so the area of Lyncombe is often lumped in with Widcombe nowadays, although it's a seperate electoral ward. I'll see about including some info in the Widcombe article or creating a new article. I linked Woolley to Charlcombe, although it could probably have its own article at some point.--Pontificalibus (talk) 19:38, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
We have to bear in mind that most of the parishes that were mentioned in hundreds do not exist today and most of them have no proof whatsoever of even existing! Last year I came across a hundred named 'Berchelei' and there were no mentions of that hundred existing whatsoever. Somethings have died out with history, I guess. Jaguar (talk) 20:57, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Maybe that was Berkeley (hundred)? Until the 19th century they used to be quite random with their spellings.--Pontificalibus (talk) 21:14, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Berchelei was near Liss in Hampshire or possibly Odiham. I have no idea where the name origin came from, but I hope to create an article for all of them soon. Jaguar (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Lyncombe, Bath[edit]

Well done for your work on Lyncombe, Bath. I think it is probably eligible for Wikipedia:Did you know if you wanted to nominate it.— Rod talk 20:47, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I've not done a DYK before so it would be good to try it. I'll see about expanding the article over the next day or two and try and think of a suitably interesting "hook". --Pontificalibus (talk) 21:30, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Ah, just remebered there's a Jane Austen connection, as she visited Lyncombe Spa, I'll work that in.--Pontificalibus (talk) 21:33, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
For the hook I would do something about Charles Milson finding the spring, calling himself a doctor and marketing a cure-all. It's well referenced and quite "interesting" in a way that might draw others to view the article.— Rod talk 20:12, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Good idea, thanks.--Pontificalibus (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Re You're welcome...[edit]

You beat me to that move by half a second. --Σ talkcontribs 22:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Choir of Mainstockheim[edit]

Hello Pontificalibus. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Choir of Mainstockheim, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: the AFD will be closed today; I believe it would be more appropriate to allow it to run its course. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:02, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Lyncombe, Bath[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Lyncombe, Bath 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! Voceditenore (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Lyncombe, Bath[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

  • Congratulations on another fine article, and thanks for your many high-quality contributions. Drmies (talk) 14:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Cheers, it's my belated first DYK but won't be my last.--Pontificalibus (talk) 19:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


Restored for now, but the "blessed village" still has unsourced pov claims Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Prior Park[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if I could pick your expert knowledge/brains? I've just put up an article on Prior Park and wondered if you had any sources which would help with the architecture section? We previously had an article on Prior Park Landscape Garden and one on Prior Park College but nothing specifically about the house. I've found a lot on the history but limited description of the architecture and wondered if you could help?— Rod talk 21:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I will have a look and see what I can find.--Pontificalibus (talk) 18:02, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to help at Ely article improvements[edit]

As a previous editor of Ely, Cambridgeshire, you are cordially invited to assist in improving the Ely article at Ely article improvements --Senra (Talk) 15:12, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm going on vacation now but will certainly chip in when I return. Wells might be a useful benchmark to follow, being a similar city and a Good Article. --Pontificalibus (talk) 15:26, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Great. Please add your name and thanks for the Wells suggestion --Senra (Talk) 15:33, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Knowle West, Bristol[edit]

Hi Pontificalibus. The above is now at WP:FAC. I would appreciate any comments/support that you may care to offer at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Knowle West, Bristol/archive1. Tx. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:13, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey[edit]


New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Pontificalibus! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:49, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Fukushima Daichii Nuclear Disaster not Monju Fast Breeder or old german plants better secured holding there already[edit]

Changed to high letters some places and Quelle to Source today English not perfect and in talk box bad. enkidu speaks german also asked.

Can you help with exactly linking references in tables with already same inside german sources ? I wrote new emtry also before cleared fully without storing in View History also not worked out I did ask for edit help but if just deleted no one helps with content already right. Maybe just delete links with refenrence names in- side already or possible do yourself or ask inside for some help. I work on more places and will add fist more on this side also like Info from Spektrum Wissenschaften August and maybe changing whole entry but at the moment showing wrong entry before inside. Why at beginning info about ankles(feet"Füße") and telleing about higher values than Chornobyl in Fukushima in table 10 times higher at Chornobyl changed clearly wrong entries from anti-atomic power movement this theme not german wikipedia but blocking High Temperature Reactor... if you can read german just compare. Stefan64 interested in chess blocks also wrong expert UvM with Tritium from 3He nonsense and wrong explantions Areva Antares link... not addable looks like arranged from anti-atom-movement. Also linking Chornobyl in B4C side as main use... Official 0 deaths of nuclear disaster (radiaoactivity) from IAEA Areva helped a lot should also stand there for "thank you" with link. Information on deaths of quake&tsunami and from stopping reactor building on outgoing oil&gas&cóal additive escalative worldwide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kay Uwe Böhm (talkcontribs) 15:26, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Peer review of Ely, Cambridgeshire[edit]

Pontificalibus. I am notifying you of this peer review as you have recently edited the article.

--Senra (Talk) 01:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Rowland Berkeley[edit]

I'm more than a little miffed by your very first edit to this new article. I did ask for help for the correct way to transfer the relevant stuff from the cotheridge court article which deserves the credit. You've Boldly removed the quotes and slapped on a citations required - is this the besssst you can do????!! Eddaido (talk) 10:35, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I added the appropriate talk page template here, I then deleted the quote template from the article as we don't quote other articles, we copy the content directly. See WP:SPLIT for info. The article does need more references.--Pontificalibus (talk) 12:58, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes, now I see that. Your edit summary was 'remove quote box' and (unlike some who seem to claim a link to almost direct access) I'm not all-seeing as well as not all-knowing and presumed you wrote there exactly what you had done, no more, no less (i.e. screwed up having removed my call for the attention of new page patrollers leaving me looking silly - as you do again in the para above). Next time just say what you've done. Eddaido (talk) 22:00, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited St Nicholas Abbey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cabbage Palm (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) 12:26, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Pontificalibus. You have new messages at McDoobAU93's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

15:52, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Pontificalibus. You have new messages at Talk:Tachash.
Message added 04:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Drmies (talk) 04:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

English Defence League[edit]

Hi Pont. Explain why you removed my link here from the English Defence League page. Peace =)IraqiLion (talk) 10:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I explained in the edit summary. is not a reliable source for descriptions of the EDL. We must write articles from a neutral point of view and as the UAF is in direct opposition to the EDL, the phrases they use to describe the EDL are likely to be biased. If you can find more neutral sources such as newspapers, academic papers, books etc that describe the EDL as a "white supremacist" group, then perhaps that description can be added in.--Pontificalibus (talk) 11:01, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
How do I overcome an obvious media bias in favour of the edl? Many newsagencies won't report on the racist activities of the edl as they are Islamaphobes. This is where wikipedia fails as you rely on western media reports before you believe something to be a fact. Neverthless, I am a fighter and will work hard to find the sources you need, despite the burdens set in my path. Peace =)IraqiLion (talk) 11:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

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

Cambridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Trinity Hall
List of churches in Cambridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Churches

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4[edit]

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

Cambridge (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Conservative Party, Newnham and Henry I
Midsummer Common (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to King John

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 4 March 2012 (UTC)


Hi, thanks a lot for all your fixes to the Aalen article. Just one thing remains unclear to me: In the Aalen#Economy and infrastructure section, the second sentence “With 13,946 (46.5 percent) employed in the manufacturing sector.” is not really a complete sentence, is it? Regards --dealerofsalvation 06:34, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that, I fixed it.--Pontificalibus (talk) 08:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Tenfu Tea Museum[edit]

I nominated 5 at once, and grouped this one in accidentally. I just noticed when I saw "...World's largest tea museum..." at the AfD discussion page. I did read BEFORE, before. :) I thought about the AfDs for a couple of days before acting. I googled these items and found almost nothing, even at news archives. I am very reluctant to click Chinese websites because during fact-checking and referencing, as few months ago, I got a virus simply by landing on malicious website.

My rationale is that the creator tends to produce articles that are below the line in terms of inclusion criteria. He then walks away, expecting others to source them. I raised this, and other concerns (copyvios) at his talk, only to be met with obfuscation, deletion of the post, and more such articles being created. So, I thought challenging the articles with AfD would push them one way or the other. Also, where my words were unpersuasive, this might demonstrate to the creator that such articles can be challenged. See also: User talk:Anna Frodesiak/archive30#AfD. Best wishes, and sorry for the trouble. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:30, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem, the articles are now hopefully in better shape. I can see the user has not been particularly responsive to your concerns, so yes, maybe they'll learn by our actions.--Pontificalibus (talk) 08:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Your report at UAA[edit]

Your report at WP:UAA is technically correct and normally should result in either a block or changed username, but I think Bell Pottinger Inc. was directed to create an obvious role account fro reporting libel and defamation. This came after the Bell Pottinger COI Investigations. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me to that. As you don't seem 100% sure, and I couldn't find anything about this account on the case page, I appended it to their SPI case so someone more familiar with the situation can confirm or deny this account's permissibility. cheers --Pontificalibus (talk) 17:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)--Pontificalibus (talk) 17:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, that's probably fine. I can't remember where it was that I thought I had read that, though. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:06, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silver Drive-In[edit]

User:Milowent's point at the AFD got me thinking as well. As the sources he found show a regional, if not world-wide or country-wide notability, I have used his searches and provided a contectual and sourced mention at Johnstown, Pennsylvania#Landmarks... one of the few places where it makes sense to send readers seeking such knowledge. Seem okay with you? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 06:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Cambridge - references[edit]

Hello, There was no need to replace the "work" parameter with the "newspaper" parameter in all those "cite news" template references. Either parameter is valid and works equally well, see WP:Cite news under 1.3.1. Essential parameters.

Also, you appear to have deleted "location" in some of those refs. Why did you do that? The rule is that the city of publication should be stated when it is not part of the name of the publication. See WP:Cite news under 1.3.2. Optional parameters. -- Alarics (talk) 15:33, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I felt it best to user "newspaper" for newspapers as I think it's less confusing. Template:Cite news documentation states "newspaper" is an essential parameter with an option to name it "journal", "magazine", "periodical", or "work" if more appropriate. That documentation also sates that for location "e.g., Toronto for The Globe and Mail. Should be included if the city of publication is not part of the name of the newspaper." I there would not include "London" for e.g. The Telegraph as it's a national newspaper. I'd give the location of London for the Evening Standard, but not national titles as that might confuse readers into thinking they were London newspapers.--Pontificalibus (talk) 15:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, they *are* London newspapers for the purpose of citing them. This is standard practice, especially in an international setting. A reader outside the UK might not know that they see themselves as "national" newspapers, a slightly nebulous concept anyway and one which doesn't exist in many other parts of the world. There is a Daily Telegraph in Sydney and a The Guardian in Dar-es-Salaam ... -- Alarics (talk) 16:02, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I don't buy the notion that it's standard practice to cite these as London newspapers. In fact, a look over various UK featured articles shows no consistency whatsoever. The principle aim at Cambridge should therefore be internal consistency, which is what I am trying to work toward at the moment, and of course the top priority, which is to make things easy to understand for our readers. For someone not familiar with the UK newspaper industry, your convention would not differentiate "Evening Standard (London)" and "The Daily Telegraph (London)". Maybe you can add "UK" for the location if you think readers will have a problem differentiating The Daily Telegraph from The Daily Telegraph (Australia)? --Pontificalibus (talk) 16:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Actually, the Evening Standard is now called the London Evening Standard, so the problem doesn't arise there. But in any case there is no real distinction between the Standard and the Telegraph in this respect. Newspapers have always been defined -- within the newspaper industry itself, and by librarians and so on -- by their city (not country) of publication, not by their circulation area or supposed area of news coverage. (As it happens, the London Evening Standard carries quite a lot of UK-level news and comment.) Thus, people in New York always refer to "The Times of London" to distinguish it from "The Times", which as far as they are concerned is The New York Times. (On the other hand, if people in Los Angeles say "The Times" they mean the Los Angeles Times.) None of the London-based so-called "national" papers (and which "nation" are we talking about? England? the UK?) circulates as widely in provincial England as in the south-east, because there are competing morning papers in Leeds, Liverpool, Birmingham, Newcastle, Bristol, etc. Their penetration in Scotland is even less. So it is not a question of national boundaries. Adding "UK" instead of "London" would be completely wrong. The Daily Telegraph in Sydney isn't an Australian paper, it's a Sydney paper. The reason why featured articles "show no consistency whatever" is that WP doesn't lay down hard-and-fast rules about these things, possibly because many WP editors are unfamiliar with practice in the real world. -- Alarics (talk) 19:42, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Also: in your edit summary where you have reverted back to the (I must say quite wrong) practice of not stating the place of publication, you say "it's not for national publications where it might confuse". The instructions do not at any point say it is not for national publications. It is absolutely for "national" publications, accepting for the moment that there is such a thing. What the instructions say is: "Should be included if the city of publication is not part of the name of the newspaper." That seems crystal clear to me. Whether a newspaper is deemed to be, or regards itself as, a "national" newspaper is neither here nor there. No confusion arises. -- Alarics (talk) 19:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
We'll have to agree to disagree over this, I'm not going to the argue the toss any more. I'll edit the Template:Cite news documentation to specify "city", rather than "place", as I believe it is currently anything other than crystal clear. --Pontificalibus (talk) 20:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


I have responded on the Talk page. I was going to leave a response on the Talk page, I guess I didn't get round to doing so fast enough. My personal preference is to situate the political response immediately after the victims section; are you amenable to this change?
Best Wishes AnkhMorpork (talk) 11:49, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Immunology[edit]

I see you have edited some of the pages within the scope of immunology. Please have a look at the proposal for a WikiProject Immunology WP:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Immunology and give your opinion (support or oppose). Thank you for your attention. Kinkreet~♥moshi moshi♥~ 09:40, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Stories Project[edit]


My name is Victor and I'm a storyteller with the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit organization that supports Wikipedia. I'm chronicling the inspiring stories of the Wikipedia community around the world, including those from readers, editors, and donors. Stories are absolutely essential for any non-profit to persuade people to support the cause, and we know the vast network of people who make and use Wikipedia have so much to share.

I'm curious about why you write about Corporations

I'd very much like the opportunity to interview you to tell your story, with the possibility of using it in our materials, on our community websites, or as part of this year’s fundraiser to encourage others to support Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're inclined to take part in the Wikipedia Stories Project.

Thank you for your time,

Victor Grigas


Victor Grigas (talk) 21:25, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Bath Forum (Hundred)[edit]

The discussion on moving from Foo (hundred) to either Hundred of Foo or Foo Hundred took place a while ago - I'm just carrying out the moves. It is taking a while because it's a long process and any help would be wonderful! Some articles should be [[Foo], some should be Hundred of Foo and others should be Foo Hundred. Because in many cases all three terms have been used in sources, the preference would be to use the form most commonly used. Initially in making the moves I am taking what the article says. Now and again if it's not clear I will do some research. Also, if someone who knows the hundred very well sees that it has been moved inappropriately, that's great. They can move it to the right name. But, under Wikipedia policies and guidelines (and plain common sense!) it is not appropriate to use disambiguation brackets if there is a suitable alternative as the general reader would not be searching for "Bath Forum (Hundred)" they would be searching for "Bath Forum" or "Hundred of Bath Forum" or "Bath Forum Hundred". See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Boroughs and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography/Archive_12#Hundreds. And also note the policies and guidelines I link to when making the moves - WP:Common name, WP:Precise and WP:NCCS. If you're unclear on what they are saying - essentially they are saying "if it's possible to avoid using brackets, then do so", and "try to use the same format if possible, but follow what sources say, and use natural language" and "use the format most readers are familiar with and which is found in the sources". SilkTork ✔Tea time 10:02, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready[edit]

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

  • Account activation codes have been emailed.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to
  • The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 04:46, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Wim Crusio[edit]

Hello. I don't understand what is happening with the page and / or archiving at Talk:Wim Crusio. I removed unhelpful comments by an IP who is now blocked. And now similar comments have been restored. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 13:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Mindfulness-based stress reduction article[edit]

There have been many improvements to the Mindfulness-based stress reduction article since you added the "refimprove" and "self-published" tags back in September 2010. Would you be able to have another look and consider removing those tages? This article is getting about 7000 page views per month. Thanks! Ianlavoie (talk) 03:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


Hi. Is FuGENE notable? If so, maybe you could add non-commercial references to make this clear. If the only references come from a retailer of the product, how can the article be interpreted as anything but promotional? I've added it to your sandbox content. Deb (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

That's more like it - thanks.Deb (talk) 19:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited FuGENE, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roche (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) 12:10, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter[edit]

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

Eurasian Eagle-Owl Maurice van Bruggen.JPG

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:07, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey[edit]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:27, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2011 M5 motorway crash 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:
  • should have foreseen smoke from the display might drift and mix with fog to form thick smog.<ref>{{cite web|url=|title=Geoffrey Counsell cleared over M5
  • police]] were all consulted before the event but "no objection of any kind was raised".<ref>{{cite web|url=

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:58, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

"Cassandra" IP-sock[edit]

Hi there, regarding my removal of a post by the self-styled "Cassandra" at Talk:List of monarchs of Northumbria, this is an IP-hopping sockpuppet who has sustained a campaign of forum posting on the talk pages of a large variety of articles. These posts push POVs which are not necessarily evident to anyone unfamiliar with their long history. I and some other user have tried engaging with them over a long course of time to ask them to stop their activities, with great difficulty as they constantly hop IPs, but to no avail. It's also difficult to enact sanctions on them because of their IP-hopping. If you're interested, a summary of their latest activities and the difficulty in countering them is here and there are several links therein which expand on the history. The talk page of Scottish Gaelic is under semi-protection due to their continued posting there. I could give you chapter and verse on the full two years. The use of the terms "Scot-land" and "Eng-land" in this particular post are a common handle for their POV (I'd have difficulty outlinining what exactly they may mean by it though) and the real reason for the post, rather than a genuine concern for the article, which they could easily have amended themself. In the last few weeks I have given up trying to engage but, per advice, am largely simply following a pattern of "revert, ignore" if the post is POV-pushing. I hope that explains my removal of the post and I'd appreciate if you were now happy to revert your reversion. Cheers, Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I have dealt with a single-issue obsessive like this before myself and I know it can be a frustrating process. What's really needed in cases such as yours is a temporary subject-specific IP range block. I don't know if that's something that is possible on here.--Pontificalibus (talk) 18:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. EdJohnston (the admin whose talk page I linked above for a recent thread) implemented a range block back in November 2012 for a couple of weeks, the activity resuming immediately after the block expired. A longer and more targeted block was implemented immediately but activity resumed again, though a few weeks after the block was lifted this time. Rather than blocking again, Ed was of the opinion that WP:SPI was the way to go but since then has been of the opinion that this may achieve little as he "(doesn't) see any admin action that is worth taking" as a result and that to "'Revert, Block, Ignore'" may be the approach. I don't know if blocks can be done on a subject-specific basis and the sock has started to shoe-horn the same opinions into the talk pages of ostensibly very distantly related articles, e.g. Talk:Confirmation bias. I'm happy enough to just keep an eye out and simply remove any forum posts I spot, though I can think of better usage of time! Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:34, 14 March 2014 (UTC)