User talk:Delldot: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 27: Line 27:


Sorry, delldot, I haven't found time to continue reviewing it. I won't have time in the next couple of days and then I'm on holiday for a week. Have you tried printing the article, and reading it out loud? You could ask [[User:GrahamColm]] for an opinion. Good luck! [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 14:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, delldot, I haven't found time to continue reviewing it. I won't have time in the next couple of days and then I'm on holiday for a week. Have you tried printing the article, and reading it out loud? You could ask [[User:GrahamColm]] for an opinion. Good luck! [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 14:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

:No problem Colin, you've been very helpful already, you certainly don't owe me anything. I was just asking if you thought it was it too sorry a state to bring to FAC without any further reviewing from you. Peace, [[user:delldot|<font color="#990066">delldot</font>]] <small>[[user talk:delldot|<font color="DarkRed">talk</font>]]</small> 14:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


== Could you have a look... ==
== Could you have a look... ==

Revision as of 14:52, 16 July 2008

Archives

1: 10/05–12/06
2: 12/06–01/07
3: 01/07–02/07
4: 02/07–03/07
5: 03/07–06/07
6: 06/07–09/07
7: 09/07–11/07
8: 11/07–11/07
9: 11/07–12/07
10: 12/07–01/08
11: 01/08–02/08
12: 02/08–03/08
13: 03/08–04/08
14: 04/08–05/08
15: 05/08–06/08
16: 06/08–07/08
17: 07/08–07/08
18: 07/08–08/08
19: 08/08–10/08
20: 10/08–04/09
21: 04/09–01/10
22: 01/10–11/12
23: 12/12–03/13
24: 05/13–12/15

Thanks for dropping me a note! Don't be shy about asking questions, I'm always glad to help. I will reply to messages here, so you may want to watchlist this page.
If you'd like to undo an action of mine and can't get a hold of me within a reasonable time, go ahead. If I disagree, we can discuss it when I'm back. This applies to admin actions too.

Ok I set mine up

You suggested that I mention when I set up for my own review so I have done so now, also I have a few people who I am waiting on replies from using the template that I mentioned on the WP:ER page. Even after I have got my review I will still be happy to help other Editors out (especially if I can get better at it) because I have enjoyed the 3 I have done so far. %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 04:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SAH

Hey there! Subarachnoid hemorrhage is on the edge of FA status, and I was wondering if you could provide a source (sources?) for Image:SAH incidence graph.svg (both inline and in the image description page, please :) Thanks, and looking forward to your next GA/FA, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks for catching that. How I could have failed to do that boggles the mind. Anyway, done now, thanks for the thorough reviewing work (as usual). delldot talk 20:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK - Level of consciousness

Updated DYK query On 7 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Level of consciousness, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Mifter (talk) 03:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pulmonary contusion

I've done a bit more. I'm afraid real-life is interfering with my WP time and I'm also trying to respond to a GA review of ketogenic diet. So, I'm going to be real slow. I see you've got another review and there are plenty other folk if you need feedback quickly. If you have concerns about your sources being up to FA level, try User:Eubulides. Cheers, Colin°Talk 13:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries at all Colin, take your time. I don't really even have a time frame in mind, plus I have a lot of real life stuff too. I appreciate whatever you can do to help me, but if you end up not having time for it I completely understand. Peace, delldot talk 15:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, delldot, I haven't found time to continue reviewing it. I won't have time in the next couple of days and then I'm on holiday for a week. Have you tried printing the article, and reading it out loud? You could ask User:GrahamColm for an opinion. Good luck! Colin°Talk 14:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Colin, you've been very helpful already, you certainly don't owe me anything. I was just asking if you thought it was it too sorry a state to bring to FAC without any further reviewing from you. Peace, delldot talk 14:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you have a look...

At Magnetic resonance neurography? I was cleaning up the references and it turns out that clearly the contributor (Afiller (talk · contribs)) is one of the inventor of the technology. While I don't think there is much COI going on, I figure it'd be best if someone with a more medical background had a look. Circeus (talk) 17:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can have a look. I don't have much of a medical background though, just a bachelor's. I'll let you know what I think. delldot talk 18:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's better than me. My (almost entirely non-academic) background is in plant science and languages :p Circeus (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done, I thought it was pretty good, if a little heavy on the advantages and light on the disadvantages. I left a note on the talk page. Good catch, thanks for bringing it up! delldot talk 19:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa

SAH is FA. I'd stuff your userpage with barnstars, but I think even that would be an inadequate sign of appreciation. Keep up the brilliant work. JFW | T@lk 19:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hooray! :D Congrats JFW, you did terrific work. Thanks much for the kind words! It was your work, though, that brought the article to the high standard it is now, no question. Peace, delldot talk 19:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 11 DYK

Updated DYK query On 11 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Focal and diffuse brain injury, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford Pray 09:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for everything

The Guidance Barnstar
I award you this barnstar for helping me to learn the process of reviewing other editors, and for giving me great advice on my Editor Review I have learned alot from you through both processes and just wanted you to know that I appreciate it%%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 15:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
:D Thank you! delldot talk 15:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am just waiting on trying to get a map but have the content just about right. A quick look-over to alert me to any grammar or flow glitches would be much appreciated... :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

pick 1 from the following: 1/you have been exceedingly busy, mostly with subarachnoid haemorrhage. 2/ you have just been letting me figure out for myself that the idea i proposed 10 days ago was too clever by half (with clever, in this case, not being a +). 3/ i have somehow given offence. that said, i have an odd situation here. i have a reference with an only copyright date of 1928. (don't worry, it's not on medicine.)i know for sure that my copy dates much later than that. on the copyright page it has the usual 'all rights reserved, no reproduction ,blah, blah, blah. my understanding of copyright law is that the copyright on this should have expired in 1998. i would like to be able to make pretty much free use of this in an article, including some pix.it's one of the major references in its field. any thoughts? advice? pax vobiscum.Toyokuni3 (talk) 14:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm really sorry Toyokuni, I just forgot to respond! I'm sorry, I certainly didn't mean to ignore you, and you definitely haven't given offense! I didn't really know how to respond, so I thought I would look into it later, and I forgot. I don't have any experience with lists, so I wasn't sure if that was a cohesive enough thing to base a list on. Did you check WP:LIST and look at other biography-related lists for similar themes? I can try to help with this if you like, just give me an update.
I'm not really sure about the copyright question either, but I believe it's the death date of the author that's important, not the publication date. It sounds reasonable to say that if it hasn't been changed in the more recent publications, it's still public domain, though again I'm not sure (In other words, a Shakespeare play would still be public domain even if it was republished, while for a new textbook edition the clock would start over, but I'm just making that up). But copyright law is very complicated, and it depends on a lot of variables, including country of origin (see Wikipedia:Public domain). For images, the copyright expires after the death of the author plus 70 years I believe, at least if it was published in the US first. Sorry, wish I could be more definitive help. Did you try asking at the help desk? I can ask around more, and I can probably help more if you give me more info. Peace, delldot talk 15:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I asked in the commons IRC channel, and others confirmed that unchanged republication would not reset the expiration date: it would be based on original publication or the death date of the author. It was also confirmed that the copyright expiration is the death of the author + 70 years, not the original publication date, but that it might be different depending on the country. Peace, delldot talk 16:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
many thanks. not the answer i wanted to hear, but it kept me from putting in work that just would have had to be removed. back to the drawing board. paix. Toyokuni3 (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great suggestion!

Remain neutralDon't be a dickIgnore all rules

So I spent some time playing around with the image map extension. I have already put it to use. with the help of Wikipe-tan and the Trifecta I have created a great little adaptation to the image on the WP:TRI page.

Thanks again for all your help! %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 21:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Now why didn't I think of that? :P I bet there's a ton of stuff like that that you'd enjoy playing with, that was just the first thing that came to mind. You should talk to the bot type people, they might have more ideas for how to put your skills to good use. Do you ever use IRC? You should join #wikipedia-en on freenode and ask around some time. delldot talk 01:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As a matter of fact, I am on there right now, just wanted to check my watchlist while I was at it :) I may indeed bring it up. %%-SYKKO-%% (talk to me) 01:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Aww, too bad I missed you, but I'm on there all the time. Maybe next time. delldot talk 04:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, the article has been reposted and is virtually identical to the original one that was deleted. I've nominated it for speedy deletion. If it gets re-created a third time I would suggest blocking it from recreation. Zazaban (talk) 20:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good catch. I hate to salt it though, since there could conceivably some day be a notable thing called "Anarchist International" that could deserve an article. I'll just watchlist it. Thanks for your vigilance and for handling this so well. delldot talk 21:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anna

She's now trying to argue that the deletion of the Anarchist International article is an act of vandalism and I am being called a vandal. Also, she's claiming that the anon who blanked my userpage and tried to sabotage the vote is not a vandal. Zazaban (talk) 20:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear it. I'll try talk to her, I don't know if she'll see it my way though. Are you able to ignore the unpleasantness, or are you going to want to take it to ANI or whatnot if it continues? delldot talk 21:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I find it difficult to ignore her, she misrepresents her organization to an incredible degree (She claims it to be somehow related to the IWW) and generally uses underhanded tactics for reasons only known to her. She hasn't even ever been able to prove her organization really exists beyond its website. Zazaban (talk) 02:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to hear it. Anyway, that's my advice, take it or leave it. delldot talk 03:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked her to take it to deletion review. Zazaban (talk) 05:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Does she have a problem with the process by which the consensus to delete was decided? Or with the fact that Wikipedians decided to delete? If it's the latter, DRV isn't really appropriate, it's just for review of the way the AFD was carried out, not for the article's merits. Seems like a pointless exercise anyway if the article doesn't have any RS, you know? I suggested that she work on a new article in her userspace with RS. delldot talk 13:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G&A

The pulmonary contusion stuff from Grainger and Allison is from Ch 20... I don't know how to indicate this with the template. I use an online edition so I have no page numbers. Antelan 02:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, no problem, thanks again Antelan! delldot talk 03:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]