User talk:Casliber: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:56, 15 December 2008

Messages from Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail)

Adoption Request: Hi Casliber, I saw your name of the list users offering adoption. I've been a WP for about 2 months, editing anonymously. I created a user name because of all the benefits. So far I think I know the "basic" stuff like a bit of wiki markup, making articles, e.t.c. I'd like to learn some of the advanced stuff. Is it possible for you to adopt me? Regards. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 14:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Casliber! Thanks for accepting my adoption request. Your help and assistance will be of great value to me.

My main interest is article writing as well as article editing. I intend to contribute primarily to Computer science and engineering related articles as well as Hinduism-related articles (esp. Mahabharata). Apart from that I will indulge in rectification of grammatical errors, etc. of all articles (that I read). I stay in New York and I plain to be on WP from 10pm to 11pm EST (minus 4 hours from GMT).

I also have 2 questions to ask:

I know certain users and all administrators have a rollback feature. From the description of the feature on the WP:ROLLBACK page it seems that what it does can also be performed in a more "manual" way by ordinary users. To rollback several edits, you could click on the older version you want to revert to, then click "edit" and save the page like that. So how does thisrolback feature differ from what I described? Or is my understanding of rollback incorrect?
Suppose a page I created and put a lot of effort in writing it gets deleted. If I re-create the page, can I get back my work from the revision history; ie. if a deleted page is re-created, is the revision history of the previously deleted page restored?

Thanks! Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 15:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your questions - yes, rollback is like the undo feature but more convenient. Regarding the second question, it is a straightforward fix. What an admin do is momentarily undelete the page and Move the page, complete with history, to userspace. I have done this before, so ask me if it happens. One way to preempt questions of notability is to begin an build on an article substantially on a draft page. I will make one for you if you don't already have one. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am primarily interested in expanding each parvan in the Mahabharata#The_18_parvans into seperate dedicated articles. Just for a short intro, the Mahabharata is an important Hindu scripture. It consists of 18 books called "parvans". Translations of each parvan can be found here. So I'll be making 18 articles for each parvan, but as of now I have only one reference which is the one above. I'm also rather sure that they deserve seperate articles since Wikipedia does have articles for each book of the Bible, Quran, Rigveda e.t.c. What do you think?

Additionally I have some doubts regarding your previously reply. Firstly, is a draft page a page created temporarily in something like a user sandbox? Secondly, You said an admin undeletes a page and moves it to userspace. Did you mean mainspace?

Cheers! Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 01:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a draft page is a sandbox like you have done. It is in userspace. You can make any number of articles in userspace as subarticles of your userpage. Thus I would move article 'X' to 'User:Arjun G. Menon/X' (i.e. userspace). Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. I will work on the draft page you have made for me. I have not yet read the translations of the parvans. I will read the parvans & summarize them for the article. Cheers. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 14:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I can check your progress as you go. Once you have some commentary and references as well as a plot summary, I can let you know when and how to move it to article space (with the history preserved) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be nice to create stub articles for the parvans and then work on them in mainspace. Pros are the articles will all have discussion pages & people will start noticing them (after I linkify the parvan titles in the Mahabharata) and therefore contribute to them. Is this possible or will the stub pages get deleted? Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 21:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can try. I like it that way better, but I am wary of overzealous deleters patrolling. OK, let's do it that way and I will keep an eye on it. It encourages others to drop in and help. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Casliber. Sorry for the lack of communication. I was busy with college (started on 2nd), and never really got much time to read the parvans. Those parvans are really lengthy and it will be quite some time before I finish the first. I've decided to refocus my editing to CS articles for the time being. If I need any help, I'll ask you. Cheers! Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 02:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I recently uploaded this image for the Arc (PL). I believe the author has made it public domain, but could you verify please... Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 03:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any link releasing the image to the public domain, its basically a pic that Paul Graham has uses in his site's Arc page. Paul has also got a page on his site dedicated to this image: which dates the chair to 1947. I recently got this notice regarding the image. My guesses are the image is public. Do we have to prove this? What do you think? Cheers. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 04:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to add a userbox for my university (SUNY Stony Brook / Stony Brook University), so I took a look at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Education/United_States#New_York, but couldn't find it listed there. How do I create one for it? Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 05:57, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've figured out how and made a couple. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 06:55, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a another small (unrelated) question to ask you. Is it OK to upoad to whatever images I like on Wikipedia, as long as I'm the one who created. I have created a page User: Arjun G. Menon/Photos where I would like to put up photos of me. I'm talking about creating a photo album on WP's servers. These images won't be used in articles and stuff, they are mostly family photos (and I don't mind releasing them to the public domain). So is using WP to host one's personal photo album against the rules? Cheers. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 14:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Casliber! I'd like to know whether images taken from Google Maps can be unploded onto Wikipedia. I also ran into trouble for the recent image I uploaded for this template. Cheers. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 06:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Casliber. Regarding the logo; you said don't use Fair Use for userboxes. My quesiton is, which license/copyright-notice whould be used on such images (non-free images inteded only to be used in userboxes) ? (BTW, I've uploaded a new image for the userbox in question, so this one won't be used. Just wanted to know how the system works.) Cheers. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) ..? Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 06:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's true, swoopo does indeed deserve an article, especially considering the controversy that surrounds it. I just googled swoopo and came across a list of news articles, blogs, interviews, e.t.c. about it. (most of them focus on the controversial aspect). Neverthless, can these suffice as means to prove the notability of swoopo? Can I use the links (obtained from googling swoopo) as sources for the proposed article? Thanks. Cheers. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 06:06, 20 October 2008 (UTC) ..? Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 02:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Searched Google News for "Swoopo", could not find any articles on it from UK national newspaper. There was only one [website] from the UK, but the subject of its article is something totally different and only mentions Swoopo in a passing. There are a couple of articles on it from the Technologizer although. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 05:11, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Casliber. I'll certainly contact the people at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard and ask them for advice, once I finsih writing the article. Thanks for pointing me there. BTW, I tried moving User:Arjun G. Menon/Workshop/Swoopo to Swoopo, but it seems that the Swoopo (redirect page) needs to be deleted first, before I can move my page to it. Could you delete the redirect article Swoopo for me? Thanks. Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 00:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC) ... Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 21:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 03:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Casliber! I was checking out an article's history today, and I notice that the external tool "Revision History Statistics" has been replaced by "Enhanced revision history". I found the older tool, a lot lot more useful/better than the new one. I was wondering, if you have an idea as to what happened. Cheers! Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 09:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The name has been changed to back to "Revision History Statistics", but the actual tool remains the same. Any idea what happened? Arjun G. Menon (talk · mail) 06:44, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More unIDed fungi

G'day Cas,

I've been frogging over the past few days, and the fungi season has definitely started! I have a coral fungi that I thought you would like for wiki, plus I also have a puff ball which I will upload later, will leave a message here when it is uploaded. Saw lots of fungi over the last few days, but only photographed the really interesting ones as I was using my small memory card, and wanted to leave some space for frogs.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/52507572@N00/465979784/?rotated=1&cb=1177065560324

Thanks. --liquidGhoul 10:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was another nearby (about half a metre) which was 8cm tall, so I would go with Ramaria lorithamnus. It was taken in rainforest, was very little Eucalypt around. Do you want me to upload it to wiki? Thanks. --liquidGhoul 11:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nomenclature of fungi

Hey there. I recently stumbled across an issue of Nova Hedwigia Beheift titled "the genera of fungi" (or was it agaricaceae?). It's filled to the brink with mind-numbing nomenclatural discussions of all the genera ever described (I think, anyway). Would it be any use if I looked up the specific ref or any specific genera? Circeus 00:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be friggin' trés bién. The first one that would be absolutely great to get a clarification on is Agaricus which was called Psalliota in many texts fro many years and I've been mystified as to why. Other articles I intend cleaning up are Amanita muscaria, which is the one I intended taking to FA first but it just didn't come together well, Gyromitra esculenta as a future FA, Agaricus bisporus as a future FA, and cleaning up the destroying angels - Amanita virosa, Amanita bisporiga and Amanita verna. Boletus edulis would be a good one to check too. let me know if anything interesting pops up. I'll see ifd I can think of any other taxonomic quagmires later today. Work just got real busy :( cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 02:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, that's pretty arcane and only relevant to genus articles, or species that were tightly involving in defining them (for example, there seems to be an odd debate over the multiple type species for Amanita). I'll look up Agaricus, Amanita (since A. muscaria's the current type) and Psalliota. I'll also dig up the ref so you can look it up yourself, with any chance. Circeus 04:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, keen to see what pops up. cheers, Cas Liber | talk | contribs 05:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only quickly thumbed through it and noted the full ref (Donk, M.A. (1962). "The generic names proposed for Agaricaceae". Beiheifte zur Nova Hedwigia. 5: 1–320. ISSN 0078-2238.) because I forgot about it until the last minute. Psalliota looks like a classic synonym case. It shares the same type with Agaricus, and might be older. Circeus 01:02, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weird! I thought Linnaeus was calling all sorts of things Agaricus so I wonder how it could predate that really....anyway I am curious.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, First thing I have to say is... Damn, 18th-19th century taxonomy and nomenclature of fungi is a right mess. Whose bright idea was it to give fungi 3 starting dates in the ICBN???

LOTS of "per" in citation here. See [1]

On Agaricus: Etym.: Possibly "from Agarica of Sarmatica, a district of Russia" (!). Note also Greek ἀγαρικ^[1]όν "a sort of tree fungus" (There's been an Agaricon Adans. genus, treated by Donk in Persoonia 1:180)

Donk says Linnaeus' name is devalidated (so that the proper author citation apparently is "L. per Fr., 1821") because Agaricus was not linked to Tournefort's name (Linnaeus places both Agaricus Dill. and Amanita Dill. in synonymy), but truely a replacement for Amanita Dill., which would require that A. quercinus, not A. campestris be the type. This question compounded by the fact that Fries himself used Agaricus roughly in Linnaeus' sense (which leads to issues with Amanita), and that A. campestris was eventually excluded from Agaricus by Karsten and was apparently in Lepiota at the time Donk wrote this, commenting that a type conservation might become necessary.

All proposals to conserve Agaricus against Psalliota or vice versa have so far been considered superfluous.

On Lepiota: Etym. Probably greek λεπις, "scale"; Basionym is Agaricus sect. Lepiota Pers. 1797, devalidated by later starting date, so the citation is (Pers.) per S.F.Gray. It was only described, without species, and covered an earlier mentioned, but unnamed group of ringed, non-volvate species, regardless of spore color. Fries restricted the genus to white-spored species, and made into a tribe, which was, like Amanita repeatedly raised to genus rank.

The type is unclear. L. procera is considered the type (by Earle, 1909). Agaricus columbrinus (L. clypeolarus) was also suggested (by Singer, 1946) to avoid the many combination involved otherwise in splitting Macrolepiota, which include L. procera. Since both species had been placed into different genera prior to their selection (in Leucocoprinus and Mastocephalus respectively), Donk observes that a conservation will probably be needed, expressing support for Singer's emendation.

On Psalliota: Etym.: ψάλιον, "ring"; Psalliota was first published by Fries (1821) as trib. Psalliota. The type is Agaricus campestris (widely accepted, except by Earle, who proposed A. cretaceus). Kummer (not Quélet, who merely excluded Stropharia) was the first to elevate the tribe to a genus. Basically, Psalliota was the tribe containing the type of Agaricus, so when separated, it should have caused the rest of the genus to be renamed, not what happened. It seems to be currently not considered valid, or a junior homotypic synonym, anyway the explanation is that it was raised by (in retrospect) erroneously maintaining the tribe name.

On Amanita: Etym.: Possibly from Amanon,a mountain in Cilicia.

A first incarnation from Tentamen dispositionis methodicae Fungorum 65. 1797 is cited as devalidated: "Introduced to cover three groups already previously distinguished by Persoon (in [...] Tent. 18. 1797) under Agaricus L., but at that time not named. It is worth stressing that [The species now known as Amanita caesarea] was not mentioned."

With Agaricus L. in use, Amanita was a nomen nudum per modern standard, so Persoon gave it a new life unrelated to its previous incarnations, and that is finally published after a starting date by Hooker (the citation is Pers. per Hook., 1821). He reuses Withering's 1801 definition (A botanical arrangement of British plants, 4th ed.). "The name Amnita has been considered validly published on different occasions, depending on various considerations." Proposed types include (given as Amanita. Sometimes they were selected as Agarici):

A. livida Pers. (By Earle, in 1909). Had been excluded in Vaginata or Amanitopsis and could not be chosen.
A. muscaria Pers. (By Clemens & Shear, 1931) for the genus (1801) from Synopsis fungorum, was generally transferred to the one from Hooker's Flora of Scotland, which is currently considered the valid publication of Amanita (or was in the 50s).
A. phalloides (by Singer, 1936) for the 1801 genus.
A.bulbosa (by Singer & Smith, 1946) for Gray's republication. This is incorrect as Gray's A. bulbosa is a synonym of A. citrina. Some authors consider Gray to be the first valid republisher.
A. caeserea (by Gilbert, 1940). Troublesome because not known personally to Persoon or Fries.

Donk concludes the earliest valid type is A. muscaria, the species in Hooker, adding that he'd personally favor A. citrina.

The name has been republished three times in 1821: in Hooker, Roques and Gray (in that order). Roques maintained Persoon's circumscription, including Amanitopsis and Volvaria. Gray excluded Amanitopsis and Volvariella into Vaginata. Right after, Fries reset the name by reducing the genus to a tribe of Agaricus, minus pink-spored Volvariella. This tribe became a subgenus, than genus via various authors, Quélet, altough not the first, often being attributed the change. Sometimes it was used in a Persoonian sense (whether that is a correct use according to ICBN is not clear to me).

Homonyms of Amanita Pers. are Amanita adans. (1763, devalidated) and Amanita (Dill) Rafin. (1830)

On Boletus: Not including (Not in Agaricaceae, sorry).

Phew! Circeus 18:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you intend to clean that prose ASAP? It's definitely not article-worthy as is. Circeus 01:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on it. Got distracted this morning...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ndashes

HTML ndashes suck. If you're on a Windows box, you can get a real ndash (i.e. unicode) by holding down the ALT key and typing 0150 on the numeric keypad. Hesperian 11:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...thanks for the tip. I'll try that next. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:33, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for indulging me, dude. :-) Hesperian 00:00, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If, like me, you're stuck with a laptop without a numeric pad with ALT functionality, n- and m-dashes are the two firsts characters after "insert" in the list placed under the edit window. Circeus 22:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I've edited my keyboard layout for "easy" dashes with a little Microsoft utility (yes, I use Windows). It takes a while to set up, but now I can add en and em dashes with only two keystrokes—quite an improvement for WP editing :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:57, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I add shortkeys all the time on various programs. If i used a reallot of weird characters, I'd totally do that to have across windows. Circeus 16:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pork

LOL, I love your sense of humour. Maimonedes is a good reference. The reality is that Islam takes food restrictions from Judaism; and Christianity doesn't have any restriction (courtesy of three references in the New Testament). The reason why pork should be restricted (along with many other things) is not given explicitly in the Hebrew Bible, hence Bible commentators have been offering guesses since ancient times. My own favourite, however, is Mary Douglas, wife of Louis Leakey, daughter of a Lutheran pastor. Her theory is excellent, based on her cultural anthropological observations, with a decent feel for how Biblical text works. It's rather an abstract theory though. Anyway, I'll see if I can manage a literature review of dietry restrictions in the ANE, especially if there's anything explicit about pork. Don't think I'll find a reference for "why" the pork taboo is in place, though, if it's documented, I'd have read about that in commentaries. Perhaps a clay tablet with the answer has been destroyed in only the last few years during the "troubles" in Iraq. :( Alastair Haines (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the great thing about uncertainty. Lacking an answer, the reports of Maimonides, Mary Douglas and the other guy mentioned are fascinating.Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scotish pork taboo is a remarkable article! Thanks for that, lol. Alastair Haines (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spotted this. I'll look for a ref to the Maimonides comment. The normal teaching is that pork is no more or less offensive to Jews than any other forbidden meat (dog, horse etc) or forbidden part of kosher animal (blood, Gid Hanasheh etc). The pig (NB pig, not pork - an important distinction which is relevant for the Maimonides comment too, I note) is "singled out" because it alone of the animals that have one of the two "signs" (it has split hooves but doesn't chew the cud) lies down with its legs sticking out. Most quarapeds have their legs folded under them. There's a midrashic lesson to be learned there, apparently, that the pig is immodestly and falsely proclaiming its religious cleanliness, when it is not. Anyway, that said, I'll look into the M comment - he was quite ahead of his time in terms of medical knowledge (check his biog). And NB my OR/POV antennae buzzed when I read that little section. --Dweller (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has tagged the Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork for OR, though the talk page seems to indicate it is for a different reason....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... makes me more dubious, but I'll check. btw... I'm not Alastair! --Dweller (talk) 23:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have found good stuff, including online version of Maimonides text. I'll dump it here for you to use as you wish.

I maintain that the food which is forbidden by the Law is unwholesome. There is nothing among the forbidden kinds of food whose injurious character is doubted, except pork (Lev. xi. 7), and fat (ibid. vii. 23). But also in these cases the doubt is not justified. For pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter. The principal reason why the Law forbids swine's flesh is to be found in the circumstance that its habits and its food are very dirty and loathsome. It has already been pointed out how emphatically the Law enjoins the removal of the sight of loathsome objects, even in the field and in the camp; how much more objectionable is such a sight in towns. But if it were allowed to eat swine's flesh, the streets and houses would be more dirty than any cesspool, as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks.^[2]

So, Maimonides argues "pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter", whatever that means! More importantly, the "principal reason" is that if you keep pigs, you end up with a dirty and unhealthy environment. Important note: Maimonides was writing from Islamic Egypt at the time, which is why he mentions "as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks." (ie France)

The comments about the pig's habit of lying with its legs outstretched come from Midrash Vayikra Rabba (ch 13) where it is mentioned as part of an elaborate metaphor, but not in connection with any reason for particularly abhorring the creature.

Hope that helps. --Dweller (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greek proofing on Wikisource

Hi Cas,

Would you mind bringing your knowledge of Greek to bear on these three Wikisource pages for me please: [2], [3], [4]? It should only take five minutes I think. If you've got a Wikisource or unified account, you can correct any errors you find; else you can let me know and I'll fix them.

Hesperian 02:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much obliged. Hesperian 06:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Easy peasy you say... nearly all of the yellow pages on this work contain Greek. s:la:Liber:De assensione Stoici quid senserint.djvu. If you could verify even a few of them, especially p.20, that would be fantastic. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 15:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You did a good job on p. 20, only one accent switch. I'll have a look later. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, we have a category for them now on English Wikisource: s:Category:Pages with missing Greek characters. The ones in the "Page:" namespace are accompanied by pagescans; the EB1911 pages usually have a link to the pagescan on the talk page. Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Updated Ucontribs

I added two columns and refined the scan logic on my most recent run, and since you are the originator of the concept, I re-evaluated you. Feel free to find any problems with the latest update, if you need an incentive, let me just say how disappointed I am that two weeks have passed and it is still not a solid list of FA's :) Also, if you're thinking of asking for a new program to show the changes between runs of my other program - no (at least not yet:). I'm wondering about putting in the latest "failed" status too, as in (Failed GA), but I'd need some category hints to work that in.

Thanks for the idea, what a great way to learn about article assessments; the wide range(/incoherence) of category names; and mostly, the great diversity of interests and accomplishments of editors of the wiki! Franamax (talk) 12:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh heck. I'll go and reply over there...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

userpage

(continuing in this thread despite the different topic) I've skimmed through several categories on commons, like Books and Mappae mundi and Image:Vinland Map HiRes.jpg comes closest to what I think you want. I like the borders, esp. the hue. Unfortunately, it's not easy to lighten and probably not possible at all to remove the ink (I gave it a half-assed try with GIMP). Anyway, just to see if we're on the same page as to your idea. Ideally, several similar but non-identical images of blank pages could be used for something similar to the DT userpage, considering that you have quite a lot of stuff on your userpage (with a different section on each page and some playful navigation). Or did you have something like a central disambiguation in mind, putting all the stuff in different subpages? I envision a self-made treasure map (the real problem would be to get the ragged border to look authentic) with an imagemap overlay on the different words (rendered into the image, possibly handwritten), linking to all the different sections (like on my old userpage or using subpages). And I see a compass rose in one of the corners (bottom right?). Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 18:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(i) I like the font, but I'm not sure how well it would blend into the treasure map concept. (ii) I still can't believe that commons wouldn't have dozens of images like we're looking for among their roughly estimated ten thousand primary and secondary sexual characteristics copyvios. Oh well. On a related note, my GF is a graphic designer, maybe she has an idea where to get such an image, or can help create one that could be filled in. She's also great —professional, actually— with Photoshop, maybe she can alternatively clean up the Vineland map with some of those tools I never use). Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 06:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. Yes, I look for compass roses on commons, too, and I agree this one is nice and can also easily be used to put it in another picture. It's a pity that the background you found isn't free, because then we'd be ready to go. I've asked my GF about the Vineland map, but she said it would take ages to get it right. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 23:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A bird-related article that could benefit from your attention

Don Merton. Okay, you made one edit to it back in January 2007. I have a feeling this is a pretty interesting fellow, as would be the saving of the black robin. Of course, I also have a feeling that there are a few other bird-loving editors who pop into this page occasionally and might also be motivated to improve the article. At least this fellow is from the same hemisphere as you. :-) Risker (talk) 04:04, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno much about him, for some reason someone really enjoys vandalising Black Robin and I am mystified why. I'll see what I can do. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sandwich Tern

I see you've taken it on, good work. The display and vision bits at Crested Tern apply for all the genus. The opening sentence isn't fully supported by Bridge - although Elegant is very close, Lesser Crested isn't, other than being in the same genus. I won't abandon this article (after all, one good ... aaaarrrggh, it's catching), but let me know if there's anything specific esp from BWP, Olsen or Harrison, where I have the books. Now, must be time for a couple of slices of bread with some meat in. 10:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Australian figs

Been a bit of a spike in editing the few days... Guettarda (talk) 00:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cute tool that. We'll see how many GAs, DYKs and FAs we can get. Got bits and pieces of horticultural stuff to add yet :) ...just musing on how to bonsai my species... Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UFOINFO

Hi, a site called UFOINFO is used in multiple articles as reference. Do you think it should be considered RS? I cannot see any editorial board or anything by which it can be considered RS. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 05:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neither can I. I guess next step is googling principal writers to see if they are notable independently. Not really my area. Otherwise the newspaper reports listed on the website themselves may have to serve...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

perennial user page project

How about this? The hue is crap, but it's just a quick edit to see if you like the direction. user:Everyme 14:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ooo-arrrr me hearties, it be a fine 'n' tidy start, I be lookin' with keen oyes at what comes next..(seriously looks good, be good if you could make it somehow stretch, as in slot in horizontal bits to keep the bottom pattern at the bottom IYKWIM) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see a minor typo. It says "Welcome to Casliber's Cove" where it should say "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here." Hesperian 14:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OH you mean like depressive realism or something...ergh....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could use the image as a fixed frame, with a scrollable text frame overlaid within it, and/or you could use it as a frame for different "pages" like my old userpage (the final revision of my old userpage combined both: "individual pages" each with a scrollable "inner" frame for the content of each page. btw: could you do me a favour and restore it? I find I need access to some formatting tricks I've collected there). At any rate, I'm going to work over the hue and upload a version without the text. It'd be possible to clone the middle (blank) part, but the limitations are manifold (apart from the challenge of making it look halfway acceptable): Different browsers and different users prefer wildly different font sizes, so you'd end up with a scrollable frame any way (where people would have to scroll "twice", once within the page and once within the frame) or you'd end up with blank space towards the bottom. user:Everyme 14:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At User:Everyme/Casliber, I've installed a simply formatted proposal to get us started. Let me know what you think. My idea is to slowly and occasionally keep exchanging until something you like develops (otherwise until you decide you want something completely different, or to keep the current design). user:Everyme 17:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've made it width-scalable. I image a pseudo-frame layout similar to my old page, with the added fun of people clicking the Welcome text to arrive at a table of contents with every entry right next to the inner (text frame) scrollbar, at the point corresponding to the position of that section. Should be great after I brush up the background images. user:Everyme 18:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Banksia sphaerocarpa var. pumilio

FloraBase has an entry for this, but no other information.[5] Know anything about it? Hesperian 04:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind; I found it.[6] Hesperian 04:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... and I see your name in the Acknowledgements too.... Hesperian 05:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

XD - cool! We were all always arguing about the distinctness of northern ashbyii, and Alex told me about the incana. sphaerocarpa makes my eyes goggle, I knew about latifolia but had no knowledge of pumilio. Wow, must go and read it now. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you might want to have a look at this too. Hesperian 11:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed a comment of yours

Casliber;
I've undone and edit of yours. It was fairly provocative, don't you think? That being said, I'll do no more w.r.t. it should you (or anyone else) decide to put your "child grooming" comment back.
Cheers big ears,
brenneman 06:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(sigh)...(shrugs shoulders) yeah, fair enough. We'll stick to the subject, though I am getting less confident of all aprties accepting consensus in debates outside AfD and FAC...for amusement have a look at Talk:Werewolf#Merger_proposal - at what point do I close this as consensus/no consensus or how %#%(&%%*& long do I leave it open....(jumps back to original topic in stream-of-consciousness typing) I can't chase these Monty orginal sources, I have tried to find a psych definition of pederast but it appears to be treated synonymously with pedophilia or not mnetioned at all in any psych material I have found. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vampire

An astute observation about vampires in movies: "I Vant To Upend Your Expectations". --JayHenry (talk) 14:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice little read that, need to keep it up me sleeve for those befanged daughter articles was gonna get round to doing for a featured topic sometime...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An even better one: A Vampire's Life? It's Really Draining. --JayHenry (talk) 04:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gawd, gotta get 'round to making all teh befanged stuff a Featured Topic at some stage, a more immediate one is critters in my garden what make drive my dog crazy and make him bark at 5AM...Laughing Kookaburra, Rainbow Lorikeet, Willie Wagtail (FA), Brown Rat (in neighbour's compost bin), Superb Fairy-wren (we..ell, they don't make him bark but they should be included for all-round cuteness)....the first two species have tunnelled a hole in my 6m high date palm and littered the patio with crap. Stupid pooch wants to catch them...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BLP cases

If you're searching for cases related, I think two of the more important are the Badlydrawnjeff case and the Footnoted quotes case. Footnoted quotes isn't really about BLP content, but it established the "special enforcement" provisions that relate specifically to BLP. The Matthew Hoffman case also wasn't directly about BLPs, but it did get into how we deal with BLP-like problems involving editors and administrators who edit with their real names. Fair amount of interesting discussion in the workshop and on the proposed decision talkpage, although you'll have to wade through neck-deep crap to find it.

Going through the closed cases page, here are some links:

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Sarah_Palin_protection_wheel_war (wheel war on the protection of a high profile BLP)
Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Footnoted_quotes (special enforcement provisions)
Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Bluemarine (The subject of the case was also the subject of a BLP, Bluemarine edited the article about him almost exclusively and the issues discussed related to his conduct and the leeway given to an article subject)
Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Privatemusings (only tangentially related to BLP, mostly "conduct on BLPs" and no new principles that I'm aware of)
Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Jeffrey_Vernon_Merkey (same basic issue as Bluemarine, subject of a BLP editing Wikipedia)
Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff (prohibits admins from undeleting content removed as violating BLP without full discussion with deleting administrator)
Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Daniel_Brandt_deletion_wheel_war (More internal drama than anything else, but is specifically about the deletion of a BLP)

Those I think are the big cases that deal with BLPs in 2008 and 2007. I'm sure I'm missing one or two, but if you look into them I'm sure any major principles articulated are cited to previous cases if they aren't new. I didn't follow arbitration prior to 2007, and the descriptions aren't very in depth, so I'm not completely sure which if any of the pre-2007 cases apply. I don't recall any being major factors in the above decisions. Avruch^T 00:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, much appreciated. My free time is frustratingly evaporating ATM...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Garden/WikiCup

Ohai Casliber, I see that you are listed towards the top of this page, which means you have experience with article writing and expanding articles -- getting them featured. I'd like you to check out the WikiCup, beginning in January for the fourth cup. aye matthew ✡ 23:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh crud, another competition..hmmmm..nice design.........have to ruminate on this one...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Christmas Meetup

G'day all - I'm hoping that I might persuade you along to a Wiki christmas celebration / meetup on december 18th :-) - The meetup regulars are a friendly bunch, and we're very much hoping to get a few new folk along to chat about all things Wiki (and there are apparently some exciting things in the pipeline! Come along to find out a bit more ;-) - you can sign up here - and do feel free to edit that page with any more ideas or suggestions too :-)

Hope to see you there - I've heard a rumour that the first drink is on the highest placed Australian in the current arbcom elections.... Privatemusings (talk) 23:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)ok, so I started that rumour too....[reply]

Bonsai

Very cool idea. But...(a) what species, and (b) is that Ganesha? Guettarda (talk) 17:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ficus rubiginosa. We get seedlings of that and Ficus macrophylla popping up everywhere. In a playground near me there is a Ficus obliqua that I am trying to collect seed off as it has both (a) small leaves and (b) buttressed roots..Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gavin.collins RFC/U

Hello. A request for comment on user conduct has recently been filed regarding Gavin.collins. Since you have been involved in the dispute regarding his disruptive edits, I thought that you would want to know. You can see the RFC/U here. Thank you. -Drilnoth (talk) 21:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good one, thanks. BOZ (talk) 03:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sound therapy

Better is: this for those who do (its great); this for the feckers who don't (it tries hard but is just absolute art rubbish). And this for the vid game FAC'r. (last one was a big comp., so have mercy, maybe.) Ceoil (talk) 02:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...interesting, I seem to like more tuneful things as I get older...this (or this 93 remix) was a great Australian band, but you could only get their stuff on import in Oz as it was all produced O/S. Great zen/karma/relaxing/unearthly....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did like the 93 remix more...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 93 remix more? Oh dear oh dear oh dear. Dude you are an unculitvated snob, read [7], and join be for some cherry later on this afternoon, when I can sneer whith what I feel like is an equal ;0 Ceoil (talk) 02:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, when one is jumping around on a dancefloor rollicking away anyway, and nowadays my crammed life and sleep deprivation also does prefer music with a little adrenaline (or epinephrine bleerrghh horrid word) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Tres funny website. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind deleting The Raft of the Medusa so I can page move Raft of the Medusa. Thanks. Ceoil (talk) 12:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One last favour, and I will never darken you door again. Wikipedia is telling me "The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text." So I suppose I need your super powers again. Also the move reason should be In line with the common English title and the original French, WP's dislike of "The" not withstanding. Thanks for letting me push my luck! Ceoil (talk) 13:02, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Thank you. Ceoil (talk) 13:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My ACE vote

No, I'm not going to embarrass myself further by telling you whom I was mistaking you for; let's just say that it's someone whose username is sort of (but not very) similar to yours and that I'm not very good with names in RL. It was, however, unconscionable of me not to investigate my confused recollections before firing off that vote. I really have to learn to stay off WP when I'm tired and have a couple of glasses of wine in me. Again, I apologize. Deor (talk) 02:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehehe, nevermind. :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your candidacy

Thank you for providing a response to my question, however, I feel that it is incomplete. I request that you review your answer and address the other 3 parts of the question (I've made this request underneath your response too). Cheers, Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have to run off now - wil answer i a few hours. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - you answered my questions very promptly, which is very much appreciated. Hopefully the other candidates who were asked these questions can follow suit. Cheers again, Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No trouble at all, thought provoking as I had been mulling over some of that for the past four weeks and my idea is slowly crystallising :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Salangbato

You were involved in a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salangbato, Philippines regarding this barangay's notability. Currently, there is merge discussion at Talk:Salangbato#Merger proposal. Your input would be appreciated.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 04:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh whoa...a really cool idea this one

Hello there, Casliber! Today's your lucky day, because you have new messages at L'Aquatique's talk page.

Creepy grinning smilie

You can remove this notice at any time by removing this template.

Amanita muscaria

Its actually not looking too bad, had a wee go at it. What's the deal with the references on that page, I been adding them with cite templates but most seem to be in another format, hope I'm not making more work for someone. What about this?[8] its not often I get to say to an Australian, we are better than you at rugby league :). Mr Bungle | talk 00:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm..they should be in cite format. I did much of this a really long time ago, wiki-wise, so there is all sorts of stuff need tweaking. Great sprucing up so far..I really want to fix up the pop culture stuff somehow, there should be some references out there...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shrooms

he he, you last post on Sandy's talk sounds like a request to me. Will do, glad to help. Ceoil (talk) 00:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! I found a cool haiku too...(will get it on the article talk apge later) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Northern River Otter:Peer Review

Hello Casliber.

I was referred to you by Ceranthor (talk) on the note that you had copy-editing skills that could help me during the peer review process. I have been working on the Northern River Otter article in hopes that I could ultimately promote it to FA status. It's in its beginning stages, but I'm confident that goal can be achieved by utilizing the expertise of experienced Wikipedia users. I would be delighted if you could stop by sometime and provide some feedback on peer review or assist with the editing process.

Thank you and best regards, --Wikitrevor (talk) 02:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assistance Casliber. I appreciate your edit contributions and valuable advice. I'll be sure to integrate your suggestions into the whole refinement process for Northern River Otter.

Best regards, --Wikitrevor (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AUS 200 GA drive

Last year we managed to pull off the century by the end of the year. What do you think about this year? We're on 178! You're one of our trump cards. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ack, we're trying to get 50 bird FAs and 50 GAs by he end of the year too, plus I need to return a book I borrowed on Amanita muscaria..ah well, I can do some Australian bird GAs and get two for the price of one... hehehehe Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Premature) Toldja

I, for one, welcome our new arbcom overlord. I'd like to remind them that as a trusted partner infuriator I can be helpful in rounding up editors to toil in their underground FA factories. Eusebeus (talk) 05:32, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hahaha - all TV episodes are equal, but some are more equal than others....anyway here is a popular culture ref I intend adding to Amanita muscaria - classic paintings, Dodson, cultural refs of real pathos/kudos/bathos as well as super mario bros. Ewven got a haiku on the talk page...hopefully this is an article which can show what a good pop culture section can be..as long as I can find the damn scholalry refs!!! PS: The other seed for the arbcom was seeing it on Brenneman's page I think (I tohught if he could do it, so could I I guess...

I have been very flattered by the supports (and even some of the opposes!) from the deletion-minded crew. Anyway, it ain't over yet so I won't count my chickens just yet...(tangential rambling swtiched off now) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gross and yuck

This kind of fungus is why I think shrooms are disgusting. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 19:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing/BLP

Hello, Special:RecentChangesLinked/Category:Living_people is useful for tracking edits to BLPs, if you want to incorporate it into your suggestion at Wikipedia:Improving referencing efforts. WP:CATSCAN can also be used to find BLPs with referencing issues. Regards, Skomorokh 02:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm interesting...thanks for those. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Skomorokh, I am sure I saw a summary page somewhere...or maybe my memory is playing tricks on me...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A summary page of what exactly? There's a collection of BLPs up for deletion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Living people, but I don't think that's what you mean... Skomorokh 17:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wally Grout

Hehehe, my mother has a biography of him lying around at her place, so there is an easy DYK in a few days...(He was my grandmother's favourite player) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All the way to GA no doubt? YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 08:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

errr mebbe...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:14, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot

Thanks a lot for the barnstar; but my contribution was very minor compared to others in MDD. Anyway; it has finally become a FA and it has been a great team work. I hope we cross again soon in other articles. Best regards--Garrondo (talk) 08:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but it was crucial at a time when my resolve was flagging....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Jack Merridew ban review motion

The above-linked ban review has been closed and a motion passed. Jack Merridew (talk · contribs) is unblocked, conditional to the restrictions and mentorship arrangement set out in the motion, available in full at this link. The three mentors assigned are Jayvdb (talk · contribs), Moreschi (talk · contribs) and yourself.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Daniel (talk) 10:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jack Merridew recently posted this. This seems uncivil in its insulting usage "Jeers". It also seems an inappropriately inflammatory topic which, due to its dramatic nature, seems likely to get Jack straight back into more trouble. I'm not sure what is best done about this but started here since you are his mentor and somewhat familiar to me. If you would prefer me to report the incident elsewhere, please advise. Colonel Warden (talk) 14:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly wasn't going to use 'cheers', given the context. Also, I'm considering writing up a 'view', but have more important things going. Jack Merridew 15:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AP Biology Project

I very sorry to say that my student editing Macaroni Penguin has opted out of the course. I had hopes on this one; in that the topic was within reasonable scope. Hopefully, her edits lead to improvement on the article, even though she fell far short of GA status. It is unfortunately typical to have students WP out of the program - it is rigorous and so many base there aptitude and interest in Biology on The Animal Planet. The reality of molecular biology, cell physiology, etc.. tends to take a toll every year. Thank you for adopting her; I hope this will not discourage you from participating in other such projects. Respectfully - Jim Butler Croatan HS --JimmyButler (talk) 16:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's fine. I got a monograph book on penguins for it and some other articles...and discovered it may be combined with Royal Penguin anyway, so I was unsure how to proceed anyway (and got sidetracked!). Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well... ignore the man behind the curtain (me). LNG123 (talk · contribs · count) / Topic: Macaroni Penguin does intend to pursue this topic. I'm pleased in that the content of the article has increased dramatically however,do you perceive a problem with species designation? --JimmyButler (talk) 15:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK next queue

Hi there, decided to drop you a note because you're the first DYK admin who appears to be online right now. Would you mind moving the T:TDYK hooks to queue #1 (the next one)? There's no queues filled right now, and I was just slightly worried that if nobody prepared it there'd be nothing for the bot to move, since the next update is less than two hours from now. I appreciate it, thanks :-) Jamie^☆S93 03:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aargh! I am just going out the door. I will be back in an hour. It is mid-afternoon here..will see what I can do tehn if no-one else has. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:15, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heck, it has all changed!! Need to run. back in an hour when I can try to fiogure it out. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I meant to say T:DYK/N (the next update's hooks). Thanks anyways! I'll see if somebody else can possibly do it before you can get back, just to be sure that the update is prepared. Cheers, Jamie^☆S93 03:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Looks like Juliancolton has done it. Thanks for your time, though. :-) Jamie^☆S93 03:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's good, as I am in and out all arvo/ Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:56, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

an inappropriate userbox

see: User:UBX/HatesUselessTaggers and WP:NPA, WP:AGF and WP:VANDAL.

So, mindless is a personal attack, as is the name of the template. The whole theme is a failure to AGF and is at odds with WP:VANDAL and WP:BATTLEGROUND. The thing should be deleted. IMNSHO, of course. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:UBX/HatesUselessTaggers

Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page width

Hi, Casliber. Your talk page width is about one and a half times the width of my PC's screen, which makes it a pain to read. Do you know why this is? If so, would you consider fixing it, please? Axl ¤ [Talk] 23:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at this. The problem remains even if all your talk text is removed, so it is part of your talk page skin. I started digging through the code, but gave up in disgust when I discovered you're using tables for layout; or rather, mixing tables with block elements in inscrutable ways. You should invite your mentee to have a squizz: from my interactions with him at Wikisource, it would seem that he is da man when it comes to this stuff. Hesperian 23:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this is weird as it wasn't doing this yesterday...you are right I will ask Jack....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:48, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mushrooms

I'm still wrapped up in the Milton fallout. However, I believe I removed your message a while back without noticing. I'm not sure where it went, but was there anything that you needed? Ottava Rima (talk) 00:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, because I linked BorgQueen about it: this. I believe such radical changes that alter common definitions and standard procedure (procedure that suddenly changed from my 40+ previous articles DYKed before) without a large community consensus is highly inappropriate. I also feel that there is an inherent bias from the fact that he established the guidelines. I am also troubled by many non-admin trying to determine what is selected directly to the mainpage, as admins are the ones responsible for the content, and they are selected because of community trust. There are so many issues happening that this is all getting out of hand. I've only been gone from DYK for two weeks and it seems like everything went backwards. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the ref was interesting but superseded. Many thanks for looking :) - I have to read a bit more to see where else to look for information. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the literary criticism doesn't discuss it. If you were correct, I think the distinguishing of the shroom came out too late for criticism to catch up. It would be an interesting topic for a New Historicist who is trying to discuss drug use and social class structures. But I don't think anything has come up. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I took a stab at google and I found this: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. They really add a lot more books to google every day. Some of them are just a tiny note about it, but the context is interesting if you can find a copy of them. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note, those are the ones that mention Goldsmith. I don't know which ones you have listed already, I just wanted to include those that I found that seem to really discuss him to any length. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I have none of those - some googlebooks are in these funny tantalising fragments while others have huge chunks. I can get to Am Jo psychiatry easy enough. Thanks for the heads up. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:01, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question on my article

I am having some trouble uploading pictures for my article I have been working on and was wondering if you could help me... Here are the links if you can: [9] or [10]

--Dondevoy01 (talk) 03:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NB: I have reformatted the above links to prevent page widening.

Cas, it is apparent that you are using the retarded browser; please fix this. Cheers, Jack Merridew 03:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aha. I edit from about six or seven different locations, some of which I do not have control over what browser is used. Certainly, when I do, I do indeed use firefox. Was less enamoured of thunderbird after it crashed (norton antivirus tagged and deleted the whole inbox as infected and I lost lots of emails, many moons ago). Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:20, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carry a flash drive w/Firefox and install it as needed! I also use Thunderbird; it's great. I've been using it and FF since beta-times. Recent versions support filtering on an individual email-basis by anti-virus systems. You may well have had something quite nasty aboard; a good reason to use gmail and allow it to serve as a first level of defense and filtering. fyi, I'm not a Norton fan. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, have switched to Kaspersky. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK template

Hey Calisber, regarding this edit...I'm glad to see you liked the template! It's still very much a work in progress and there are still a lot of issues we're trying to resolve (such as making it less confusing/intimidating for new contributors), so if you have any thoughts on things you didn't like about it, things that could be improved, etc., you are more then welcome to share them at my page or at Template talk:DYKsuggestion! Also, by the way, [premature] congratulations on your performance in the ArbCom elections. —Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:06, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Using yer connections...?

Hey BL, did you ever think of contacting someone like Richie Benaud and asking if they wanted to donate some "off-cut" photos to wikipedia? May be a good way to get some images of players from 1960s anyway. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a little bit recently, that I met and talked to Dr Bernard Whimpress, the curator of the Adelaide Oval museum and Gideon Haigh at a cricket mini-conference. Dr Whimpress did ask me to explain what WP was about and perhaps give a talk about it to the Australian Society of Sports Historians, although GH chortled, perhaps sardonically. when I metnioned that his work was quoted on WP! Nevermind, we'll see what happens as I've been told that my blogpost about Jack Iverson was passed onto GH. I wonder if it was wel reeived though. Also apparently Roger Wills teh ABC radio commentator goes to the ASSH although not when I was there this month. Perhaps I can twist his arm lol. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:53, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i will keep me fingers crossed...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:46, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DE

Hi, just a quick note to say I think your answer to my question concerning DE is perceptive - aqnd I hope you will make specific constructive concrete suggestions on the DE talk page, or help edit it to the point where it could be a viable policy. One comment, though, concerning the proposal you forwarded that got shot down: I think the flaw with your proposal is that it as an attempt to create a litmus test to identify "disruptive editors" i.e. a class of people. I think any such attempt however well intended will draw a lot of fire. I think a better approach is to come up with criteria for patterns of disruptive editing (i.e. that seeks to classify patterns of edits rather than kinds of editors) because I think this can be applied with more flexibility and take into account varying contexts. Slrubenstein | Talk 01:45, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, so far I have been doing mainly article writing, and it was a first attempt, and alot of editors whose editing patterns I was pointing out were around to comment. They have remembered it too for this arb election. Agree about taking a step back to look at the overview and focus on editing rather than editor. We'll get there ;) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help at DYK

Hi Casliber. I was wondering if you could move the next update page at DYK to Queue 1. It has been six hours since the last update and no-one else seems to be around. \ / (⁂ | ※) 00:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK...

…that there are other options to facing the humiliation of surrender? Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, what's the proper way to {{Cite book}}, or whatever for a Google scan such as this? I've read this book, but it was a borrow; I could probably get it again, next week.

A Short History of Bali: Indonesia's Hindu Realm‎ - Page 106

by Robert Pringle

It's already mentioned a few times on en:wp; here Dang Hyang Nirartha, for example.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Screw that; I just bought a new copy for only Rp385,000. It's a good book and will come in handy. Also, my friend Charles has loaned his copy out, again. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They have added a nifty citation add-on to edit tools - look to top right of edit box. great for inline refs. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This? <ref>Insert footnote text here</ref>

It's easier to just type. I added a bunch of cite books where above book was already being used. There really should be a better mechanism for using one cite book (et al) with different page arguments. And I wish Jonathan's WPCite tool worked with FF3. I also added a list item per your suggestion. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:04, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No no, when you open up a edit-text box, the right-most tab just above it is citation. click on it. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, and it generates the above boilerplate. I don't use most of those buttons. Jonathan's tool generated an entire, filled-in, cite template when you invoked it on some other website (right-click…); read page titles, meta tags, and filled in the fields pretty well. But it's broken, now (i.e. FF3 API changed). Cheers. Jack Merridew 12:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK…

…that Category:Subdistricts of Indonesia should have over 5,000 articles in it? Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tired

I'm tired of these DYK double standards put forth by Art's supporters. It really needs to end. It was never like this until they started rewriting everything this summer. This was written because they keep redefining what is "prose". Prose meant the body of the text, including everything encyclopedic. But no, quoting your sources no longer counts. Quoting the author on his work no longer matters. Hell, they try to discount sections that are merely "similar" to another page. No more background for literature, that's too much like the biography, even if they are different! This really needs to end. I'm tired of this. It really needs to stop. The double standards need to be erased. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a mild/moderate influenza-like viral illness at the moment (in December????? weird, we had a cold snap recently but me having a cold in summer is ridculous but tehre you go...). This is making my head spin. I may make a point, would it have been simpler to ask for a WP:IAR on quotes? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This was the page. See how the quotes are used? Very critical info and hard not to use it. Ottava Rima (talk) 06:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, my wording would promote more science articles that rely on charts and such for content. Ottava Rima (talk) 06:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed this thread; have a Hot Lemon at Dewa Warung, it'll clear things right up. Or a Ginger Jive at Iggy's. Cheers, Doc Merridew 07:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK Ottava, I see what has happened. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be based on reinterpreting the word prose and the word new. New merely meant that the article was either expanded, or just created. Now its being used to say the content in the article must be "new". As I pointed out, this completely goes against the concept of WP:OR in principle, would remove any ability to rely on important quotes, on excerpts, etc, and would destroy connections to other pages. But the biggest problem is that the "new" is not contained, meaning that they say it must be new, but if you expand the page 5x and still count the original content, you only actually expanded the page 4x. The fact that this was never a problem and that many of my pages were passed without this ever being an issue only verifies that this is a new phenomena and should be dealt with. 4 other people agreed that the "unwritten rules" were problematic, and three believed in my wording, yet they closed the discussion, Gato threatened Rlevse for his comment, and now he is threatening to "deal" with me because I called him out on having no basis for his actions. This is very problematic. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the pages were already going through on IAR and people still caused a dispute. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection

Hiya, in response to your message at my talkpage,[11] are you sure you got the right person? I have no idea what you're talking about. --El on ka 21:19, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the problem is someone edit warring on a page (i.e. Banias) (WRT the Ashley Kennedy3 incident), and you think they will use an IP and continue to edit war on a page while logged out, then consider blocking the person (and not IP) and semi-protecting the page. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

You may only have received 92%, but you are a 100% in my eyes. Haha. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 00:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Casliber's Day!

User:Casliber has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Casliber's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Casliber!

Peace,
Rlevse
~

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.

You were on my list for this anyway, but you get today because I salute anyone who can survive an en wiki arbcom election and stay over 90%! You may one day regret being so successful ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 00:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

+Me, too. R's right, though; you may regret this, the squabbles aren't over birds; it's more like a blood sport. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:56, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!

Wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy, but couldn't happen to a nicer guy!

Well done!

I'm sure Wiki will benefit, but I hope we look after you well enough that you don't suffer for your generosity.

Happy Cas Liber day! :D

Alastair Haines (talk) 01:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehehe, thanks all, more later, gotta eat... :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:12, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

It's practically a done-deal now — congratulations, Cas. It's great to see you there. And on the note of whether or not your content contributions will suffer, I am of the opinion that you're a benefit to the site however you opt to assist. Even if you aren't as active in content (it would most definitely be missed), it's still clear you'd have changed priorities, and I find it appropriate to encourage that.

You're a fair, intelligent, and uncontroversial editor and administrator, and I'm sure you'll do great on the ArbCom. Master&Expert (Talk) 07:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^ Letter is script and looks like a Russian и.
^ Maimonides, Guide for the perplexed, Book III ch.48. Can be viewed online at http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp184.htm

[1] Letter is script and looks like a Russian и.

[2] Maimonides, Guide for the perplexed, Book III ch.48. Can be viewed online at http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp184.htm

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 594: / Line 594: @@
 ==Happy {{{nickname|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>PAGENAME}}}}}'s Day!==
-{| style="border:2px ridge steelblue; -moz-border-radius: 10px; background:#EAF5FF; padding-left: 8px; padding-right: 8px; padding-top: 8px; padding-bottom: 8px;" align=center
+{| style="border: 2px ridge #4682B4; -moz-border-radius: 10px; background-color: #EAF5FF; margin: 0 auto; padding: 8px; text-align: center;"
 |[[Image:Featured article star.svg|150px|none|left]]
 |style="padding-left: 20px; padding-right: 10px; font-family: Comic Sans MS, sans-serif; font-size: 9pt; text-align: center;"|
-'''[[User:{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>PAGENAME}}]]''' has been identified as an '''''Awesome Wikipedian''''',<br>
+'''[[User:{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>PAGENAME}}]]''' has been identified as an '''''Awesome Wikipedian''''',<br />
-and therefore, I've officially declared today as [[User:Rlevse|{{{nickname|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>PAGENAME}}}}}'s day]]!<br>
+and therefore, I've officially declared today as [[User:Rlevse|{{{nickname|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>PAGENAME}}}}}'s day]]!<br />
-For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,<br>
+For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,<br />
 enjoy being the Star of the day, dear {{{nickname|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>PAGENAME}}}}}!
-Peace,<br>[[User:Rlevse|<b><font color="#009900">R<font color="#00AA00">l<font color="#00BB00">e<font color="#00CC00">v<font color="#00DD00">s</font>e</font></b>]]<br><includeonly>~~</includeonly>~<includeonly>~~</includeonly>
+Peace,<br />[[User:Rlevse|<b style="color:#090;">R<span style="color:#0A0;">l<span style="color:#0B0;">e<span style="color:#0C0;">v<span style="color:#0D0;">s</span>e</b>]]<br /><includeonly>~~</includeonly>~<includeonly>~~</includeonly>
 <small>A record of your Day will always be kept [[User:Rlevse/Today/Archive|here]].</small>
@@ Line 610: / Line 610: @@
 You were on my list for this anyway, but you get today because I salute anyone who can survive an en wiki arbcom election and stay over 90%!  You may one day regret being so successful ;-)<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — [[User:Rlevse|<b style="color:#060;"><i>R</i>levse</b>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 00:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
+* +Me, too. R's right, though; you may regret this, the squabbles aren't over birds; it's more like a [[cockfight|blood sport]]. Cheers, [[User:Jack Merridew|Jack Merridew]] 07:56, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 == Congrats! ==