User talk:SMcCandlish

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.

As of 2012-11-30 , SMcCandlish is Active.
I'll reply to your message within 24 hours if possible.

WikiStress level

Wikimood
[purge]	[edit]

User talk:SMcCandlish/IP

Unresolved old stuff

Cueless billiards

Unresolved

 – Can't get at the stuff at Ancestry; try using addl. cards.

Categories are not my thing but do you think there are enough articles now or will be ever to make this necessary? Other than Finger billiards and possibly Carrom, what else is there?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Crud fits for sure. And if the variant in it is sourceable, I'm sure some military editor will fork it into a separate article eventually. I think at least some variants of bar billiards are played with hands and some bagatelle split-offs probably were, too (Shamos goes into loads of them, but I get them all mixed up, mostly because they have foreign names). And there's bocce billiards, article I've not written yet. Very fun game. Kept my sister and I busy for 3 hours once. Her husband (Air Force doctor) actually plays crud on a regular basis; maybe there's a connection She beat me several times, so it must be from crud-playing. Hand pool might be its own article eventually. Anyway, I guess it depends upon your "categorization politics". Mine are pretty liberal - I like to put stuff into a logical category as long as there are multiple items for it (there'll be two as soon as you're done with f.b., since we have crud), and especially if there are multiple parent categories (that will be the case here), and especially especially if the split parallels the category structure of another related category branch (I can't think of a parallel here, so this criterion of mine is not a check mark in this case), and so on. A bunch of factors really. I kind of wallow in that stuff. Not sure why I dig the category space so much. Less psychodrama, I guess. >;-) In my entire time here, I can only think of maybe one categorization decision I've made that got nuked at CfD. And I'm a pretty aggressive categorizer, too; I totally overhauled Category:Pinball just for the heck of it and will probably do the same to Category:Darts soon.

PS: I'm not wedded to the "cueless billiards" name idea; it just seemed more concise than "cueless developments from cue sports" or whatever.— SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 11:44, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no "categorization politics". It's not an area that I think about a lot or has ever interested me so it's good there are people like you. If there is to be a category on this, "cueless billiards" seems fine to me. By the way, just posted Yank Adams as an adjunct to the finger billiards article I started.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Cool; I'd never even heard of him. This one looks like a good DYK; just the fact that there was Finger Billiards World Championship contention is funky enough, probably. You still citing that old version of Shamos? You really oughta get the 1999 version; it can be had from Amazon for cheap and has a bunch of updates. I actually put my old version in the recycle bin as not worth saving. Heh. PS: You seen Stein & Rubino 3rd ed.? I got one for the xmas before the one that just passed, from what was then a really good girlfriend. >;-) It's a-verra, verra nahce. Over 100 new pages, I think (mostly illustrations). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 13:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

If I happen to come across it in a used book store I might pick it up. There's nothing wrong with citing the older edition (as I've said to you before). I had not heard of Adams before yesterday either. Yank is apparently not his real name, though I'm not sure what it is yet. Not sure there will be enough on him to make a DYK (though don't count it out). Of course, since I didn't userspace it, I have 4½ days to see. Unfortunately, I don't have access to ancestry.com and have never found any free database nearly as useful for finding newspaper articles (and census, birth certificates, and reams of primary source material). I tried to sign up for a free trial again which worked once before, but they got smart and are logging those who signed up previously. I just looked; the new Stein and Rubino is about $280. I'll work from the 2nd edition:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... I haven't tried Ancestry in a while. They're probably logging IP addresses. That would definitely affect me, since mine doesn't change except once every few years. I guess that's what libraries and stuff are for. S&R: Should be available cheaper. Mine came with the Blue Book of Pool Cues too for under $200 total. Here it is for $160, plus I think the shipping was $25. Stein gives his e-mail address as that page. If you ask him he might give you the 2-book deal too, or direct you to where ever that is. Shamos: Not saying its an unreliable source (although the newer version actually corrected some entries), it's just cool because it has more stuff in it. :-) DYK: Hey, you could speedily delete your own article, sandbox it and come back. Heh. Seriously, I'll see if I can get into Ancestry again and look for stuff on him. I want to look for William Hoskins stuff anyway so I can finish that half of the Spinks/Hoskins story, which has sat in draft form for over a year. I get sidetracked... — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 14:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

It's not IPs they're logging, it's your credit card. You have to give them one in order to get the trial so that they can automatically charge you if you miss the cancellation deadline. Regarding the Blue Book, of all these books, that's the one that get's stale, that is, if you use it for actual quotes, which I do all the time, both for answer to questions and for selling, buying, etc. Yeah I start procrastinating too. I did all that work on Mingaud and now I can't get myself to go back. I also did reams of research on Hurricane Tony Ellin (thugh I found so little; I really felt bad when he died; I met him a few times, seemed like a really great guy), Masako Katsura and others but still haven't moved on them.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, the credit card. I'll have to see if the PayPal plugin has been updated to work with the new Firefox. If so, that's our solution - it generates a new valid card number every time you use it (they always feed from your single PayPal account). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 18:37, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

PayPal Plugin ist kaput. Some banks now issue credit card accounts that make use of virtual card numbers, but mine's not one of them. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 19:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for trying. It was worth a shot. I signed up for a newspaperarchive.com three month trial. As far as newspaper results go it seems quite good so far, and the search interface is many orders of magnitude better than ancestry's, but it has none of the genealogical records that ancestry provides. With ancestry I could probably find census info on Yank as well as death information (as well as for Masako Katsura, which I've been working on it for a few days; she could actually be alive, though she'd be 96).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Sad...

How well forgotten some very well known people are. The more I read about Yank Adams, the more I realize he was world famous. Yet, he's almost completely unknown today and barely mentioned even in modern billiard texts.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Reading stuff from that era, it's also amazing how important billiards (in the three-ball sense) was back then, with sometimes multiple-page stories in newspapers about each turn in a long match, and so on. It's like snooker is today in the UK. PS: I saw that you found evidence of a billiards stage comedy there. I'd never heard of it! — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 15:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Jackpot. Portrait, diagrams, sample shot descriptions and more (that will also lend itself to the finger billiards article).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Nice find! — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 06:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Cite4Wiki

Unresolved

 – New version for FireFox 4.x not released yet.

Updates to this are very welcome, thanks. One thing though - it doesn't seem to use the vertical form any more, could this be fixed (or added as an option) in future releases? pablo 12:28, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Working on it. Probably won't release until FF4.x is out of beta (if it isn't already - haven't checked in a few weeks). Vertical format will be an option, but one that you have to manually enable. Have no had time to work out the code for actually installing an Otions menu and supporting functionality. Going with horizontal layout by popular demand, though I prefer the vertical format myself. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 01:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Every time I think about messing with it other stuff comes out, and or another version of Firefox hits public beta... — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 16:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Look at the main page

Unresolved

 – Katsura News added (with new TFA section) to WP:CUE; need to see if I can add anything useful to Mingaud article.

--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Since you don't appear to have seen this near to the time I left it, it might be a little cryptic without explanation. Masako Katsura was today's featured article on January 31, 2011.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Supah-dupah! That kicks. WP:CUE's (and your?) first TFA, yes?! And yeah I have been away a lot lately. Long story. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 01:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, my first, though I have another in the works (not billiards related). I think François Mingaud could be a candidate in the near future. I really wanted to work it up to near FA level before posting it but another user created it recently, not realizing my draft existed, and once they did realize, copied some of my content without proper copyright attribution and posted to DYK. I have done a history merge though the newer, far less developed content is what's seen in the article now. I'm going to merge the old with the new soon. Glad to see your back.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:15, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

My front and sides are visible too. ;-) Anyway, glad you beat me to Mingaud. I'd been thinking of doing that one myself, but it seemed a bit daunting. I may have some tidbits for it. Lemme know when your merged version goes up, and I'll see what I have that might not already be in there. Probably not earthshaking, just a few things I found in 1800s-1910s books. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 16:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Some more notes on Crystalate

Unresolved

 – New sources/material worked into article, but unanswered questions remain.

Some more notes: they bought Royal Worcester in 1983 and sold it the next year, keeping some of the electronics part.[1]; info about making records:[2]; the chair in 1989 was Lord Jenkin of Roding:[3]; "In 1880, crystalate balls made of nitrocellulose, camphor, and alcohol began to appear. In 1926, they were made obligatory by the Billiards Association and Control Council, the London-based governing body." Amazing Facts: The Indispensable Collection of True Life Facts and Feats. Richard B. Manchester - 1991[4]; a website about crystalate and other materials used for billiard balls:[5]. Fences&Windows 23:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll have to have a look at this stuff in more detail. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 15:54, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I've worked most of it in. Fences&Windows 16:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Cool! From what I can tell, entirely different parties held the trademark in different markets. I can't find a link between Crystalate Mfg. Co. Ltd. (mostly records, though billiard balls early on) and the main billiard ball mfr. in the UK, who later came up with "Super Crystalate". I'm not sure the term was even used in the U.S. at all, despite the formulation having been originally patented there. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 21:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCite project in development

Hello SMcC, the m:WikiCite project proposal is gaining some interest again. Your insights and suggestions would be welcome. – SJ + 04:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Cite4Wiki and Jetpack

I saw Cite4Wiki mentioned on foundation-l and, on downloading it, noticed that it wanted me to restart and hadn't been updated to the latest Firefox. I'm going to go look at your code, but I thought you might be interested in Jetpack to help you with maintaining the extension since it would mean you wouldn't have to worry about Firefox versions or force people to restart Firefox to get it to run. I happen to be good friends with the guy who runs the project, so even if you aren't interested, I'm going to see what it would take to get Cite4Wiki ported to run there. — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 16:44, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good! It needs work. For one thing, it needs a proper settings window that allows you to set options like whether to use vertical or horizontal formatting. I never did figure out how to do that (previous author apparently didn't either). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 23:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source code repository somewhere? I'd like to work from that if I could. — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 00:18, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Not yet, but good idea. I still have a SourceForge account, so I guess I can use that. Is everyone using Git these days? They offer Git, SVN and Mercurial but not CVS any longer. Looks like I need new version control software... Any preference? — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 00:43, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

If you don't have a preference and don't currently use a VCS, then I'm going to say git. Not that it is easy (Torvalds isn't know for creating easy-to-use software), but it is pretty good. And we can pull from each other. I think I can get a repository set up in git hosted by the WMF. I'll probably end up putting it there anyway, unless you have some objections — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 01:07, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

But, now that I think about it, would you mind if I put it in the SVN repo hosted by WMF? I can do that right now. I'm not sure if I can do gerrit right now.

Sure. I honestly don't even use SVN yet; I've been using CVS since the dawn of time. Which of the post-CVS alternatives to use isn't something I have a set mind about. :-) IIRC, the version that's publicly available is stable but missing some stuff I've added to it. I guess I can commit that stuff later as a beta. I haven't touched it in 6 months, so I don't remember where I left off anyway. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 01:15, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, committed. Now, to understand Jetpack. — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 14:53, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, you should apply for Commit_access. — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 15:08, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay. And vice-versa, you should register as a Mozilla add-on developer, so I can give you access to the "official" distribution channel. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 15:15, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Cite4Wiki4Chrome...

Hi there! I was just wondering if a Chrome port of Cite4Wiki was on the cards at all? I tried messing with the source code but I have no real knowledge of JS, XUL and the rest so can't really do anything about it. — Joseph Fox 15:39, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't thought of one, since I just use Firefox. Maybe after the stuff mentioned above is done a port will be easier. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 00:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

---

New stuff

Chapeau

... for this one! Cheers - DVdm (talk) 20:20, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I actually like hats. :-) Your readability tweak was a good idea. I was a little concerned about it myself, but I'm not a cards editor, so I wasn't sure if there was a typical way of making hands more legible. (Also not sure if people conventionally use the card symbols that are available in Unicode, etc.). I do edit a lot of games articles, but almost exclusively in cue sports and related. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 12:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I specially like hats when there's a set of dice under them :-)

Perhaps you don't know, but overhere we use the name chapeau for the cup and, by extension, for the game itself. As you can see here—als je Nederlands een beetje in orde is—, we play an entirely different game with it, a game where one can practice the fine art of subtle bluffing, downright lying, assessing oponents' behaviour, and accurately estimating probabilities. We also play the "Mexican" variant, which is even subtler. Check it out and cheers! - DVdm (talk) 18:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I didn't know that, about the chapeau. I thought you were awarding me a virtual hat. :-) . I am familiar with the bluff game (possibly the Mexican version, since I learned it in California), but have always played that one with regular dice. Anyway, if you like what I did in the English version, certainly feel free to "port" it to the Netherlands Wikipedia. I may be able to work through the Dutch enough to add something about the other variants to the English article here, since it is rather paltry. Heh. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 04:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it was meant as a virtual hat award as well - I had seen a hat on your user page :-)

Porting from there to here could be a bit problematic, as there's not many sources around, alas. - DVdm (talk) 17:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll have to dig through my game encyclopedias and stuff. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 17:45, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, if you find something, please let know. I'd be glad to work on it together. Cheers and happy digging. - DVdm (talk) 20:20, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar comment

Hello. You have a new message at Djathinkimacowboy's talk page.

Don't delete this! -

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For behaving in a genteel fashion, as if nothing were the matter, and for gallantry. --Djathinkimacowboy 03:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Sankyu beddy mush! Hardly necessary for me just behaving properly. Heh. But I appreciate it anyway. I left you a note at your page about that Guidance rename idea. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 04:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Shou ist werie velcum. I think the 'Guidance' name and the way you simplified it into a short statement is very good! And people should give out more barnstars. They are very merited and it isn't as if they cost us anything.--Djathinkimacowboy 10:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Heroic Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For your recent work at WP:MOS: A model of unflagging effort, precise analysis, institutionally broad and historically deep vision, clear articulation, and civil expression under great pressure. Unforgettable. DocKino (talk) 06:14, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I do my best. At this point I'm being attacked on multiple pages in a concerted effort of harassment, and suspect that their goal is to get me to simply quit the project. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 18:17, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Cheers!

		A beer on me!
		for all of the thoughtful posts through the extended discussion at MOSCAPS. I've appreciated it. JHunterJ (talk) 13:52, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank ya verra much! I was thirsty. >;-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 15:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar Creator's Barnstar
		Thank you for your submission of the Instructor's Barnstar. It's now on the main barnstar list. Pinetalk 15:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Keen beans! Thanks.

Capitalization of common names (just a passing comment)

Resolved

 – Just a chat.

While writing a reply to you elsewhere, I happened to look at Murinae. All the English names here are capitalized (which may be ok as it's a list) but equally all the links I followed (about 20 I guess) have capitalized titles. Nothing follows from this either way with regard to policy; it's just an observation. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:09, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

There's a lot of cases like this. It's the sort of mess (and misleading WP:false consensus) to be expected when the guidelines have all been contradicting each other, and certain parties have been going on massive capitalization sprees through thousands of articles. WP:MAMMALS has not advised capitalization of common names, and there is actually an off-wiki explicit convention against it in zoological literature, yet look at the inconsistent mess in categories like Category:Mammals of Africa:

  ...

• Greater spot-nosed monkey
• Greater White-toothed Shrew
• Green monkey
• Grévy's Zebra
• Grey Rhebok
• Grey-cheeked mangabey
• Grey-faced Sengi

  ...

It's farcical and embarrassing. This kind of chaos is what I'm aiming to undo. If we end up with a bunch of bird and winged insect and some plant articles capitalized (for a while or forever) based on a handful of will-not-budge wikiprojects insisting on it, that's workable. Random "capitalize whatever the hell you want, or don't" pandemonium isn't. Anyway, the current prevalence of capitalization in articles on any particular family of organisms isn't evidentiary of anything, other than the effectiveness of WP:AWB to force capitalization on thousands of articles at once. It's actually also evidentiary of when the articles were created, since various pages like WP:MOSCAPS, WP:FNAME, WP:TOL, etc. have at one time or another, mostly in the mid-oughts, advocated for either capitalization as a standard or for wikiprojects making up their own rules as if WP:OWN didn't exist, with some some members of a pro-caps project actively pushing caps on other projects for several years. Over many, many objections, culminating in cries of "enough!" throughout 2007, and MOS adopting an anti-caps default in early 2008 after extensive debates all over the place. Re: "a reply to you elsewhere", I may need a pointer to it; my attention is thinly spread again now that the WT:MOS debate has quieted. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 11:40, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Believe or not, I really wasn't making a point, only noting my surprise that capitalization was so prevalent in mammal articles, which I didn't know. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:33, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I know, and I wasn't meaning to sound like I'm being argumentative with you about it; rather I'm expressing consternation at the mess you've stumbled onto. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 15:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I've also realized very recently, while doing some work on Yucca and its species, that there's a quite common "third style" used in articles, namely to use sentence case style in running text for English names, i.e. always capitalize the first word in an English name but not the rest (unless proper names). I think people do this particularly when they are writing about species where a sizable proportion have proper names as the first element. If you've written e.g. "Similar species include Torrey yucca, Yucatan yucca, Great Plains yucca, Adam's needle, Spanish dagger, Big Bend yucca, Texas yucca", then it seems odd to continue "spoonleaf yucca, soaptree yucca and flaccid leaf yucca" (all actual names in the Yucca article). The effect is to make the few yucca species with English names not starting with a capital letter look less important. It makes me wonder whether the lower-case style shouldn't be more consistent, i.e. decapitalize every part of the name. One of my objections to decapitalizing 'official' names is precisely that there's no reliable source for how to determine what is regarded as a proper name and so left capitalized. However, I guess total decapitalization would be too radical for everyone else, although I think it does actually remove one of the valid objections to the uniform use of this style.

As to where I left a comment, um... I find it hard to remember too. I think it was about merging stuff from fauna naming into the MOS. Anyway, you are definitely right about {{lang-en}} (I've left a comment saying so), however wrong you may be about other things! Peter coxhead (talk) 15:33, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Right, I've also seen that "third style"; it frequently also simply happens by virtue of the fact that people are used to sentence-casing WP article names, e.g. "I was editing Albinism the other day and...", or "[[Pool (cue sports)|pool]]". I'm vastly in favor of decapitalizing all of the name parts, always, except where they are proper nouns (i.e. "spanish dagger" wouldn't be acceptable to very many, I don't think). I'm not sure I've seen many if any cases where it's indeterminate what is or isn't a proper name in a species common name. If/when this arises, I'd go with lower case; burden of proof should be on anyone asserting something that looks like misc. words is actually a proper name. I did find your comments on the WP:FAUNA -> MOS:LIFE merge stuff. Template:Lang-en: I think A. di M. is right that it should be TfD'd. May do it myself. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Dead end

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Dead end. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Cleanup

Resolved

 – Done.

Hello, SMcCandlish. You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:00, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for joining! Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:11, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Surprised I didn't start it myself. :-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 01:19, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:SAL

No one has actually objected to the idea that it's really pointless for WP:SAL to contain any style information at all, other than in summary form and citing MOS:LIST, which is where all of WP:SAL's style advice should go, and SAL page should move back to WP:Stand-alone lists with a content guideline tag. Everyone who's commented for 7 months or so has been in favor of it. I'd say we have consensus to start doing it. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 13:13, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look at the page shortly. Thanks for the nudge. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 23:19, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:CITEVAR

Resolved

 – Just a chat.

Having had some bad experiences trying to improve citations (as I saw it), I was interested in your comments on WP:CITEVAR here. A small group of editors can utterly control referencing on a given page using WP:CITEVAR; arguing that a change is an improvement has no effect because of the absolute way WP:CITEVAR is worded. For example, User:Stemonitis and I once attempted to add links between Harvard style refs in a References section and the full citations in a Bibliography section. No changes were made to the visible style on the page other than the links. This was reverted (after a lot of work by Stemonitis) on the grounds that the editors didn't like bits of blue all over the Harvard style references and that WP:CITEVAR allowed them to object on these grounds (which I had to agree it does). They didn't argue that linking Harvard refs to full citations wasn't useful to readers; just that the 3 or 4 who had worked on that article didn't like the visual appearance of links. I found, and still find, their ability to argue in this way outrageous.

(There is a relationship to our other debate; I believe it is unreasonable not to allow editors to adopt different, but consistent, styles for the names of species, when they are free to adopt any consistent style of referencing whatsoever.) Peter coxhead (talk) 11:36, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what to do about CITEVAR. I find it problematic too. Even if I were a specialist-style maven, I'd have a problem with it. It would allow, for example, someone who is a cultural anthropologist to accidentally be the first to create an article, e.g. a miserable little stub, on an archaeological topic, and use anthro citation style, which differs from archaeo style in a number of ways (going by what the majority of journals in these related but distinct and sometimes antagonistic fields mostly do consistently within those fields and inconsistently between them), and then stubbornly prevent archaeo editors to later fix it, just to be an ass. (I'm not picking on anthros; I have a degree in cultural anthropology). I guess just bring it up in a talk discussion and propose more moderate wording. WP:ENGVAR went through some adjustment too (it's not just "we got here first"; there are some common sense things in it, like close national ties). CITEVAR probably needs some common sense, too. My personal feelings on the subject is that difficult, geeky Harvard referencing should be deprecated, but Hell will probably freeze over and thaw again before that happens. >;-) Anyway, if you raise a thread about it, I'd be happy to comment. (I.e., I'm requesting notice, so it wouldn't be canvassing, if anyone were to accuse). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 11:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm still thinking about raising it at the talk page; it needs some thought about how to make WP:CITEVAR more reasonable. There's clearly no point in arguing against a particular style, however "geeky", because supporters of that style will just defend it endlessly and will be able to produce reliable sources. What it needs, as a minimum, is some way of at least saying that readers' interests must be taken into account and that styles suitable for an online encyclopaedia are not necessarily the same as those suitable for paper publications. Um...

One issue I'm not sure about is the prohibition on using templates when editors don't like them. I've never yet worked on a significantly sized article that didn't use templates that didn't have inconsistent visible styles. I'm not sure why an editor shouldn't be allowed to convert a reference to a template, provided that it didn't change the visible referencing style. Or is this too contentious to be worth even raising? Peter coxhead (talk) 12:25, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd raise it. If it doesn't affect the output, it sounds like filibustering just to be stubborn, and it's worth addressing that. PS: I didn't mean to imply all I'm thinking about is "I hate Harvard style". I understand the more general points you are making; I was mixing agreement with that, on the one hand, with personal consternation at ref harv, just to vent, on the other. Heh. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 12:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Self redirect

Resolved

 – Fixed.

Glossary of South Asian economics is a self redirect as I do not believe this is where you wanted that redirect to point to. Please fix. Thanks. -- A Certain White Cat ^chi? 11:45, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Good catch! — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 11:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion

FYI

 – Just a pointer.  Declined – I don't have an opinion on that one.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

More in reference to slang

Resolved

 – Said what I needed to. RfC is ongoing; up to the community now.

Hi SMcCandlish--

I apologize for bothering you with another question directly related to User talk:SMcCandlish/Archive 63#Question re: slang as opposed to colloquialism, and again involving the same editor.

This time the specific question pertains to this wording, which has devolved into an edit war at Erection:

• "Erections during sleep or when waking up are known as nocturnal penile tumescence, informally called morning wood or morning glory."

Here I believe that the phrase "informally called" is both inaccurate and misleading, and that these two terms (of many other such, e.g. "piss hard-on" or "piss proud", etc) are slang. In addition to the article's history of reverts, there is also discussion on the talk page. I wonder if you might have any thoughts on this question. As always, thanks for any advice you may have. Milkunderwood (talk) 03:16, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Your dissection was pretty conclusive, but the same editor has reverted again. Also again at nocturnal penile tumescence - see history there. Milkunderwood (talk) 22:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The RfC should resolve this. And WP:3RR exists for a reason. Even anons from WP:MED are reverting him, so there's clearly no consensus to push his couple of favorite slang terms as encyclpedic content. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 05:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Smallcaps all

FYI

 – Just a pointer.  Done – commented at TfD.

Template:Smallcaps all has been nominated for merging with Template:Smallcaps. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. This template Template:Smallcaps all is effectively the same as Template:Sc, the merge debate of which you voted on last month. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 19:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 06:28, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list

FYI

 – Just a pointer.  Declined – I don't have an opinion on that one.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:16, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Quick question

Resolved

 – Just a chat.

I'm currently expanding Cactus and trying to keep it in American English, which isn't always easy for me. I think the word I would naturally spell as "multi-petalled" should be "multipetaled", although a Google search reveals American sources with either or both of the hyphen and double-l. Am I right? Peter coxhead (talk) 20:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Zoiks. I've lived in the UK, the US and Canada, so I sometimes forget. Okay, the Associated Press and New York Times style guides use "labeled, labeling" and "traveled, traveling", so "petaled" would seem to be in order. My America-centric spell-checker actually prefers the ll spellings, FWTW, but red-flags all other Briticisms/Canadianisms like "colour" and "centre". Then again, Mozilla isn't a spelling authority. >;-) For "multi[-]", the trend is to fully compound it when it's something in normal use, like "multplayer", "multipage", "multitasking", "multinational", judging from usage in the Chicago Manual of Style, but hyphenation remains very common (I see "multi-player" quite frequently), especially for uncommon, neologistic constructions ("multi-zoned", "multi-screen", "multi-speed") and before vowels ("multi-orgasmic"). "Semi[-]" and "non[-]" seem to follow a similar pattern. Anyway, I'd go with "multi-petaled" in this case, though I think any of the four possible spellings would be parseable by all readers. If someone with a bug up their booty about hyphens changes it to "multipetaled", oh well. My actual preference is the same as yours, and I regularly use the double-l. But, I learned to read and write in England, so what can I say? Actually, I don't think I use it consistently. I prefer "labelled", but "traveller" looks funny-to me... — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 21:07, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It's interesting that I too would be happier to write "traveler" than "labeled", even though both are wrong in British English; odd... My daughter now lives in Canada, where I go regularly and see what seem to me very mixed spellings (e.g. "colour" but "tire"), which doesn't help my feeling for what's American and what not! Peter coxhead (talk) 21:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Canada: My rule of thumb was that if it was something older than the Victorian era, go with the British spelling; newer, use American. Seemed to match majority Canadian practice most of the time, though that practice is not entirely consistent nationwide. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 06:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Heads up, Pass a Method in disguise

Resolved

 – Not interested in making this personal.

SMcCandlish, take note that Pass a Method may start to edit under a different account and that therefore any future conflict you have with a "new editor" over things you have combated against Pass a Method in the past may, in fact, be Pass a Method. See here. If it comes to that point, you probably already know that you will have the right to report him for inappropriate use of WP:Fresh start. 222.45.72.124 (talk) 23:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

FYI I've received a similar message on my own talkpage. Personally I'm only concerned about adolescent gobbledy-gook in sex-related articles rather than who may have posted it. What's more puzzling to me is all these anonymous IP posts made from 222.45.72.124, 50.16.131.13, 49.212.13.55, 107.20.63.220, 50.16.83.112, and others, that I'm finding on my page, at the Erection article, and on User:Pass a Method's talkpage, including a long discussion of his being blocked (which has been deleted from his page). I have not read all of this last, but User: HJ Mitchell appears to have imposed the block. To me, it's just an ugly situation that I'd prefer not to be involved in, as I suppose you probably also feel. Milkunderwood (talk) 01:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Yep, that sums up my feelings on the matter. As long as the article is good, all is well. I'm generally only concerned with user behavior when it's outright vandalistic in articles or is grossly disruptive in policy discussions. POV-pushers in articlespace are inevitable and can be dealt with just by overwhelming their bad edits with good ones. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 06:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Resolved

 – Fixed

Hi. When you recently edited Cue sports techniques, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Phelan (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) 10:42, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Turkish Van

FYI

 – Just a pointer.

I re-wrote the whole article last night to reflect the decision to keep the breed separate from the landrace. Please have a look. pschemp | talk 15:38, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

A vast improvement! — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 10:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Head asplode

Resolved

 – Just a note.

I like the fact that there's now a template called strongbad. Good choice of name. pablo 12:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I hoped it would both amuse and be useful. :-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 17:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:POINT discussion

FYI

 – Just a pointer.  Done – commented at that page.

There is a discussion going on with regards to changes made to WP:POINT.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 16:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 17:28, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Cite doi

FYI

 – Just a pointer.  Done – commented at that RfC.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Cite doi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Donkeys

Might I call to your attention (per your support of WP:USEENGLISH) List of donkey breeds? Montanabw^(talk) 23:05, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Ugh. What a mess. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 23:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Yup and see Talk:North American donkey. However, much as I would love to have you (or really, anyone who is a solid, respected editor) dive into this with both feet as someone neutral and previously uninvolved who can look at the issue and only the issue without bringing in personalities, I will provide a full disclosure: JLAN and I are not the best of friends, and I did file an ANI on him for a different incident. Frankly, I want out of the donkey articles, but the ongoing OR and use of non-English language titles and sources is a headache that needs to be addressed by someone. Most of WPEQ has thrown up their hands. Montanabw^(talk) 17:09, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

While you are doing what you are doing, maybe add donkey and burro to your watchlist and feel free to comment on the merge discussion too? Montanabw^(talk) 19:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

ToC templates

Resolved

 – Solution provided, though I decline to make this type of edit 50 times to that template. >;-)

Hello, I saw you said you created {{Compact ToC}} on its talk page re: the move. Could you do me a favor? That template allows this parameter:

• a= through z=: individually disable particular letters that have no entries.

Could you add such a parameter on {{TOC US states}}? I imagine the documentation would read:

• Alabama= through Wyoming=: individually disable particular states that have no entries.

Much obliged for your efforts, Rgrds. --64.85.216.195 (talk) 12:15, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

What you want to do is just change each state entry that looks like this:

[[#Alabama|Alabama]]

To something that looks like this:

{{{AL|{{{al|{{{Alabama||[[#Alabama|Alabama]]}}}}}}}}}

That would enable the state name or the official two-letter state abbreviation (in upper or lower case) to be used to blank out an entry, e.g. |AL=, to usually more wisely replace it with a non-link, as in |AL=Alabama, or to replace it with something else that makes sense in the context, e.g. |NM=[[#New Mexico Territory|New Mexico Territory]]. The /doc should probably mention and illustrate all three uses. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 13:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

50 times weren't nothin'! Just a bunch of ctrl-c, ctrl-v. I think I got it...now to try it out. Thanks, --64.85.216.195 (talk) 14:22, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

• D'oh! It doesn't seem to include the states if the parameter is left blank. See this old edit for what I mean. --64.85.216.195 (talk) 14:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

....Just so things don't get confused, User:Frietjes took over the reins on this. Thanks for getting me started. Rgrds. --(Dynamic IP, will change when I log off.) 64.85.216.195 (talk) 14:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Expand language

FYI

 – Just a pointer.  Done – commented at this RfC.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Expand language. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

GOCE March drive newsletter

FYI

 – Just project spam.  Declined No time to participate in the drive this month.

Extended content

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graphs Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter. Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far. Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers. Your drive coordinators – Dianna (talk), Stfg (talk), and Dank (talk) To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

– Dianna (talk), Stfg (talk), and Dank (talk)

Refusal of non-controversial EPs

FYI

 – Pointer to another discussion.  Nothing I can do about that.

Re your comment on Template talk:Documentation; I have a similar issue on Template talk:Infobox vandal. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:50, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I've never tried to use an {{editprotected}} for page move before. In your case, file it under WP:RM in non-controversial moves section and it'll get semi-speedily moved if no one objects. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 22:55, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:More plot

FYI

 – Pointer to another discussion.  I was already involved in this one. Heh.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:More plot. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

sfnote

Resolved

 – Just a helpful note.

{{Sfnote}} is not a citation template: it is a typing aid that creates a piped link to link to Help:Shortened footnotes as so: Shortened footnotes. If you escape it with {{tl}}, then it does not work as intended. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:54, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Got it. It works like {{cite xxx}}. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 16:02, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Citation/doc

Saw you updating the doc page. Have not yet gotten around to updating it with {{Citation Style documentation}} yet, so if you want to tackle that. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:22, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't even know that existed. Some of what I've been tweaking in the one place needs to go into this CSdoc template, I would think. Parts of it are also confusing. Like, it says journal has work as an alias, but work has its own entry. The work2 entry says that journal, etc., alias to it. That seems contradictory. And work2's quotation marks vs. italics formatting wouldn't be appropriate for journal, periodical, etc. Hmm... — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 04:57, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

work is used in {{cite web}} and {{cite podcast}}; work2 will be used in {{cite news}} (my updates there were reverted and I am ignoring it until July); journal is used in {{cite journal}}. The concept is to keep the doc on one page where we can keep it consistent and easy to update. I have done a lot of work figuring out how {{citation/core}} and the CS1 templates actually work. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 10:07, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The formatting in work2 still wouldn't seem to be appropriate. Magazine and newspaper titles are italized; the articles in them (title, not work2) are quotation-marked. Am I misunderstanding something again? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 10:13, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

You are right. I can't remember why I did that. It is unused, so I deleted it. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 10:29, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Keen-o. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 10:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks

FYI

 – Pointer to another discussion.  Done I was already involved in this one.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

Resolved

 – Fixed.

Hi. When you recently edited Donkeys in North America, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pedigree (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) 10:10, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Stalev's name

Resolved

 – Not an issue after all.

Hi sorry I just noticed your question about Stalev's name on the Evgeny Stalev page. I wrote Evgeny because his name is written like this everywhere on the web. Also a russian user helped me to the biography and I think he would have spotted the mistake on Stalev's name... I think Evgeny is correct. Bye, sorry for my bad english. --89Slh (talk) 12:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the note. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 16:03, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Help talk:Citation Style 1

Resolved

 – I'm the one who started that RfC.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Help talk:Citation Style 1. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis/Tennis names

Resolved

 – I'm the one who started that RfC.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis/Tennis names. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:16, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I see you know far more about the history of this than I do, but it seems that 2 sincere and well meaning tennis editors are going against about a dozen non-tennis editors and at least one other tennis editor on this insistence on the WP:STAGENAME argument that because ITF and ESPN can't cope with accents, particularly Eastern European accents, we should have article ledes with Sergio Gutiérrez-Ferrol (born March 5, 1989) and known professionally as Sergio Gutierrez-Ferrol, is a tennis player from Spain and so on .... Martha Hernandez, Guilherme Clezar, Sophie Lefevre, Radomir Vasek, Nikola Pilić no idea how many more. Is there some sensible calm rationale way forward here of dealing with the WP:STAGENAME argument in lede separately and first from the more open to question issue of WP:TITLE? In ictu oculi (talk) 08:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I've already shined the light of logic on the arguments raised there, as have plenty of others. If the two in question will not see it, oh well. Two editors don't get to make a consensus. There's a total landslide against their position, so at this point I'd suggest taking that page to WP:MFD for userspacing or deletion. It does not represent a consensus of WP:TENNIS users, and it is written as a guideline, not an essay, so it either needs to get out of "Wikipedia" namespace, be rewritten as an essay, be deleted, or at very least be tagged with {{historical}}. I'd urge deletion, as there isn't actually anything historical about it; it's only been around for a week, and if it's userspaced, its proponents will surely just wait until they think no one's paying attention and move it back to WP-space and continue pushing it. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 10:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation closed

FYI

 – Just a notice.

An arbitration case regarding article titles and capitalisation has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1. All parties are reminded to avoid personalizing disputes concerning the Manual of Style, the article titles policy ('WP:TITLE'), and similar policy and guideline pages, and to work collegiately towards a workable consensus. In particular, a rapid cycle of editing these pages to reflect one's viewpoint, then discussing the changes is disruptive and should be avoided. Instead, parties are encouraged to establish consensus on the talk page first, and then make the changes.
2. Pmanderson is indefinitely prohibited from engaging in discussions and edits relating to the Manual of Style or policy about article titles.
3. Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all pages related to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy, broadly construed.
4. Born2cycle is warned that his contributions to discussion must reflect a better receptiveness to compromise and a higher tolerance for the views of other editors.

For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 23:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

About time. I still resent having been named a party to that case for no reason at all. Nothing in it had anything to do with me. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 06:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Libyan civil war

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Libyan civil war. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: typo

Resolved

 – Just a chat.

Thanks for catching that (it wasn't in my offline draft, so maybe an errant spell check tweaked it :P) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:51, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

No prollem. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 05:51, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:LCCN

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:LCCN. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard

Disregard

 – No such RfC.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Image copyright and permission

Resolved

 – Answered.

Hi, the owner of this image has just filled the form to give the permission to use the image on the article. What should I do now? Can I just re-add the image to the article or I need some other procedure? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Evgeny-stalev-10.jpg --89Slh (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Just adding it back ought to be fine. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 17:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Making a comment

Stale

 – Cat got your tongue?

I'm trying to stay off of Selina's talk page, but I wanted to make a response to you. While her restriction was on editing in the Wikipedia space, no one was really looking over all of her edits making sure of that. The main point of the restriction was to stop her continued arguing about paid editing across the site. Unfortunately, she started up again on Jimbo's talk page, added a COI notice to the CREWE article, and also expanded the Wikipedia:WikiProject Paid Advocacy Watch/Editor Registry page to include people working for GLAM (see from here on down.) It's likely for these reasons that she was blocked, because it's continuing the same behavior as before that made the restrictions necessary in the first place. Silverseren^C 18:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I'm coming at this from a more general perspective than "what did Selina do?". Trying to shut people up for being critical of Wikipedia's stance on CoI, or critical of people abusing Wikipedia's openness – that whole paid editing debate has two very strong opposing viewpoints – absent any showing of genuine bad faith, vandalistic trolling or vicious personal attacks, is a crock. It's vindictive and it makes all of Wikipedia look bad. "Speak your mind much? Come to Wikipedia and get censored!" I'm so tired of sanctimonious, good-ol'-boy cadres of special interest pushers trying to take over the whole project and succeeding bit by bit for the most part. The old-school autocratic model that a) we trust admins, and b) just about anything an admin does is okay and will be enforced by other admins, is going to undermine this project. It's far too easy to become an admin, the position attracts people who want power over other editors far more than it attracts people like me who simply want maintenance tools like being able to do moves over edited redirects or being able to edit protected templates, and it's too hard to get rid of bad-apple admins, especially because most other admins will back up just about anything another admin does, not wanting to threaten their own power. Desysopped admins get the tools back even more easily than new people become admins (it's the "forgive and keep the incumbent" problem we see in politics). Admins are not actually inherently any more trustworthy than anyone else, and the fact that the position carries power of a sort automatically means it attracts people prone to abuse it, just like cops, judges and politicians.

There are only three kinds of admins on the system: Actual workhorses who are trying in genuine good faith to make a better encyclopedia, entrenched wikipoliticians for whom internal WP squabbling is a nearly all-encompassing way of life, and power seekers bent on shutting other people up and making sure that articles and entire categories of articles are at "the right version" for the POV they are pushing. The first are being slowly pushed out by the third, who eventually evolve into a POV-pushing version of the second, combining their worst traits. The number one problem WP faces is crafty WP:POV/WP:OR violators, not vandals. As more and more POV/OR pushers worm their way into admin positions, the ability of the project to collectively prevent bias and unreliability is reduced, step by step, as in the ability to present an actually consistently encyclopedic work instead of a collection of "topic fiefdoms" where POV-pushing, WP:OWNish groups of editors, with admin-empowered ringleaders, act in WP:FAITACCOMPLI concert to dominate "their" topic, in ways that alienate the non-expert readers the encyclopedia actually exists to serve. The various similar cadres that form to "spin" different topics never criticize the others' power abuses, and will even go out of their way to back them up as SOP, for fear of having their own abuses criticized. There's an entire essay at WP:SSF about one common brand of that kind of crap.

All that said, censoring people right off the face of WP because they dare to disagree with the notion that everyone who works in PR is automatically and forever incapable of balanced editing is irrational guilt-by-association nonsense. So is blocking people who have a hard time shutting up about their idea that PR people really can't be trusted. Giving either camp the boot for being argumentative, insistent and unpleasant isn't going to resolve the argument, just makes both sides more entrenched. As for Selina, Jimbo's talk page is not a WP: page, nor is the article about CREWE and its talk page. That leaves her edit to the PAW "editor registry". I'm hard pressed to see that as justification for a 6 month block, other than it just being a "STFU or this will happen to you, too" show of force. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 04:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Except, at least stated by her, her opinion is the exact opposite. She thinks that paid editors can never be trusted ever and shouldn't be allowed to edit at all. While she's entitled to her opinion, the issue is that she's been disruptive with it, including insulting numerous editors with a number of slurs related to paid editing (such as "shills") and this includes singling out editors, such as WWB, who is only a paid editor part of the time and has a separate account for that, but is productive on his own time on his own personal interests with his main account.

So the issue isn't her opinion, but how she's going about expressing it. If she had just been calmly questioning certain things or overseeing edits for neutrality, i'm quite sure none of this would have ever happened. But...she didn't. And i'm sad that that happened. But I suppose, considering her past blocks (including the one for years), not much changed in her editing behavior that led to those blocks in the first place.

In addition, if she was actually a content editor to any extent, people probably would have been more lenient on her. One of the main points of the restriction she was on just a while ago was to make her actually do some content work. From the looks of things, she didn't. So...that's how things have ended up. Silverseren^C 05:42, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I repeat: "Trying to shut people up for being critical of Wikipedia's stance on CoI, or critical of people abusing Wikipedia's openness – that whole paid editing debate has two very strong opposing viewpoints – absent any showing of genuine bad faith, vandalistic trolling or vicious personal attacks, is a crock. ... All that said, censoring people right off the face of WP because they dare to disagree with the notion that everyone who works in PR is automatically and forever incapable of balanced editing is irrational guilt-by-association nonsense. So is blocking people who have a hard time shutting up about their idea that PR people really can't be trusted. Giving either camp the boot for being argumentative, insistent and unpleasant isn't going to resolve the argument, just make both sides more entrenched." It doesn't matter whether she's in the "all PR people are bad" or "all people who hate PR people are bad" camp; that's immaterial.

The block makes it clear to anyone looking that it is about the fact that she has an opinion on an issue that is a hot button for a lot of people, and is pointed and loud about it. Her restrictions were not to stick to civility, or to not air unproven theories about backgrounds and motivations of individual editors, or anything else relating to specific user behaviors that are addressable under policy. They are simply to shut up and go away and be relegated to articespace. Yet there is no policy anywhere authorizing an admin to restrict another editor to editing only articlespace! It's bullshit, and a blatant abuse of admin blocking authority. See latest comments on the thread at her talk page. Actually reasonable remedies with actually policy-conscious rationales have been suggested, and should probably be looked at by some non-involved admins, because this editor, annoying as she may be (if I see another smiley, I'm going to puke) has clearly been vindictively blocked for violating punitive out-of-process sanctions that are grossly un-wiki. Welcome to Wikipedia, the encyclopedia anyone can edit, but only where some random tinpot dictators who are probably undersocialized teenagers have decided you can edit, and how, and only as long as they don't find you personally annoying and want to screw with you just to make a point that they have power and will use it. Sure as hell not what I signed up for. Crap like this makes me seriously question the amout of time and thought and work I've put into this site over the last 6+ years. If there were actually any policy that people had to mostly be productive content editors, most admins, even the good ones, would have to block themselves. Thousands of active editors do very little content editing, just like not everyone in the army shoots guns and not everyone in a hospital is a surgeon. Most very active content editors I've seen become (good) admins are barely content editors at all any longer.

As others have noticed, this particular editor did a lot of pretty interesting research that revealed blatant COI/POV/NOR problems. Her e-personality is grating (mine is too; no WP:KETTLE here, and the world needs no-nonsense, proactive "lead, follow or get out of the way" loudmouths or nothing would ever get accomplished), but what's she's been doing productively suggests we are missing a process here. We have WP:SPI and other investigative processes, like figuring out if vandals are coming from school IP address blocks and reporting them to school admins for disciplining. What she's doing has turned out to be helpful. Sometimes not, because she's a random person doing it, not a closely-watched process with consensus-established ground rules. "Outing" editors with clear professional conflicts of interest who are obviously spindoctoring for profit is not really particularly different from digging around to figure out if people are sockpuppets, etc. (See the recent PMAnderson case, with all kinds of investigative techniques like grammatical analysis, comparison of posting times and length of activity, research into how far apart in meatspace various IP addresses' owning entities are, etc.) That a "lone wolf" investigator can make mistakes is not a surprise. It's an indication we need a process, not an indication that the editor demonstrating the need for the process and doing the best they can without one needs to be kicked in the verbal teeth and told to get out of Dodge for 6 months. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 06:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Guide to appealing blocks

Stale

 – RfC was already closed.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Guide to appealing blocks. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:17, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Categorization

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Categorization. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

GOCE March drive wrap-up

FYI

 – Just a project newsletter.

Extended content

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graph Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! This is the most successful drive we have had for quite a while. Here is your end-of-drive wrap-up newsletter. Participation Of the 70 people who signed up for this drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Special acknowledgement goes out to Lfstevens, who did over 200 articles, most of them in the last third of the drive, and topped all three leaderboard categories. You're a superstar! Stfg and others have been pre-checking the articles for quality and conformance to Wikipedia guidelines; some have been nominated for deletion or had some preliminary clean-up done to help make the copy-edit process more fun and appealing. Thanks to all who helped get those nasty last few articles out of the target months. Progress report During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—October, November, and December 2010—from the queue, and have now eliminated all the 2010 articles from our list. We were able to complete 500 articles this month! End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here. When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy-editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy-editing at this time for other reasons. The {{GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators. Thank you for participating in the March 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy-edit drive will be in May. Your drive coordinators – Dianna (Talk), Stfg (Talk), and Dank (talk) To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot (talk) 22:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Resolved

 – Done.

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello SMcCandlish. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Blank this section if you must

FYI

 – Just a pointer to a related discussion.

Hello. You have a new message at WT:Stand-alone lists (television)'s talk page. --George Ho (talk) 03:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Why must I blank it? Anyway, thanks for the note. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 04:07, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:16, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

En dashes in work titles

Resolved

 – Done.

Hi! I was wondering if you might take a look at this discussion if you had the time/energy. You seem to be an authority on such things. Thanks! (In reponse to the almost inevitable accusations of illicit canvassing, I really don't care which way consensus goes, as long as there is a consensus.) —danhash (talk) 18:27, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! —danhash (talk) 20:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

No prollem. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'm not 'thority, just 'pinionated. >;-) I do think about, and read up on, this stuff a lot though. My bookshelf is an authority. I have almost every style guide worth mentioning. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 20:20, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. You have a new message at Wikipedia talk:Stand-alone lists (television)'s talk page. Message added 01:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC).

I don't think I have anything further to say on this right now. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:07, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:More footnotes

Disregard

 – I'm the one who started this RfC in the first place.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:More footnotes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps

Disregard

 – RfC was deferred.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Science lovers wanted!

Resolved

 –  Declined. Too many irons in the fire on my part, but I agree this is a good idea.

Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 00:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons

Resolved

 – Definitely had something to say on that one.

Invitation to diacritics guideline discussion at WT:BLP

Hi, you were one of 100+ Users who has commented on a living person Requested Move featuring diacritics (e.g. the é in Beyoncé Knowles) in the last 30 days. Following closure of Talk:Stephane Huet RM, a tightening of BLP guidelines is proposed. Your contribution is invited to WT:BLP to discuss drafting a proposal for tightening BLP accuracy guidelines for names. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Feel free to duplicate this invite on the pages of others who have commented, for or against. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:36, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Please never do that again. Using cutesy pictures in an attempt to sway opinion is a clear case of WP:CANVASS. I'm even on your side of this debate, and I'm pissed off at you already. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 19:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Get Smart!

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Get Smart!. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May copy edit drive

FYI

 – Just projectspam.  Declined No time to participate in the drive this month.

Extended content

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

– Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg.
EdwardsBot (talk) 18:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Filmizing for deletion

Resolved

 – Commented at the AfD.

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but utterly doomed neologism articles don't need more eyes at their AfDs. They get flushed plenty fast. >;-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 19:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Update: I looked into it after all, and it's an obvious keep-and-rename. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 08:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

Disregard

 – No such RfC by the time I got there.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Stories Project

Stale

 – Real life stuff got in the way of my actually participating in this; just not enough time.

Hi!

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'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

user:Victorgrigas

vgrigas@wikimedia.org

Victor Grigas (talk) 21:50, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I come from a nonprofit org background myself. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 01:47, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

can you send me an email? vgrigas@wikimedia.org and we can go from there :) 107.3.136.161 (talk) 03:06, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Template messages

Resolved

 –  Done

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Template messages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Doubt "Stalev image"

Resolved

 – Question answered

hi

I found on my talk page that I have new message from you about stalev image. I don't find any change but maybe I'm wrong. This is the message:

"Hello. You have new messages at User:SMcCandlish.

— SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ Contrib. 05:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)"

The last conversation we had was on 30 March and this message is 7 April but I don't find your new message. I also don't find the "stalev image" subject. Can you help me?--89Slh (talk) 11:45, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, it was a broken link that was supposed to go here. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 20:11, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Chernobyl after the disaster

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Chernobyl after the disaster. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:17, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Resolved

 – Fixed.

Hi. When you recently edited Evgeny Stalev, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Poker face (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) 11:10, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages

Resolved

 – Done.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Resolved

 – Activated already.

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 http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• 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} 04:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages

Resolved

 – Commented at that page.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:16, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style

Resolved

 – Commented at that page.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers

Resolved

 – Commented at that page.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Items to be merged

Resolved

 –  Declined.

Your comments would be welcome about this edit, which I've raised a comment about on the category talk page. Thanks. --Izno (talk) 21:39, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm disinclined to argue about that one further. Thanks for asking, though. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Ping

Resolved

 – Commented at that talk page.

Any thoughts regarding Template talk:Key press#Thorn (letter) and other Alt Gr uses? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:54, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I think Edokter has a good solution. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:45, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:The need for coordination

Resolved

 –  Declined, per WP:DGAF. That proposal will snowball straight into the bitbucket, if anyone even bothers commenting.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:The need for coordination. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:16, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Weign in

Resolved

 – Commented at that page.

You might want to weign in on this Pass a Method talk 08:04, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May mid-drive newsletter

Disregard

 – Just projectspam.

Extended content

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 49 people signed up for this drive so far, 26 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Template:J Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive, largely due to the efforts of Lfstevens and the others on the leaderboard. Thanks to all. We have reduced our target group of articles—January, February, and March 2011—by over half, and it looks like we will achieve that goal. Good progress is being made on the overall backlog as well, with over 500 articles copy-edited during the drive so far. The total backlog currently sits at around 3200 articles. Hall of Fame: GOCE coordinator Diannaa was awarded a spot in the GOCE Hall of Fame this month! She has copy-edited over 1567 articles during these drives, and surpassed the 1,000,000-word mark on May 5. On to the second million! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. |} Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) Resolved  – Done. Commented at that talk page. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Indentation Resolved  – Done. Commented at that talk page. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Indentation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 18 May 2012 (UTC) Cultivar Moved to Talk:Cultivar § Cultivar group Please note your editing of article Cultivar. Group with capital G is a formal classification category and replaces the old designation cultivar-group - see the latest 2009 International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants. Writing group with lower case totally alters the meaning. I have reverted your changes, please discuss your changes on the Cultivar talk page or my talk page if you have any difficulties with this.Granitethighs 07:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC) Just an aside: I'm well aware that I edited the article, so I don't need to "note" that I did. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 08:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories Resolved  – Done, at that page. This was a no-brainer and did not need to be an RfC. Dictionaries exists for a reason. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:16, 20 May 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Template talk:American cuisine Resolved  – I was already part of that discussion. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:American cuisine. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 23 May 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style Resolved  – I was already part of that discussion. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article size Resolved  – Commented at that talk page. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article size. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard Stale  – I was too busy to get to this before it expired. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Spelling Stale  – I was too busy to get to this before it expired. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Spelling. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 2 June 2012 (UTC) GOCE May drive wrap-up Disregard  – Just project spam. Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Out of 54 people who signed up this drive, 32 copy-edited at least one article. Last drive's superstar, Lfstevens, again stood out, topping the leader board in all three categories and copy-editing over 700 articles. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We were once again successful in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog—while removing 1166 articles from the queue, the second-most in our history. The total backlog currently sits at around 2600 articles, down from 8323 when we started out just over two years ago. Coodinator election: The six-month term for our third tranche of Guild coordinators will be expiring at the end of June. We will be accepting nominations for the fourth tranche of coordinators, who will also serve a six-month term. Nominations will open starting on June 5. For complete information, please have a look at the election page. – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:57, 3 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories Resolved  –  Declined per WP:DGAF. I do not believe these "Year by X" categories are encyclopedically useful to begin with, but a trivial intersection of factoids. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC) Welcome back! FYI  – Just a chat. As a fellow WikiJanitor, I wish to welcome you back with a cup of coffee. I dream of horses @ 19:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC) THanks, but I'm not really back in the active sense, just responding to talk page messages. I check in periodically, but am not taking on any large projects until after my move in meatspace. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 18:58, 10 June 2012 (UTC) Aw, drats! --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 02:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC) Template:American cuisine Resolved  – Done. I set a poll up here, please contribute. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:24, 10 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Yugoslavia Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Yugoslavia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC) Missing signature Resolved  – Fixed. Hi. Not sure if you meant it to be all in boldface, but I think you might want to sign it. Rivertorch (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC) Fixed. THanks for the head's-up. I was in a hurry and didn't preview. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 20:50, 10 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Close paraphrasing Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Close paraphrasing. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Beacon Center of Tennessee Disregard  – Moribund RfC was too vague to comment on. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Beacon Center of Tennessee. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Help talk:Merging Disregard  – RfC already closed by the time I got there. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Help talk:Merging. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 19 June 2012 (UTC) WP Snooker in the Signpost Stale  – Too late; didn't see this for almost a week. The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Snooker for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 16:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC) GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive FYI  – Just a project newsletter. Extended content Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their July 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on July 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on July 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to eliminate the articles tagged in April, May and June 2011 from the queue and to complete all requests placed before the end of June. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 6 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in April–June 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Summary style Disregard  – Just a spat between two users over wording; not a real RfC in my book. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Summary style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:24, 24 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User access levels Disregard  – The RfC has already snowballed against the proposal almost unanimously. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User access levels. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 27 June 2012 (UTC) Logical punctuation, again Resolved  – Commented briefly at the section in question. As one who has devoted considerable time and energy (a noted sacrifice, scarce as these commodities are for most of us) to the struggle for the proper use of logical quotation, you may find of interest the exchange, earlier this month, at Talk:La Strada#Logical Punctuation (leaving aside the section header's use of another source of discord, the "illogically" capitalized common noun). The subject will obviously continue to be raised due to the widespread use of the "illogical quote" by the American print media (I live in a New York City suburb and, as a longtime reader of The New York Times, sense my eye settling on the paper's "misplaced" quotation marks) thus suggesting the possible utility of a "See also" to a specially-created page or some other method of reference to a compilation of such discussions, which often remain obscure within sparsely-frequented talk pages. Something to consider for those who care, myself included, with the precious nature of time taken into account. Perhaps even a link at the talk page of the MOS subsection discussing logical quotations might be sufficient for the day.—Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 15:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories Disregard  –  Declined per WP:DGAF, not to mention a WP:SNOWBALL against yet another of Leifting's WP:CREEPy crusades of nitpicking. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jazz Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jazz. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 3 July 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy Resolved  – Done, at both extant RfCs there. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Blocking policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC) GOCE July 2012 mid-drive newsletter Disregard  – Just projectspam. Extended content Guild of Copy Editors July 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 37 people signed up for this drive so far, 25 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Template:J Progress report: We're almost on track to meet our targets for the drive. Great work, guys. We have reduced our target group of articles—May, June, and July 2011—by about 40%, and the overall backlog has been reduced by 264 articles so far, to around 2500 articles. Copy Edit of the Month: Starting in August, your best copy-editing work of the month will be eligible for fabulous prizes! See here for details. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:54, 15 July 2012 (UTC) – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. Please comment on User:Mdupont/SpeedyDeletionWikia Resolved  –  Declined. I don't feel a need to WP-comment on someone's external tool; their server, their rules. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User:Mdupont/SpeedyDeletionWikia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:16, 16 July 2012 (UTC) Iperú Resolved  – Article rename done. Iperú has been deleted to make room for the move that you wanted. Agathoclea (talk) 17:51, 17 July 2012 (UTC) Thanks, but how did that take so long? Are there so few active admins these days? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 03:49, 27 July 2012 (UTC) The placing of the template was malformed and so it was not placed in the category. I found it on a whatlinkshere from the template itself. Agathoclea (talk) 09:05, 27 July 2012 (UTC) I wonder how I mangled that? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:42, 7 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Vietnamese) Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Vietnamese). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC) GOCE July drive wrap-up Disregard  – Just projectspam. Extended content Guild of Copy Editors July 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Out of 45 people who signed up this drive, 31 have copy-edited at least one article. Lfstevens continues to carry most of the weight, having edited 360 articles and over a quarter of a million words already. Thanks to all who have participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, will be available early in August here. Progress report: We are once again very close to achieving in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog. Only 35 such articles remain at press time. The total backlog currently sits at under 2400 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We are just two articles away from completing all requests made before July 2012 (both are in progress). Copy Edit of the Month: Starting in August, you'll be able to submit your best copy-editing work for palaver, praise, and prizes. See here for details. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 00:17, 28 July 2012 (UTC) – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. Dispute Resolution IRC office hours. FYI  – Just a notice. Hello there. As you expressed interest in hearing updates to my research in the dispute resolution survey that was done a few months ago, I just wanted to let you know that I am hosting an IRC office hours session this coming Saturday, 28th July at 19:00 UTC (approximately 12 hours from now). This will be located in the #wikimedia-office connect IRC channel - if you have not participated in an IRC discussion before you can connect to IRC here. Regards, User:Szhang (WMF) (talk) 07:05, 28 July 2012 (UTC) COI+ certification proposal Resolved  – Commented on the talk page there. I've thought of an idea that might break our current logjam with paid editing. I'd love your sincere feedback and opinion. WP:COI certification Feel free to circulate this to anyone you think should know about it, but please recognize that it hasn't been agreed upon by either PR organizations or WikiProjects or the wider community. It's also just a draft, so any/many changes can still be made. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi 15:16, 28 July 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages Resolved  –  Declined. No need to respond to a WP:SNOW proposal by a sockpuppeteer. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 28 July 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons Resolved  – Done Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 31 July 2012 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)#Foreign language and articles’ titles Resolved  – Done. Since your User:SMcCandlish/Logical quotation was briefly mentioned in support of a distantly related point, the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)#Foreign language and articles’ titles and, on the same page, Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)#Moratorium on foreign language page moves/Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (films)#Discussion regarding moratorium on foreign language page moves may be of interest.—Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 17:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Mediation Committee Resolved  –  Declined. I don't see that our mediation system works at all anyway. Every time I've used it, no resolution actually resulted. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Mediation Committee. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC) A kitten for you! FYI  – Just a chat. Cute huh? Misa-chan (talk) 06:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC) Thanks. See also Template:Kitten. :-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article Feedback/Guidelines Resolved  –  Declined. I don't presently have any opinion on this, pro, con or in the middle. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article Feedback/Guidelines. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC) Glossary templates question Hi. I've recently been learning about and implementing the glossary templates at a few articles, and am greatly appreciative. So first off, thanks! (They've been happily received at Glossary of chess and Glossary of chess problems, and nobody has objected to them at Glossary of botanical terms.) There's a complication at Glossary of ancient Roman religion, where, the editors are very receptive to the possibilities, but are wondering if it's possible to retain the per-entry [edit] links, that they currently enjoy from having each entry in a ====sub-header====. Any suggestions? -- Quiddity (talk) 04:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC) I think these modes of layout are going to be fundamentally incompatible. An HTML heading cannot be inside a DL glossary list item, or vice versa. I would not be surprised, however, if someone has implemented some template somewhere to put an "edit" link on things other than H# headings, perhaps on DIVs or any block element. Something like that could work. If not yet, it surely can be done, but might have to be done at the MediaWiki developers level, since it's something that will require back-end Javascript. Maybe ask on Village pump (technical)? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 05:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC) PS: The last sentence of Template:Edit section#Usage explains what the problem is. We'd need a way to forcibly generate a MediaWiki page section number on a per-block basis, or there's nothing for the &action=edit code to refer to. Small price, really; it's not that hard to edit the "J" section instead of the "Jupiter" entry. If the entries are so incredibly detailed and long that this would be a problem, then template-structured glossary markup isn't a good idea anyway, and the entries really should be sections. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 05:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC) PPS: I've raised the issue at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Forcing creation of a section without a heading. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 06:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC) Much thanks, particularly for the detailed explanation. I'll leave the decision up to that page's primary editors, and if they choose not to use the templates now, perhaps revisit the decision in a year or two, or if FL status is sought. Enjoy the rest of your vacation (shooo!) -- Quiddity (talk) 06:18, 7 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 8 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section Resolved  –  Declined. The current discussion is just a chat, and unfocused on any particular proposal; nothing to really comment on that hasn't already been said. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 11 August 2012 (UTC) TfD for new Cite_web/smart Resolved  – Done. I am contacting you, per wp:CANVAS, after contacting other negative or positive editors, as a user previously opposed to quick, fast citation templates, in considering the latest TfD discussion. In this case, the template {Cite_web/smart} is finally the big upgrade to entirely replace {Cite_web} with a faster version that carefully checks the parameters to only invoke the massive {Citation/core} for any rare parameters, else quickly formats a cite. See TfD of 11 August 2012: WP:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2012_August_11#Template:Cite_web.2Fsmart This notice is only an FYI, as announcing the discussion under way. Feel free to oppose the template, support the template, ignore the discussion, or even delete this message. The TfD just started, so there should be, at least, 7 days (18 August 2012) to consider the issues. Thanks. -Wikid77 (talk) 21:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC) cite4wiki Hello, I was wondering if you're still working on cite4wiki? If you are, would it be possible to update it to recognize it's on a highbeam.com URL? They have a few meta tags that include all the information needed for a cite. It would be very helpful. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 05:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC) User_talk:MarkAHershberger was talking about porting it over to a JetPack codebase, but I'm not sure where that's gone. I've dropped him a line about it. I haven't touched Cite4Wiki since that discussion was raised. If it's not going to be ported, it could certainly be updated to do something special on Highbeam, but you don't have to wait for me. Just open the add-on (rename it with a .zip extension and it will unzip), and edit the rules file yourself. It's pretty much self-explanatory if you look at the extant examples. Then zip it back up, and rename the extension back, and restart the browser. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 05:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Kosovo Resolved  –  Declined. This looks as complicated as Northern Ireland or Palestine, and I don't know enough about former-Yugoslav geopolitics to get involved without probably making an ass of myself again. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kosovo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC) Jetpack plan You asked what I've been doing. I got started a lot on it, but got discouraged. I'd like to get some feedback on it, though, if you have some time. -- ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 13:04, 13 August 2012 (UTC) Where should I start? — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 20:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC) I'll try to get you some information tonight. (Making a note here so that you can remind me if you don't hear from me for a bit.) -- ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 20:16, 13 August 2012 (UTC) No hurry. I'm in the process of moving cross-country, actually. If we deal with this in September, no worries. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 22:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC) Since I didn't get to it last night, I appreciate the timeline you've given me. I'll try to put it on my schedule, but, yeah, right now is kind of hard. -- ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 13:10, 14 August 2012 (UTC) I feel ya. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 23:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on User talk:CityMorgue Disregard  – No such RfC. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User talk:CityMorgue. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 16 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 19 August 2012 (UTC) GOCE news and September drive invitation Disregard  – Just projectspam. Extended content Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events: The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best August copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC). September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit the articles tagged longest ago and to complete all requests placed before the end of August. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top six in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". This drive features a much easier signup process. We hope to see you there! >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Record charts Resolved  –  Declined. I don't know enough about this topic to participate meaningfully. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Record charts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 22 August 2012 (UTC) Your Credo Reference account is approved FYI  – Just a notice. Good news! You are approved for access to 350 high quality reference resources through Credo Reference. Fill out the survey with your username and an email address where your sign-up information can be sent. If you need assistance, ask User:Ocaasi. A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Credo article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Credo pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Credo accounts/Citations. Credo would love to hear feedback at WP:Credo accounts/Experiences Show off your Credo access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Credo_userbox}} on your userpage If you decide you no longer can or want to make use of your account, donate it back by adding your name here Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 17:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC) Yay! — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 10:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Official names Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Official names. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC) A barnstar for you! The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar This comes as a recognition of your kindness in developing the Firefox Cite4wiki add-on. It has been helpful and a great resource. I was also happy to learn you contribute to Mozilla which I do as well :) ₫ӓ₩₳ Talk to Me. Email Me. 18:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC) Thanks, though some others deserve more credit than I do, especially Jehochman (talk · contribs) for the original concept, and Unit 5 (talk · contribs) for the bulk of the code still used in this version. I mostly just added the ability to customize the output for specific sites, and fixed some consistency issues, as well as set up the WP:Cite4Wiki page for it. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 21:01, 31 August 2012 (UTC) GOCE September activities Reminders from the Guild of Copy Editors A quick reminder of our current events: The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight September 14 (UTC). The September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight September 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin. The September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is now underway! The event runs until midnight September 30 (UTC). The goal is to copy edit articles with the oldest tags and complete all requests placed before September. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who participates, with special awards given to the top five in the following categories: "Total articles", "Total words", "Total articles over 5,000 words", "Total articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 04:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Article titles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 3 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ships. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Tom Cruise Resolved  –  I feel I have to recuse myself per WP:COI. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Tom Cruise. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 8 September 2012 (UTC) Have to pass on this one, I think, as a conflict of interest. As a former Electronic Frontier Foundation employee, from the period during which EFF's anti-Internet-censorship position brought it into frequent conflict with the "Church" of Scientology's attempts to abuse the legal system to silence websites critical of Scientology, I don't I should comment on this. The fact that I consider CoS a fraudulent, dangerous criminal organization probably wouldn't bode well maintaining a neutral point of view, given that Cruise is a long-time celebrity shill for Scientology, as well as a fine actor. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 15:57, 8 September 2012 (UTC) Chaos and consistency Resolved  – Done. Allo. Thanks again for the help earlier with Gloss templates. (That's the buttering up part ;) I'm honestly/earnestly curious about your comments at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Responses. I collect perspectives as a passion/hobby/inclination, and am wondering what aspects/precedents I'm unfamiliar with, in this instance. Can you point me towards some examples (either specific articles, or abstract/overarching issue-summaries, are fine. I can extrapolate well, but need clues!), either in that thread, or here, or privately? The onion of context must grow! Thankee ;) —Quiddity (talk) 20:37, 8 September 2012 (UTC) I've commented further there. Basically, you just need to skim the last 10 years of [{WT:MOS]]. About 95% of disputes over style here are specialists of one kind or another trying to force their oh-so-special style preference, derived usually from some very narrow academic journal context, on the entire rest of the world, readers and editors, if they ever dare to wander into the topic "owned" by the specialists. These people are fortunately starting to dwindle - many of them literally quit Wikipedia in a huff rather that admit that they should write in a generally comprehensible style for a general readership instead of ape the weird nitpicks of academic publishing in a context in which they do not make sense and aren't undestood by anyone but the handful of subscribers to those particular journals. It's a cancer, but one that seems to be curing itself slowly over time. Not least of which because of the efforts of myself and some other MoS regulars to stop letting them take over Wikipedia and abuse it as a platform of trying for force language change. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 22:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for September 9 Resolved  – Fixed. Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cat, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Vocalization, Growl and Panting (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) 11:44, 9 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:File names Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:File names. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 12 September 2012 (UTC) Template merger discussion Resolved  – Responded at that discussion. Hi! I just noticed that you weren't notified of this merger proposal. I don't know whether you'll agree with the nominator or with me, but you certainly should have been invited to comment. —David Levy 20:09, 12 September 2012 (UTC) Thanks. Hope I provided a voice of reason. :-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 22:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC) You did (as usual). (-: —David Levy 01:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC) Your Credo account access has been sent to your email! All editors who were approved for a Credo account and filled out the survey giving their username and email address were emailed Credo account access information. Please check your email. If you didn't receive an email, or didn't fill out the survey, please email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com If you tried out Credo and no longer want access, email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me. I hope you enjoy your account! User:Ocaasi 15:38, 13 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC) GOCE mid-drive newsletter FYI  – Just projectspam.  Declined No time to participate in the drive this month. Extended content Guild of Copy Editors September 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 37 people signed up for this drive so far, 19 have copy-edited at least one article, about the same as the last drive. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Template:J Progress report: We're almost on track to meet our targets for the drive. Great work, guys. We have reduced our target group of articles—August, September, and October 2011—by about 44%, and the overall backlog has been reduced by 58 articles so far, to around 2600 articles. The biggest difference between this drive and the previous one is a stronger focus on large articles, so total word counts are still comparable. Don't forget about the Copy Edit of the Month contests! Voting for the August contest has been extended through the end of the month. You don't have to make a submission to vote! August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight September 30 (UTC). September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight September 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:19, 15 September 2012 (UTC) Dispute on Andy Segal page Moved to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Legal threat by 173.77.173.111 a.k.a. Hudsonapa Mr McKandlish, You disputed the information on Andy Segal page that I created. You have posted false information and if this behavior continues, you will be contacted regarding a slander suit. Please refrain from posting anything false until you are sure that it is true. All of the information posted in the article of concern has sources that can be documented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.77.173.111 (talk) 21:19, 16 September 2012 (UTC) You probably just got yourself blocked, and I've moved this discussion to AN/I, per Wikipedia's zero-tolerance of legal threats policy. (And of course I categorically deny that I've posted any false information.) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:15, 18 September 2012 (UTC) Update: User was blocked, per WP:NLT. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 08:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC) The "context solution" Moved to Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles Quiz From Apple Corps' 2009 liner notes for Let It Be: "When this plan was eventually discarded, The Beatles reunited at their own studio in the basement of their Apple HQ." From Apple Corps' 2009 liner notes for Abbey Road: "In the early part of 1969, the Beatles had recorded in their own studio in the basement of the Apple office building". Which did Apple get right and which did they make a mistake on and why? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 02:33, 18 September 2012 (UTC) The first one is correct, because the name of the band is "The Beatles", not "the Beatles". They got it wrong the second time because record company marketing flacks are not grammarians. Even entertainment industry journalists (i.e. those most often writing about bands) are not grammarians, they're journos whose job it is to spit out as much prose on deadline as possible. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 06:22, 18 September 2012 (UTC) Are you sure they aren't both incorrect? Anyway, so you admit that Apple cannot get this straight but somehow you think Wikipedia editors will not argue over each individual occurrence? Why is this a better option then either "the" or "The" throughout. Also, why cite grammar when grammar is clearly in support of "the". Every style guide we researched supports "the" for grammatical reasons and not one supports "The". So you seem to want to side with grammar but also disregard all style guides. I find that confusing. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:26, 19 September 2012 (UTC) Replied at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles. Please do not fork discussions like this, by raising the same questions on individuals' talk pages as raised publicly e.g. at RfM. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 11:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC) PS: I realize that some people would argue for "the" instead of "The" in a construction like "Since the 1980s, the Beatles have been dying one by one", because it refers to the bandmembers as individuals (the construction "...The Beatles reunited" actually doesn't pretty much by definition - it's about the reuniting of the band as, well, a unit), but this is ridiculous hairsplitting that does nothing but sow confusion. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 11:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC) Thanks for this Resolved  – Redir created as suggested. Hi - I am always happy to find a template on someone's page that I've never encountered, but fits a need I've had. I'm talking about {{moved discussion to}} - brilliant! It only would be better if it could be rendered {{mdt}} for amnesiacs like me who will go through a few rounds of saying "moving" until I get it right, but that's me. Very useful, thanks. Tvoz likes this.. Nice to meet a compatriot anthropology major - although mine dates back to sometime before they were convinced that Neanderthals could speak - I've seen you around the project for years, of course. Cheers! Tvoz/talk 16:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC) Redirects are easy to create; {{mdt}} and {{mdf}} now work.  :-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 06:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC) Duh. Tvoz/talk 08:39, 22 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Category talk:Indexes of topics Unresolved  – I have nothing to say at this time; I'm more interested in seeing what others think on this one, then maybe chiming in later. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:Indexes of topics. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC) Intelligent grammar Resolved  – Just a chat. I like your reasoning, and your intelligence. I thank you.--andreasegde (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC) You're welcome, though I'm not sure what you're referring to. :-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC) Oh, you mean about The Beatles. Well, glad to be of service. :-) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:17, 22 September 2012 (UTC) Why is 4,000 things to argue over better than 400? Moved to Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles What would you say to the assertion that the context "solution" only exacerbates the problem? We are currently arguing over about 400+ articles, should we adopt your suggested "solution" we would have 4,000+ individual occurences to argue over. Why is this better, educate me please, because I cannot see any advantage to this whatsoever. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 04:11, 22 September 2012 (UTC) [Please stop trying to fork the discussion between the public one at the RfC/RfM, and my talk page. I decline to discuss anything substantive with regard to the band name capitalization in user talk, because it just means I need to re-discuss it at the proper venue, and I don't have time for this redundancy.] It's simple: Don't change the official names of thing to suit whims, like not personally liking "The Beatles" in mid-sentence. That is all, please drive though. See longer post of mine at the RfM page on how to handle cases of a single Beatle being referred to, etc. This stuff is not complicated at all. Nothing creates any sort of "4,000 individual occurrences" problem, other than continuing to assert that it should be "the" or "The" depending on some kind of positional determination. You are railing against a confusion that you yourself have created. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:04, 22 September 2012 (UTC) New message from Gareth Griffith-Jones Hello, SMcCandlish. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page. Message added 09:51, 22 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Good morning Mr McCandlish, The request and motive contained in the posting linked in this tb is, in itself, self-explanatory. However I have wondered about this posting and why a direct approach is not being made here. Would appreciate your guidance. As a footnote, you and I had a little fun on "His Grace" 's talk page regarding scare-quotes and ellipsis usage. Gareth Griffith-Jones (GG-J's Talk) 09:51, 22 September 2012 (UTC) Not sure what to tell you. I'm unclear on why the approaches being used are the ones being used (e.g. forking discussions between public and private fora, escalation of a MOS matter to RfM as if a private two-party dispute, etc.) It's just weird and noisy. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 10:21, 22 September 2012 (UTC) I appreciate your prompt reply – considered you may not have risen – and shall wait for his next move. Cheers! __ Gareth Griffith-Jones (GG-J's Talk) 10:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC) WikiProject Good articles (Participant Clean-up) Hello, you are receiving this message because you are currently a participant of WikiProject Good articles. Since the creation of the WikiProject, over 200 user's have joined to help review good article nominations and contribute to other sections of the WikiProject. Over the years, several of these users have stopped reviewing articles and/or have become inactive with the project but are still listed as participates. In order to improve communications with other participants and get newsletters sent out faster (newsletters will begin to be sent out monthly starting in October) all participants that are no longer active with the WikiProject will be removed from the participants list. If you are still interested in being a participant for this WikiProject, please sign your user name here and please help review some articles so we can reduce the size of the backlog. If you are no longer interested, you do not need to sign your name anywhere and your name will be removed from the participants list after the deadline. Remember that even if you are not interested at this time, you can always re-add your name to the list whenever you want. The deadline to sign your name on the page above will be November 1, 2012. Thank-you. 13:33, 22 September 2012 (UTC) Sorry for having to send out a second message but a user has brought to my attention that a point mentioned in the first message should be clarified. If user's don't sign on this page, they will be moved to an "Inactive Participants" list rather then be being removed from the entire WikiProject. Sorry for any confusion.--Dom497 (talk)15:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC) Dispute If you want to stop/put on hold the "clean-up" by all means do it.--Dom497 (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2012 (UTC) I think it should be a consensus discussion at the project, not the opening of a discussion topic followed immediately by you proceeding without the actual discussion taking place yet. That's called a fait accompli. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 09:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:51, 23 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (capitalization) Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (capitalization). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 29 September 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lego Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lego. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC) WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter - October 2012 Disregard  – Just projectspam. Delivered October 3, 2012 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter any longer, please remove your name from this list. → Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page. → Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 05:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Levomefolic acid Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Levomefolic acid. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2012 (UTC) GOCE September 2012 drive wrap-up Disregard  – Just projectspam. Extended content Guild of Copy Editors September 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Out of 41 people who signed up this drive, 28 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We achieved our primary goal of clearing July, August, September and October 2011 from the backlog. This means that, for the first time since the drives began, the backlog is less than a year. At least 677 tagged articles were copy edited, although 365 new ones were added during the month. The total backlog at the end of the month was 2341 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We completed all 54 requests outstanding before September 2012 as well as eight of those made in September. Copy Edit of the Month: Voting is now over for the August 2012 competition, and prizes will be issued soon. The September 2012 contest is closed for submissions and open for voting. The October 2012 contest is now open for submissions. Everyone is welcome to submit entries and to vote. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters Resolved  – Done. That one was easy-peasy. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 5 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (geographic features) Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (geographic features). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 8 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) Disregard  – No such RfC any longer Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC) Template:Aritclehistory listed at Redirects for discussion Disregard  – DGaF. An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Aritclehistory. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Aritclehistory redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC) Template:Aritcle history listed at Redirects for discussion An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Aritcle history. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Aritcle history redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:File mover Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:File mover. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC) Struck me funny this Haven't read the discussion, but I have to admit, just reading your comment (saw your edit summary on my watchlist and had to go look) struck me funny : ) - jc37 02:46, 15 October 2012 (UTC) <shrug> I've re-re-re-read it, and it does appear to say "the only error I ever make is thinking I erred". Not sure what else to say. PS: The funny thing is, about 2 or 3 years back, I used "WTF?" as an edit summary about something equally perplexing, and some third party editor wrote to me, "Watch your language!". That's deep, deep into "unclear on the concept" territory! I think on my userpage I have that in my list of funniest WP stuff. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 03:14, 15 October 2012 (UTC) Notability (geographic features) Resolved  – Done. Hello SMcCandlish! Please see my reply at Wikipedia talk:Notability (geographic features). Kaldari (talk) 04:42, 15 October 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the heads-up. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 09:27, 15 October 2012 (UTC) WP:CAPS Thanks for disambiguating this shortcut! It never made sense to have WP:CAPS and MOS:CAPS pointing to different pages, but the former shortcut has probably been around too long to just change the destination now. Good solution. --BDD (talk) 15:13, 15 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Three Kingdoms Resolved  – Declined: I don't know enough about China to be certain I'd be commenting meaningfully. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Three Kingdoms. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 15 October 2012 (UTC) WikiProject Good Articles - Participant Clean-up (Second Call) Stuck  – I oppose removing editors from a project just because someone has arbitrarily decided they think the editors aren't active enough. In protest, I thus decline to sign up for the project via this bogus process. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 18:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC) You are reciving this message because you have not added your name to the list of active WikiProject Good Articles participants. Though you may have recived the first message sent out in September, some users may have had that message archived before coming online to read it and therefore never saw it. If you are deeming yourself inactive with the WikiProject please disregard this message as your name will be moved to an "inactive participant" list at the end of the clean-up. If you are still active with the WikiProject, please be sure to include your name on this list. The current deadline to add your name to the list (if you are still active) is November 1, 2012. A third and final message will be sent out during the last week of the clean-up before the deadline. Thank-you.--EdwardsBot Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement Resolved  – BT,DT Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Civility enforcement. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 18 October 2012 (UTC) GOCE fall newsletter Disregard  – Just projectspam. Extended content Fall Events from the Guild of Copy Editors The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events: The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best October copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC). Voting is in progress for the September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest. Everyone is welcome to vote, whether they have entered the contest or not. NEW!! In the week from Sunday 21 October to Saturday 27 October, we are holding a Project Blitz, in which we will copy edit articles tagged with {{copyedit}} belonging to selected project(s). For the first blitz, we'll start with WikiProject Olympics and WikiProject Albums and add more Projects to the blitz as we clear them. The blitz works much like our bimonthly drives, but a bit simpler. Everyone is welcome to take part, and barnstars will be awarded. November 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in 2011 and to complete all requests placed before the end of October. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! >>> Blitz sign-up <<<         >>> Drive sign-up <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Jimmy Savile Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jimmy Savile. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 21 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC) Nomination for deletion of Template:Span Resolved  – Done. Template:Span has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 12:24, 27 October 2012 (UTC) Nomination for deletion of Template:Div Resolved  – Done. Template:Div has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 12:24, 27 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 27 October 2012 (UTC) WikiProject Good Articles - Participant Clean-up (Final Call) You are receiving this message because you have not added your name to the list of active WikiProject Good Articles participants. Though you may have recived the past two messages sent out in September and October, some users may have had that message archived before coming online to read it and therefore never saw it. If you are deeming yourself inactive with the WikiProject please disregard this message as your name will be moved to an "inactive participant" list at the end of the clean-up. If you are still active with the WikiProject, please be sure to include your name on this list. The deadline to add your name to the list (if you are still active) is November 1, 2012. This will be the last message sent out before the deadline which is in 2 days. Thank-you.--EdwardsBot Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 29 October 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Recruitment Disregard  – Meh. This is a WP:SNOWBALL in the making. No need to bother. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Recruitment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 1 November 2012 (UTC) Ancient move Resolved  – Commented on that talk page. Talk:Paille-maille#Requested_move_back_to_.22pall_mall_.28game.29.22 FYI, Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the notice. I interpret the "issue" as a bunch of WP:LAWYER noise and a waste of time, but I appreciate being notified all the same. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 05:48, 2 November 2012 (UTC) The GAN Newsletter (November 2012) The WikiProject Good articles Newsletter Volume III, No. 2 – November 2012 For past newsletters click here In This Issue Request for Comment: An RFC about the Backlog Elimination Drives has been started this month. Go and voice your opinions! Featured editorial: A Matter of Time: The Future of Backlog Elimination Drives Project News: Over 345 unreviewed articles, 13 at reassessment Good Articles of the Month GA Task Forces: A calmed GA community awaiting for an RFC Member News: 223 members of the GA Wikiproject Read this newsletter Single-page Unsubscribe Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 3 November 2012 Template {{B}} Resolved  – Done. Hello. You have a new message at Template talk:B's talk page. Message added GregorB (talk) 10:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC). Good idea. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2012/Questions/General Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2012/Questions/General. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC) Term capitalization Resolved  – Can't fix, though the documentation has been updated. Is it possible to make caps and non-caps links work with a simple {{term}}, without having to add a manual {{anchor}} ? eg. Glossary of wildfire terms#airtanker vs Glossary of wildfire terms#Airtanker. I ask because I see quite a few edits like this being made. (placement has been since fixed) I don't know nearly enough about templates and conditionals to guess, but I'm hoping it's possible. Ta. —Quiddity (talk) 21:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC) Yeah, it should be {{term|1=costa|content=costa{{anchor|Costa}}}}. MediaWiki's parser language isn't smart enough to have some kind of "do X regardless of case" test. Template:Term/doc has been corrected to show use of {{anchor}} with {{term}} properly. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 00:05, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Template talk:Infobox person Resolved  – Done Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Infobox person. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ticker symbols in article leads Resolved  – Done Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ticker symbols in article leads. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2012 (UTC) Diacritics again Resolved  – Commented at that talk page. Will this particular pseudo-issue never die? Re interpretation/action of your RfC of earlier this year. Talk:Facundo_Argüello_(tennis). Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the notice. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 11:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks for clear comment. Unfortunately someone will have to reopen the RfC and notify all 40 participants in order to have a second attempt to get this editor to comply with it. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC) I've said all I can say without crossing lines. I don't think the issue needs to be reopened. The article is at the diacritic name as it should be. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 01:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Hmm, okay, well I've said I'm not going to reopen RfC either, though in fact I think it should be. On the other hand a monument to stupidity left in 100x tennis BLP ledes is very far from a major problem. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Not sure I'm following you. I'm unsure what the "monument" is that you're referring to. PS: WP:LEADs are not ledes; they're two different kinds of introductory paragraph, with essentially opposite aims (a journalistic lede is a teaser, a Wikipedia lead is a summary). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 08:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mixed martial arts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC) WP:POSTNOM Resolved  – Commented at that talk page. A couple of days ago I opened this thread: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#WP:POSTNOM. It has to do with unbolding post-nominals in the ledes of biographical articles. I noticed that you have edited the guideline page before and I thought it'd be nice to have your input on the talk page. Cheers. --Omnipaedista (talk) 21:28, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the pointer. PS: The lead section of Wikipedia articles is not a lede. Applying "lede" to the WP:LEAD is a misuse of the term. The concepts are completely opposite: A journalistic lede is a teaser that intentionally leaves out crucial details to entice the reader to read the full article, while a WP lead is, when properly written, a complete summary of the article that ensures that the reader does not have to read the full article unless they need details. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 01:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the clarifications. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Thank you The Socratic Barnstar In recognition of your general fine work around the 'pedia, and the staunchness and standard of argumentation on style issues. And if for nothing else, I think you deserve it for this comment  Ohconfucius ping / poke 02:07, 13 November 2012 (UTC) <bow> — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Brazilian jiu-jitsu Resolved  – Addressed at Talk:German ju-jutsu What about German Ju-Jutsu? --213.196.209.251 (talk) 03:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Haw! — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 08:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Ok, here's an imho more difficult one: Krav Maga. The issue was brought up several years back, with one editor responding based on a reasoning which is imho sound, but has since been removed from the applicable guidelines: Wikipedia:Naming conventions apparently advised to use proper-name-style capitalization if the term appears in capitalized form in most sources. That does make a lot of sense imho. Krav maga would look terribly wrong to anyone even remotely involved or interested in it. The term always appears as "Krav Maga". But according to current applicable guidelines, it has to be Krav maga. So what to do about that one? --87.79.176.62 (talk) 18:56, 14 November 2012 (UTC) It's capitalized, because it's a trademark. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 20:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Yeah, I agree. Or, to be nitpicky, its Wikipedia article title most likely wasn't originally capitalized "because it's a trademark" so much as for the same reason BJJ and other article titles are/were capitalized. --87.79.108.207 (talk) 03:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC) That seems probable. People were wildly capitalizing at random all over WP several years ago, even things like the common names of animals (Pronghorn Antelope, etc.). At any rate, Krav Maga is properly capitalized. Some of the other modern martial arts might also qualify (e.g. jeet kune do, kemp and kajukenbo) if they too are trademarks; I haven't the patience or interest to find out. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC) Refactored indentation I am curious to know how this revision of Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, by you at 20:58, 14 November 2012, improves readability. Does the usefulness of "<br>", "<br />", "<p>", and "</p>" vary on different kinds of devices? Does Wikipedia have a page (or pages) explaining these things? —Wavelength (talk) 00:13, 16 November 2012 (UTC) It helps the readability of the wikitext source code, and even the rendered page for visually-impaired users, to use proper XHTML coding. When you misuse "indentation" (actually list-formatting) markup like you were doing, it makes it hard to tell where one person's comments begin and another ends. Replies on talk pages are marked up with a : (or ::, etc., to show later indentation) at the beginning of a person's comment. These actually have semantic HTML meaning; each indicates a new, separate entry in the list of posts that the talk page consists of. This can make accessibility more difficult, by making it hard to determine what content is actually part of what post. Misapplying these list/indent codes to generate line breaks and new paragraphs within comments is messy, and confusing to later editors. Most of us just figure that over time, which is why most talk pages are formatted pretty well. The lazy way is a bad habit to get into, as it causes problems (requiring a total refactor) if regular : indents or * bullets are converted (e.g. to show a headcount in a poll or whatever) into autonumbering with #'s. The proper code <br /> generates a line break, and <p>...</p> delineates a new paragraph (<br />&;lt;br /> is a sloppy way to attempt this, and will be converted to a single <br /> by most browsers and devices). The usefulness of these codes does not vary by browser or device; they are basic XHTML, and work on all platforms that can read Wikipedia, from desktop Linux, Mac and Windows boxes to iPhones to Android tablets. I'm not aware of a page explaining this here, but I have not read the basic Help namespaces files on editing, formatting, etc., in years. They may or may not cover it. It's not a huge issue, anyway. Just something to be aware of, and which bored WP:GNOMEs like me will tweak when we come across code that needs fixing. PS: I started refactoring the indentation in the first place because someone replied to a :: comment with another :: comment instead of a :::, and everyone else's indentations were off by one after that through the entire thread; only noticed the misuse of indents for linebreaking half-way through. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 07:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Being a stickler for correct talk page indentation, I am fascinated. Your reply has explained clearly to me something that I have stumbled into only recently. I promise to never again use a : or, if appropriate, multiple colons in the same posting after the initial indentation. One question, is the position of the space important? I have been typing only "<br/ >" which seems to do the job, and never "<br>" ... indeed, is the space always required? Sincerely, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 17:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC) The <br> style is old 1990s HTML. The correct syntax in modern standards is <br /> (and the space does belong there). MediaWiki is smart enough to auto-correct <br>, <br/> and even the completely invalid </br> to <br /> by the time it hits the reader's browser, but WP content can be reused in any way people see fit, including copy-paste of source code into systems that don't have that feature, so it's always best to use correct, modern XHTML. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 22:08, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Perfectly clear. I am most obliged. It is a constant source of amazement to me how helpful and patient you are to those who have come to computers late in life. Best wishes, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 23:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Just for background, the <br> style was a mistake by the early developers of HTML. HTML was an implementation of SGML, and SGML requires that all elements be terminated either in <whatever>...</whatever> fashion, if they contain something, or <whatever /> style, if self-contained. The HTML developers forgot that in the early versions. The distinction became more important when XML was developed, and the Web moved to XHTML, a re-do of HTML as an XML implementation. XML, because it is intended to be machine-parsed, is much more strict about syntax than old SGML. Oh, and the space before the / isn't mandatory in XML, but leaving it off causes older browsers to fail to properly parse the code, so it's effectively required in <whatever /> constructions. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 23:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC) I am so impressed. Your complete understanding makes me feel that I should learn more. Again, thank you. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones/The Welsh Buzzard 23:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC) <blush> It's just geekery. I'm like the technological inverse of the little old lady who knows how to perfectly bake 47 kinds of cookies and cakes without bothering with the recipes any longer, but can't set the blinking 12:00 on her microwave or remember the difference between Star Wars and Star Trek. I know a whole lot about a little but only a little about a whole lot. I have enough brain cells left that I can pick up new topics and figure them out well enough for WP very quickly (lately it's the Meyers Manx dune buggy, for no particular reason other than the awfulness of the article bothered me), but lost enough of them that I drop topics pretty quickly and easily, too (I haven't touched Albinism, Albinism in humans, etc., in years because the once-stupid, wannabe-articles are now so journal-citing rigorous and medical/scientific they're beyond my competence unless I go to grad school.  ;-) Don't feel you need to learn more HTML; just absorb what you need to know to get the "job" done and not write "blecherous" bad code. It will all be obsolete eventually when future tools shield us more and more from the "guts" of the code and we write in more and more natural language. I picture a future WP where, if and only if I did not want to use WYSIWYG editing effects/styles buttons & pop-up menus, I could as a "power user" begin an article something like ~bi~The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization~ is a ~ld~film~... and not only would that be the equivalent of what we now do as '''''The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization'''' is a [[Motion picture|film]]..., it would also not be visible as either form of such gobbledygook to anyone else editing unless they turned on a "show me the geeky bits" option (the short or long form, as they prefer), but otherwise render as more natural language in the source code, e.g. as The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization is a film... right in the editing window, much like how a word processor works, and of course would render as "The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization is a film..." in reading mode. I could see it as long-form wikimarkup – '''''The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization'''' is a [[Motion picture|film]]... if I chose to view it that way, but with a single click flip it back to the short ~bi~The Decline and Fall of Western Civilization~ is a ~ld~film~... version. I am making up that "shorthand" on the fly as an example of simplified coding, where ~ would delimit a "New Wiki Markup" code block, in ~commands~content~ format [or somewhat longer ~command1~command2~content~~ form, when commands might need to be easily severable, but I digress...]. In the example, b meant "bold", i "italic", l "link", d "default meaning, if the link term is ambiguous" (i.e. first entry on the disambiguation page). At that level of abstraction, a blind user could use voice tone instead of ~ to indicate when markup began and ended. The underlying MediaWiki editing engine tech is advanced enough we could implement this in less than a year if there were enough will (i.e. community consensus on details, plus developer willingness to upgrade MediaWiki to do it)! Blah blah blah, I can ramble sometimes. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 22:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC) Thank for your reply. I have carefully studied your explanations, and, wanting to be open-minded about opportunities for self-improvement, I have spent extra time in trying to understand your points. I agree that someone replied with the wrong degree of indentation and that every subsequent reply was off by one degree. However, I am unable to agree about "misuse" of markup, "misapplying … codes", and the "lazy way" and "a sloppy way" to show line breaks and new paragraphs". On the rendered page, I saw no difference in line breaks and paragraph starts. In the source code, I find it more difficult to find source codes in the midst of a "paragraph" of source text, than to see those separations made in the way that I was making them. Also, I do not expect that colon indentations or asterisk points would be converted to autonumbering with number signs. When there is a poll, there can be an instruction for respondents to use number signs to facilitate counting. I am unacquainted with the experience of visually impaired users using screen readers. —Wavelength (talk) 17:48, 16 November 2012 (UTC) I am here to improve the encyclopedia, not engage in sport debate for my own entertainment. Life, including WP editing, does not require unanimity, and I do not need your agreement to know I'm right about this. If you want to keep using sloppy code that makes things difficult for other people, go right ahead; I'll continue to feel free to refactor. :-) I've already clearly explained that it's about the source code, not the rendered page, so this entire attempt at conversation is seeming pointless anyway. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 23:31, 16 November 2012 (UTC) GOCE November 2012 copy edit drive update Disregard  – More project spam. These annoyingly visually-loud project "newsletters" are making me want to dump these projects in the bitbucket. Not just this particular project, all of 'em. It's like "BUD LIGHT $12.99!!!" in 10-foot high letters every f'ing block or asinine hotel-sized billboards for TV shows no one will watch more than twice. Extended content Guild of Copy Editors November 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter Participation: Out of 31 people signed up for this drive so far, 22 have copy-edited at least one article. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, every bit helps; if you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Template:J Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive. We have reduced our target group of articles—November and December 2011—by over 50%, and 34 of the the 56 requests made in September and October this year have already been fulfilled. However, the rate of tagging for copy edit has increased, and this month we are just keeping the size of the backlog stable. So, all you copy editors, please do come along and help us! The September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest was won by Baffle gab1978 for his copy edit of Expulsion of the Acadians. Runner up was Gareth Griffith-Jones for his edit of I Could Fall in Love. Congratulations to both. The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the discussion and voting stage until midnight November 30 (UTC). You don't have to make a submission to vote! November 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is in the submissions stage until midnight November 30 (UTC), when discussion and voting begin. Seasonal oversight: We had a slight fall from grace in the title of our last newletter, which mentioned the season in the northern hemisphere and thus got it wrong for the southern. Fortunately an observant GOCE member was ready to spring into action to advise us. Thanks! In future we'll stay meteorologically neutral. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 20:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:16, 19 November 2012 (UTC) Hey, you don't know my history with HTML. I've put up with more than enough abuse in this relationship; it's only right that I be able to deal some out once in a while. VanIsaacWS Vexcontribs 01:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for November 20 Resolved  – Fixed. Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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. Meyers Manx (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver) added a link pointing to Street-legal Volkswagen Westfalia Campers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver) added a link pointing to Eurovan It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:15, 21 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest Resolved  –  Declined. I have not been following this issue for almost a year, really. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 24 November 2012 (UTC) :) Resolved  – Just a chat. Quite a good laugh I had at your reply here. :D Just thought I'll leave a note. Wifione Message 17:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC) I didn't participate in WT:BLP#OMG WTF BBQ!!, though. I did post in two earlier threads that are still on that page (a closed RfC and a Disregard-tagged thing that followed it). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 23:38, 26 November 2012 (UTC) Of course I meant the other thread only; posted the wrong link here. From fishes to sheepes, it's a pleasant moment to read up such brilliant, humorous interactions :) See you around. Wifione Message 05:59, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Ah, that one. Thanks; I feel sheepesish.  ;-) The closed RfC thread before that had some potentially amusing stuff in it, too. I suspect the anon in the "sheepes" thread may even be the same recipient of my attention, LittleBenW, as in the RfC (LittleBenW leapt to the same anon's defense elsewhere, and himself writes in a very "precocious but sloppy, twelve-year-old know-it-all who's actually wrong" style). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 08:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Template talk:Version Resolved  – Done. Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Version. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for November 27 Resolved  – This was intentional, but has been clarified. Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that 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. Grimjack (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver) added a link pointing to The Maltese Falcon Manx (cat) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver) added a link pointing to The Maltese Falcon It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Request for MOS thoughts I am having a civilised discussion with another editor at Talk:Mayoralty in Puerto Rico#The list of current mayors... where we disagree on certain style issues. I have picked you as the most recent editor to edit WP:MOS (effectively at random) to ask if you would visit the discussion and give an informed opinion there. I am most assuredly not seeking to influence that opinion. Do feel free to invite anyone else you see fit to do the same. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC) MOS Have a cup of tea, and when its done have another. After three cups of tea we can talk. Apteva (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC) My original interest in editing this encyclopedia was simply to fix an error, and take pity on anyone reading it without it being fixed. Since then I have made thousands of additions and contributed a hundred articles. As a collaborative media it is essential to discuss the issue, not the conduct of a contributor on article and wikipedia talk pages. The place to discuss content is AN/I and user talk pages. It is never appropriate to name an editor on a guideline talk page, as was done at the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style page. While you and I may have a different opinion on the purpose of the MOS, and I do know that you are a frequent contributor of the MOS, I am not. I am a content contributor, not a guideline writer, but I do not appreciate, and can not tolerate, the MOS giving me or anyone else bad advice, as is currently the case with hyphens being replaced with endashes where hyphens are correctly used. So what is the solution? How is this problem to be fixed? Any suggestions? As I see it the MOS is written by about a dozen editors, who evidently are not very respectful of the wikipedia community as a whole. Apteva (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC) Your holier-than-thou "take pity on anyone reading [Wikipedia]" without your magically fantastic input, that is somehow automatically better than everyone else's, is the whole problem. You do not have a collaborative attitude, but a "my way or the highway" stance that is extremely offputting. No one cares that you are certain you are right. WP is not about "winning". It is entirely appropriate, and necessary, to address specific editor behaviors when they become disruptive, as yours consistently have, and to address them at the locus of the disruption initially, without escalating matters further if possible. You appear to be confused about what WP:AN/I's purpose it. It is for addressing specific user behaviors, not content, and in particular it is for seeking administrator response to problems for which users can be blocked. You've been staying clear of those, so there is no reason to take you to AN/I, unlike User:LittleBenW at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#diacriticsagain, who go blocked last week. Whether someone "names" you on WT:MOS is moot, since you sign your own posts there. Your opinion that MOS "gives bad advice" has been noted, by everyone within virtual earshot of MOS and various other places you visit with this anti-endash bugbear, like various WP:RM discussions, etc.; you just will not shut up about your obsessive nitpicks that almost no one else agrees with, and it's getting really obnoxious at this point. This won't be a WP:AN/I matter if you continue; it'll be a WP:ARBCOM issue, and if it goes there it's likely that you, like various other parties before you, will get topic-banned from MOS for incessantly brow-beating disruptive editing, refusal to acknowledge that most other editors just don't agree with you, and your attempts to re-re-re-raise issues again and again after they're already settled, in hopes of incidentally finding a receptive audience if you wear out your opponents. The "solution" is for you to WP:JUSTDROPIT and remember that you are to work on the encyclopedia, not dictate your style preferences to everyone else. MOS is written by the Wikipedians who care to write it and with such consensus as can be forged among them, like all other pages here, and has had the direct input of many hundreds of editors. At any given time there are probably a dozen or so editors paying a lot of attention to it, and this too is true of almost any page on Wikipedia; they change over time as editors come and go, and as editors' individual focuses change. You should be aware that the assumption of a conspiratorial cabal running Wikipedia or any process on it is generally considered a farcical idea, and widely mocked. Most people topic-banned from editing MOS, like PMAnderson, have also taken the "it's a conspiracy!" position, and it has not availed them, but instead made them look crazy. I don't agree with everything MOS says (e.g. I really, really loathe sentence instead of title case for headings – I think it looks completely ridiculous), but I and everyone else but a few cranks, whom your behavior is aligning you with, agree that MOS should be followed, because it is important for WP to be self-consistent. There is not a grammar and style rule in the world that someone will not take issue with, but it is more important that we settle on such rules, arbitrary as some of them may be, and follow them, than simply have chaos. PS: Your principal objection seems to be that I took you to task publicly at WT:MOS, and that is very telling. People who are genuinely correct on an issue never fear public criticism, because their critics are self-evidently wrong, and only serve to make the facts they oppose all the clearer. The opposite has been happening in your case. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 09:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC) Short version: Wikipedia:Nobody cares. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 09:04, 30 November 2012 (UTC) Please comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:User pages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)