User talk:ChrisGualtieri: Difference between revisions
→AWB: more |
Lucia stop posting here |
||
Line 1,413: | Line 1,413: | ||
:: Yay, thanks! [[User:ChrisGualtieri|ChrisGualtieri]] ([[User talk:ChrisGualtieri#top|talk]]) 16:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC) |
:: Yay, thanks! [[User:ChrisGualtieri|ChrisGualtieri]] ([[User talk:ChrisGualtieri#top|talk]]) 16:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC) |
||
::: Such a shame that was a sockpuppet.[[User:Lucia Black|Lucia Black]] ([[User talk:Lucia Black|talk]]) 16:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC) |
::: Such a shame that was a sockpuppet.[[User:Lucia Black|Lucia Black]] ([[User talk:Lucia Black|talk]]) 16:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC) |
||
I'm not sure who was right or wrong, but I understand the stress dealing with people so take this. [[User:DragonZero|<font color="#0080FF">DragonZero</font>]] ([[User talk:DragonZero#top|<small>Talk</small>]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/DragonZero|<small>Contribs</small>]]) 07:18, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#000066; background-color:#DDEEFF; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:A small cup of coffee.JPG|125px|left]] |
|||
[[User:DragonZero|<font color="#0080FF">DragonZero</font>]] ([[User talk:DragonZero#top|<small>Talk</small>]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/DragonZero|<small>Contribs</small>]]) has given you a cup of coffee, for taking the time to weather a dispute. Thanks for staying [[WP:Civility|calm and civil]]! Coffee promotes [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a coffee, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy! |
|||
Spread the lovely, warm, bitter goodness of coffee by adding {{tls|WikiCoffee}} to their talk page with a friendly message. |
|||
{{-}} |
|||
</div><!-- Template:WikiCoffee --> |
|||
== A strange one == |
== A strange one == |
||
Line 1,441: | Line 1,429: | ||
--[[User:Trabixu|Trabixu]] ([[User talk:Trabixu|talk]]) 18:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Trabixu |
--[[User:Trabixu|Trabixu]] ([[User talk:Trabixu|talk]]) 18:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Trabixu |
||
:: I'd discuss at [[Talk:John Dalli]]. Also semi-protected means you need to be on the site for 4 days before you can edit those - its a means to stop IP vandals from continuing with newly registered accounts. Also the first two edits hit the filter for vandalism. There was a lot of [[WP:BLP]] issues and a lack of sources. If you mean well, you'll need to discuss and cite your sources. [[User:ChrisGualtieri|ChrisGualtieri]] ([[User talk:ChrisGualtieri#top|talk]]) 18:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC) |
:: I'd discuss at [[Talk:John Dalli]]. Also semi-protected means you need to be on the site for 4 days before you can edit those - its a means to stop IP vandals from continuing with newly registered accounts. Also the first two edits hit the filter for vandalism. There was a lot of [[WP:BLP]] issues and a lack of sources. If you mean well, you'll need to discuss and cite your sources. [[User:ChrisGualtieri|ChrisGualtieri]] ([[User talk:ChrisGualtieri#top|talk]]) 18:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Bypassing template redirect == |
|||
Why did you make [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Victorian&curid=80341&diff=580968674&oldid=569382844 this edit]? [[User_talk:Josh Parris|Josh Parris]] 00:02, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
: Increase in speed and gets pages off the checklist once and for all. [[User:ChrisGualtieri|ChrisGualtieri]] ([[User talk:ChrisGualtieri#top|talk]]) 00:03, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::Don't blow me off then delete this from your talkpage. [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Billing&curid=87775&diff=580989484&oldid=579127692 You are still making edits without effect]. '''Stop now''' your editing is disruptive and you have been told so. [[User_talk:Josh Parris|Josh Parris]] 06:19, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
== AWB == |
|||
'''Please stop''' Edits such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Church_of_the_Brethren&curid=82193&diff=580976903&oldid=578506599 this] which in no way effect the display of an article are discouraged by the [[WP:AWB|AWB]] documentation. —[[User:Koavf|Justin (<span style="color:grey">ko'''a'''vf</span>)]]<span style="color:red">❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯</span> 06:06, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
I specifically bring to your attention [[Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser#Rules of use]] Rule 3: |
|||
:''Do not make insignificant or inconsequential edits. An edit that has no noticeable effect on the rendered page is generally considered an insignificant edit. If in doubt, or if other editors object to edits on the basis of this rule, seek consensus at an appropriate venue before making further edits.'' |
|||
Running AWB in General Fixes mode, without any other activity, falls into this classification. The rate you are editing makes it clear you are not reviewing your changes, and it certainly seems you are running without any alternative edits planned. You have been warned. [[User_talk:Josh Parris|Josh Parris]] 06:41, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:And [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Barfly&curid=84046&diff=580980254&oldid=563005069 this] is another example of a pointless edit which just wastes other editors' time if the article is on their watchlist. Please stop. [[User:PamD|<font color="green">'''''Pam'''''</font>]][[User talk:PamD|<font color="brown">'''''D'''''</font>]] 09:06, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
|||
==Be civil== |
|||
You have not even "attempted" to being civil with any discussion. If you seen my link bank, you can seee the vast ammount of attacks in just one day. I'm watching my own comments so that [[WP:BOOMERANG]] doesntt occur. Recently you have appeared in ANI for more relevant issues. I'm prepared to bring this case. Again if I have (this time with serious evidence) and I am also showing my own comments aswell within your responces so that there's no chance of boomerang. |
|||
This is a formal warning, you've made significant ammount of personal attacks in just one day. (Also note, you have a pattern of leaving unnecessary uncivil comments in your edit summaries, which if you do decide to remove this. It would be best to remove in a civil manner. Or it justt provides further evidence to incivility.)[[User:Lucia Black|Lucia Black]] ([[User talk:Lucia Black|talk]]) 07:33, 10 November 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:16, 10 November 2013
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
GAN for Taiko
Hi Chris-- I know your speciality is in Anime and Manga, but I wanted to ask if you might consider reviewing the good article nomination for the article on taiko, which I've been trying to improve over the last month or so. If you're not interested, that's completely fine, but if you have any suggestions on how the article might be improved, feel free to make changes or suggest them to me. I, JethroBT drop me a line 21:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- I'll do it on my days off, but I'll put in a request for the books through the library to double check sources and content. For a complete review it may take me more than a week to assemble the sources and a few additional ones. The page is far better than the Japanese one, but theomission some kanji terms and the use of shaku without the context can be confusing. Also, historical musical pieces played on the drum would be nice to have for some context. Usage in popular culture should probably included instead of a "see also" and Taiko no Tatsujin is deserving of a few lines itself. Some additional sources I'd like to see consulted include: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] And so on an so forth. The further reading section should definately be worked in for more competing views and scope. The article is indeed good, but for type of musical instrument the "broad" aspect becomes rather FA like because it cannot be comprehensive on a single page unless it deals with the whole. With that being said, the types are fairly well covered, but so much commentary and insight into the drums. The drum makers are absent, and so is details on the construction and drum materials. The wood is perfectly fine, but I see nothing on the drumhead. So its indeed good, but its got some missing content still. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Chris, great suggestions. (I was nodding my head the whole way through reading your response!) I'll get started on some these issues right away. I, JethroBT drop me a line 02:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
- And to think I was just rambling on for a few moments about some observations! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
- It seems a number of these topics are not accessible online (or just in snippets without sufficient context), so it's off to the library for me as well! I, JethroBT drop me a line 19:17, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- The resource exchange board would probably get most of those. WP:RX has helped me out before. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll check this out. I do have database access, so that should be OK for the articles. Most of the books are accessible to me through the Chicago Public Library too, so it's just a matter of waiting. One thing I want to point out is that it may be helpful (at some point) to fork some content on some of the types of drums because they are so common (e.g. there was already a page on shime-daiko before I started improving this one). Not sure how you want to factor this consideration into the GAN, but I certainly understand the need for breadth for a musical instrument (though in this case, it's a very wide variety of instruments). I, JethroBT drop me a line 20:34, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- You'll have the burden of being broad, whereas individual articles on specific types of drums will have to be more specific on the individual development and construction. A FA or GA on a musical instrument is not an easy thing to do, much less a foreign instrument. In a sense, the article almost already surpasses parts of the GA aspect, but filling a few holes in would make it better, since they have been pointed out. I just have to go through one or two more books tonight and I'll pick up the review. I've got to return 6 books to the library by the 8th and 1 by the 4th that I haven't only begun reading. Adult Manga by Sharon Kinsey is the book I need to rewrite manga because it has a lot of coverage on the development and industry of adult-targeted comics (not pornographic either) and I got Anime Classics Zettai and I still got to review Anime Explosion. On the 9th my Little Boy book has to go back as well. I got only 6 others due by November after that, but I had to do three books on the 2nd so I blew through them in two days and got plenty of notes and material scattered on my desk and computer. I take my research very seriously; I do GA fairly to the criteria, but if you get it to FA level, I could be a demanding person and offer additional notes and back and forth about commentary. You do realize that in my anime and manga research that I typically find publication errors and sometimes solve decades old mysteries through studious research? Asking me to review something I take an interest in is a sure-fire way to make sure its vetted and checked against anything and everything I can get my hands on. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- That sounds great-- I like a thorough review. I think you will find me a very receptive person to improvements and suggestions. I may have questions for clarification, but I don't try to fight tooth and nail over every little thing. It will be helpful to have another head in this, too, because I've already come across some discrepancies in the literature on certain matters (e.g. just today, I've come across conflicts over what constitutes "traditional" construction of drums...also considering that it might be better to just avoid the word "traditional" altogether in some spots here). In any case, I'm in this for the long haul, so I'm committed to making improvements for GA (and eventually FA) for as long as it takes. This was article had zero citations when I started working on it and a giant bibliography at the bottom...a great deal of which are unreliable sources. I've done a lot, but as you say, there's work left to do. Let's just say I like a good challenge, so I'm ready for your scrutiny. : ) I, JethroBT drop me a line 21:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- You'll have the burden of being broad, whereas individual articles on specific types of drums will have to be more specific on the individual development and construction. A FA or GA on a musical instrument is not an easy thing to do, much less a foreign instrument. In a sense, the article almost already surpasses parts of the GA aspect, but filling a few holes in would make it better, since they have been pointed out. I just have to go through one or two more books tonight and I'll pick up the review. I've got to return 6 books to the library by the 8th and 1 by the 4th that I haven't only begun reading. Adult Manga by Sharon Kinsey is the book I need to rewrite manga because it has a lot of coverage on the development and industry of adult-targeted comics (not pornographic either) and I got Anime Classics Zettai and I still got to review Anime Explosion. On the 9th my Little Boy book has to go back as well. I got only 6 others due by November after that, but I had to do three books on the 2nd so I blew through them in two days and got plenty of notes and material scattered on my desk and computer. I take my research very seriously; I do GA fairly to the criteria, but if you get it to FA level, I could be a demanding person and offer additional notes and back and forth about commentary. You do realize that in my anime and manga research that I typically find publication errors and sometimes solve decades old mysteries through studious research? Asking me to review something I take an interest in is a sure-fire way to make sure its vetted and checked against anything and everything I can get my hands on. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll check this out. I do have database access, so that should be OK for the articles. Most of the books are accessible to me through the Chicago Public Library too, so it's just a matter of waiting. One thing I want to point out is that it may be helpful (at some point) to fork some content on some of the types of drums because they are so common (e.g. there was already a page on shime-daiko before I started improving this one). Not sure how you want to factor this consideration into the GAN, but I certainly understand the need for breadth for a musical instrument (though in this case, it's a very wide variety of instruments). I, JethroBT drop me a line 20:34, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- The resource exchange board would probably get most of those. WP:RX has helped me out before. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Chris, great suggestions. (I was nodding my head the whole way through reading your response!) I'll get started on some these issues right away. I, JethroBT drop me a line 02:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
- I've scored a cache of documents and I noticed some Wikiproject mess so I'm going to be fixing a bunch of things up while I wait for the books to come in. I'm going to take the GAN now, but it will be some time before I get everything I need. Do you mind the wait? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:24, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
- No problem-- just keep me posted on when you think you might get officially started. I just stopped by the library yesterday to place a hold on the books I need (which are Varian's Way of Taiko and Bender's Taiko Boom. In the meantime, I can start adding information from the sources you scrounged up above. I, JethroBT drop me a line 17:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
- I am going to see what I can do on Wiki while I wait for mediation and the books. I think fixing the WP:USA assessment and making it functional and worth checking will be a good side project. I'm like the only person who cares to do such work on Wikipedia, but losing it would be bad because a high level project sort function is better than a bunch of low level ones for international studies and focus. If there is a fault with the organization and operation of a system, many people will abandon or call for its removal rather than its fixing simply because cleaning it up takes longer than passing it into obscurity or removing it entirely. Which ironically, would take more work at this point. Why few people appreciate such things is beyond me, but it is a good feeling to have your hard work be useful to someone, right? A scholarly topic on Taiko does more for the education and appreciation of the work than playing in some band or giving some speeches. Wikipedia is a good platform in that sense, but the goal is to represent the sum of all human knowledge and have easy accessibility to that information. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:09, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
- No problem-- just keep me posted on when you think you might get officially started. I just stopped by the library yesterday to place a hold on the books I need (which are Varian's Way of Taiko and Bender's Taiko Boom. In the meantime, I can start adding information from the sources you scrounged up above. I, JethroBT drop me a line 17:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
- Books just came in today, so I'll be getting started with some more substantial edits this weekend. I've also started to incorporate information from the sources above. How are things on your end? I, JethroBT drop me a line 13:09, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
- Library called about one of the books two days ago, I won't be getting my Asian music in North America book. Apparently the library that had it listed cannot find it in its records. Sad to say, but I think JSTOR and MUSE requests at the RX would be all I have unless you can send a copy or scan to me through email or something just so I can peer review it. Though it is not necessary and is likely more trouble than it is worth. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
- There are a few I can e-mail you, actually (I have some access to databases from grad school). I'll do that now. I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:27, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Chris-- sorry that I haven't been able to get book scans to you yet. I've been tied up at work! Do you still think you have time to do the Taiko review? I see you have lots of things on your plate right now... I, JethroBT drop me a line 01:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- That's alright. We are both busy, but if you can get the book scans in a few days time, I'll hold off. I didn't want to rush you or cause concern by not being responsive or alarming other editors about the time delay in the review process. As you can see, I have been really busy, but I usually print out GANs and go through them line by line during my lunch breaks and mark them up in red to prepare my review. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Chris-- sorry that I haven't been able to get book scans to you yet. I've been tied up at work! Do you still think you have time to do the Taiko review? I see you have lots of things on your plate right now... I, JethroBT drop me a line 01:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- There are a few I can e-mail you, actually (I have some access to databases from grad school). I'll do that now. I, JethroBT drop me a line 16:27, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hey, just want to confirm that you got the scans from me. Any idea when you might be able to start the review? There's a couple things I still need to add from your suggestions above. I, JethroBT drop me a line 21:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hey Chris-- just checking in again. If you need to back out of looking over the GAN for any reason, that's totally fine. But if you think you have the time to spare, that's great. Just wanted to see where you were at. Thanks, I, JethroBT drop me a line 15:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Have you added everything you wanted? I've been really busy, but just let me know when your set and I'll reveal it from there - I do have the scans. Sorry for the delay. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:52, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- I'll be adding some things in this evening on Taiko no Tatsujin and (hopefully) something on a historical piece or two, the latter of which I can probably draw from Yatai-bayashi. I, JethroBT drop me a line 14:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- OK Chris, I'm ready to go. I still have the books on me (I renewed them!), so if there is more content that is missing, I should be able to add it in as you go through the GAN. Will you be able to start soon? I, JethroBT drop me a line 03:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- Will post it tomorrow! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:20, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- OK Chris, I'm ready to go. I still have the books on me (I renewed them!), so if there is more content that is missing, I should be able to add it in as you go through the GAN. Will you be able to start soon? I, JethroBT drop me a line 03:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'll be adding some things in this evening on Taiko no Tatsujin and (hopefully) something on a historical piece or two, the latter of which I can probably draw from Yatai-bayashi. I, JethroBT drop me a line 14:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Have you added everything you wanted? I've been really busy, but just let me know when your set and I'll reveal it from there - I do have the scans. Sorry for the delay. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:52, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hey Chris-- just checking in again. If you need to back out of looking over the GAN for any reason, that's totally fine. But if you think you have the time to spare, that's great. Just wanted to see where you were at. Thanks, I, JethroBT drop me a line 15:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
I left a important message there. Please be quick and clean up the plot in 2 days, otherwise, I've to fail that article. Regards, --Jionpedia ✉ 19:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- I've left comments there. Will pass the article after the problems have been resolved, but please do it quickly. Regards, --Jionpedia ✉ 12:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Fostering through Social Enterprise (FtSE)
Hi Chris, A while back (27 February 2012) you declined a submission because it was not adequately supported by reliable sources: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Fostering_Through_Social_Enterprise. I've just added some verifiable sources, such as The Guardian, The Telegraph, as well as a number of national charities. I hope that this submission now satisfies notability requirements. I wondered if you might be able to take another pass at it? Thanks in advance. LizHawkins (talk) 22:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Appears to meet the bare minimum in terms of content and sourcing for the presumption of notability. I have moved it to mainspace. It still needs development, but after a year from its first submission the continued improvement and coverage in sources bodes well for the future. Keep up the good work! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Question about edits to Chase Paymentech Page
Hi Chris, I was alerted that you made some edits to the Chase Paymentech page today (thanks!) and just wanted to ask a few quick questions. What was changed? Did you notice something I did wrong in the setup/editing that I should keep in mind moving forward? I am fairly new to contributing to Wikipedia, so I am doing my best to make sure I am doing everything right. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvb (talk • contribs) 21:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- I fixed the template and bolded the name.[10] I just noticed a broken wiki link for things like JP Morgan Chase, just make brackets around them and it will link it like this [[JP Morgan Chase]] and it will work. You do not need to provide the URL. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.
Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:
- Views/Day
- Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
- Quality
- Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.
The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:
- Content
- Is more content needed?
- Headings
- Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
- Images
- Is the number of illustrative images about right?
- Links
- Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
- Sources
- For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:58, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film)
The article Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jionpedia -- Jionpedia (talk) 07:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations!
![]() |
The Good Article Barnstar |
For making Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film) a GA. Keep up the good work, and continue writing more GA's. ---- Kailash29792 (talk) 08:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC) |
Million Awards
![]() |
The Quarter Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film) (estimated annual readership: 419,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2013 (UTC) |
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:
![]() | This editor won the Quarter Million Award for bringing Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (film) to Good Article status. |
Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yay! Thank you! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Actually, looking again at your user page, we actually owe you the big one, and a Hall of Fame spot, too! Sorry I missed this previously; it looks like it passed while I was on wikibreak. Anyway, it's amazing how many readers you're helping with these articles--I hope you keep it up! Cheers again, Khazar2 (talk) 11:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Million Award | |
For your contributions to bring Spirited Away (estimated annual readership: 1,461,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC) |
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:
![]() | This editor won the Million Award for bringing Spirited Away to Good Article status. |
- Thanks again! I'm doing all that I can to help out; I might have some more in a week or twos time. I'll keep at it! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:51, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Awesome, good luck! -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:52, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks again! I'm doing all that I can to help out; I might have some more in a week or twos time. I'll keep at it! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:51, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
An RfC about the use of the {{fairusereview}} tag on mainspace pages is in progress here. From 2005 until recently, this template was added to file pages when the non-free status of the file was being discussed. In May this year it was edited so that it could be added to articles. The RfC question is: should the template be reverted to the pre-May 2013 version, and retained only for use on file pages?
Since you are a registered member of the Fair Use WikiProject, you might have an interest in this discussion. Tom Reedy (talk) 04:30, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 26
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.
- Dragon Ball (anime) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Mike Reynolds, Mike Shepherd, Don Brown, Jeffrey Watson and Naoko Watanabe
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Tennis article whitespaces
I noticed you are removing whitespaces from the events section of tennis articles. I'm not intimately familiar with the guidelines regarding this formatting issue but the whitespaces are there to increase the readability of the articles. Without the whitespaces the events section becomes one big blob of text that is much harder to scan and read compared to the same section with whitespaces. Compare e.g. the 1970 South African Open (tennis) article with (1) and without (2) whitespaces.--Wolbo (talk) 18:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
- These are extra breaks, they are rendering and they should not be per WP:MOS. Also, links like [[Hard court|hard courts]] should simply be [[Hard court]]s. This type of additional lines of nothing but whitespace breaks the reading flow and I do not know why you are saying this makes it easier to read, when the text is simply and inexplicably separated from further. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Sources
Hi Chris I updated the section on sightlines in stadia. I am an experienced stadium architect The information I added is stadium good practise and cant really quote a source but know all this to be true. I want to add further very useful detail on stadium design and good practise. Is it OK to not have sources. Anybody else who knows will not disaggree with what I have added. Thanks Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tadpolefarmer (talk • contribs) 16:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Some things need not be sourced, but these are like "the sky is blue". Anything generally controversial should be cited, or likely to be controversial. The addition is fine under common sense, but is extremely technical. Thankfully, this is all easily covered through scholarly sources.[11] I particularly like how this is covered with ADA seating - a major part of existing law.[12] I like to use Google Scholar to cite what I already know because my "word" is meaningless on topics here. I do happen to be an expert in a specialty field though yet Wikipedia does not distinguish such experts and is typically rough on them because of the unique atmosphere. Just let those sources back your words up! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Stan Gibilisco
I've just created an article about TAB Books that contains a minor link to Stan Gibilisco. I removed your "dead end" tag because it doesn't apply any longer. Probably another tag is needed, since there's now only one teeny-tiny link to him, but I don't know what it might be. Lou Sander (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
- Dead end is for lack of outgoing links where "orphan" is less than 3 incoming links from other pages. The tag only details the problem and not the fix; it is not meant to be a form of punishment or method for continual directed improvement based on the whims of editors. Thanks for fixing it, I was doing a quick run with AWB and it places them if they qualify and it is very hard to tell otherwise. Thanks for fixing it. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Read the full newsletter
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:14, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Unfixing
Hi,
Not sure what you've got AWB set up to do, but the "fixes" labeled General Fixes + CheckWiki 75 using AWB are messing up articles. Specifically, it seems that AWB is messing up the conversion of colon-plus-asterisk to just asterisks. I noted it at several articles you'll see I reverted. — kwami (talk) 04:17, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
It can't handle ::*. But sometimes there's a reason for having this rather than asterisks, as at Berber languages, and it shouldn't be "fixed". — kwami (talk) 04:26, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Would you mind explaining why you are replacing indented bullet points, coded as ":* ", with "** ". Instead of indenting cleanly, this introduces an unnecessary asterix. Thanks. --Epipelagic (talk) 05:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- According to CHECKWIKI, "The article had a list, where one line is indent (:* text). A list doesn't need an indent with ":". Use more "*" to indent the list." and it seems to be under WP:L. I'll hold off, because I don't know why it broke down after triple or quad asterisks, but as you can tell from the mark up, below, it doesn't need the semicolons. Check when you respond or view it for proof.
- Is one indent
- Is two indents
- Is three indents
- Is four indents
- Is five indents...etc
- Is four indents
- Is three indents
- Is two indents
- And it doesn't make a separate bullets. I think the issue is somewhere in the text of the coding. I'll take a look into it, but semicolons are not needed and they seem to confuse the software when in lists. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Oh and I'm holding off on doing any more, simply because I think the formatting is to blame and the issue is the software considering each one as a new list and making extra bullets where there need not be any. As you can see, unneccessary line breaks cause the problem and I didn't have it tighten those up.
- And it doesn't make a separate bullets. I think the issue is somewhere in the text of the coding. I'll take a look into it, but semicolons are not needed and they seem to confuse the software when in lists. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- 1
- 2
- 3 (spaced with line break)
See? It is the line breaks that seem to be responsible, but having no line breaks is fine and does not change the formatting on the page. So its a combination error because one is trying to override the other. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 12:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Tips for the Dyslexia Page:
Psychiatrists are given a cursory overview of dyslexia in our training -- child psychiatrists get a little more training in it. Psychiatrists and mental health practitioners typically handle associated problems like ADHD. Treating dyslexia itself is handled mostly by educational psychologists and reading specialists. Neuroscientists, neuropsychologists, and educational psychologists do the research on it.
That being said,
First I'd go to pubmed to get a decent overview:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002379/
There's also the page below -- which is a nice, simple overview:
http://www.dyslexia.yale.edu/whatisdyslexia.html
Looking over the Wikipedia dyslexia article, I'd say the introduction has some problems:
1) It's top-heavy -- i.e., it starts with a lot of jargon rather than, in simple language, defining the types of 'difficulties with words' that people with dyslexia have. The intro should be written in more user-friendly language. In my opinion, the best article I've seen so far that does this in the medical section, is the "Schizophrenia" article. The wiki-linked jargon should be kept, but used in sentences that define it later on.
2) It then goes on to introduce stuff that, since it's controversial, should be addressed in a controversies section or another relevant section in the body, not the intro.
3) As you probably know, the introduction should be simple with known and undisputed facts about dyslexia.
The rest of the article isn't organized very well. Some of the sections are vague and could be written in more simple, direct sentences. Even some long sub-sections could be summarized in a couple compact sentences.
Unfortunately, because of time constraints, I can't work on that article. But I'm confident you'll do a great job! If you have any other questions related to Wikipedia articles don't hesitate to ask.Youtalkfunny (talk) 05:27, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
One thing I'd like to add: Look on Pubmed for 'Review' articles that summarize the current field's knowledge of dyslexia also.Youtalkfunny (talk) 05:50, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
PS: My apologies. I didn't see how many great things you've contributed yourself 'til now -- so if the end of my first comment sounded lame: It was! Anyway, given that you're an ace on Wikipedia, hope suggestions helped somewhat.Youtalkfunny (talk) 06:28, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- 230,000 edits doesn't make me an expert; I still make mistakes and I do a lot of things around here that classify as janitorial work! It was an interesting conversation that lead me to look up books on the matter and I found Davis's work to be enlightening - making dyslexia into a gift that the individual distorts into a disability by lack of proper training, even before they enter school. That article is not representative of my work; I noticed its issues so that is why I wanted to work on it. I've been watching your progress on the article and dropped a line - and with good reason - you've been a great help already! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:18, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- you need to avoid the USA skewed idea of dyslexia based on the needs of the Orton Gilligham organisation and its marketing agencies and friendly universities, and look at the International Dyslexia research from outside the skewing influences of the dyslexia industry. have a look at the CiteULike Developmental Dyslexia research paper sharing library. And the Alexia (acquired dyslexia) Library, and the Reading: acquiring and developing the skills and abilties library. And if you want PubMed sources you could have a look at the Dyslexia subsection of my user page which includes a wide range of PubMed research paper collections So go read the international research regarding dyslexia from around the world, which is what Wikipedia is supposed to reflect. dolfrog (talk) 13:55, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Agreed.
Yes, I couldn't agree more. Part of what I try to do professionally is help people see differences as gifts.Youtalkfunny (talk) 20:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- pure marketing hype dolfrog (talk) 13:41, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Ghost in the Shell (film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ghost in the Shell (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- Jburlinson (talk) 21:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.
Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:
- Views/Day
- Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
- Quality
- Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.
The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:
- Content
- Is more content needed?
- Headings
- Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
- Images
- Is the number of illustrative images about right?
- Links
- Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
- Sources
- For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:02, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
User talk pages
If you do not want me to post here, then kindly do me the same favor.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:09, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- I am required to post certain messages and you did not ask. You re-instituted your revert without citing a reason and without discussion when I had already posted to the talk page. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:13, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- You are not required to warn me that I am edit warring when I only made one revert that I backed up with policy.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
ANI
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bleach (anime), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2x2 (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) 09:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
WikiCup 2014
Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:20, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Maybe. Could be fun, but stressful though. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:21, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Up to you. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah. I'll decide probably by December. It depends on whether or not I have to go through the Arb Com process with Ryulong and likely a handful of A&M editors. I could probably do a hundred or more GAs if I put everything else I did on hold. But we will see. Right? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Do what you have to do. The deadline for signing up, I think, is 31 January 2014, just like this year's competition. Whatever you do though, make sure you write those hundred or more GAs ;) --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:45, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Hehe. I can really bug my local library for a lot of materials on some pretty obscure stuff. I'm not to familiar with the Wikicup, but I'm sure my other maintenance and helping edits don't count for anything. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:48, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Do what you have to do. The deadline for signing up, I think, is 31 January 2014, just like this year's competition. Whatever you do though, make sure you write those hundred or more GAs ;) --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:45, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah. I'll decide probably by December. It depends on whether or not I have to go through the Arb Com process with Ryulong and likely a handful of A&M editors. I could probably do a hundred or more GAs if I put everything else I did on hold. But we will see. Right? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Up to you. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 02:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
A giant step back
I have proposed that an RfC take place in which both combatants in the anime/manga article structure debacle state their positions and then let the community work it out from there.
Considering that, if this long-festering dispute does not abate, this will get to ArbCom, and ArbCom almost certainly will put a year long or indefinite topic ban on both of you (or a siteban, although that's less likely), I would strongly encourage you to run with this idea.
Please indicate at that thread whether or not you would be willing to participate in such a discussion. Please indicate only your answer to that question, as I don't want the proposal to become yet another venue for the interpersonal conflict to play out.
Yours, Sven Manguard Wha? 16:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
You've got mail!
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Mail-message-new.svg/40px-Mail-message-new.svg.png)
Message added 06:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the
Sven Manguard Wha? 06:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to say...
... that this - specifically the part where you say that for the good of Wikipedia you'd rather be personally topic-banned, rather than mutually topic-banned - is one of the classiest things I've seen on here all year. As we say in the Khazar house with fake Australian accents, "Good on ya, mate." -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
RfC
You and Ryulong now have your RfC, for the record I was going to withdraw my support for the topic ban but when I came on just a few ago I saw that it was held off so It is moot now. Chris I still want to help you and Ryu come to an agreement if the issue is MOSANIME then as I said before throw out your proposals in the RfC and gain consensus from the community to help improve it =). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:57, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, pleaseconsult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:46, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Please note that navigation templates are placed underneath the external links [13]. Also note that a navigational box is only meant to be included in pages which are linked to it, not to every single article that is relevant to the navigational box's subject. --Omnipaedista (talk) 09:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- AWB moved it to that position, perhaps it was missing an intermediary move check. I'm not positive what happened or why. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
November 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hadrien Laroche may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- Flammarion, 2009) <ref>[http://www.lexpress.fr/culture/livre/la-restitution_832142.html]</ref>]—which have placed him at the forefront of contemporary French writing <ref>[http://www.dailymotion.
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:08, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Etel Solingen may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- In an article-length review essay published in the journal ''International Security,''] William Potter of the Monterey Institute and Gaukhar Mukhatzhanova described the book as, "[http://
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
hi, first of all thanks for improving on the article, a little note on removing stub templates which in itself is correct, the templates often keep articles in a category, in this case the Animal anatomy category dropped of. Cheers Mion (talk) 10:30, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
RfC has started
The RfC is now public, and can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/franchise coverage RfC. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:51, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Ghost in the Shell (film)
The article Ghost in the Shell (film) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Ghost in the Shell (film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jburlinson -- Jburlinson (talk) 22:11, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Your GA noms
Hi Chris, I'm settled in and have internet set up now in my new house. I haven't seen any changes to NGE since I responded to you on the review page, and there are still issues you haven't touched. Can you give me a sense of your plan for completing the articles I've reviewed? I would recommend that you hold off on nominating new articles for review until after we've wrapped these up. Regards, Lemurbaby (talk) 10:31, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
- I was asking for direction for the NGE one. I do not know what the problem is. And as you can tell, the Ghost in the Shell film GAN actually precedes your GAN reviews, it just was taken. And is actually about to pass. I'd like to focus on the NGE and anime ones. Since NGE is really close can you please tell me what is needed for the NGE one to pass? @Lemurbaby:, I do not think the hentai one will be able to pass given your request. Hentai had been up before all the others and I hate to see it fail - I'd hate for any of them to fail, but I can go all out on the anime page if you request as well. Just say the word. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:13, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
- I don't intend to fail any of them - it's just a matter of you deciding how you'd like to tackle the workload. It's fine to start with NGE first. I'm not clear on what sort of additional information you need to improve the article. There are still suggestions and recommendations in the GA review that don't seem to have been addressed. If they aren't crossed off, it means they still need attention. If you believe you've addressed an issue and I haven't noticed the change, point it out and I will have another look. If there is anything unclear, let me know. Lemurbaby (talk) 15:48, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
![]() |
The Resilient Barnstar |
You are the pride and joy of Wikipedia! Without people like you Wikipedia would not move forward! Banaster Giver Extra Polite (talk) 11:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC) |
- Yay, thanks! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
- Such a shame that was a sockpuppet.Lucia Black (talk) 16:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
- Yay, thanks! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
A strange one
Hi ChrisGualtieri, hope you're well. If you're not too busy, would you be able to look in at User talk:Quadell#mirror images? A very odd situation, regarding a new Harrison biography, which … well, it basically rips off Wikipedia's Harrison album and song articles. Strange but true.
What I'm hoping is, you might want to hit "helpful" on my Amazon review – which I've signed as "HariG", and which is linked from Quadell's page. In the interests of drawing attention to this issue, I'd simply like to ensure that the review is helpful/popular enough to register in the listing's main space. Quite understand if you'd rather not of course. Many thanks. Best, JG66 (talk) 18:00, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Can you help please
Dear Chris, Someone has blocked me out of the page about John Dalli. The fact is that there are contributors who are vandalising this site with intent to damage Mr. Dalli. I tried to compile a factual description of his achievements and of the events that led to problems in his political life. I tried to reference the contribution profusely. I would like my contribution to be included and protected from vandalism by the likes of "Demdem" and "ritche333".
I would appreciate some help --Trabixu (talk) 18:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)Trabixu
- I'd discuss at Talk:John Dalli. Also semi-protected means you need to be on the site for 4 days before you can edit those - its a means to stop IP vandals from continuing with newly registered accounts. Also the first two edits hit the filter for vandalism. There was a lot of WP:BLP issues and a lack of sources. If you mean well, you'll need to discuss and cite your sources. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC)