User talk:Neelix

This user is one of the 250 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

Just curious

Hi! I noticed that you nominated several lists at WP:TFLS. Did you write all of those blurbs? Do you take requests/wishes for writing blurbs (I am pretty bad at it ;-))? bamse (talk) 19:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't know how the lists get from TFLS to the main page, i.e. whether they are shown on the main page in the order given in TFLS or whether somebody makes a selection. If the latter is the case, it would not hurt to have two National Treasure lists at TFLS, would it? Either way I did not see any fine arts list at TFLS yet. So something like paintings, sculptures, swords or other crafts could fill a gap. I'd be very happy if you considered writing a blurb for it (anytime you feel like it; no need to do it now). bamse (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I am afraid my understanding of Buddhism (and non-Japanese, i.e. Chinese/Indian stuff) is too limited to do much about the twelve generals. I am lacking sources and knowledge to do much about Tanzania's protected areas, so the WH in Danger would be the most likely candidate. One Hundred Famous Views of Edo (how do you like this for TFLS?) could be another candidate for FL. The good point of the WH in Danger list is that it would likely interest more reviewers, so that I would not need to harass people with a review request. First I'd like to get all NT lists to FL (one is a candidate now and the other only needs a copy-edit) though, which will take a couple of months more. And as far as I understand, I can have only one list at a time at FLC. bamse (talk) 22:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Giglets

The article Giglets has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a dictionary

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 01:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stultification

The article Stultification has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Belongs at Wiktionary. See WP:NOTDICTIONARY.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mesoderm (talk) 20:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Shakespeare scholars

Category:Shakespeare scholars, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:23, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

List of books about Oakland, California

I noticed you added this list article to the template for Oakland, CA. When i first encountered it, i had not seen any such lists, and thought the list should only be of books or authors who have articles or the likelihood of an article. however, I did a little looking around, and found numerous such bibliographical lists. I have apologized the article creator for any apparent slight i made in my comments, but i do have an ongoing question: what exactly ARE the criteria for inclusion for bibliographical lists like this? I ask you because you have a fairly extensive editing history, and i want to get some sense of what is going on with such lists before making any edits (which i may not do anyway, of course, depending on real world commitments). Have you worked on such bibliographic lists, either stand alone articles or the long "further reading" sections of articles? Is this list as it stands pretty close to the standards? ARE there standards? SHOULD there be standards? WHO would set them? If you know of a forum where this is discussed, id like to be directed there. i found Wikipedia:List of bibliographies and Lists of books, not sure if anyone there is interested.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:48, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Need your help.

We need to keep episodes 24-26 hidden until their air dates on the List of Scooby-Doo! Mystery Incorporated episodes cause someone is still vandalizing the Scooby-Doo! Mystery Incorporated page and changing the status from Airing to Returning series with no reference and I believe they are doing it because of the episodes page. Please help me keep them hidden for now to minimize the vandalism on the main page. JamesAlan1986 (talk-Contributes) 07:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

TFL suggestions

Hello Neelix. Firstly, thanks so much for your interest in our new project, very much appreciated! So far so good, there's been no major traumas relating to our lists on the main page, and in due course I think we'll be going for a more frequent appearance. However, in the meantime, we're now up to 50-odd suggestions at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/submissions, most of them from you which, currently, would give us a year's worth of nominations, not including the ten or so that have already been accepted for the queue. I find editing that page on my pathetic 2.4 GHz Macbook a challenge now, so I was wondering if you'd slow down a little on the nominations until the rest of the community has a chance to catch up with your suggestions and I can move more to the prep area? All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. I missed the comment WFC had made about 100 blurbs. Nevertheless, I think where we are right now is fantastic. I see FAC getting complaints about not having even tomorrow's blurb in place (although hopefully that'll change, if it hasn't already), and with 50 suggested blurbs and an approved queue of 10 or so to get lined up, I think TFL is already in a seriously good state to consider expanding to perhaps three days a week in a couple of months time! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Should the category "Laotian people" be changed to "Lao people"?

Hi, Neelix. I noticed that you had changed Laotian cuisine to Lao cuisine and provided the following edit summary: (moved Laotian cuisine to Lao cuisine over redirect: "Lao" is a more common adjectival for Laos than "Laotian". Google Books has 220 hits for "Lao cuisine" but only 60 for "Laotian cuisine".) You also moved Laotian art to Lao art and stated again that: ("Lao" is a more common adjectival for Laos than "Laotian".)

I've submitted a proposal to change Category:Laotian people to Category:Lao people so that it is in the more common form. I thought that you might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 July 1#Category:Laotian people. Thank you. Wikicentral (talk) 09:22, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Orange-breasted for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Orange-breasted 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/Orange-breasted 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 good 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. Snowman (talk) 13:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Egregiousnesses listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Egregiousnesses. Since you had some involvement with the Egregiousnesses redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Wandering Courier (talk) 18:32, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

No consensus?

Can you please explicate how you determined that there was no consensus to move at Talk:United States Declaration of Independence? 7 !votes in support vs. 4 !votes opposed is normally considered to be consensus support, unless the support argument counters policy or something. Perhaps you miscounted? Or am I missing something? --Born2cycle (talk) 00:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for replying on my talk page. I'm afraid you've misinterpreted the guideline. To verify, I've started a discussion about it at WT:AT: Wikipedia_talk:Article_titles#Clarification_of_WP:PRECISION. Please read my detailed analysis for what the guideline means, why, and how you misinterpreted it.

If you think I'm missing something, please explain there. Otherwise, please reverse your decision. Thanks. --Born2cycle (talk) 04:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Brave

Neelix, that was a brave close. Kudos to you for taking it on. The argument could really go either way, and at the end of the day, either title works just fine. I think "no consensus" was a reasonable call. -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:38, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and ditto all of that for Côte d'Ivoire. -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Grant Morrison photo

Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested here. If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. Nightscream (talk) 01:32, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your contribution to Retreat of glaciers since 1850.

Thank you for your contribution to Retreat of glaciers since 1850. (",) 99.181.156.173 (talk) 03:26, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Was your warning per policy?

I've left a response to you on my talk page. I was upset by the way you warned me re 'Civility', bringing up my block log (2 civilities over five years) and saying blocks get progressively longer. One was reduced so what does that mean? And they both had mitigating circumstances.

I can't even see what I've done that's so bad - and you didn't give me a diff.

I've asked you a few questions re policy anyway. I'm extremely touchy about my block log and I always use use highly-punitive attitudes like yours as a warning to people to avoid risking blocks if they possibly can. Clearly to some admin they are scars for life. Matt Lewis (talk) 19:59, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Environmental implications of nanotechnology

I have restored this article to its old title. While there is a series of articles on environmental impacts of various technologies, this article is more closely aligned with the series of articles on various types of implications of nanotechnology, so I feel that its title should maintain consistency with the latter series. I've explained my reasoning a bit more on the article's talk page.

I support your efforts to improve organization and consistency over different articles; a lot of my work has similar goals. In this case there's just a judgement call as to what to be consistent with. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 17:01, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Mojmír II

Hello Neelix. Did you see the talk page? There's no consensus to move the article. To be honest, I don't think there's a consensus to move the article Mojmír I. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Tree9.jpg

File:Tree9.jpg is under unidentified acacias. Any indication of its location may facilitate an identification. JMK (talk) 09:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for those details. Added id as Acacia erioloba, which in Zimbabwe is limited to the west. There, and anywhere else in Zimbabwe it could also have been Acacia sieberiana, but the location gives more certainty. Id, description and cat changes were added to the photo. JMK (talk) 14:10, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Your tree seems to have been photographed before, and identified as such: Camel thorn. The map on the latter page is not accurate though, the species is less widespread in Zimbabwe. JMK (talk) 14:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Ambassador Program: assessment drive

Even though it's been quiet on-wiki, the Wikipedia Ambassador Program has been busy over the last few months getting ready for the next term. We're heading toward over 80 classes in the US, across all disciplines. You'll see courses start popping up here, and this time we want to match one or more Online Ambassadors to each class based on interest or expertise in the subject matter. If you see a class that you're interested, please contact the professor and/or me; the sooner the Ambassadors and professors get in communication, the better things go. Look for more in the coming weeks about next term.

In the meantime, with a little help I've identified all the articles students did significant work on in the last term. Many of the articles have never been assessed, or have ratings that are out of date from before the students improved them. Please help assess them! Pick a class, or just a few articles, and give them a rating (and add a relevant WikiProject banner if there isn't one), and then update the list of articles.

Once we have updated assessments for all these articles, we can get a better idea of how quality varied from course to course, and which approaches to running Wikipedia assignments and managing courses are most effective.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:27, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Kamen Rider video game prods

In the future, I suggest you do not use the English name of the game to perform searches to determine notability. I have found two unique references for Kamen Rider Hibiki (video game) that show it is notable and I will be seeking a reversal of the deletion of Kamen Rider Blade (video game).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:14, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Electro-Wave Human Tackle

Could you please withdraw your AFD nomination? The subject of the page is a fictional character that has been in existence for longer than I have been alive. However, I can tell that you have not really made any actual searches for sources, particularly those in the original language that the subject is based in. I've found mentions in three magazines in the past few years, but I doubt that there are records going back to 1975 that I can find online. The fictional character has to be notable if it has existed in one form or another for the past 36 years.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:07, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of LC12 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LC12 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/LC12 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 good 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. _TalkIslander 11:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)