User talk:Atsme

Gabor B. Racz

Thought of complimenting you for this article. A good one mainly in terms of prose quality. Best --PeterCRames (talk) 19:20, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

What a nice compliment. Thank you, PeterCRames. Atsme☯^Consult 03:50, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Alligator gar

Gatoclass (talk) 05:37, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Great works!! You have improved a lot....Keep up.... The herald 15:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
The Herald - how sweet - thank you!! And thank you for being so patient and giving of your time. I'm pretty excited about a couple new projects I'm working on offline, and also trying to improve a very inaccurate "start" article that relies heavily on self-published sources, and original research. Atsme☯^Consult 16:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of American paddlefish

The article American paddlefish you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:American paddlefish for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 00:42, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bowfin

The article Bowfin you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bowfin for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for American paddlefish

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		To Atsme, an overdue barnstar for the impressive articles she has written on "primitive" fish. Well done! --Epipelagic (talk) 19:38, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you kindly, User:Epipelagic. Your recognition is much appreciated. Atsme☯^Consult 22:31, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Bowfin

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:43, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Synodus intermedius

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gabor B. Racz

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gabor B. Racz 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 Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:02, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gabor B. Racz

The article Gabor B. Racz you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gabor B. Racz for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:03, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Cwmhiraeth, thank you for your tireless efforts. Atsme☯^Consult 22:06, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

FA congratulations

Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of American paddlefish to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA) appear as "Today's featured article" soon (either on a particular date or on any available date), please nominate it at the requests page. If you'd like to see an FA appear on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with about 1,287 articles waiting their turn at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. Bencherlite^Talk 10:46, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Bencherlite. I believe in the DYK/GA/FA process, admire the reviewers for their diligence, and generosity of their time, and hope I will be able to help bring more quality articles to Wikipedia. Atsme☯^Consult 12:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Today's Featured Article: Notification

This is to inform you that American paddlefish, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 24 December 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 23:24, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Precious

intrinsic beauty of sharing knowledge
Thank you, free at last, for quality articles such as American paddlefish and Gabor B. Racz, written with the background of experience and in the spirit that there's "something indescribable, yet intrinsically beautiful about sharing knowledge", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

One of the best Christmas gifts ever. Thank you Gerda Arendt. It is such an honor to receive this from you!! Atsme☯^Consult 13:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	GREAT job! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:36, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, User:7&6=thirteen. Your collaboration was much appreciated. Atsme☯^Consult 01:12, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Osama bin Laden (elephant)

We need your tick. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

• If you're referring to support for ALT3, I did that before you posted this...great minds think alike? Atsme☯^Consult 14:40, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

I saw your support. Thanks. However, I meant the confirmatory symbol. It's DYK thing. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:44, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for North American Piedmontese cattle

Harrias ^talk 12:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

11,777 views - not so bad for a lot of bull. Atsme☯^Consult 19:32, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

North American Piedmontese cattle

What I am proud of is that we made this article twice as big as Piedmontese cattle. Quite an accomplishment.
As an aside, I find that one should be especially careful about not changing the substance of the article. This is a technical article, and it's one thing to edit and format it; but one should go slow, particularly when there is technical jargon. As some of the recent edits prove, there are those of us who are editing above our knowledge and understanding. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:30, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Total agreement here, User:7&6=thirteen. Something similar happened with Paddlefish and American paddlefish. In the beginning, I wanted to merge the two, but my request was denied. [1] As a result, I decided to focus on improving/expanding the stub, American paddlefish [2]. End result: article was nominated for DYK, made it to GA, and was eventually promoted to FA. . The original Paddlefish remains the same which is kinda sad, but some editors are of the opinion that not all articles are intended to be GA. My thinking is that if articles are not intended to be GA, they belong in Wiktionary, not in the encyclopedia. Another aspect I find quite puzzling is the fact that I've encountered at least 3 stub/starter articles that could be improved/expanded, but the resistance was over the top. The debates are quite tiresome, but it is the project that suffers in the end because they who oppose the loudest do nothing to improve or expand the article, thus the article remains a stub or starter. I'm beginning to believe the latter is the intent WP:COATRACK. Perhaps WP needs to create expansion/improvement teams to work on such articles, including special NPOV teams to work on POV articles where edits have been determined by consensus (which side attracts the most participation) instead of policy. (PS: can you show me how to style your user name so I can ping you instead of using brackets?) Atsme☯^Consult 14:43, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Very perceptive. Those are several of many reasons why the encyclopedia is so wildly uneven. Fortunately for me, I tend to posthole in articles that nobody else cares about. Including edits before I took on this user name, one of my very first was Outhouse, which is quite metaphorical and really is my article. Likewise, Three hares and Barber pole. You can find out more in those articles than you probably ever wanted to know. I also ran into all kinds of insuperable problems on the DYK in Turtling (sailing) because I refused to dumb the article down and make it conform to their policy. I've run into similar problems where I had tried to simply put in better forms of citations into a few GAs. NIH, and WP:Own; it was like I had done something heretical. Won't do that again. Stay in touch. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:52, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Excellent choices for articles, and well-written. Here's a little something that might interest you. --Atsme☯^Consult 16:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

An outhouse display in an old west setting on a Colorado ranch

Very good picture. Would be a good addition to the Outhouse article if it were in Commons. I appreciate your comments on the articles. I was trying to write a really comprehensive and more or less definitiv3e article, which should give a reader a good place to start their own research. I tend to put in way more sources than is typical. As you know, we put them in, and rarely get feedback (except now for "Thank"s, which is at least something.) Ciao. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:41, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

It is in Commons. You're welcome to use it. Atsme☯^Consult 18:44, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll add it. Somebody may not like it, as there already are a lot of pictures in the article. But it is artfully done, and I like it. Better to put it ih and let somebody else challenge it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Put picture in. Take a look. May have to tweaked for placement and size. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:23, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Nice! And here we are talking about outhouses. . If I may make a suggestion - my personal preference for adding photos when there are too many to line-up left or right can be seen at Alligator gar. Scroll down to about mid-page. You can add quite a few pictures that way. Atsme☯^Consult 19:28, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Good suggestion. Would you mind doing it? A fresh perspective and a new set of eyes on Outhouse would benefit the article, I'm sure. I've grown jaded. As I said, I did a whole lot of edits before I became 7&6=thirteen and even more after. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:33, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Certainly - it will be a good break for me while still staying on topic with another project I've been involved in. Atsme☯^Consult 19:42, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep an eye out. I appreciate the extra set of hands, too. All of my edits on that page are close to 500, well over 40% of the total edits to that page. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:48, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Elsevier access

Hello, Atsme. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Chris Troutman (talk) 00:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hubert Walter

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hubert Walter. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Question

Have you read WP:MEDRS? Am really interested to know. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 00:31, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I have read them. Has nothing to do with Griffin's BLP. Are you planning to slap the PS/Fringe bullcrap on every BLP that says vitamins may be good for you and here's why, and then they suggest further research? You're going to wear yourself out. My reference to Natural News was relative to their references about Griffin's occupation. You really need to cool your heels on the PS/Fringe stuff, and stop being presumptuous. Your POV is showing. Atsme☯^Consult 01:21, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

just curious. I will be interested to see what content you propose about laetrile. good luck! Jytdog (talk) 01:43, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

My only focus is getting the article neutral and policy compliant. I have only one goal here, and you should have figured that out just reading my User Page. I could use some collaborative help which would serve a much greater purpose than a watchdog. Hint, hint.

We have different goals with respect to our work here, and different views on PAG I don't care at all about "gold stars" like GA/FA or DYK (I just want to create and maintain good content in WP, per PAG, as I see it) and those seem important to you. We clearly see PAG differently. We see the article differently too. It is OK to me, based on PAG and my standards for quality within PAG. Not perfect, but OK. Based on what you have written so far (which is a lot - I am not presuming much), you think it needs dramatic revision and I don't share the vision you have described, for where you want the article to go. Like I've said you are free to try to move the article in the direction you want. We'll just have to work it out, as you go. I suggest you propose draft article content expressing your vision on the Talk page while the article is locked down. There is no reason to not start now, if you really intend to try to rework it; and proposing content is the most efficient way to get to consensus (or lack thereof) for the specific proposals. Jytdog (talk) 02:24, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out, Jytdog. I provided links to a couple of GAs that I plan to use as models for consistency, and I hope you will help me make that happen. Did you get a chance to look at them? Whenever I focus on an article, my plan is automatically to make it a GA. I believe if given the time and attention by good collaborators, almost every article on WP can be a GA. If an article cannot grow beyond stub or starter, then it probably needs to be modified for Wiktionary, not left as clutter for Wikipedia. If an article doesn't pass the smell test for NPOV, then it belongs in a tabloid or on some partisan website somewhere, not in Wikipedia. I am not here to advocate anything except good writing, and I'm not promoting anything except good articles. That's pretty much it in a nutshell, even though I know how much you love reading my walls of text.

Based on the great deal that you have written, our ideas about the world, and the epistemologies that we use to try to grasp what in the world might be true, are so different that I very much doubt if you and I will end up pulling in the same direction on much of anything. And really, I don't share your vision for content in the Griffin article and cannot help you move it in the direction you want to take it. But I appreciate the desire to collaborate. I like to collaborate too! Good luck with your efforts. Jytdog (talk) 17:19, 10 January 2015 (UTC)