User talk:842U

Tyler Florence edits

Thanks - a considerable improvement. Wikidemon (talk) 18:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Stem (bicycle part)

Nice work on the Stem article! 842U (talk) 22:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

You did all the work. I just tweaked the results. Hope you don't mind. -AndrewDressel (talk) 22:09, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what this means "The threadless stem's centering can be adjusted without disturbing handlebar height." -AndrewDressel (talk) 13:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

With a threadless stem, if the handlebars aren't centered, facing forward, you can adjust that centering and because the headset can only rotate and not move up or down, you won't disturb the handlebar height. On a quill stem, the second you free up the stem to adjust it, you have to manage the stem in two dimensional planes: lateral as well as vertical.

Maybe there's a better way of saying this in the article. 842U (talk) 14:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

NYC clean-up

Thanks! Les woodland (talk) 15:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)les woodland

Barnstar

Well I know how tempting it can be to just walk away from an argument, especially one against a stubborn mule -- and sometimes walking away is the right thing to do, but I think the MoS over-reactions in this case merited your continued arguing and hopefully common sense will prevail in the end. So thanks, "on behalf of the project", for not taking the easy way out. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 00:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Cycling in New York City

I've noticed the considerable clean up and edits, however it may be best to work on the changes you wish to make using Show preview or Show changes rather than making edits and saving the page each team for small additions. It would save your time and its easier for people to see your contributions to the page. Thanks--CorrectlyContentious 14:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Caravan reply

I'm not sure what you meant in your previous message. Unless I'm missing something, the white 4th-gen Caravan image is in the infobox, not with any text about the Grand Caravan. I had only switched the Grand Caravan image out of the infobox because it's a bit blurrier. IFCAR (talk) 23:39, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

geobox

I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean you would like to exclude some of the information in the new box, simply leave the fields blank, and nothing will appear. If you mean that you would like to include features that aren't apparent in the new mountainbox template, you would use the "free" fields to include them. I just left some instructions on how to do so here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Mountains. Once you get the hang of the new form, it's quite easy to use, but there is a slight learnign curve to overcome. There's a price for change. . .even good change.--Pgagnon999 (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

If you mean, "is there a way to adapt the features of the new mountainbox into the old mountainbox", I don't know. If there is, it would require a rewrite of the template itself. I think that was the point of creating the new version in the first place. If there is something unappealing about the new version (the color?), then perhaps the new version should be changed, not the old version.--Pgagnon999 (talk) 14:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

NoMoreLinks text

Was the comment text in [1] copied from another article? The comment contains {{NoMoreLinks}} and that is a way to indicate it was made with {{subst:NoMoreLinks}} which substitutes {{NoMoreLinks}}, but that template currently has another text. It's a little confusing when the comment still indicates it was made with {{NoMoreLinks}}. I guess it was originally made like that on another article at a time where {{NoMoreLinks}} had another text. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

great observation

Who cares if the media calls it "Miracle on the Hudson"? I completely agree! Does Donald Trump's article mention "Best Sex I Ever Had", which was a newspaper headline? I hope not! Chergles (talk) 21:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Escaped vs Rescued

While the passengers and aircrew of Flight 1549 escaped (evacuated) the Airbus 320 on their own ("active"), their subsequent rescue from the plane's wings and inflated slides was made by and with the assistance of others ("passive") who arrived in ferry boats and other watercraft after they had escaped from the cabin. These were two separate actions -- the first "active" and the second "passive" -- which both occurred. (Centpacrr (talk) 06:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC))

VW Routan

Finally got a chance to review a couple guidelines that suggest revising the lead section of the Routan article; my comments are here and I welcome your thoughts. Cheers, NMS Bill (talk) 22:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, 842U. While I still believe I have some good points about what should happen with the article, I'm afraid I don't have time to continue the discussion now. However, I just wanted to be clear that my suggestions are based on what I think would make for the most accurate and guideline-appropriate article; I intend for all of my suggestions to comply with WP:COI and relevant policies. I'm not infallible, but I do try to edit fairly. And as my user page notes, when an edit becomes the subject of debate, I head for the Talk page until it is resolved. I'm sorry to have to step away while this one seems unresolved, so I hope I get a chance to pick up the conversation with you again at another point. Cheers, NMS Bill (talk) 19:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Japan Airlines Flight 2

Hi there, not sure of the protocol here. (I don't login very often as you can tell.) Not sure what you mean by "doesn't seem to support the Captains' statement"? Did you mean "This book doesn't actually claim that the Captain said that"? Or did you mean Senge's report isn't of a form considered sufficiently definitive for Wikipedia? Here's Senge, p.301 (I have the book on my lap) -- whoops, looks like I gave the ISBN of the paperback edition? I'll put ISBN that matches what's here on my lap. OK, here's Senge, p.301:

Asoh's response, though never recorded in the official NTSB minutes, has gone down in airline folklore: "As you Americans say, Asoh !@#$%^&* up."

Whoops, I just noticed that in my July edit, I was modifying a statement attributed to "The Abilene Paradox" -- which perhaps I shouldn't have...? Comparing the edit I made vs the state of the page now, I see that someone has made Harvey's book the primary reference for the "Asoh Defence"... so I actually didn't attribute that to Harvey -- whew. --Collinpark (talk) 02:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Cesar Millan

as per Spanish naming customs (which refer to all Spanish speaking countries) "Spanish naming customs denote the two-surname personal appellation practised in Hispanophone societies; the first surname is paternal, the second surname is maternal." It's not a big deal but Favela was his mother's maiden name so it would follow Millan in orthodox Spanish language naming tradition. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 20:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Normally not, especially for anyone born or raised in a non-Spanish language country (which includes the USA). But since he is from Mexico and his mother's maiden name was provided, one could write that he is the son of Felipe Millán and Maria Teresa Favela, or that he is the son of Felipe Millán and Maria Teresa Favela de Millán. Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 01:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi 842U, thought you might be interested in an email I received from the AHA. They clearly haven't retracted their statement (notice 'his inhumane methods'), but reading between the lines I got the impression they don't want to piss him off either: I think they might see him as a great way to get their message to many more people. I can't delete the text from wikipedia as there's no valid source, and yet I know it's wrong. Go figure!

Thank you for contacting us regarding our position on Cesar Millan's training methods. Our position has not changed and we have not retracted our statement regarding his inhumane methods. In an effort to more thoroughly gain an understanding of our position, the principles at the Millan organization reached out to open a dialogue with us a fee weeks ago. So although we have not wavered in our position, we realize that there is great importance in the educational opportunities here. We are in the planning stages of a Symposium that will bring together many of the best professionals in the world of humane dog training and behavior and we know that Mr. Millan is interested in learning more about a different perspective.

As the plan for the Symposium becomes more defined, we will be happy to share more information. Since American Humane is also a humane educator, we see the potential for real value coming out of this summit. As noted in our online press release, American Humane is committed to collaborating with organizations on initiatives that strive to ensure that pet owners receive accurate information and messages about what constitutes effective training and appropriate treatment of all animals, including the companion animals that are so much a vital part of our modern families.

We are in the beginning stages. We look forward to sharing more details as they become developed.

Publications and Communications Manager
American Humane Association

DYK for Chicken tax

On September 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chicken tax, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 12:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I have to say that was a most interesting DYK, my compliments - nicely written. ~ mazca ^talk 19:08, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Done. --candle•wicke 15:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

LHC

Hi, I reverted your change to the LHC article. I don't know what exactly you meant by "super-specific", but nature and energy of the collided particles are indeed the most important information for a particle collider, as they determine what kind of physics processes can be studied. They are certainly more relevant than depth, circumference and geographical location of the tunnel. But please feel free to discuss your point of view if you are not convinced. Cheers Ptrslv72 (talk) 12:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Cesar Millan and partial sentences

Good catch - not sure how I missed that. Cheers! Mark Shaw (talk) 02:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Centurion (bicycle)

Nice job with the new article. Are you going to nominate it for DYK? -AndrewDressel (talk) 00:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Shoot. My memory is bad. It has to be less than five days old. Sorry. Still a nice new article, though. Also, great story from Frank J. Berto. I had no idea. -AndrewDressel (talk) 14:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi 842U,

Thanks for your feedback to my edits on the Smile Train page.

I appreciate your changes, but feel that your deletion of my American Institute of Philanthropy reference is unwarranted. As you said, it's always good to have pro's and con's in a controversy section to provide a balance and maintain NPOV. I feel as if your edits removed neutrality and so am reposting. There are many critics of the American Institute of Philanthropy, as cited by an established study. This is important as this publication is given much weight in this section, and isn't really even a "controversy." It is one organization's opinion, based on what could be faulty methodology. It shouldn't be posted in this section at all, which is why I deleted in initially. If you would like to leave it in, it is only fair to also point out that the American Institute of Philanthropy has its own faults. I don't see how linking to the Intelligent Giving article solves the problem as they are another watchdog group! My citation provides neutrality. For all of these reasons, do not delete the controversies section of the Smile Train article without discussion and consensus: to do so is vandalism of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smiller44 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Cloud computing

Thanks for not hammering me! It really does need work, so I just plunged in. Good luck on the citations - the couple I deleted just didn't seem to make any sense at all. As I see it, the main message is; "Nothing new about it, just a new term for channeling marketing & sales talks with younger purchasers who don't know client-server history". It's hard to tell someone to "get on the grid" when the basic physical layer is intangible. You used to be able to point to a cable and tell people they were connected to something. That is just no longer the case! I'll be interested to see if I have helped the discussion any. DSP-user (talk) 15:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Donald Frey, Recent death

Wow, that's creepy. I was watching ABC news and they said, "and we have a death to report..." They never said his date of death, but the deaths are usually the day of reporting. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I like to know where they come from, what their roots are that shape what they do later. Did you read (the reference that I added-."Innovation: What It Is All About". Engineering Management Journal ) that he wrote? It looks like you did. He seemed to write his own obit six months ago. I would like to find out what he did during WWII. I doubt it was much, probably worked with military vehicles, but it would be nice to know and put it in there. He mentions his maternal grandfather, who came direct from Scotland to be a railroad engineer, including during the Civil War, but I don't have his name.

His paternal grandfather does not seem to be around, either he died or abandoned them, and his father was raised mainly by his (Muir's) grand-parents Thomas V.[?J?] and Margaret "Maggie" (nee Muir) LUKEN (LUKON) on their farm in rural Dorchester Township, Macoupin County, Illinois. Is Maggie related to John Muir?

Do you have this reference:

• Frey, Donald N. (March 1989). ""U.S. is losing 'global race': we think for the Japanese, then they beat our brains out"". Ward's Auto World.

I would like to read it, but the link that was there was broken (I personal don't like findarticles that much), so I just removed the link.

Thanks for working on this article too. > Best O Fortuna (talk) 20:01, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

PS: The article says that he taught while he was studying (which for a Ph.D is quite normal. In the article that he wrote he says he 'taught after his degree'. He might have done both, but it needs clarifying and to be cited. > B O F

His car: Is that a convertible? > B O F

I just can't tell from the photo, although you would assume so knowing the normal Mustang pattern. To paint a hard top that way would be quirky. So it was a white rag-top.

Do you have an account at the Chicago Tribune to get an obit for his mom? > B O F

Re: Rhodes Piano

I did a history merge on the article, then imported an old edit from the Nostalgia Wikipedia. It probably looks so strange on your watchlist because I had to history merge it with the Rhodes article; you might want to unwatch that page. Graham87 11:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for The Art of Racing in the Rain

On April 3, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Art of Racing in the Rain, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:04, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Peter Schreyer

On April 5, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peter Schreyer, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Phrygian cap

it turned out o be easier to find the citation than I had expected. I had written the author and page number in the section I'd added, a very early attempt on my part of do citations. Since I am not at home I could not look the book up, but I recently joined a web site called Library Thing where I have been slowly uploading my library. Turns out that I had Gale's book on Thomas Crawford already up, so . ... to da. Instant citation - which I am about to do. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:55, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. When I went there it appeard as if thre already was a citation/ oh well, thre is now for sure. Carptrash (talk) 17:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Kia Design and Manufacturing Facilities

Hi 842U, I tagged this article with an advertising tag because I'm concerned that its language is leaning towards unencyclopedic, and the article sounds very much like an official document that would be released by Kia. I'll make some changes to the article so you can see what I mean by improving the language. I'm additionally changing the article name, as it currently contributes to making it seem non-NPOV. Your work on this article is very good; let's take it to the next level. Rodface (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Karakoram Highway

Hi 842U, if you look at the image on the commons, you will see that I added an image note in the general region of the line. Also if you would like to know more, you can view the image on the source page for a more detailed description. I agree that it isn't clear, but it does say that its faint! As for highlighting roads etc on images, I am not aware of any way of doing this other than making a derivative of the file and highlighting the road yourself, using image software or something. Originalwana (talk) 11:00, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Richelieu Foods

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Dauphine

I think Ill need to read thru properly, I think is B anyway --Typ932 ^T·C 18:02, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

GA review for Chicken tax

Hi, I placed the article on hold with a major complaint about US-centrism and recentism. I am hoping you will be able to address the issue -- the article is truly fascinating! Renata (talk) 02:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

• I added a note on sources following Renata's review (perhaps too much hair-plucking for a GA). East of Borschov 09:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, it's been over a week and there were no edits or replies to GA review. Please respond or I will have to fail the article. Renata (talk) 00:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk back

Hello, 842U. You have new messages at Rambo's Revenge's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Florence Meyer Blumenthal

Hello! Your submission of Florence Meyer Blumenthal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

You just had to respond to the Did You Know nominations page. I pasted your comment to me there, and approved your hook. Best, Yoninah (talk) 21:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Prix Blumenthal

Hello! Your submission of Prix Blumenthal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:04, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Photos

Hello re your enquiry: Photos of paintings cannot claim copyright according to wikipedias interpretation of copyright (and external links in wikiarticles should be at the end) Victuallers (talk) 10:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC) Oh yes. PD = Public domain. Sorry (for saving too may keystrokes :-) ). Victuallers (talk) 10:42, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Paule Marrot

Courcelles (talk) 12:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Prix Blumenthal

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Florence Meyer Blumenthal

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Corvair

The Criticisms section I basically created first of all..The Handling section is not meant to be a crash course in oversteer or handling. It is meant to explain the Corvair's initial cost cutting compromises (and why) which were all but deleted, There is nothing wrong with the Handling section. It is, as I said, also a general history of the car's suspension development. Your work was not changed. The section was just cut too much and I added some of my sentences back blending quite nicely with your (new) edit.Vegavairbob (talk) 18:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Why was the reason for the initial lack of an anti-roll bar deleted? and why must the text be in list style format?Vegavairbob (talk) 18:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Ponton (Buchstabierung)

I think the spelling is ponton, not panton. Sorry. And please resist the temptation to shoot the messenger. (You might even decide that I am wrong...) Charles01 (talk) 06:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Hino Contessa

Hi, I started that article then my Firefox kept crashing. Will resume shortly. --Degen Earthfast (talk) 14:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Notchback image

Images have been changed every day for a week in Notchback. Your additions were the best and were not deleted by me. the 67 Mustang I reverted back to the article as it was deleted by another user. (even though you replaced my image that was perfectly acceptable - wiki polcy-image should remain if it's a high quality image that depicts subject. The Fiat diagram however, although useful, was drab, and un-focused. I AM collarborating with you and will protect your high quality work from deletion. Thanks for working with me as well. Vegavairbob (talk) 12:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Impala generations

A User had added much detailed info to the fourth and fifth generations in the Impala article. I verified this new text as copied from one source. The Editors of Consumer Guide. This text was then split to a fifth generation article (by a different User?) leaving the Impala article section with little more than a paragraph, which I quickly corrected. As per your discussion, I then split the fourth generation that had also been vastly increased in size. I will contribute to adding other sourced text for these generation articles and will add references. In the meantime they have been flagged for insufficient citations. It takes time (more than two days) Also, a large part of the changes on any given model year within a generation of these cars are styling changes and any site or book highlights these in detail. There will also be production figures, detailed engine changes and other info added. As stated the text was added from one User and copied from one source so the articles need work which they will receive. The Chevrolet Impala First generation (1958) (and origin) has been revised with new referenced text as this section had received little attention previously. Vegavairbob (talk) 15:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Are they "big statements"?

Thanks for "tightening" the text in the Ford Mustang (second generation). Before all the referenced contributions that I had made earlier today, the article was lacking cited material. Just as I have tried to do, it would help if you could also help provide referenced information. For example, it is not productive to criticize the article's text with your edit summary "how can the article begin to make big statements like this without ref's? "the first fully metric engine built in the U.S. for installation in an American car." This is because this information is well known. Please see here (American Horsepower: 100 Years of Great Car Engines By Mike Mueller. page 147). Moreover, making an edit summary comment as "What is all this expository: who are the sources and are they notable?" seems out of place when the objective of the text tries to explain the rapidly changing automobile market at that time. Perhaps it would be better to help to include additional referenced material to communicate the dramatic changes at that time, rather than questioning the purpose of the text. Once again, thank you for improving the article. CZmarlin (talk) 23:15, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: User Regushee

There is no "relationship" of any kind between Regushee and me. Regushee did not "announce" my retirement; s/he simply duplicated on my user page the retirement notice I placed on my talk page. This didn't bother me, so I left it alone. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C22:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

changes

Every article I've worked on you've made the wholesale changes, the difference with me is I don't delete your work or images. Have the same consideration please.Vegavairbob (talk) 18:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

842U, I see that elsewhere you have recently directed this editor to WP:OWN. IIRC when a similar issue arose concerning this editor, User:Daniel_J._Leivick took a special interest in him and gave valuable advice and guidance. If the problem is ongoing, seeking Mr. Leivick's help once again might prove a benefit to you, the other editor and the articles you collaborate on. -- Writegeist (talk) 19:22, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Bicycle Commuting

There's plenty of data online. It is the most common type of cycling in the world. Left a website in discussion page too—Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 22:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jet Blue Terminal5 logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jet Blue Terminal5 logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

La Sagrada Familia

Could I suggest to you that rather than simply deleting statements from articles about architecture and the like, you request a reference? In the case of this church, it is beyond any doubt the "masterpiece" of Gaudi's designs. And as you noted, there was a sentence linking its unusual design and vast size with its tourist venue status. You cited this as speculation and deleted two very important facts- that its size is vast and its design unprecedented. As a skilled editor, you really ought to be able to find a way to maintain those facts, while delinking them fom the fact that thousands of people go to look at it. The insertion of the word "and" would have ceased to imply that vast size and unusual appearance was the reason that people visit it, if that was your aim. The problem with what you did is that you left an introduction about a truly unique building without any tiny clue as to why it is in fact unique. Could you please be less heavy handed about the editting process?

Every editor who writes about things of outstanding beauty, wonder or greatness has to find a way of expressing those qualities, within the Wikipedia guidelines. The vast majority topics on wikipedia do not fall into these categories, but some few do. An editor can reasonably describe Claude Monet, Ernest Hemmingway and Joni Mitchell without using superlatives, but one cannot write about "The Divine Michelangelo", "The Bard" or "La Stupenda" without them, and to do so would be unrealistic. Likewise La Sagrada Familia is one of the greatest buildings of the Modern Era, and the first paragraph needs to indicate that, in some way.

Amandajm (talk) 13:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I forgot to mention: the name of the designer, author, composer, breeder goes in the first sentence. Amandajm (talk) 13:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Some points on who is a reliable source for quotation

• With regards to Dr Rainer Zerbst, whose quote you deleted, he's one of the most highly regarded authorities on Gaudi, specifically. Being a German scholar and critic, he's not well known to English speaking people. Regardless of that, his authoritative book was reprinted in English four times, and then reissued as a commemorative edition.
• The reference to the Time article is useful, but the journalistic quote sensual, spiritual, whimsical, exuberant could refer to a thousand Rococo buildings and only passingly to Gaudi's undoubted masterpiece. This quote does nothing to suggest an extraordinary building.
• Goldberger's quote 'the most extraordinary personal interpretation of Gothic architecture since the Middle Ages does far more to express it, and is a good one to include. However, it does not appropriately sum up the building. The reason is that this suggests that it is a Neo Gothic building, which it is not.
• The H. G. Wells quote, dating from 1938, from a man not renowned for his aesthetic taste, is not an indictaion of the design being "polarising". The argument as to whether it should be finished or not has been polarised, but the opion of art scholars over the last 50 or 60 years has been almost unanimous that this is one of the greatest works of modern architecture.
• The reason for the argument over whether the church should be completed is not because its design is criticised. Exactly the opposite. It is out of reverence for Gaudi's original concept.

The point that I am making here is that the quote from Zerbst, the expert, is the one that gives the best possible concept of the unprecedented and extraordinary nature of this building. Sensual, spiritual, whimsical, exuberant does not tell the reader that it is awe-inspiring and unique. Amandajm (talk) 10:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Sagrada Familia

See: Sagrada Familia talk page. 842U (talk) 23:59, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Karmann

Hi, yes the 2+2 is insufficient, so it needs something more, it can be other than sports car if you find better word -->Typ932 ^T·C 19:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Media reaction sentence on iPad

See WP:LEADCITE as its in the lead it doesn't need sourcing, and its backed up by the reviews/reception section lower down the article. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:53, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Spaced em dashes

I see you added a number of spaced em dashes to iPad. Please note that em dashes should not be spaced, per WP:EMDASH. --Mepolypse (talk) 15:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Reading en dash verus em dash, which says in practice, there is little consensus, and it is a matter of personal or house taste – as well as reading the WP:MOS, which says spaced en dashes – such as here – can replace unspaced em dashes in all of the ways discussed above, – then to be more precise, it's ok to use en or em, but when using en dash use a space and when using em dash, don't. Thanks. 842U (talk) 20:23, 3 January 2011 (UTC) (Preceding comment moved from User talk:Mepolypse.)

Correct, but I don't feel my comment was imprecise. I only said that em dashes should be spaced. --Mepolypse (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I didn't say your comment was imprecise. I said my explanation was more precise. By definition, a more complete and whole explanation of the rules would be more precise than only half the story. 842U (talk) 20:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC) (Preceding comment moved from User talk:Mepolypse.)

I purposely did not mention the fact that unspaced em dashes and spaced en dashes are replacable, specifically because I felt that would dilute the issue (since you hadn't used en dashes on that article). I guess our definitions of precision differ. Anyway, I'm glad we can agree that em dashes should be spaced on Wikipedia, and hope we can both get back to editing articles now. --Mepolypse (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rebecca Cardon

I removed both the BLP prod and regular prod tags you placed on Rebecca Cardon. This article was created before 18 March 2010, making it ineligible for BLP prod; it was also discussed at AfD on 28 September 2006, making it ineligible for regular prod. Compliance with policy/procedure is the only reason I did this, and I have no prejudice against opening another AfD. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011

Hello. I noticed that you attempted to file a deletion discussion (on the article Rebecca Cardon) but did not complete the process. Please note that, when listing an article for deletion, a discussion page needs to be made for other users to discuss whether to keep or delete the article. This is typically done by following the steps listed here. Note that if you are editing as an unregistered user, you cannot create a discussion page. Please consider registering an account or asking another user to help you complete the process at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Redbox logo 2.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Redbox logo 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hugahoody (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for David E. Davis

The DYK project (nominate) 16:05, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Your post...

...immediately preceding the one linked @ "Notes" on your user page is spot-on. Well said. Writegeist (talk) 01:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for I Am (2011 film)

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Chevy Vega

I see their was no outcome from your ANI on Barnstarbob. His fiddling and whitewashing of the Vega articles continues. Do you think it is time to go back to ANI or RFC and perhaps propose a topic ban? --Biker Biker (talk) 08:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I really do -- 842U (talk) 15:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Incoming! I have asked Barnstarbob to discuss on talk page after he reverted all your work today. I reverted his revert but really hope he will engage in a productive discussion instead of edit warring. If you know of any other editors in the automobiles project who might provide an alternative opinion (either way, I don't care, I want consensus) then perhaps you could invite them to review the article and join in the discussion? Thanks in advance. --Biker Biker (talk) 00:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

You Are the Subject of an Edit Warring Discussion

Hello,

I noticed that your accuser has not posted a notice of this discussion on your talk page, so I thought I would. Ebikeguy (talk) 14:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Vega lead

I have asked Bob to join discussion in a section on the Vega talk page to discuss the lead. I like your version, but clearly he doesn't so it would be good if we could work together to come up with a version that works for everybody. --Biker Biker (talk) 11:29, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Personal attacks

I know you have a thick skin, but Barnstarbob's comments about you at Talk:Chevrolet Vega are bordering on personal attacks now. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:29, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

It does look as if he's returning to the old Vegavairbob ways. Yet again WP:OWN springs to mind. The increasingly apoplectic and adversarial tone of his screeds is troubling. I should think it might discourage other editors from joining the discussion or editing the article. Perhaps it's time an admin stepped in? Writegeist (talk) 23:31, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Admins seem reluctant to step in, but if you as an uninvolved third party want to point out the way the talk page stood as of this revision with its direct personal attacks and threats then I would thank you. --Biker Biker (talk) 01:42, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I have notified Daniel J. Leivick and the user. Writegeist (talk) 06:04, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I have let this admin know, also. He had let Barnstarbob know about a month ago he was on thin ice. [2] 842U (talk) 11:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

RfC at Chevrolet Vega

This is to notify you that an RfC has been opened regarding proposed edits in Chevrolet Vega. You have been involved in the discussions leading up to this RfC. The discussion is located here. Ebikeguy (talk) 19:56, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Glad to be of help. As noted, I think Bob's intentions are good, he just needs to change his attitude.

As noted, I have no particular problem with him using his own pix, but I agree, there are too many redundant pix. I did take out some of the dupes once, but they're back again. :( IDK who put them back in. (Give you one guess. ;p ) TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 21:48, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you add the text for your cite #5 in the lead? (Flagged in the refs with a red "no text" tag.) Thanks! Writegeist (talk) 19:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Place your bets

I'd stake next months pay cheque on knowing exactly who this is - 69.14.207.132 (talk · contribs · info · WHOIS). --Biker Biker (talk) 17:52, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I see you're ahead of me.... --Biker Biker (talk) 17:54, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Desiderata and copyright

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup#Copyright_headache: Desiderata for further discussion. Mangoe (talk) 11:58, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Good work on the DYK

Just remember that the link to the article in the DYK must always be boldened using the three apostrophes →example. A friend called-- CrossTempleJay  → talk 17:16, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Opinions?

Some more eyes, minds, and keyoard-rattlings could be helpful here and here, if you're so inclined. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C23:58, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Volkswagen Chattanooga Assembly Plant

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Volkswagen Westmoreland Assembly Plant

Materialscientist (talk) 18:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Jimmy John's

VERY nicely done. I have no argument with that inclusion. It's short, to the point, and proves it's notability. The sponsorships were a good deletion, as well.

Thank you. Now let's see if it sticks. Regards, --Manway 14:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Louis Renault (industrialist)

Why is he categorized as French racecar driver then? That's probably how Ser Amantio came to categorize him as a sportsperson.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. He was listed as a sportsperson in his categories. I agree, it's not correct, but the category shouldn't have been there in the first place. One auto race does not a car racer make. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 15:25, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

External Links

(copied and pasted from my talk page Eddaido (talk) 08:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC))

See wp:external links: there is already an open source photo of the Aston shooting-brake in the article. 842U (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Ha ha ha! (cover for my embarrassment) I have just had to read the article to try to find "there is already an open source photo of the Aston shooting-brake in the article" and so now understand that I have been very repetitive elsewhere. My apologies to all for being a further irritant. I guess you refer to the photo that may be found by following the link through DB5 and then hunting. Not in the article is it. My link was to a good clear photo of an example in which the shooting brake part is plain and provided immediate access to some more.

Re wp:external links. My mistake is to fail to hide it in a reference? I think every single one of the references for the article is an external link. Your comments please. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 00:37, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

You'll like this: Jaguar estate Eddaido (talk) 03:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

This note was put here to show you what happened to the proposal on your user page. The inaccurate writer in the NY Times would recognize your anachronism even if you cannot.

how about answering my question on this page. Eddaido (talk) 12:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Morristown

I've tried to discuss this with you on the article's talk page, without success. I have no connection with this group. It is (supposedly) "notable", by Wikipedia standards. I/we are not "promoting" it, but just mentioning that it is headquartered in Morristown, supposedly. Maybe the article lies. Good reason to delete the company! But if it is notable (an article), it really should be noted in the Morristown article. This would be better discussed on the Morristown page so everyone can see it. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 18:32, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Manitoba Hydro Place

See comments at Template:Did you know nominations/Manitoba Hydro Place.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:08, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Manitoba Hydro Place

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Dario Gabbai

Thanks for your rather comprehensive review of this. WilliamH (talk) 03:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Guiding Eyes for the Blind

Hello! Your submission of Guiding Eyes for the Blind at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Miyagawa (talk) 11:44, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK hook length

A DYK hook should read as under 200 characters of prose. It is not clear to me whether the leading ellipses and trailing question mark count in this number (I believe not on the former and possibly on the latter). It is also not clear whether "(pictured)" counts when applicable. There may be an explicit explanation on the DYK rules or supplementary rules pages (WP:DYK and WP:DYKSG).

I believe the fuss at Template:Did you know nominations/Guiding Eyes for the Blind is not about hook length, but rather about article length. If the article is new it must be at least 1500 characters of readable prose. This excludes tables, captions, infoboxes, templates, bulletpointed text and section headings. It counts the spaces between words in the prose. If the article is an expansion, the new article must be 5 times as long as the original in terms of readable prose unless it is an expansion of a WP:BLP that was previously unreferenced in which case, refs must be added and it must be 2 times as long. This is all laid out at WP:DYK and WP:DYKSG as well.

Hope that helps,--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:58, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Go to the DYK discussion page and ask how to insert the code in your monobook or profile to have a readable prose counter in your left hand side toolbox menu. Until you can figure it out how to insert that code, cut and paste into Microsoft word.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:14, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi: What I do is use the word count that is under Tools in MS Word. (I'm sure it's similar in other word processing programs; they seem to be very similar these days.) I copy and paste the text of the article, except for any bulleted lists and any indented quotations, the section headings, and the references and stuff at the end, into a new Word document. I usually go section by section so it doesn't pick up picture captions since those don't count, either. Then I delete the footnote numbers and the brackets around them, and write down the character count including spaces on a piece of paper. I do this for the version before expansion started and for the latest version - or occasionally for the version when it was nominated, if further expansion has happened after the 5/6-day limit. The discussion about the Manitoba Hydro building shows that people are not currently allowing bulleted paragraphs (list items that contain a sentence or more) to count either; if an article has a section like that I'd do a third count and suggest making those into a non-bulleted series of paragraphs, possibly with boldface headings at the start of each item, and the bullets can always be restored after it runs on DYK. (As was suggested to you with the Manitoba Hydro building.) That rule appears to have become stricter; I believe the rules used to say that list items that are actually prose count, too. I don't use one of the count scripts; I understand they occasionally fail, and plus adding scripts to my monobook sounds hard and even potentially dangerous to me. If you are less of a technophobe, then that's obviously what most people do and saves the writing down on a piece of paper and getting the calculator as well as the manual erasure in Word. Hope that, plus the above, helps make it clearer. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:17, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Guiding Eyes for the Blind

Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Ole Singstad.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Ole Singstad.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:50, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Andrew Geller

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Merger discussion

You may be interested in this discussion.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:43, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Branch House

Hello! Your submission of Branch House at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Branch House

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanx

Hey, thanx for the ‘I Am’ and ‘Art Of Racing In The Rain’ pages, it’s good to see them there.

I also see from his 'talk' page with the Honda Super Cub you've had the same probs with the user Dennis Bratland (talk) that other people have had with him only thinking that own his edits are any good and no-one else's are - talk about ownership issues.

and i notice he's doing it again here – BMW R1100GS (BMW R1100GS) - so maybe for the good of Wikipedia we should contribute to this noticeboard discussion. It seems to me he's in the wrong yet again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.173.13 (talk) 10:31, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Apologies

I recently notified the relevant editors of related discussions of this ANI - Bad Faith and Mr Bratland - but I mistakenly did not notify you, so apologies for that. Unfortunately it's now been closed - rather too swiftly, I thought. Although I have been (falsely) accused of 'canvassing' (although other editors didn't agree), so even this innocent note to you may result in some ludicrous accusation. Anyway, stay free. Rivercard (talk) 00:27, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Subarus (tiresome)

Hello 842U, I wasn't aware that I had offended you so much in the past - apologies. I really often feel that many articles were better off combined, and most certainly hope that reasoned thinking (rather than number of editors who will have one's back) should win in an argument. In any case, I asked slakr to set up a single place to discuss the Legacy/Outback/Baja etcetera. The reason I reverted MarcusHookPa was because there was existing consensus to merge, and I don't like seeing a single energetic reverter having his way above the opinions of many others. While I fall on the side of split-and-merge, I don't actually feel all that strongly about the Outback location (and I think the Baja should stand, because of the structural differences and minimal shared article content). Anyhow, let's get on with things!  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 16:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Subaru Outback and friends

I just wanted to invite you to a second discussion regarding whether the Subaru Outback deserves a standalone article or if it ought to be merged into the relevant generational articles of Subaru Legacy (and Impreza). Thank you,  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 08:27, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Source question

I noticed you deleted some things posted on the Dog Whisperer talk page, I'm not sure if you objected to the content/source or if you were just removing something that appeared to be content the editor who posted it didn't intend to add to the article. The content/source is back now, both on the talk page and in the article. Just letting you know in case you'd like to give feedback on it. Dreadstar ☥ 05:00, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Ebikeguy (talk) 00:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, 842U. You have new messages at Ebikeguy's talk page.
Message added 15:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ebikeguy (talk) 15:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Ad hominem

If it been posted after my message, I think that a block would have been in order. As it is, it's unhelpful to scratch old sores. I'll warn Marj, and any non-content based comments I see from now may lead to action Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:05, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see my reply Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:59, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Swope

Regarding Herbert Bayard Swope being Jewish, regard his brother Gerard Swope's Wikipedia entry. S2grand (talk) 01:57, 31 August 2012 (UTC)s2grandS2grand (talk) 01:57, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Ergo you're saying that Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source for info. Regard this on Gerard Swope, also I hope you contacted whoever wrote that Gerard Swope was Jewish about certifying that. http://ebha-bhsj-paris.sciencesconf.org/6472

(talk page stalker)Hi S2grand. Wikipedia is only as reliable as the editors who work on it. If you see mistakes, please fix them. It is not 842U's responsibility to fix all the mistakes on Wikipedia, nor is it the responsibility of any one editor. Together, however, we can keep improving this encyclopedia. Sincerely, Ebikeguy (talk) 01:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

What'd I say?? Ebikeguy (talk) 22:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Nothing, lol,just funny and maybe a little... stalkerish!?842U (talk) 01:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Talk Page Stalkers are a proud tradition here at Wikipedia! Try it; you'll like it! Ebikeguy (talk) 03:34, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

"Frankly , my dear, I don't give a damn." Oy vey!

Help and Feedback

Hi 842U, I'm currently working on a class project which involves creating or editing a Wikipedia article, as well as interacting with other Wikipedians. My team and I are currently editing Guiding Eyes for the Blind, and I saw that you were the most prolific recent contributor. So far we've done relatively little to the actual page; here's a rough draft of our eventual plan for the article. If you could guide us in any way or give us some tips/feedback that would be much appreciated. Thanks! Jdk243 (talk) 02:29, 2 October 2012 (UTC)