User talk:Delldot

Archives

1: 10/05–12/06 2: 12/06–01/07 3: 01/07–02/07 4: 02/07–03/07 5: 03/07–06/07 6: 06/07–09/07 7: 09/07–11/07 8: 11/07–11/07 9: 11/07–12/07 10: 12/07–01/08 11: 01/08–02/08 12: 02/08–03/08 13: 03/08–04/08 14: 04/08–05/08 15: 05/08–06/08 16: 06/08–07/08 17: 07/08–07/08 18: 07/08–08/08 19: 08/08–10/08 20: 10/08–04/09 21: 04/09–01/10 22: 01/10–11/12 23: 12/12–03/13 24: 05/13–12/15

Thanks for dropping me a note! Don't be shy about asking questions, I'm always glad to help. I will reply to messages here, so you may want to watchlist this page.

If you'd like to undo an action of mine and can't get a hold of me within a reasonable time, go ahead. If I disagree, we can discuss it when I'm back. This applies to admin actions too.

Well

How the heck are you? I miss the IRC banter. Hope to see you around my most worthy rival. ;) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 01:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

KOS!!! So good to see you again, so psyched you're back. Sorry I didn't stop by to say hi earlier. I'll see you on IRC sometime soon. Peace, delldot talk 02:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes indeed! I'm kicking back a few cold ones and using hugglee. What an amazing tool, I was quite skeptical about using it at first, but wow it's amazing! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

*huggles*

as you probably still can't last until Friday -- Gurch (talk) 09:41, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm a little hard up for the huggles, and I'm completely out of snuggles and cuddles (glomps too, but that's not as pressing of an issue). Anything you can do for me? *snuggles and all other types of affection* delldot talk 10:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't your boyfriend provide any of these things? :/ -- Gurch (talk) 11:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but I want Gurch huggles snuggles cuddles and glomps too! delldot talk 11:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Whatever happened to plain old hugs? *hugs delldot* -- Gurch (talk) 11:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh right, I need those too. *Hugs Gurch* delldot talk 11:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

*hugs Delldot tight* -- Gurch (talk) 18:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thaaaaat's more like it. *hugs* delldot talk 19:16, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Halp me some moar!

Could you please use your administrative powers to redirect Sasha Toperich and Sasa Toperic to Saša Toperić? All three articles are about the same person but the variations in spelling caused some miscommunication and more than one article was created. Saša Toperić is the correct spelling (as indicated in Sasha Toperich and Sasa Toperic) so, unless I'm mistaken, that should be the main article rather than just serving as a redirect.

Thanks again!

Peace!

P.S. Apologies if I'm interrupting exchanges of Wiki-fection between yourself and Gurch :) SWik78 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks like DJ Bungi moved Saša Toperić to Sasa Toperic in October. Are you sure it's the right name and that it would be an uncontroversial move? If not, it should be discussed first. But yeah, the material in the two articles should definitely be merged, I can do it if necessary.

P.S. No probs, we're pro's at wikifection and unaffected by interruptions. You're welcome to join in if you have the stomach for it! delldot talk 18:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh God! Or should I say Oh Ceiling Cat?

It shouldn't be a controversial move. Saša Toperić is the proper spelling in his native language whereas the other two are modified to allow the use of english alphabet. The other two articles even specify Saša Toperić as the correct name.

Saša is a pretty common name for ex-Yugo nationals, but it's often transliterated as Sasha for the english speaking world. As a point of interest, Saša is diminutive for Aleksandar or Alexander. Hence, I myself have 2 nicknames that I'm commonly referred to by my friends :)

SWik78 (talk • contribs) 18:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

K, I moved the long one to Saša Toperić. I'll let you deal with the merge from the stub. I don't want to do a histmerge with those because then you'd end up with a very confusing history; better to keep the histories separate with one in the redirect you'll create in the merge (like a merge from a regular article). Just refer to the article you're merging from in your edit summary and explain what you're doing (and you can link to the history on Talk:Saša Toperić). Hope I didn't bugger anything up, I've been editing wikipedia for like 19 hours straight now and I'm a wee bit disoriented :P Peace, delldot talk 20:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

All looks good, I can take it from here. But, seriously, step away from the keyboard dude/dudette. 19 hours? Now I can see your BF's point. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think I've achieved a new unhealthiness record! Sweet! But I do have a real life excuse: I recently quit my night job and am having trouble getting back into day awakeness. So I'm trying to stay awake all day because the only way I'll be able to sleep at night is if I'm deliriously tired. So... no yeah, I need help. delldot is a dudette, but don't tell or they'll revoke her rainbow license on account of the boyfriend 22:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

:O TOO MUCH EDITING. See it is good for Wikipedia that you can't chat to me *huggles* -- Gurch (talk) 10:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

good article review for mirror neuron

Thanks for catching the image copyright problem: we need to know how the image in question got into the public domain. I have withdrawn the nomination and have posted a warning at the presumptive picture uploader's user talk page, as well as on the image page itself. Even if it's copyright it might be fair-use, but I am not a lawyer and am not qualified to make that determination.

I'll let editors more familiar with the subject matter address the other comments you left. Thank you for taking the time to review the nomination. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Delldot. You have new messages at 69.140.152.55's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

And as an aside, I might be victim of #59 on this list. Despite my literally thousands of edits (when you count the other IPs, as well as my brand-new username), I have produced only 3 "real" articles (about 6 or 7 if you count those stubs that are more than just "sub"- stubs), all during a short span of a few months. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 16:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: reversion

No problem. I must say, I really enjoyed the one thing you said, "It's like they think they're the only vandals in the world." I'll have to remember that... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

It's true, every vandal does! It's the only way they can possibly thing they're clever :P delldot talk 05:04, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

:O

*huggles* -- Huggle (talk) 14:09, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

*snuggles* -- Gurch (talk) 03:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

There's no real reason for me to leave a message here, just realised I hadn't actually spoken to you in a while! Hope you're okay! Regards, CycloneNimrod ^talk?_contribs? 15:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Good to get a note from you again, thanks for dropping by. I'm chillin', how are you? delldot talk 01:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty good thanks :) What're you working on at the moment, then? Regards, CycloneNimrod ^talk?_contribs? 16:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Huntly Park

i can't quite decide what criterion for speedy deletion this comes under, but as the supreme court justice said 'i know it when i see it' your attention at your earliest convenience is requested.paix. Toyokuni3 (talk) 20:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, good catch. A slightly braver person would have speedied it as blatant advertising (for the advocacy group), but I felt safer prodding it. Unfortunately, this means it'll be around for a few more days, and if someone takes the prod tag down I'll have to take it to AFD (at which they'll probably be like "speedy it as blatant advertising!"). But yeah, thanks for catching that. delldot talk 01:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

all's well that ends well. paix. Toyokuni3 (talk) 04:06, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Huntly Park

Are you the person who is seeking deletion of the article?

You can reply to <email address removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.170.151 (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for the note. Yes I am. The matter's been brought to a community discussion, which you can find and participate in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Huntly Park. Other members of the community will discuss the article and decide whether it should be kept or deleted, so it's out of my hands.

The very most important thing you can to to increase the article's chances of being kept is to add references from reliable sources that are independent of the subject (e.g. not the website of an advocacy group), such as news articles. This is because our very fundamental verifiability policy mandates that all subject matter in Wikipedia must have been covered previously in published sources. I was concerned that not enough has been written about the park in published sources for us to have a verifiable article. Feel free to improve the article while the discussion's going on (the next 5 days), and you may want to note in the discussion that you're doing so so people can take that into account while deciding whether they think it should be kept. Don't hesitate to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need anything, I'm always glad to help. Peace, delldot talk 18:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

^_^

*huggles* -- Gurch (talk) 01:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Some questions and clarification if you wouldn't mind. :)

Hi Delldot, I ran into a spammer this morning and found some things that I don't know if I am doing it correctly, or if the articles are formatted correctly for that matter. Anyways, would you mind explaining what goes into the 'see also' sections in medical articles? Is it only for wiki links or do external links go in there too if there is a see also section? Or do external links get a title of their own to go into and does it appear below the references? I have seen it above the references and also below, I think it looks better above but I want to do it in the correct format. Another editor is asking me too about this for clarification on my page and I don't want to give incorrect info and would like to also know myself. I hope I am clear on what I am asking. If you wouldn't mind responding to my page under the other editors questions I would appreciate it so he/she can see your response too. Thanks as always, and hope you are well. --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks as usual a clear answer to my impossibly worded questions! ;) I appreciate the answers and now I understand. I told Barek to watch my page for your response. Thanks again, oh we are talking about IBS and Crohn's disease articles. --CrohnieGal^Talk 19:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem, good seeing you again as usual Crohnie. Glad to see you keeping up the good work. delldot talk 19:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful to see you again too. I finally got bold and am jumping into more areas now. The good thing is that it's still fun for me. Great talking to you. We need to do it a little more often. :) Take care and I promise to pop in more frequently. --CrohnieGal^Talk 23:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

That's so exciting that you're getting involved in more areas! I'm so proud to have been involved in your progress on this project. Indeed, we should talk more, I'm glad you stop by when you do :) delldot talk 23:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: Howdy

Hey delldot :)

Yeah I just emailed him out the blue, i'd read his article about SAH on eMedicine so essentially just looked around for his email address and managed to find it. Just emailed it asking very politely if he had any images that were free for release into the public domain and he replied with those two images. I did indeed try to hint that he could take a look at SAH but he hasn't to my knowledge, but I don't blame him being one of the top people over at John Hopkins (must be a very busy job!)

As for the FA, best option is to get it as good as you can make it until you're almost certain it's ready for submission to FAC. You can then either nominate it and they'll probably give you a few points to repair and then they might give you the FA. Alternatively, get it as good as you can get it and roll over to FAC and find an editor who has experience with reviewing for FA's. Ask them politely on their talk page if they'll see if your article is ready?

Hope this helps :)

Regards, CycloneNimrod ^talk?_contribs? 21:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, hadn't thought of asking the emedicine author, that's a good idea. I'll try that once I can muster enough courage. :P Thanks for the advice! delldot talk 21:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Haha :P Not a problem! Regards, CycloneNimrod ^talk?_contribs? 21:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hopkins has a reputation to protect when it comes to SAH. The great Walter Dandy practiced there. JFW | T@lk 07:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Sweets!

Here's a German chocolate cake for you! German chocolate somehow promote WikiLove, and hopefully this one has made your day better and sweeter. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Acalamari 21:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the compliments, Delldot! They mean a lot to me! :) Those candies you gave to me look nice, and here's something sweet for you! :) Acalamari 21:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Awww! See? Told you you were sweet ^_^ delldot talk 22:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

:D. Acalamari 23:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 18 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article penetrating trauma, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 06:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 18 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article sternal fracture, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 13:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Section editing at Wikipedia:Editor review...

...seems to be disabled. Can you diagnose the problem? I'm an Internet Explorer luser, but section editing works elsewhere. Thanks. Yechiel (Shalom) 16:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I think it might have just been too long, I archived a couple and they came back. Are they fixed for you too? delldot talk 17:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it works now. Yechiel (Shalom) 17:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

GA thanks

Thanks for your assistance. You may want to post the following somewhere:

This user helped promote John Benjamin Murphy to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Tony! Glad you appreciated the suggestions, it sure was nice of you to stop by and say so. delldot talk 12:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

SAH for FAC

Could you offer your opinion as to whether subarachnoid hemorrhage is ready for FAC? Comments invited on Talk:Subarachnoid hemorrhage. JFW | T@lk 19:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 20 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article tracheobronchial injury, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 09:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

English usage

a number of questions on english usage and etymology: is the antonym of defunct 'funct'? is the opposite of disheveled 'sheveled'? if one takes something to pieces, one dismantles it. if one assembles something, can one be said to have 'mantled' it? and finally, is the opposite of unkempt 'kempt'? these are questions that keep me awake at night.i wish you peace while you contemplate these.Toyokuni3 (talk) 04:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

XD Don't know, but it's definitely going to keep me up. I'm gonna start using 'funct' though, in fact it's my new favorite word. delldot talk 13:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Abdominal trauma

On 23 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abdominal trauma, which you created or substantially expanded. 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) 18:31, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Palatine uvula

hey kiddo, do me 2 favours, bitte. fill me in on the wp policy on medical articles containing rx advice, and take a peek at the above article.danke schön. frieden mit dir.Toyokuni3 (talk) 07:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Rx advice: Just say no. Any advicey-sounding stuff should be removed or reworded (e.g. here). This is covered under WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, or textbook, which explicitly mentions medical advice. The article doesn't look horrible but it was good that you caught that. I took out the worst of it, but the ipecac/bulemia stuff might be a bit irrelevant still, feel free to go to town on it. You keep impressing me with your good instinct for what does and does not belong in articles Toyokuni! You've got a good head on your shoulders and make a valuable part of the project. delldot talk 14:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)