User talk:ArielGold/Archive 13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14

Nuvola apps kuickshow.png
Nuvola apps chat.png
Nuvola devices blockdevice.png
Nuvola apps mozilla-firebird.png
Nuvola apps korganizer.png
Adium.png
Nuvola filesystems folder txt.png
Main Talk Userboxes Awards Archives Images Email

Morning!

Howdy, Ariel. I hope your Saturday morning finds you with much coffee and some nice quiet time to rest and relax so you can recuperate from your recent illness.  :)

I'm just doing a little bit of work and learning about AJAX before heading off to a wedding later today. Have a great one! --MikeVitale 14:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Always a wonderful day when I get to talk to you, and I have a couple of pages I'd like your opinion on later on when you're back and available, so just holler at me and I'll show them to you! Have fun at the wedding! I'll be going back to bed soon, still pretty ill and not fully myself, quite tired, but at least I've stopped tossing my cookies (well, if I'd had any cookies...) ArielGold 14:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
<homerdrool> Mmmmmmm. Coooooooooooooookies. </homerdrool> But not the tossed kind. --MikeVitale 14:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile

I did thank you on your talk page, but so our lovely MiszaBot will archive this topic, I shall reply here as well. Thank you! ArielGold 18:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

AfC

They're going to take AfC down in November :-( --Agüeybaná 17:59, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Is that for sure that any IP will be able to create an article, or just something someone proposed. I saw the proposal, but didn't see that it was something "for sure". Got a link? ArielGold 18:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
This looks like a decision, not a proposal. --Agüeybaná 18:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Huh. Oh well. CSD will sure be backlogged, and so will AfD, I'm sure, lol. Interesting. ArielGold 18:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, then its good that by the ninth, you will have had your bit for about a day or two. i (talk) 18:04, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
LOL! Silly I! "Some time in November" dear! Don't put me on a deadline! lmao. ArielGold 18:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Harrrrrumph. I belive you said early November. But apparently my oh so subtle prods don't work. I guess it's sometime in November then. i (talk) 20:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Argh, more meaningless drivel for admins to clean up. RlevseTalk 20:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

We're already short on admins...*groan* Feel better, Ari! Love, Neranei (talk) 03:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

John L. Fugh article

Hi, I created an article "John L. Fugh" here but it doesn't appear to have been approved and neither has it been rejected. I thought I'd ask if the article has been passed over (?) here seeing as you're one of the administrators of that page. I'm not all that familiar with the article creation/pending review process so I thought I'd ask for your comments regarding that submission. Thanks (I'll check back here for comments). 220.255.35.70 23:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Howdy! Let me just first thank you for your submission, but realize that those who monitor Articles for creation aren't always administrators, and I'm not one. One doesn't need to be an administrator to know the policies and guidelines, and approve articles at AfC, though. Looking over that submission, it does appear at first glance to pass the notability requirements, although I didn't go check the sources. Let me make some tea, and go look the sources over, and if no issues come up, I'll probably go create it for you. Cheers! ArielGold 04:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
YesY John L. Fugh article created! ArielGold 07:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi, that was quick. Thanks! 220.255.35.70 18:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
You are most welcome, and it was an interesting article to create, as you see I expanded it drastically over the submission, adding refs I found as well. I submitted it to WP:DYK as well, because I think it is a good start article to add to the front page. Cheers on a great starting submission! ArielGold 18:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. And many thanks for the explanation in addition to taking the time to vet my article. Really appreciate it. Cheers! 220.255.35.70 18:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I now see you've vastly improved the article. 'Beyond the call of duty' as they say. Thanks again!!! 220.255.35.70 18:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
That's the beauty of submissions that are actually about notable people, there are plenty of sources out there to use to get more information and fill out an article, and this was one of those submissions I'm more than happy to dig into more to get additional citations and references. Thanks again! ArielGold 18:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Problem with your talk...

Arielgold.PNG

That's what the heading looks like to me... I'm not that good with web design, or, I'd fix it myself... BTW, I see you around everywhere, and you seem to have a great grasp on how things work here, have you ever thought about requesting adminship? Heck, if I can pass, nearly anyone can, in theory :) SQLQuery me! 06:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, we've been talking about that display issue, but thanks for the image, it lets me see the issue others are seeing, have you hidden the donation bar via your monobook.css? I'm pretty sure that is what causes this issue, as it never came up prior to this donation drive bar. The thing is, if I manipulate the position so it appears right for those who see the donation bar, it will appear odd to all those who don't, so I'm not sure what exactly to do. The donation bar will eventually go away, and then the display should return to normal. I've got the .css file completely nuking the notice for donations, so it displays normally for me, but I really do appreciate the picture, I'll see what I can do. As for the admin bit, it's been brought up to me a time or two I think, perhaps... Face-wink.svg I'm thinking about it, perhaps next month. But thank you for your encouragement! ArielGold 06:11, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Odd, I have not hidden the donation bar, but, it does not appear for me in your talk! Not sure what's causing that... Regarding adminship, I'd say it's time now! :P What with anon page creation looking like it's gonna be enabled soon, we're gonna need some more good admins! SQLQuery me! 06:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
(ec)So we went from "early November" to "sometime in November" to "perhaps next month"? =D I guess I'll stop bugging you about it though. As a side note, I've never had problems displaying the top of your talk page. i (talk) 06:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
SQL, That's because your donation bar is hidden behind my special custom header ~*Grin*~ But, the donation bar is pushing everything else down, and my custom title is an "absolute" positioned element on the page, so isn't affected by the donation bar. And i, silly dear, "next month" is November! You don't have to stop bugging me, but I just hate to put a deadline on things, and then have something come up. Plus, I really, really wanted Phaedriel here to do the nomination, and if I cannot get ahold of her, well, I don't know... She wanted to do it, but she is taking a break, so this is another reason that I'm waiting. Perhaps a silly reason, but she's my good Wiki-friend, and I'd hate to do it without her. ArielGold 06:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Just to let you know, that is exacaly what I see :P Tiddly-Tom 08:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I doubt I'll worry about it, once the donation thing goes away it will be nuked anyway. I might dump the custom header tho until that happens, I guess, just so it isn't ugly. ArielGold 08:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Huh

As i said if you think it could be improved you should do so... It was not anywhere near word for word from the site... infact it is far more less than the rest of the article.. witch by the way is word for word from varies sites only not referenced... I spent all night writing this small section and you just delete because it doesn't meet your standards... If you have a problem with certain phrases then remove or reword them... why should anyone waste their time trying to improve articles if people like you just delete are contribution as soon as they are written.... Trail Rider —Preceding comment was added at 14:59, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It was basically word-for-word copying from the official site, and I've replied at length on your talk page, showing you in bold the comparison between the official site, and what you added, 95% of the paragraph is exactly the same. I'm sorry if you think these are "my standards", as they are definitely not, the copyright policy is something Wikipedia takes very serious, as they must, legally, and as I mentioned, I've added much more information to assist you on your talk page. Cheers! ArielGold 15:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

ok fine with me i shall waste my time no more... oh and by the way please don't post copywrited text on my page... you can do me one favor and tell whoever you tell they can cancel my account.. as i will make no more contributions from this day on... User:Trail Rider... —Preceding comment was added at 15:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope that you change your mind, as I mentioned, these are policies and guidelines set down by Wikipedia, not my opinions, and you can simply familiarize yourself with the policies, and contribute to the encyclopedia within those constructs. There's no need to quit, just because someone has called your attention to these issues, and I was quite explanatory and kind in how I went about explaining the issues to you, so I'm unsure why you feel the need to simply stop trying. As I mentioned on your talk page, I'm more than willing to assist you in any way, and that offer remains, should you decide to continue editing. ArielGold 15:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Nobody... can delete or cancel your account... just stop contributing... Goodbye... --Agüeybaná 15:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

KFC

Thanks for taking the time to clean that up. I have been busy fixing up Burger King related articles and have not been able to get back to KFC. Good job. - Jeremy (Jerem43 17:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC))

Hey, thanks for noticing! I ran across it (hrmm, I forget how I came upon it) and saw the mess the references were in, so I figured "Hey, I have nothing else to do this morning", lol. Making messy references all pretty and spiffy is one of my specialties, so I was happy to do it! Thanks for the kind words! ArielGold 17:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

hugs for your edits to User talk:Kyoko

Blatant WikiLove on the page User talk:Kyoko
Welcome to Wikipedia. While we invite everyone to make meaningful contributions to our encyclopedia, edits that seem intended solely to amuse or spread good cheer are considered obvious examples of WikiLove. If you continue in this manner you may receive a smile and/or hug in return. Please accept my thanks. Keep spreading the love, and consider improving a random article too. Thank you.

*hug* Thanks, AG! --Kyoko 22:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Spaceflight participant

Appreciate your comments and help adding references to the new article at Spaceflight participant. Rillian 20:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm on it! My specialty, hee hee. ArielGold 05:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Improper use of conversion templates, and problems with what they do

I realize that using templates will probably allow you to do a better job of making conversions than if you did them with a calculator or with pencil and paper. But when they've already been done by someone else, that someone else is most likely a whole lot more competent at making them than you are. Please leave them alone. For example, here are some of the conversions you added to Space Shuttle in several different edits.

was ArielGold template ArielGold seen GN says notes
The payload capacity is 50,000 lb (22,700 kg). convertW|50000|lb|kg|1|lk=on The payload capacity is 50,000 pounds (22,679.6 kg). original or "50,000 lb (23,000 kg)" or "50,000 lb (23 t)" [1]
each provide 2.8 million lbs of thrust at liftoff, convertW|2800000|lb|kg|1 each provide 2,800,000 pounds (1,270,058.6 kg) of thrust at liftoff 2.8 million lbf (12.5 MN) [2][1]
about 150,000 feet (45.7 km), convert|150000|ft|km|lk=on about 150,000 feet (45.72 km), original [1][3]
about ½ inch (1.27 cm) thick [had just been changed to] about ½ inch (12.7 cm) thick convert|.5|in|cm|lk=on about .5 inches (1.27 cm) thick retain the common fraction either ½ inch (13 mm) or ½ inch (10 mm) [1][4][3][5][6]
It weighs 7,500 lb (3.4 t) less convertW|7500|lb|S/T|2|lk=on| It weighs 7,500 pounds (3.75 S/T) less original [5][1][7]
Operational altitude: 100 to 520 nmi (185 to 1,000 km) convert|100|nmi|km|2|abbr=off|lk=on
convert|520|nmi|km|1|lk=on
Operational altitude: 100 nautical miles (185.2 km) to 520 nautical miles (963 km) 100 to 520 nmi (190 to 960 km) [8][1]
Speed: 27,404 ft/s (7,643 m/s, 27,875 km/h, 17,321 mi/h) convert|27404|ft/s|mph|0|abbr=off|lk=on (7,643 [[Mile#Statute miles|m]]/s, 27,875 km/h) Speed: 27,404 foot per second (18,685 mph) (7,643 m/s, 27,875 km/h) original (might be overprecision in all of them, needs looking into [9][10]
Crossrange: 1,085 nmi (2,009 km) convert|1085|nmi|km|2|lk=on Crossrange: 1,085 nautical miles (2,009.42 km) original [1]
giving roughly 200 mph (90 m/s) of delta-v. convert|200|mph|km/h|1 giving roughly 200 miles per hour (321.9 km/h) of delta-v original [5][1][3]
at about 400,000 ft (120 km) convert|400000|ft|km|lk=on at about 400,000 feet (121.92 km), original [1]
reduced from 424 mph (682 km/h) to approximately 215 mph (346 km/h), (compared to 160 mph (260 km/h) for a jet airliner), at touch-down. The landing gear is deployed while the Orbiter is flying at 267 mph (430 km/h). To assist the speed brakes, a 40 ft (12 m) drag chute is deployed either after main gear or nose gear touchdown (depending on selected chute deploy mode) at about 213 mph (343 km/h). It is jettisoned as the Orbiter slows through 69 mph (110 km/h). convert|424|mph|km/h|1|abbr=on|lk=on
convert|215|mph|km/h|1
convert|160|mph|km/h|1|abbr=on
convert|267|mph|km/h|1
ft to m|40
convert|213|mph|km/h|1
convert|69|mph|km/h|1
reduced from 424 mph (682.4 km/h) to approximately 215 miles per hour (346 km/h), (compared to 160 mph (257.5 km/h) for a jet airliner), at touch-down. The landing gear is deployed while the orbiter is flying at 267 miles per hour (429.7 km/h). To assist the speed brakes, a 40 feet (12 m) drag chute is deployed, either after main gear or nose gear touchdown (depending on selected chute deploy mode) at about 213 miles per hour (342.8 km/h). The chute is jettisoned as the orbiter slows through 69 miles per hour (111 km/h). original [1][11][12]
notes
  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j You need to choose the proper precision for the results
  2. ^ You need to properly identify the units you are converting from.
  3. ^ a b c Terms such as "about" and "roughly" are especially important clues as to precision.
  4. ^ You need a leading zero.
  5. ^ a b c You need to choose the proper units to be converted to. In these cases, the previous editors had already used the proper units, and you improperly changed them.
  6. ^ Template does not use the proper singular form
  7. ^ At least one of the symbols used by your template is improper
  8. ^ Grouping precisions together can vastly improve their readability.
  9. ^ You have improperly changed a symbol, moved the link to the wrong number and linked the wrong symbol to that link
  10. ^ Template does not use the proper plural form.
  11. ^ The spelled out vs. abbreviated choices are questionable.
  12. ^ Spelled out units as adjectives do not change form in plural. The plural form here is improper.

Those black box templates are deceptive. Some of the problems with them could be fixed--for how long, who knows? But in order to use them correctly, you need to know all the nuances of the parameters associated with them, you need to be aware of ambiguities in the names of the units converted from or to, and most of all you need to use some common sense to make sure that what gets presented isn't way overprecise or way underprecise. There are often two arguable choices as to where to round them off, sometimes more, but many of yours go way beyond acceptable limits.

Additional problem: Your templates will not show significant zeros following the decimal point.

I haven't commented on your linking choices.

You made some other changes with other templates, too. I just looked for "convert" which found the "convertW" as well, and one {{ft to m}} got in with the bunch. The {{convert}} template seems to be a little more polished than the {{convertW}}.

I'll check back here. I hate ping-pong discussions. Gene Nygaard 04:51, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, first, I do perform the calculations myself, at least twice or three times, before using templates, in the case of the Space Shuttle article. These conversion templates are there for a reason, because peoples' math is infallible. I don't just throw them in willy-nilly, as you seem to have the impression I do. I compare the results before, and after, and double check them. I'm also fully aware of convert, and convertW, ft to m, and the many other conversion templates, as well as the proper use of parameters, and I have used them correctly, if I didn't, it is a simple mistake or typo, not because I don't know what I'm doing. I'm really unsure what your concern is, you say use the "proper" precision, but there's nothing wrong with using a more precise measurements, especially with technical items, and the majority of my template additions added a level of precision not there previously. I follow the WP:MOS, which states that the first instance is fully spelled out, and wiki-linked, and the subsequent uses are neither. Obviously, in some articles I may have missed a prior mention/link, but for the most part I try to be careful to check, and make the first mention wiki linked and not abbreviated.
I'm going to be honest and say that to come here, dump a huge table like this with criticism of someone whose background you are unfamiliar with, is not only a bit harsh, but is not likely to be reacted to well. I see you've done the similar thing to other editors, using comments like "If you don't know how to use the precision parameter, don't do it. Leave it to someone smarter than you are." And your comment here to me: "someone else is most likely a whole lot more competent at making them than you are. ", which is false, I have to say, I find that kind of comment unhelpful, bordering on rude. While I'm doing my very best to not react to your comments negatively, I'm going to just say that I would have appreciated a helpful note that explained your concerns nicely, and offering assistance, rather than filling my talk page with a table like this. ArielGold 05:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
‹ The template below (Pufc) is being considered for deletion. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. › The file File:600px-Slime.png has an uncertain copyright status and may be deleted. You can comment on its removal. Slimey sez, "Holy huge table of distraction, Batman!" FraidSlime 05:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
There are three classes of problems here:
  1. The problem that you don't use the templates right
    • Just go read our Wikipedia articles at false precision and accuracy and precision and arithmetic precision. And read the MoS: Avoid overly precise values where they are unlikely to be stable or accurate, ...
    • Thrust is a force. It is not correct to misidentify its units as units of mass, and improperly convert them as if they were units of mass. A great many units are ambiguous, used with several different meanings. Before you can use a black box to make the conversions, you need to make sure that you know what is being used in the first place.
    • The conventional metric units of delta-v are meters per second (an appropriate prefix can be used when the size warrants it: 37 km/s, for example). Those were the units used in this article, before you improperly changed them. Nobody uses kilometers per hour for this. You need to properly identify the units to be the targets of the conversion. Similarly, centimeters are okay for your hat size and for cubic centimeters, but are otherwise little used in a technical context. And using them with decimal fractions is ugly in any case. For our particular example, I'd say that "1 cm" would be acceptable; however, "1.27 cm" is not, even if the precision of that half-inch number warranted it (which it does not).
  2. Problems with "black box" templates
    • It is not correct to say "a 40 feet drag chute".
    • It is not correct omit leading zeros (.5 rather than 0.5). This is clearly covered in the MoS.
    • It is not correct to say "27,404 foot per second" rather than "27,404 feet per second" (this isn't an adjective like the drag chute example above)
    • It is not correct to say "0.5 inches"; it should be "0.5 inch"
    • The problem of not presenting significant zeros after the decimal point sometimes matters.
  3. Problems with an overliteral reading of the MoS and with the fact that the MoS varies over time
    • The convoluted wording about precision we now find still says you are wrong, but it was probably clearer in the older wording. The MoS advice about precision used to be expressed more succinctly, in a way you are more likely to understand. The current guidance isn't contrary to this, merely obfuscated and confusing in the way it is worded. It used to say something along these lines (as of 22 Feb 2007 and for quite a long period before and after that):
      • "Converted values should use a level of precision similar to that of the source value. For example, "the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth", not "(236,121 mi)"."
    • The MoS doesn't say that the first occurence of a unit needs to be linked. It may say that they should not be linked in later occurences. But right now, I'm not particularly concerned about the linking, there are hugely more important problems here.
If you continue to insist that your conversions are correct, you and I are going to be tangling for a long time. Let's start by finding out how much of this you do agree with, and how much you are willing to change. Gene Nygaard 12:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Look through the talk archives of MOSNUM and you will see that the precision problems have been discussed many times. But in particular, go read the current discussion at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Level of precision. Gene Nygaard 12:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I also see that the MoS still has wording pretty explicit about this, maybe even better than it used to be:
  • Converted values should use a level of precision similar to that of the source value; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth, not ... (236,121 mi). The exceptions are values with only one significant figure, which, to avoid the introduction of inaccuracy, may need to be converted to a greater level of precision; for example, one mile (1.6 km), not one mile (2 km).
Gene Nygaard 12:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Now that kind of explanation is much more helpful than a giant convoluted table that does nothing to present the issues in a readable format. Thank you. That being said, I was not "insisting" anything, but merely stating my personal opinion, and since your initial comment started out basically insulting my intelligence, and calling me "incompetent", neither of which was very civil or helpful, I may have naturally reacted with a bit of defensiveness, even though I tried not to. You are right that I do disagree with the precision item; I think that with some technical items, "rounding off" is not a good idea, but I'm not inflexible, and I don't edit-war, so feel free to make any changes you see fit, even if you wish to revert every instance of a template in the Space Shuttle article. Or, if you insist they be removed, but don't wish to do it yourself, I'll be happy to do it when I get a chance. I would of course prefer to leave some of them, as I do think that precision is more important in that article than the MOS's recommendations (specific example: operational altitude, which previously rounded 963km up to 1000km) or in some, just remove the parameter that adds a decimal point, which solves most of the issues. But again, I'm not about to argue about it, or edit-war over it. Face-wink.svg ArielGold 12:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I did go ahead and fix or remove the templates you had concerns with. ArielGold 17:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for noticing my user talk page, I probability would have not noticed! Get better soon! Tiddly-Tom 18:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

LOL I had to go back and figure out what I did! That was no biggie, no thanks needed at all, just noticed that removed another comment, so I just went about my little Wiki-Fairy job and replaced it. Face-wink.svg ArielGold 18:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't you love the cryptic thank you message (or in my case more often flame)?--Isotope23 talk 18:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
LOL I do! The former, of course, much more than the latter. But both are equally as fun to dig through and figure out what you "did" lol. Hi Isotope! :) ArielGold 18:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey. My personal favorite is the cryptic "Why did you delete my page?" Inevitably it takes me 10 minutes to figure out that I deleted some page 5 months ago and the editor is just now realizing it and complaining. It got to the point I made a banner for it.--Isotope23 talk 18:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
~*Giggle*~ That's too funny! Yeah I imagine that would be quite a challenge, especially if it is an IP that's not static asking, eh? Heheheh ArielGold 18:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Or when they create a new account name to complain. Ugh.--Isotope23 talk 19:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for being so cryptic! So you don't have to look for it ;). I could not understand what this was referring to! Tiddly-Tom 19:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I have no idea what that's referring to either, and I did look into it to try to figure it out when it was first posted, lol. ArielGold 19:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Good night! Tiddly-Tom 19:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Poke!

Hi! Thought I would stop by and poke ya! I know im not on much any more, but I am at least passing all of my graduate courses with B's or better (so far). Full time classes and working full time was probably more than I should have bitten off! I hope I will get some time here soon to get back into my normal contributions! Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Chris!!! I miss you so much, but I'm very happy you are doing well in school, congratulations! And hopefully you're never too far away via email. Nuvola apps amor.png ArielGold 13:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I am NEVER far away from my email actually. Now that I have my iPhone, i always have my email with me! (and internet access too!). Too bad it does not come with extra time to use it all with! Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
That's reassuring to know! Of course I don't bug you via email often, but it is nice to know it's there if needed. Don't be a stranger, dear, you're very missed around these here parts! (Y'all come back now, y'hear?!") ~*Giggle*~ ArielGold 13:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
don't be a stranger - heh. I'm not sure you can be stranger than some of the people that visit this page :) — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 15:19, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Guess who's back!

OK, here's the scam: I've taken over the Eilat page for a major update, upgrade and expansion (it IS my home town, after all) and even got the template to say so. My current problem is this: the Coral World Underwater Observatory Marine Park, Eilat, is the first of its kind in the world, but the link Coral World goes to the second one in the Virgin Islands. What I think is needed is a disambiguation notice on the VI page saying something like "for Coral World EILAT see Eilat page" etc. Then when I've finished with the city of Eilat maybe I'll get around to creating a new page. a) Does that make WP sense? b) Would you do it for me? I'll learn in time.... but right now I'm up to my EARS. Thank you, Shir-El too 04:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC) P.S. this is from WQ:

  • For out of olde feldes, as men seith,

Cometh al this new corn fro yeer to yere;
And out of olde bokes, in good feith,
Cometh al this newe science that men lere.
~ Geoffrey Chaucer ~

P.P.S. May we continue here? Ping-pong between your page and mine is a @#$^ in the )(@^#%*($. Thank you!

YAY! Shir-El! I'm so happy to hear from you! Thanks so much for that lovely quote! Okay, a quick glance at the page, and I'd suggest a couple things. First, maybe go to one of the featured articles on cities, like New York, and see what order the sections go in. This article has History in the middle, buried under tourism and attractions, so I'd move history up to be the first thing readers see, after the introduction. As for the Coral World thing, I'd change the wiki link in the Eilat page to be Coral World Observatory, which is a red link and then just create the article when you're ready. Because one is an observatory, and one is a marine park, this would seem to be a good compromise and not require a disambiguation page. To each of the Coral World articles, you can add a hatnote to the top to direct readers if they've reached the wrong one. Normally, disambiguation pages aren't created until there are more than 2 items with the same name, so in this case it is probably not needed, and a small hatnote would work. Then, as part of the cleanup, I'd suggest removing the naked URLs out of the article space (when a URL is just placed in brackets in an article) and put them into references. You can see templates for this at WP:CIT, or you can just put reference tags around the URLs like this: <ref>URL</ref> so that at least they show as footnotes, and will display in the footnotes/reference section. Changing references into templates for standardization is my hobby, but the templates are kind of not explained very well, so many people just put ref tags around a URL. It is best if it is done inside brackets, giving the title, author, etc., but once you're done if you would like me to stick the references into templates, I'd be more than happy to do that! Just holler and let me know. I'm glad to see you back! (P.S. Are you sure you'd like me to do the hatnote thing for you? I just saw your edit, so I want to be sure) ArielGold 04:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

All the help I can get...

  • You're points are taken, but it'll take time to implement; I'll need to re-read a few times to get the hang of it. The article is still very raw, with much to be added, edited and cited, so I'd appreciate the hatnote help but please remember: the Eilat location is "Coral World - Underwater Observatory and Marine Park, Eilat" - the observatory predates the park, and there is another, mobile celestial observatory to take into account.
  • I'll take all the help available for this one: it is the most ambitious task of its kind I have ever undertaken... and you know by now research, citations, references, etc. have been a foreign language until now. But it's a shame to let the Eilat page be so dull when this place is anything but! [BTW have my its/it's improved any?]
  • I'm also using the history/talk pages to leave messages for anyone who's been interested and is still active on WP: "Shalom! I'm trying to expand and bring the Eilat page up to date. From the history/talk pages you have been there too, so please come and see what we can do to make it even better. Thank you, Shir-El too" What do you think? [I may be barrowing trouble, but I'm hoping it will be worth it.] GOT to run. Will be back soon - and Thank You again- Shir-El too 14:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to be sure you wanted help, and didn't want to do it by yourself, I'm fine with either way you decide to go, and I think that since the Eilat Coral World is an "Observatory", in its title (do you have a URL for them, do they have a homepage?) it could be named that reasonably. I'll look again at the other park and see if they have a site as well, to see their official name. There has to be a way we can name them differently. If there is a third "Coral World" place, then we could do a disambig page. I'll check into that as well. I think it is fine to ask others who have edited the page for help, if they are still around, there is a major difference between inviting people to help improve an article, and inviting people to comment on other types of discussions (like deletions, which is a huge no-no, and called canvassing). You're not doing anything wrong by asking them, as long as it isn't tons of people, lol. I tell you what, I'll start by doing some general cleanup on the article, putting the references into templates for standardization, and I'll look into some other things. And then as we find more info, if you want to take a stab at putting them into the templates, it could be a good experiment. Sound good? (And yes, lol, you're it's are perfect!) P.S. Have I said how happy I am to hear from you!? ArielGold 14:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Okay I did some prelim work, but the whole tourism and attractions section needs work, both to remove the really "advertisement" sounding tone/words, but also to put all the URLs either into refs or down to external links. I'll keep working on it. I did add a note to the talk page, which I think you'd be able to help with, I put a news report that was in the external links up into the article, but I'm not familiar enough with the political history of the city to really formulate what it relates to. Basically, there needs to be a section at the end of the history that explains the reason that Egypt's FM declared the city "Israel's", and explain the issues of it remaining Palestinian. Evidently there's some history there, and definitely relevant, but I'm not able to figure out how to word it. So I think you'd be great at that. I'll work on the rest of it as well, the whole tourist thing, and then the Coral World thing. ArielGold 17:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Suez Canal

I visited the page before signing off and saw a lot of great changes. In Modern era, could you reference the 1956 - Suez Crisis after Suez Canal? It's perfect for it. G'Night! [And Tks: I'm glad to be back!] Shir-El too 01:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't do much yet, still a lot to do, lots of naked URLs floating in the article, lol. Gilabrand did a lot of the work today as well, taking care of much of the promotional tone of the tourism section. I'll work on it more later today. :) ArielGold 04:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I left notes on the Eilat talk page and looked up the article you were talking about. Shir-El too 12:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Article

That's a very old joke as well as a potential POV can of worms. the Negev was partitioned to the Jewish state because (a) only the Jews were insane enough to try and settle it {Negev is the source of the word magevet- towel, as in toweled dry}, and (b) it looked good on the map. Hence "Palestinian land", which legally refers to "Mandate Palestine". Everyone forgets two important facts: (1) Mandate Palestine included Trans Jordan all the way to the Iraqi border (the British peeled it off to make a thank you gift of it to Emir (later King) Abdallah I of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan). (2) "Palestine" was a British administrative designation, never a "people". Even the British acknowledged it in their official documents, including initials equivalent to "LI", Land of Israel under Palestine, even on coins.

Nobody thought the young state could hold onto it all. Egypt tried to grab a direct land link to Aquaba before the final armistice came into effect. Ben Gurion wanted access to the Indian Ocean, and he saw the Negev as Israel's greatest potential resource in terms of raw materials and agricultural communities. Hence the importance of the Ink Flag.

Egypt doesn't want the boat rocked today because Israel and the international community have agreed on the current borders - after Israel developed Sinai into a tourist goldmine and after Israel developed the Abu Rodes oil field between 1967-80.

Apropos "Palestinians": the current situation doesn't make sense unless you understand that all Arab society and culture is and always has been feudal in nature. Loyalty is to family and clan, not base on an abstract nationality, nor is territory an absolute definition because it is won or lost through warfare. That explains why what we think of as "corruption" is so rampant: one has to take care of oneself and one's family/clan first. Islam was a unifying force for a while, but today the closest thing to a pan-Arab organization is El'Qaida.

Sorry to bore you: will try to keep it down in future. Thank you, Shir-El too 12:53, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

LOL I'm completely lost... I don't know what Negev (or who?) was/is, and I'm not sure what this is in response to. Please know that I've not changed a bit of the content of the article, all I did was some formatting work, and some re-organizing of the sections, that's all. And you don't have to ever apologize, but I'm still pretty confused about what I may have done, lol. ArielGold 12:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh dear! I am really and truly sorry! D!&&d, I keep forgetting how busy you are! The Negev is the desert region of Israel: it starts from about 50 miles north of Beersheeba all the way south to Eilat, and comprises a sizable chunk of the country. It was in response to " Dec 24, 2006 12:40 | Updated Dec 24, 2006 23:06 Egyptian FM: Eilat to remain Israeli By YAAKOV BEN ZVI AND HERB KEINON", the article you wanted me to explain. Enjoy a Happy Halloween! :-} Shir-El too 13:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
ROFL No need to apologize, and I'm really not that busy, I just really didn't know what this was in reference to. And ohhhhhhhhh I'd completely forgotten that I put that URL there and asked for the review, lmao. That's just my senility showing, rofl! Don't mind me... The voices tell me that I'll be okay soon... lol. Okay, so in relation to the article, that source doesn't provide much info, gotcha, I cited it just to reference the city's location, so no worries! Thank you for clearing that up for my old addled brain, lmao. ~*Hugs*~ ArielGold 13:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Alphabet soup

So now you'll have to explain all the alphabet soup and I thought you were asleep???? G'Night!!! Shir-El too 15:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

LOL Nope I'm not asleep, I just didn't switch my status, lol. So what specific mix of alphabet soup would you like words on? (Oh, you mean ROFL and LMAO? ROFL = Rolling on the Floor Laughing, and LMAO is Laughing my *ss off. While I'm really not doing that, I use them when I am thinking about a big grin, hee hee.) :o) ArielGold 15:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Bots and/or MediaWiki API programming

anyone of the myriad that watch this page know much about doing programming of any kind to get info out of MEdiaWiki? Not for Wikipedia, but for the office Wiki. Drop me a line either here or on my talk page. Thanks! — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 03:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Not only do I not know, but I don't even have a clue what your question is asking, lmao. You know who would probably be able to help though, is Cobi, at the least, he'd probably be able to point you in the right direction. ArielGold 04:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Before I can provide any kind of real answer to that question, you're going to have to be a little bit more specific. In the end, I might not know exactly how to do what you want to do...But I run my own Office Wiki, and at the very least, I'd like to follow the discussion... --MikeVitale 04:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
(I've replied on this user's talkpage) SQLQuery me! 05:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey! Thank you so much SQL! I'm sure Timothy appreciates it! ArielGold 05:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Heh. I wasn't actually expecting you to know, Ariel, but this page has high visibility among some very nice people (anyone who is a friend of yours must be nice!) so I thought it would be a good place to ask. SQL has answered my question in the first instance and given me direction to move in. Mike, to answer you more fully, I wanted to know if there was a nice easily parsable way to get at some data in a wiki, without having to "screen scrape" the html, but also not querying the back end database directly. Apparently there is :) — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 13:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I didn't figure you really expected me to come up with anything useful on this, lmao. I'm very happy that SQL's assistance was helpful, though! Good luck with your new project ;) ArielGold 13:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

(undent)Anytime! Glad to be of assistance :) SQLQuery me! 05:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

Let the mayhem begin!
Happy Halloween! To Ariel and all of the people on this page. Or, to be nice, happy unspecified pagan holiday! But if any of you really do dislike Halloween, then I just wish you a happy almost November. i (talk) 04:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
And a super happy day to you too, my dear i ! Are you going trick-or-treating? ~*Grin*~ ArielGold 08:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Nah. That's a tad juvenile. I probably should have found something else to do, but it just crept up so quickly. I assume you aren't going trick or treating. Doing anything? i (talk) 19:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Jack-o-lantern dot com icon.jpgJack-o-lantern dot com icon.jpgJack-o-lantern dot com icon.jpg
Nah, and I've never gotten trick-or-treaters where I live, so it will be a quiet night, lol. ArielGold 19:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
At work, we had a costume competition — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 20:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Hahaha Timothy, that costume looks a little... breezy! Face-grin.svg ArielGold 21:06, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
You should see the back. :-o  — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 22:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Face-surprise.svg ArielGold 22:15, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

John L. Fugh on DYK

Updated DYK query On 31 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John L. Fugh, 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.
Wknight94 (talk) 14:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks WKnight! ArielGold 14:31, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Flag icons

I think for NASA STS missions its fine to assume crew members represent the USA, and I agree using a flag icon draws unwarranted attention to nationality. For ISS expeditions, which are inherently inter-national in nature, I think it makes more sense to be completely consistent: either every crew member gets a flag icon, or none do. (sdsds - talk) 18:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Hrmm, good point. I'm of the mind that the flag icons are an unnecessary visual distraction in the mission articles, so I'd prefer to simply see the agency they represent instead, like NASA, ESA, RSA, etc. But I'm also not hard-headed, lol. I think that in lieu of US flags, just saying (NASA) after the American astronauts would be a good idea, but the same goes for the RSA, since usually half the crew is from the Russian program. Again, it just comes down to my personal dislike for these tiny flag pictures to emphasize nationality, rather than focusing on the mission, and the agency. ArielGold 18:49, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
You are right: showing the space agency each crew member represents would be better than showing their nationality. Similarly, using text is better than using an icon (flag or otherwise). (sdsds - talk) 21:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Agreed completely, could you weigh in on Talk:Expedition 16, as others also think this would be a better way to go about it. ArielGold 21:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Bad stuff

Hi Ariel, I came upon this user page, and I did blank the page but I suspect its a vandalized page - maybe there's another name for this kind of thing. Anyway if you check the history you'll see what I blanked . I would think the whole thing should be deleted . It does use your User name "in vain". Bad puppy! (olive 21:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)) [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littleolive oil (talkcontribs) 21:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Heheheh thank you for the notice, and you were fine to blank the page in that case. It will soon be deleted, no worries! Thank you for watching out for things! There is also a User:Ariel., but that isn't me, either. :o) ArielGold 21:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Jay Barbree page

Hello Ariel, and thanks for your cogent points on the Jay Barbree references / Deke Slayton authorship.

Re. the Barbree story, it is an anecdote that appears in his book, that the writer of the MSNBC (same affiliated company as Barbree) repeats in the context of talking about his book, and the only source of which can be Barbree (as the other person, Shepard, is long dead). Therefore, it seems more accurate to cover all bases by saying "Barbree says Shepard told him" - but it would also work to say "In his book, Barbree writes that Shepard told him" - I'd be happy to amend to that. It therefore then correctly leads to the source. As Barbree's books are not an accurate account of the space program (there are a huge number of factual errors in the most recent one, and many of the anecdotes are unreliable) it is best to show that the source is him, and not a fact coming from another source. In this instance, the only possible source for the MSNBC story is Barbree. MSNBC, by repeating it, do not by default verify it.

Re. the Slayton authorship, I also believe it is more correct to say:

In 1993, Shepard, journalist Howard Benedict, and Barbree collaborated to write the best-selling book, Moon Shot.[3 Astronaut Donald K. "Deke" Slayton is also listed as an author, although he passed away before the project was completed.

Slayton colleagues have said that the "Moon Shot" book was one he had no actual participation in, but that he allowed his name to be placed on before passing away without ever seeing a draft. I thought my wording was therefore a more accurate summary, in that it still names him as a listed author, without (incorrectly) suggesting he was an active participant. The wording you have changed it back to "In 1993, Shepard, fellow Mercury astronaut Deke Slayton, journalist Howard Benedict, and Barbree collaborated to write the best-selling book, Moon Shot.[3] Slayton died before the book was completed" is factually incorrect (although impossible to source this) as it lists Slayton as an active collaborator. I'd recommend it be changed to the more accurate, more open version which allows both possibilities, not just the factually incorrect one.

I realize that we are in the somewhat murky waters here of impossible-to-source information, therefore my wish that a more neutral pose is taken. Otherwise, the page is pushing in the direction of incorrect information, no matter how meticulously it can be proved that the incorrect information is repeated by other journalists. Thank you, and I appreciate and admire your longstanding and hard work to keep these pages accurate. Authorinfo 22:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Authorinfo, thanks for the reply! Regarding the Moon Shot passage: I think the current wording reflects the known facts, he's listed as an author, and since it is not possible to source the statement that he had nothing to do with writing the book, I don't think it is appropriate to mention it, as that would be considered original research. He is listed on the cover as the co-author, and the book is only mentioned in context with Barbree's writing career, so who wrote what passages, or who participated how much is not really relevant, but listing the authors as listed on the book, is appropriate when citing a book's authors. With regards to the "Shepard told Barbree he would be the first to fly" passage, I agree your suggestion of rewording to "In his book, Barbree writes that Shepard told him" would be appropriate. I really don't think it can be argued this is fact, but you're right that the book is a primary source. Feel free to make that change, and thank you very much for your help! ArielGold 22:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello Ariel, Okay, I guess we'll agree to disagree on the author listing - the page is incorrect, as any reliable space historian would tell you. but I understand the need to keep things grounded in sources. I have made the other change, as you suggest, and thanks for understanding the viewpoint on that one.

As the person who began the Barbree page, FYI you may wish to look at areas such as recent Amazon.com reviews on Barbree's new book, including from a well-known Apollo spacecraft engineer. It might be informative to you as to why many people are concerned whenever they see Barbree's anecdotes repeated as fact in web pages that others may use as reliable sources.

So pleased to see that you are working on so many fronts to keep the space information updated and widened on Wikipedia - great work - thanks! Authorinfo 23:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I do understand what you're saying, but for an encyclopedia, if the information cannot be sourced, it shouldn't be added. As I'm sure you know, Amazon.com reviews are not a reliable source of information, as anyone can put anything they wish up there, true or not. I would take the reviews with a very large grain of salt :o) Either way, I don't disagree with your history, I just disagree that the passage in this particular article needs to be qualified by saying Slayton had nothing to do with it but is listed as author; that's not relevant to establish that Barbree was one of the authors of the book, along with multiple others (as listed). Now, if an article were written on the book itself, then definitely it would be worth mentioning. But I hope you can appreciate that it is a rather unnecessary item to note in the context of Barbree's biography, as a passing mention of one of his books. And hey, feel free to holler at me anytime, I enjoy talking with people who are friendly, kind, and listen to alternate options and opinions without getting defensive, it is a pleasure to work with you! (P.S. Have you read his new book? It is amazing, despite what the Amazon.com critics say, lol) ArielGold 23:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ariel,

Yes, I read the book the other month. I'm sorry to say, it has all of the errors in there that are listed on Amazon. I was immensely disappointed, as I have always enjoyed Barbree's work.

I agree, Amazon reviews are not something that could ever be used or relied on as a source, that was just FYI. In this instance, those negative reviews are correct, as information like rocket heights, mission lengths, rocket fuel amounts etc. can be checked and verfied against non-memoir sources, and they are often incorrect in his book. There are even lines from the "Apollo 13" movie used as if they really happened, although there are verifiable sources saying they were invented for the movie. I found and noted all the same points as mentioned in those reviews, as have other space historians.

For an outside space enthusiast, I bet the book reads as a wonderful, exciting account. For those who were there or have researched the events, it is painful to read for the amount of errors. The fact that it uses a faked photo is damning in itself, when it comes to accuracy.

I certainly agree with you that something like "Slayton had nothing to do with it" would be far too strong for somewhere like Wikipedia - I was instead trying to write neutrally but with wider options. But I quite understand what you are saying, and the care that needs to be taken for any changes, however subtle. I have to admire the way you do your work, even when I disagree sometimes! Thanks.

And there are some great other books out there about the early years of spaceflight - here is probably not the forum to make recommendations, but I'd encourage you to see what else is out there, too. Authorinfo 00:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. And I don't dispute the issues, nor am I a "novice" with space related items or history, I guess I just have gotten used to ignoring factual inaccuracies in memoirs, lol. I still found the book quite enjoyable, despite the issues. My favorite book will probably always be what I consider the definitive source of information, Jenkins' History of the National Space Transportation System, and that's actually a book MCC folks use for reference on occasion, as well as being a wonderful tech source. My copy is getting so worn out the spine is falling off, lol. ArielGold 11:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Ariel, sounds like you are thinking about all of the ramifications and looking for accurate information, which is great. Indeed, memoirs tend to be less reliable than other types of publications - all the more reason not to rely on them for objective facts, and to tie anecdotes from them back to the memoir. Glad you are interested in the subject, and appreciate your work.

Authorinfo 17:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Preity Zinta FA

Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

My dear Sir Blofeld, it would be my honor to offer whatever support I can, and I shall take a look at the article today. ArielGold 11:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:Congrats

Thankyou very much! And thankyou also for your support in my RfA. I look forward to getting started. Best wishes, Lradrama 18:46, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you. IslaamMaged126 16:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

You're most welcome :) I hope you find what you were looking for, there is certainly enough information there! ~*Giggle*~ ArielGold 16:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

A questions about Socks

Is there a quick reference of all socks and suspected socks or did you just happen to know about Albi? Thanks JodyB Roll, Tide, Roll 17:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL I wish there was an easy way to know them! Wouldn't that rock? Sadly, there isn't one that I know of, just that some issues like this one, are monitored by a number of editors and admins, and I've been aware of this particular sock for a while, via watching Queen's talk page, and reverting the edits made to the articles this particular sockpuppet focuses on. For this particular sock, the best response is no response, just an indef block/tag. (DFTT is particularly relevant in this particular case) ArielGold 17:03, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Personal information

At WP:EAR I saw some personal information which you later removed. I would have removed it myself - I was there a few minutes before you - but I thought that an admin could remove it completely (even from the history files), where all I could do is a normal edit. If I run across that kind of thing in the future should I just go ahead and remove it instead of waiting for an admin? Can an admin in fact remove it completely? Sbowers3 23:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Information like what I removed, email address and company phone number, can just normally be removed via editing it out, but there are cases where it should be oversighted (removing the edit completely from the page's history), for example, if you come across a user page of an editor who identifies themselves as a very young child, and gives their address, full name, email, or more information (sadly, I've come across several of these). For obvious reasons, (see WP:CHILD) this information needs to be completely removed, and what normally happens is an admin will delete the user page completely, and then re-create it without the personal information. For issues like the EAR, that information was basically advertisement, and no real personal information, but removing it from the page is just a smart idea, because there are robots that comb the web looking for email addresses. It just goes along with the idea of using user(at)host(dot)com when posting an email. Each issue, obviously should be reviewed individually, and judgment used, but if you ever have a question about it, feel free to ask Adrian, as he's quite familiar with EAR and can take a look at the information and decide what should be done. I hope that helps! ArielGold 23:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Sbowers3 00:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
You're most welcome. Face-smile.svg ArielGold 00:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
P.S. That User:ArielGold/r template is kind of clever. Sbowers3 00:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, feel free to use it if you like (don't substitute it, just transclude it so the reader can remove it once the message is read). ArielGold 00:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Things...

Hello Ari, how are you? I hope that some interesting things will be happening soon! Happy November! Love, Neranei (talk) 00:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I tried to say the same, but be more subtle, I don't think Ariel got the message :P And then I got called a Moomin by Timothy! Tiddly-Tom 09:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
LOL I read the Moomin article intro, and still have no idea what that has to do with anything... I don't get that joke, hee hee. ArielGold 10:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Timothy called me a Snork, one of its meanings being a moomin! Tiddly-Tom 17:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Hrmm, I'm not sure he called you a snork, I thought he was just laughing, the way he used the brackets, like, ~*Snork*~ (Which is what I do when I laugh really hard, lol.) Either way, the lil guys in the Moomin article are cute, so it isn't an insult, lol. ArielGold 17:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I don't think I often ~*Snork*~ ;) They still fat cows ;) BTW, thanks for the revert to my userpage, not the best attempt at vandalism I have ever seen.... Tiddly-Tom 19:03, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
They are cows? Huh... they looked more like... gosh I don't even know what they looked like to me, lmao. Cute though, in a cartoony way, that is, ~*Snicker*~ (And no thanks needed for reverts, happy to oblige.) ArielGold 19:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

November

Happy November! ;) Tiddly-Tom 18:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

ROFL! Happy November to you too, my dear Tom! Face-grin.svg ArielGold 18:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
~*snork*~  — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 18:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I am not a Moomin! I got my first reminder email that it was November ;) Tiddly-Tom 18:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Hee hee. "Reminder email". Hee hee. Apropos of nothing, I've offered my userpage to Kurt to test scripts, so if anyone notices warnings or other funky templates, don't worry, they're just tests Face-grin.svg ArielGold 13:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Counts on her fingers... Wonder how many days it is until some of the special birthdays around here... ~*Hrmmmm*~ ArielGold 10:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
oOoo is it your birthday comming up?!?! How old? it was just my 18th! w00t finally an adult (don't worry i am no more mature!!) XD PhilB ~ T/C 12:18, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Nope! Not my birthday, but lots of birthdays this month! ArielGold 12:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Second one received. At what stage does early November become not early November? Tiddly-Tom 18:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
LOL! I'm not getting any emails! ArielGold 18:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

This is cool

This is very cool! — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 21:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

(and since when did external links not have the little link icon?) — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 21:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Oddly, it shows up as a link in the preview, but not in the actual view of the page. Though, I do agree it's very cool. this is a test! [2] Into The Fray T/C 21:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Hm, apparently something she's done to the page here. Tricky Ariel. Into The Fray T/C 21:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
She has a div class up at the top to make everything plainlinks. i (talk) 00:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
LOL Shhhh i, we had them boggled! ~*Giggle*~ And Timothy, did you get that link from the reply I gave on WP:EAR? I'll be honest, I didn't enable scripting to allow it to run, so I've no idea how it looks lol. ArielGold 07:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
LOL, this idea with plainlinks is so brilliant, I think I'm gonna steal it. Face-grin.svgМиша13 15:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
LOL Misza, feel free, it is certainly not my coding, but I just dislike the "messy" environment of normal links on talk pages! ~*Giggle*~ ArielGold 15:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
That is very cool ;) Tiddly-Tom 11:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay, okay I enabled scripting temporarily to see what exactly this is that y'all are raving about, lol. Yeah, it is pretty cool. Sort of mesmerizing, actually... ArielGold 13:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

<- No, a friend IM'ed it to me. — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 14:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh, coincidence, I had just hours before you posted this, replied to an assistance request for someone looking for it, lol. Small world, eh? ArielGold 14:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I admit it. I sat there for a good half hour last night just watching this thing, lol. Almost addicting. It is a bit delayed, though, wouldn't be of much use for RC patrol, but it is really wild to see that more edits come from places I'd never have expected them to, lol. ArielGold 10:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thought the ArielGoldTalkPageForce would find this interesting

This does not surprise me in the least. /me wonders why an archive would be so popular... Soleil (formerly I) 20:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Omigosh... you have got to be kidding me! Face-grin.svgFace-grin.svg There must be something off with that tool, lol. Is it filtering only A names? Or... lol, I don't get it. I mean, my talk page has been abnormally slow for the past few weeks, lol. Sort of interesting that archive is #1, I am not sure why either, lol. That's a new tool, I'm sure I'd have found that before, lol. ArielGold 20:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
There has to be something off with that, according to that page, Jimbo's talk page is only viewed 8 times a day, but there are far more than 8 edits per day to his talk page, much less views to it, lol. Nice tool, but I'd say it has a few bugs Face-wink.svg ArielGold 20:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I'd tend to agree, but hey — we can still believe you're #2. Soleil (formerly I) 20:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Geez, even if the tool isn't accurate, did you look at the articles? 185 million views per day for the main page, and Harry Potter stuff is in the top 10 twice? lol. That's a lot of times people are looking at the page. Mind boggling! ArielGold 21:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
It's always funny to see the sex related items. They're always on there. But after HP VII came out, HP was everywhere. It's always fun to look at that tool. Soleil (formerly I) 21:05, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I checked something like that several months ago, not sure if it was this same tool, but the top 10 pages were all sex related, lol. Sad. Now, the top sex page is #17, so do you think the world is focusing on more important things? (Like Harry Potter, Halo III, and Transformers?) ~*Snicker*~ ArielGold 10:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Aww only 17th, pfft the school computers wont let me on it grrr... PhilB ~ T/C 13:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

November? Boring? :)

What??? :) Heh, heh, you may want to see this old userpage revision to find out why I don't think November is boring. :) Acalamari 21:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Ahhhh, a day to mark down on my calendar! ~*Scurries off to find herself a pencil*~ And how have you been, dear? :) ArielGold 21:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Heh, heh; I'm fine thanks. :) You as well? Acalamari 21:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, getting over being sick. It has been a bit slow around here, I'm not sure why, maybe I'm not out doing enough RC patrol, lol. ArielGold 21:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, I hope you're better now. :) Thanks again, and best wishes. Acalamari 21:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I hope so too, November is in no way boring! Best wishes, Neranei (talk) 21:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
November is also scary...:P Love, Neranei (talk) 12:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Extremely belated thanks...

Did you know that I just noticed this now? :-) So, belated thanks for reverting the troll. I guess I'm pretty famous around here, considering the fact that I've already been impersonated several times :-) --Agüeybaná 00:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL No need for thanks, dear Squid Guy. I'm always watching out for friends. ~*Hugs*~ ArielGold 01:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I specially liked this question. The answer is both, because, when Puerto Rico was invaded by the United States in the late 19th century, the English language was imposed as the official language of the island. So, technically, and even though I don't write it very well and speak it even worse, I am a native speaker of English :-) --Agüeybaná 01:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I think you do fine, if you had not said that, I'd have not known English wasn't your first language, you've always come across quite articulate to me. ~*Hugs*~ ArielGold 10:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

GlassCobra's RfA

LyttonMajorGeneralMop2.gif The count is in, and now I join the crew who wield the mops and pails.
Thanks for your support! I pledge to serve both you and Jimbo Wales.

If you have anything you need, then please don't think to hesitate.

For I am the very model of a grateful admin designate!

Hello dear! I know that you've already retired for the night, but I wanted to leave you this little note for you to wake up to. :) Whether it's answering questions, defending me at my RfA, or being one of the very first to say congratulations once the smoke cleared, you've been so helpful and incredible about everything, and I just wanted to thank you from the bottom of my heart. See you on IRC soon, I hope! We're waiting in your channel. :) GlassCobra 02:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Aww, and what a great thing to wake up to. I'm so very happy for you, dear GC, I truly am. And now I can come to you with issues too! Yay more admins to bug! ~*Giggle*~ ArielGold 10:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Wahhhh, my article fell through the cracks of the approval process!!  :-(

I tried to add this article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2007-10-30#Les_Parrott

on 10-30, and... it's still sitting there, not disapproved, just forgotten. Could you please look at it, Ariel? Thanks!!  :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.154.214.92 (talk) 08:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Ahhhh it did indeed slip through, didn't it? I'll create it today, I just checked and those two sources are good, and if he's appeared in NYT and on Oprah, I can find even more sources. No worries, I'll get that done today, I promise. Face-wink.svg ArielGold 10:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 Done : Les Parrott ArielGold 15:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

WOW!! You found way more info on him than I did-awesome article!! Thanks!!  :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.154.214.92 (talk) 21:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome :) It wasn't too hard, although it was a challenge getting his education history, and I still don't have even a year of birth, lol. ArielGold 23:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Fabio Cardone

Hi, thanks very much for your help, but I am still a bit confused since I have found at least two pages (many more are out there) Ruggero Santilli and Giovanni Amelino-Camelia who have their page as well and I am pretty sure that they edited it by them selves. I know both of them. Anyway I will read all the links that you gave me and I will try and understand a bit better what "third-party sources" mean. Can I get back to you if I am still confused? In the mean time the page won't be deleted I will be glad at least until I understand.Thanks a lot for your help.--Cardone Fabio 20:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Just because other articles exist doesn't mean they adhere to the notability policies, and if the subjects of the article were editing, then perhaps they were unaware of the conflict of interest guideline. That being said, take a look at the Ruggero Santilli and you'll see it has many sources as references to verify the information. The Giovanni Amelino-Camelia article is a stub, but it states the notability in the second sentence: "He is one of the major proposers of non-commutative geometry, one of the two theories, alternative to string theory, that hope to find a way to quantize general relativity." Now, reliable sources will need to be found to verify that, but these are the differences between those articles, and yours. The article about you is basically a resume, it doesn't have reliable sources to verify the information. "Third-party" sources mean newspaper articles, magazine articles, news reports (from fact-checking, reliable news agencies), such as CNN, BBC, Associated Press, UPI, NPR, major television networks like ABC/CBS/NBC (US), etc., and reputable professional journals. They are "third party" because they aren't published by the subject, or someone affiliated with the subject, but by an outsider who performed fact checking to verify the information was true. The awards you've listed should at least have been covered and published by the news media, you simply need to find the publications to be able to cite them. Hope that helps explain things more! ArielGold 20:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Webcomic speedy deletions... again

An article I maintain (out of a grand total of two) was one of those targeted for speedy deletion last week. Several of us have upgraded the article [link] this past week. When do we know the article in question has achieved notability and when can we take the non-notable and hangon tags down? Or is that done my an administrator?

I am sorry to bother you with this, but I just want to make sure I am not adding to the problem. Thank-you for all your effort and time. Chadatonic 20:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll go take a look and let you know what I think. Give me a few minutes and check back here :) ArielGold 20:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay, there was no CSD tag, so I removed the {{hangon}} template, as it isn't needed. I also removed the talk page template that was in article space, as it shouldn't be there. I moved it to the talk page. The article does seem to have notability, but it is buried way at the bottom of the page: "The 2007 Memorial Day series was included in the literary journal, Art In A Liberal Frame.", so I think that could be moved up to demonstrate notability earlier. The article needs some work, the references are half inline, half not inline, and the comic strip's website shouldn't be used as a reference. Additionally, both the Mt Airy URLs used as references are invalid URLs, and this URL is not a reliable source, that's a Wiki, so it is not reliable. It can be moved to the external links section, however. This URL is a blog, so also not a reliable source, and should be moved to the external links section as well. It seems the only reliable, third-party source is the Bits of News article. But I would imagine with some digging, more could be found. That is just my initial take, given only a few minutes. If you'd like me to fix the referencing issues, I'd be happy to do so, just let me know. Cheers! ArielGold 21:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
THANK YOU! I really do appreciate the help with this. I have made all the changes suggested and hopefully Mr. Anon will not come back to delete everything. Again, many thanks. Chadatonic 21:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
You're most welcome. And as an aside, I did leave a very long explanation for the editor who tagged all the webcomic articles with CSD tags, explaining what the issues were nicely, so once they return from their time out, hopefully they will have had a chance to review the policies and guidelines I pointed them to. Feel free to holler if you need anything else! ArielGold 23:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)