User talk:Bduke/Archive 10

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

request for retrival of deleted article

my username is yahoo468 and my article NIMT have been deleted ,i request u to either mail its copy to me at or retrive it on wikipedia.

i would recreate the article according to rules and regulations.pls cooperate —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yahoo468 (talkcontribs) 20:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Edward L. Rowan

New article on a Scouter, psychiatrist, and author. Very interesting. Pls help improve. Up for DYK too. RlevseTalk 15:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)


Since you nixed the QD, I started a move request. I believe that naming conventions favor returning the pioneering article to its original title Purplebackpack89 16:06, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


Feel better soon! (no need to respond to this msg) DMacks (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Get better and come back soon! Take Calcium and a little Selenium to knit those bones. No need to respond. North8000 (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Ouch! Get better soon. How'd you do this? RlevseTalk 22:25, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Rlevse is wanting to make you work, but I was curious too. Or I could make up something good. Here it is: Bduke broke his arm cliff diving in Zanzibar. Pass the word! North8000 (talk) 18:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Nothing so adventurous. It was at home in the dark in our car port after a serious of other disasters that evening starting with a flat battery. Thanks to both of you for your concerns. I'm not doing much on wiki. --Bduke (Discussion) 23:29, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to read this bad news. Take it easy and get well soon. Best wishes, Dirac66 (talk) 18:47, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Nigerian traditional rulers

I don't know if you want to add to your comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nigerian traditional rulers - or if your broken arm will let you. This one has got me fixing up List of Nigerian traditional states and starting Nigerian traditional rulers and articles on specific states such as Agaie Emirate and Akwa Akpa. An interesting area (to me) but I am not comfortable with the list itself, which seems likely to stay incoherent. Not a strong opinion - no great harm if the list stays. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:12, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Silver Buffalo category debate

User_talk:Fastily#Category:Recipients_of_the_Silver_Buffalo_Award RlevseTalk 09:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Scouts Royale Brotherhood

Hopefully we are closer to a good article now. I think the reason that things have settled down over the last couple of hours is that it that it is now 5:30AM in the Philippines. Note that the IP vandals also hit Alpha Phi Omega and Tau Gamma Phi, two other Philippines Fraternity. The fact that vandals hit Alpha Phi Omega tells me that they are in the Scouts Royale Brotherhood Forever faction rather than the Scouts Royale Brotherhood Traditional faction...Naraht (talk) 21:40, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Should the factions be mentioned? BTW, I have no idea about fraternities. There are totally foreign to me, but I do know quite a lot about student Scouting and Guiding in the UK and to a lesser extent in Europe. What is the link of SRB to Scouting? I have just asked on its talk page. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:49, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Probably not, until we can get some level of referenced information on the change from a High School only fraternity/sorority (and I'm not quite sure when Scouts Royale Sisterhood started) to one with college chapters. SRB Traditional expects members to join APO when they get to college, SRB Forever wants members to stay with SRB. Note, my knowledge here is from being on a Filipino Fraternity website. As for it's relationship with scouting, Alpha Phi Omega in the USA in 1925 was formed on the Ideals of the Scout Oath and Law. APO spread to the Philippines in 1950 and it established SRB as sort of a "Youth wing" in 1975. The other large Fraternities in the Philippines (Tau Gamma Phi, Alpha Kappa Rho) and others have them as well, but they tend to be controlled directly. Most of the SRB symbolism is related to scouts, but I think any contact with Boy Scouts of the Philippines is through Alpha Phi Omega. I'm on the International Relations committee for Alpha Phi Omega, so I have somewhat of a COI here, but I hope I'm working with NPOV.Naraht (talk) 01:05, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Victoria Office of Police Integrity

Hi Bduke, I saw your post on the Wiki Project Australia saying you wanted to contribute. I'm interested in updating the Victoria Office of Police Integrity (OPI) page, as it's written like a press release and doesn't have any discussion on the numerous issues in the OPI (corruption, cover-ups of human rights abuses etc) that are regularly reported in reputable Australian media outlets. I've left a comment in the discussion page with a huge list of links and will be doing more myself. Sorry if this is the wrong area to be posting this, I'm somewhat new to editing and that's part of the reason I'm asking for help with editing the OPI page. Thanks.Wikiiuser87324987234 (talk) 18:24, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

It needs more references and it needs those that are there to be formatted correctly. I will fix up the references, but I do not have much time, or indeed interest, to do more. Good luck with it. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

A reminder

Regarding [1], there are a couple things that are supposedly agreed on. It's rather nice when they get done. I've looked several times for references for these tiny "inhabited place" articles, including via library search, and come up empty. How do you think I knew what I said was the case? Or do you think I just made it up? Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:21, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually, your "reminder" is more snide than the perceived incivility.--Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 14:43, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
You're probably right, and I apologize if my tone was more aggressive than needed. I don't like having my integrity questioned, though, and still really did not appreciate it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
I do not think I was questioning your integrity, but I was iritated by your attack on stubs which I recall from long ago. Encyclopedias can have very long or very short articles and I think small places are well served by short articles. They contain exactly what many readers will be looking for. I do not support their merger into lists. I do not think you have the backing of a consensus of editors on this point. If you want to continue this, please take it back to Wikipedia talk:Notability. --Bduke (Discussion) 20:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The Chair

I think you misinterpreted my "vague" comment. By that I meant that the term has too many meanings for it to be a redirect to a horse racing target. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 19:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

TPH has NAC'd the AfD and moved the article to The Chair (Grand National) and established The Chair as a disamb. I have no problem with that but don't think the current name is quite right. Please contribute to the discussion at Talk:The Chair (Grand National)#Rename. Thanks, Bigger digger (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Nations at/in Scottish universities

Hi! I didn't understand.[2] The phrase nation at a university is more correct, right? -- Frous (talk) 20:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'm a bit noob with all the practices here since I don't have time to contribute so much. Could you please explain to me what I should do if I find the name of an article incorrect? If you want to chnage the title, it should be moved to retained the history and not words of one syllable, please? :) In case you prefer the preposition in in the name of the article, let me know.

Thank you for your patience. :) -- Frous (talk) 21:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

  • If a title (sorry, two syllables) is wrong, move the article to the right title--don't copy it. Copying "moves" only the text, not the history of the article and its many versions and edits; copying it does not preserve who did what to the article, and thus erases other editors' contributions. A move preserves all that. Drmies (talk) 23:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for helping our friend. I reversed the copy before rushing out to a conference sessions. --Bduke (Discussion) 01:41, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Yep, thanks! But is the redirecting function reserved only for admins? I see no "move" button on the toolbar when I'm editing articles, so might want to consult you, Bduke, in case the [[3]] prefers "at". -- Frous (talk) 15:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
It is in the menu that drops down when you move your mouse over the down pointing triangle in the toolbar at the top. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox Australian winery

Template:Infobox Australian winery has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox winery. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. WOSlinker (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Progressive Award Scheme

I take your point as well - my personal thought on it is get consensus to merge (which there seems to be - I'm certainly happy with that), do the merge then I don't think there would be any objections to closing the RM as moot. If I'm honest I was thinking I'd be happy to leave your closure but notice you hadn't removed the movereq template so it would still be listed on RM and so as I was going to edit it anyway I chose to undo your close even though I wasn't too bothered either way. If you reclose it I will not oppose as it seems the common sense, ignore all rules, thing to do. Dpmuk (talk) 00:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

/* Religion in Scouts Australia */

Brian, I was sitting back re-reading and editing the Scouts Religious section and feel it is probably now getting more space than it deserves. Religion plays little part in the day to day australian scouts activities and it will end up being the biggest section on the page. By highlighting religion and religious intolerance I may be scaring kids off while outside of wiki I am actively trying to recruit kids. The original entry where it stated that scouts was open to non religious faiths was wrong but that has now been modified. Can I propose deleting paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 and 9? I am happy with the wording as is that says that people unable to make the promise can't be members. Anyone with any sense can see that this excludes atheists. --Ozscout (talk) 04:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with that. Some of it is rather unencyclopedic anyway. However, I think you should raise it on the talk page. On your last provocative sentence, I have been discussing the issue of religion in Scouting across the world for many years, and you would be surprised how many people disagree with you. Personally, I can see how some atheists might in honesty, see the wording of the Australian Promise as a way in, but I am not one of them. I think is is a way in for many Australians who simply do not care less about religion, for or against. Again, I am not one of them. I think, like Richard Dawkins but less strongly, that belief in God is both false and often dangerous. --Bduke (Discussion) 06:45, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to join 10 Years Of Wikipedia in Melbourne

Hi Brain, I am writing to you to invite 10 years celebration program in Melbourne. Earlier I wrote to you at As I havent heard back I am writing here. I was wondering will you be there? Can you please write me back at

For more:

Regards Arif. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I replied to your e-mail. Hopefully we can post details of a meetup tonight or tomorrow morning. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Bangladesh Scouts

hello brother i am a President's Scout of Bangladesh Scouts, i made the changes to the page because it will make the page nice, some of my friends suggesteed me to make the changes, & i am a authenticated person of Bangladesh Scouts --Tahmidazuwad (talk) 21:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


thnx bduke brother for the nice suggestion, i will follow you, & would you plz describe the steps, how i can license my images that i wanted to upload in wiki??? :D --Tahmidazuwad (talk) 03:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


would you plz license it by yourself??? i am trying but i can not fix it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tahmidazuwad (talkcontribs) 13:35, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Olave B-P

Thank you for tweaking my efforts  ;-)

RobinClay (talk) 14:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


Your name has been mentioned in recent evidence for an arbitration case filed on 2010-11-18. You were not originally named as a party, but I am sending this notice proforma to editors named in evidence, before the workshop period closes. If you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Longevity/Workshop#General discussion, or elsewhere on that page or the case's four talk pages. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks, JJB 21:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


I have added a detailed list of pros and cons on the chemistry talk page why I think the picture with the reaction of water is more appropriate for the page than that of the flasks. I hope to get some feedback from you and the other editor who reverted the first version of the new figure. Next time I add a new figure, I will give a longer explanation up front. Thanks for the suggestion to discuss this on the discussion page. I'm looking forward to a good exchange, and am interested to hear was everyone has to say on this matter.

--Theislikerice (talk) 22:31, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Old Fooians

Hi Bduke

Thanks for your suggested compromise at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 January 24#Old_Edwardians. I'm glad to see that the discussion has now been closed as "rename to People educated at Foo". Thanks for being the one to settle this.

I think that it would be now be appropriate to do as you suggested, and have a followup nomination for the others. I undertook at CFD to do that, but before going ahead I wanted to ask for your thoughts on my idea for how to go about it.

My first thought is to leave aside the 9 original public schools, as defined by the Public Schools Act 1868. Some editors may feel that all of those schools are sufficiently well-known to justify retaining the the "Old Fooians" format, even if it is replaced elsewhere. So I think that they should be treated as a special case. Personally, the only "Old Fooian" term I'm wholly persuaded on keeping is the Old Etonians, but I may be persuadable on some or all of the others ... so I suggest leaving them all aside until the others are done (and possibly omitting them entirely).

My second thought is to group the remainder in batches of about fifty, because if we do all 300 at once, then it'll be difficult to examine whether the titles are sufficiently disambiguated.

How does this sound to you? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE.

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:18, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Particle AfD

Hello Bduke. Thanks for correcting my error in the closing template subst for the Particle AfD discussion. Best regards, Crowsnest (talk) 02:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Chicago first Gang Show

I can provide a pdf file of the Chicago Gang Show program, but being new on Wiki I still haven't figured out how to add it to what I have written. Help? D.Bischel (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Absorption Cross Section

Hello, I am writing to inform you that there is an error on the Absorption Cross section page. The dimensional analysis does not add up.

I use SI units for simplicity. using the dimensions:

= [m-1]
-1 = [m3/g]
u = [g]
Ma= [g/mol] (mol is dimensionless not a problem)

gives the absorption cross section as [gm-2]

Absorption cross section units should be = [m-2]

So this comes from the mistake of using Ma which is not correct, I believe the number should be 1/Avagadros constant i.e. dimensionless or per mol.

As you seem a dab hand at editing and I have no idea. I hope you do not mind me bringing this to your attention with the hope it should be corrected. Such a wonderful resource Wikipedia ChoppyDunbar (talk) 08:45, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I have moved this to Talk:Absorption cross section#Units for comment. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:34, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Think of Wikipe-tan!

Hi Brian. You linked to Wikipedia:Wikipe-tan in your argument for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Think of Wikipe-tan!. Did you mean to link Wikipedia:Think of Wikipe-tan!?

On a related note, is the comment by Underween (talk · contribs), whose account is under two days old, grounds for a block? Underween appears to be a troll. Newyorkbrad (talk · contribs) speedy closed Underween's first MfD nomination, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:DustFormsWords/Systemic bias against Transformers, as disruption. Cunard (talk) 08:00, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I intended to link to it, but I could have been clearer and I have just tried to clarify it on the MfD page. Underween does seem a bit odd, but I have to be elsewhere for quite a while now. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:19, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. By the way, Underween has now been blocked as a sock of Wiki brah (talk · contribs) so that explains the erratic behavior. Cunard (talk) 08:49, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Female editors

I did not realize it was as bad as 13%. Though I personally like Wikipetan and don't like to see her creator tarred as tarc was doing, I do not want to chase off the editors we have in GGGS taskforce. Is the GGGS Wikipetan I had commissioned offputting?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:27, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Ibrahim H. Umar

Hi Bduke. I noticed that you created the article on Ibrahim Umar, and also noted from your userpage that (over what I must say sounds like a facinating career) you spent time working at the Bayero University Kano. Therefore I was wondering whether you knew VC Umar during your time at BUK, and whether you are still in contact with him, or happen to know what he is presently up to. He was a student of my late father, and so i'm quite interested to track the progress of his career, and hopefully be able to update his biography a bit. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 04:45, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I knew him quite well as he was in Physics and I was in Chemistry and the Science Faculty was all together. He also lived next door to me on campus. However, I have had no contact with him since I left BUK in 1981. --Bduke (Discussion) 07:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

List of important publications in chemistry - deletion of textbooks

Hi. I am wondering what happened to the discussion about deleting the textbooks which were not really pioneering. Would you mind if I went ahead and deleted the list we had decided on two years ago? As I understand it, this was the last list for deletion:

  1. Physical Chemistry P. W. Atkins
  2. Physical Chemistry R. Stephen Berry, Stuart A. Rice, and John Ross
  3. Quantitative analysis Day, R. A. and Arthur L. Underwood
  4. Electrochemical Methods: Fundamentals and Applications Allen J. Bard, Larry R. Faulkner
  5. The Practice of Medicinal Chemistry Camille Georges Wermuth editor
  6. The Structure of Physical Chemistry C. N. Hinshelwood

Dirac66 (talk) 02:37, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

You are quite right that we should do something about this. I have been wanting to spend time looking to see if we can find some sources that demonstrate that these are notable. For example, I think Atkins was profoundly important as it was so far ahead of the competition. The competition however rapidly caught up, and the whole pattern of PChem books changed. However, I do not have a source for this. Hinshelwood was not a textbook, but a very scholarly work by a Nobel Prize Winner. Again, I think it had a very important influence, but again I do not have a source for this. Could you help in looking for sources on all these books to see if they did have an influence, before we delete them. I will see what I can do during the next week. --Bduke (Discussion) 04:47, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
It is not easy to find impartial sources for the influence of a textbook. Googling the title and author tends to yield a list of publishers' announcements which cannot be considered impartial. So if we were to insist on a reliable source for the influence of each publication on the list, we would probably have to delete all of the above plus a number of others.
However I think it is reasonable to retain some books by a consensus of editors, but probably not all because the list in the article is really too long. You have argued above for retaining Atkins and Hinshelwood, so what about removing the other 4 now? And then perhaps recruiting an organic chemist or two to help winnow the list of organic texts? Dirac66 (talk) 20:49, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Is the list really too long? I thought many of the other lists are much longer. One of the things I want to do is to take a careful look at the other lists to see how we compare. Keeping Atkins and deleting Berry, Rice, and Ross might annoy some people. Could we just leave it as it is for a while. I really am very pressed until a visitor returns to the US on Tuesday and then I have to catch up with other stuff too. I am only suggesting a week or two, no more. --Bduke (Discussion) 02:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
OK, I can wait a little longer. My intention was to end the long period of inactivity on this subject and act according to the apparent previous consensus on inclusion of textbooks. However if you are uneasy with these criteria and want to rethink them, I will wait. Dirac66 (talk) 13:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

IRC meeting to discuss possible addition of Jmol links

Hi Bduke, we are planning an IRC meeting to discuss adding Jmol links into Wikipedia - see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemicals#IRC_meeting_to_discuss_possible_addition_of_Jmol_links. I hope it's not too late at night for you to participate (1500h UTC) - but if it is, please leave your comments on-wiki. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 16:58, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Stately home

I think you are right. There are similar problems with his Arabesque (European art) essentially an OR fork of Arabesque_(Islamic_art)#Western_arabesque - he has now renamed that article twice in mid-discussion. To get the full taste of his work, see this version, before I removed the wildest stuff today. There has been lengthy discussion of both articles, all at Talk:Arabesque (Islamic art) ("Total rewrite needed" onwards). He has ideas in his mind when he begins, and won't check them by research. It's a pity as we need editors in this area. Johnbod (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

The behavior does look similar, but this sort of art is beyond me. I will stay with Country houses. Thanks for the input. --Bduke (Discussion) 04:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Can't you think of them as a sort of molecular diagram? No? Oh well. Was at a good talk on WP & chemistry tonight. Johnbod (talk) 01:32, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I am sure it was a good talk. I know Henry and have visited him at Imperial College when I am in London. I last saw him at WATOC in Sydney a few years ago. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:24, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Criticism of science

The discussion of the merge for this article has restarted again after a posting on the helpdesk, I wanted to see what your thoughts are and if they have changes since your last post on this issue considering both pages have undergone revisions since you voiced your opinions. Please check it out and post any changes over here. Thanks. Tiggerjay (talk) 02:45, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your update Tiggerjay (talk) 03:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

4th Halifax Highland Scout Troop / Scots Highland Company merge

I stumbled across the page in the backlogs of the new page patrol and noticed the merge request. Whilst I'm not sure if consensus has been reached on the merge decision, I would be happy to scale it down before the merge (if, indeed, consensus has been reached). --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 21:20, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I suspect the Scouting Project has got as much of a consensus as it will get. The problem is that the article is very long and it will be a bit of an effort to do the merge. I can not do it as, you can see above, I am on a wikibreak. Currently I am a long way from my home base in Australia and busy. I'll try to do it when I return on August 18, although I may be able to look at briefly today. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:26, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

didn't know you were an admin...

That gives us better chances for the project of Scouting in History, then... :-) yamaplos 22:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yamaplos (talkcontribs)

Can you review my content?

Hi there, I was asked by Drmies to have one editor to review my drafts:) I'm editing "Larry Namer" and "Metan Development Group"'s wiki pages, and I re-edited it again because these are all facts... But I was suggested to have you take a look... Thank you!

Best, Michelle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michellexlx (talkcontribs) 23:29, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Melbourne meetup this Saturday

Hi there! You are cordially invited to a meetup at North Melbourne this Saturday (23 July). Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne 16 Hope to see you there! JVbot (talk) 04:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC) (this automated message was delivered to all users at Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne/Participants)

Progressive Award Scheme

Remember your old merger proposal re Progressive Award Scheme? I've added my remark and said go ahead, and perform the merger.--S. Rich (talk) 13:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I will have a look again when I get home next week. --Bduke (Discussion) 18:09, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Boys with toys

Notice what is wrong with this article?[4] ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 02:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

BSA uniform and he is supposed to be a Pom (Aus for limey!)? --Bduke (Discussion) 07:57, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
It's a stock Getty photo, but another example of newspapers without a clue. It think he is holding an airsoft gun. And I know what a Pom is. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 11:37, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

WP Australian Politics in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Australian Politics for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 16:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Queen's College and the Henley Regatta

Confused about this. Does the 1839 date refer to the "Boat Race" involving Queens College or the beginnings of the regatta? Sl1dewest (talk) 17:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

1839 is the beginning of the Henley Regatta. 1837 is the year Queens's represented Oxford against a Cambridge College at Henley. Note that the Queen's old members association to support rowing in the college is called the 1837 Society. It has been asserted that the 1837 race encouraged the town of Henley to organise the Regatta in 1839. It is that assertion that needs a source. --Bduke (Discussion) 23:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Broaden our scope?

Hi, BDuke. LadyofShalott and I are interested in broadening the scope of WikiProject Science pearls and making it into something like WikiProject Academic bibliographies. You have carried the ball for this project for so long - would it be o.k. with you? And would you like to join us? Please reply at User talk:RockMagnetist#Invitations. RockMagnetist (talk) 03:02, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

List notability

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

--Mike Cline (talk) 23:11, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I See You Are An Admin

You could delete Wikipedia:WikiProject Science pearls/List of publications in philosophy then.

Why would there be 2 copies of (essentially) the same page. If one version gets changed, how do we know which version to keep? The live version is preferred, so if it does get deleted, and there is consensus to keep a copy it is uncontroversial to bring it back to to another space.Curb Chain (talk) 02:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I prefer to not spend my time on "busy work". After the dust as settled, as I said, there can be a clean-up and I might well have deleted that page myself. There was no need to take it to MfD. That is what I call "busy work". I think we should all slow down a bit on these science publications. The encyclopedia is a work in progress. It does not have to be done by tomorrow. --Bduke (Discussion) 03:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


For the catch. I'll yell at my fingers. :) --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 01:01, 23 November 2011 (UTC)