User talk:Circeus/november2007

vamps

Hey Circeus, I noticed you had a nahuatl lingo thingy userbox, is this another interest of yours? We're working up vampire for FAC and just have a teeny bit on Cihuateteo...any refs? Also, is Tlahuelpuchi worth sticking in I owonder...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Future FLC...

I am working on List of deadly fungi as a future FLC. Before I get too stuck into it, do you think number and order and subject of headings in alright? cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - if I keep it to deadly fiungi I already have half of them covered (in terms of final numbers)...the other thing is scientific or common name in first column...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Trying to keep the categories clear is thus: first one is fungi known to have caused or would have a significant risk of cuasing death based on the toxins (thus all can go in where there is a record of making very ill or they've been biochemically studied and found to have lethal agents). category 2 is those where there have been odd deaths recorded but it was unusual. There are alot more which are moderately poisonous (mainly gastrointestinal symptoms) but not life threatening. Was pondering whether to have a 3rd cat and name it 'fungi known to have significant symptoms and be at risk of consumpition' or something but it is a little open ended. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

William Couper (naturalist)

On 4 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article William Couper (naturalist), 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.

--And wow, that's a big notice at the top of your talk page :) GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 01:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

LOTD proposal

You have nominated a recently successful WP:FL. There have been two recent proposals to begin a List of the Day feature on the main page, which have both received majorities but have not been approved as overwhelming support sufficient to change the main page. WP:LOTDP is a new proposal to try to get the ball rolling based on the original proposal. You can voice your thoughts on its talk page. Basically, what the proposal entails is attempting to run an official trial, and then vote after the trial run on whether to change the main page. Support to run a trial requires much less consensus than support to change the main page. Should we succeed at eventually getting such a feature on the main page it would tentatively look like this. Whether or not you support an experimental trial or not you should come discuss the matter at WP:LOTDP's talk page. I apologize if you have either already voiced your opinion on this matter or already tired of hearing about it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:WP:SKYSCRAPER banner mix-up

Sorry, I forgot to add the "s". My mistake! :)

Also, I was wondering if you could perhaps comment on the discussion taking place at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of tallest buildings in Detroit. There has recently been disagreement on the inclusion of informative "tidbits" in image captions, which have been removed from all building lists per your comments at the Providence and Boston FLCs. It would be great if you could add your opinion on the matter. Thanks and cheers, Rai-me 21:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nine Inch Nails at FLC (again)

Thanks so much for your comments on the previous FLC for the Nine Inch Nails discography. Unfortunately the FLC failed since I just didn't have enough time to address the issues raised, but I have since had a bit more free time, and have addressed the problems and have resubmitted the article for Featured List status. I would very much appreciate if you could give the article another look and let me know what you think on its new FLC page. Thanks! Drewcifer 05:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

List of palms of the Caribbean

The user has started creating pages for all of the stuff in the list. Do you still oppose the list? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Copernicia berteroana

FYI, this page has been re-created. Tiptoety 05:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Tiptoety 05:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Amanita ocreata

Well, I recall you mentioning the sorry state of the destroying angel article and I started to develop Amanita virosa (I like 'em in FA sets...), but the taxonomical headache around that species and Amanita bisporiga dampened my enthusiasm, however I quickly built up Amanita ocreata as it is fairly well circumscribed...thought the death cap was lonely as the only fungal FA....let me know if there's anything I missed. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 00:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and a Barnstar

	<font=3> Thanks for your careful eye and comments - List of municipalities in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania made featured list! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

The Reviewer's Barnstar awarded to Circeus for diligence, persistence, and attention to detail in reviews of Featured Content. Given with respect, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Toxicology series

I noted that you had added the toxicology slug to 2007 pet food recalls to make it part of a seies on toxicology and just wanted to let you know that the portion of the original article that deals with the investigation into the source of the contamination and any impact on the human food supply had been split off into a separate article (Chinese protein export contamination) and might be appropriate for inclusion, as well, though I am unfamiliar with the project and criteria myself and didn't want to just add it. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 16:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Hall of Fame

The above project, of which you are a listed participant, is currently being considered for deletion. Please feel free to take part in the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Hall of Fame. Also, I have added a few nominations to the project's talk page. I would welcome your input on those nominees, or any others you think might qualify for inclusion. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 20:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Ckimpson

vandalizing again. [1] Gopher backer (talk) 17:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Category:Japanese citrus

There is a DRV discussion here related to the Japanese citrus category that may benefit from your input in view of your contributions to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants. Thanks. -- Jreferee t/c 20:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Templates vs Content

Circeus, a while back you nominated a TfD for a template I was using on each of the "List of GLB people" lists, stating that content doesn't belong in template space. I'm just dropping you a note that I'm going to re-institute that template system for the lists. In reading Wikipedia:Template namespace#Usage, it says:

This does not apply to templates which are transcluded onto multiple articles, such as templates that display the introduction for a long list (which is split into multiple smaller lists), because it would be extremely tedious to edit the same text in many different articles every time a change is made.

That's exactly the reason I was using the template. Please let me know if this is still an issue or if it's okay to go ahead with creating the template again. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 20:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah hah! A breakthrough! This same discussion has been carried out as far back as 2005 - take a look at Wikipedia talk:Template namespace#transcluding prose. In reading wading through it, I found that it is possible to transclude from article-space - simply use {{:Article}}. So what if we had "List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/lede" that holds the content and is transcluded into each section of the list - would that satisfy both of our needs? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

So I don't think I understand. What are your objections? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

To clarify, am I right saying the pros and cons are that a) it's confusing for new editors, versus b) it standardizes content across pages. Does that sum it up? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 20:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Please lets find a good place to discuss this with a wider audience. While I can understand that using a template for a lede would be a bit confusing to some editors, one could argue that the same situation exists for many navigational templates as well. One could also argue that the main content for a long list is the list itself, not the lede, so any editing that needs to happen would be *more* accessible to the average editor. That reasoning is actually very similar to the reason you mentioned re: "because the wikitext is overly long for the visible result".

In any case, since this discussion seems to have petered out when it took place in 2005 on the Wiki:Template guideline, and since long lists are becoming more common, maybe we could bring it up for an RFC or something? Or at the village pump? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Spiffier triple crown, new awards available

The standard triple crown.

Hi, I've been sprucing up the triple crown awards. Here's the new version of the standard triple crown you've already earned. Feel free to replace your old one with this if you like the new version better. I've also introduced two new triple crown awards for editors who've done a lot of triple crown work: the Napoleonic and Alexander the Great edition awards. If you're active in a WikiProject, check out the new offer for custom WikiProject triple crowns. I'll make those upon request if five or more editors qualify. See User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle for more information. Thanks for your hard work, and cheers! Durova^Charge! 21:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Specific question about Eardwulf paragraph

Circeus, thanks for the edits on Eardwulf of Northumbria; Angus and I appreciate the help. We've started implementing the {{cite encyclopedia}} cites in the reference section to address the sub-referencing and I think that's going to be the best outcome for the refs. However, there was one particular comment you left that I hoped you could expand on somewhat: that the paragraph starting "Within the church at Breedon" should be rewritten completely. Can you give me a bit of a pointer on the problem that needs fixing? Is it unclear, or clunky, or out of sequence? Anything you can point to would help. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 02:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

WP on water and sanitation / barnstar

Circeus, thanks for the barnstar, but I am not sure for exactly which activity I deserved the honor? I saw on your userpage that you know a lot about templates. Maybe you can help me fix the problem with the template Template:WikiProject_Water_supply_and_sanitation, which has something dangling at the end? That would be much appreciated.--Mschiffler (talk) 04:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Plants/box-header

may i know why did you reverted my edits. i have a bit good experience editing on portals and have seen this trend of using box-headers in portal space. pls don't revert it. for that instance i would like to tell you that selected articles are archived (based on monthly selections). i think you started up with portals recently; hope so will enjoy constructing them. cheers, Sushant gupta (talk) 14:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

if you ever construct a new portal then do follow this link. it might prove to be a bit helpful to you. Sushant gupta (talk) 15:52, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

List of cities and towns in Tennessee

In response to your question about the possible retitling of this article, the folks who commented at Talk:List of cities and towns in Tennessee#Title of article all opposed renaming the list. After cogitating on it and noting that these entities are legally named "cities" and "towns" (not municipalities), I concluded that I see merit in either title. So consensus is "no change".--Orlady (talk) 02:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)