User talk:MathewTownsend

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
O'Leno State Park sink01.jpg



Hello, MathewTownsend, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Meelar (talk) 19:07, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Working memory[edit]

Hi MathewTownsend! I hope you're still semi-around so you'll see this message. You put a tag on Working memory saying that it has an unclear citation style. I cannot see the problem! Could you please explain? With friendly regards, Lova Falk talk 10:50, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi again! Just telling you I've removed your tag. Lova Falk talk 10:50, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Replied with my reason on the article talk page. Thanks for returning the tag.MathewTownsend (talk) 23:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Good article reviews[edit]

Hello Matthew, thank you for your really useful User Page, as well as for reviewing our article. I had a small question about Wikipedia etiquette. Can anybody review an article for Good Article review or is there a certain edit count needed, or admin status? For example, would it be appropriate for me to review an article from a more senior editor? Ramwithaxe 08:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ramwithaxe,
No admin status needed!
At Wikipedia:Good article nominations it says good articles can be "reviewed by any registered user who has not contributed significantly to the article." On the same page, there is a section titled "How to review an article" with specific instructions on the things you need to know. And below that, how to Pass, put on Hold, Fail, or ask for a Second Opinion.
You can also read Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles (lots of good advice here) and ask questions at the Wikipedia:Good article help desk where you can ask for a "mentor" to help you out in the beginning. I did and it was very helpful as some things, like the formatting, was hard for me to understand at first.
Also, if you run into problems (as I just did!) you can ask questions at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations.
And feel free to ask me!
Best wishes and have a wonderful new year! MathewTownsend (talk) 15:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


Hello, MathewTownsend. 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.

Go Phightins! 21:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Why are you not indefinitely blocked?[edit]

Why are you not indefinitely blocked? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:38, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Since MathewTownsend isn't around I'll answer the question for you, MathewTownsend is not indefinitely blocked because he is not indefinitely blocked; good question, thanks for asking it. --My76Strat (talk) 07:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


What a brave editor you are. My advice? A doubled-up set of knee pads. I would normally suggest that if you kneel, your knees are protected. But then of course your head is at just the right height to be severed. I hope the new year brings you much editorial enjoyment and very little ill-will. ```Buster Seven Talk 02:22, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

You got any Alternative accounts ?[edit]

User:KennethSides and User:Boodlepounce are coming to mind ?- Youreallycan 03:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Got something to say? Say it.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:34, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
  • All the comments regarding Mathew do is make people look gauche, rather late to information, and somewhat eager to show off how discerning they are by telling other people what they already know.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely[edit]

I have blocked this account indefinitely as a sockpuppet of User:Mattisse (see my brief comment here). Appeals to this block should follow the procedure listed at Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks#Checkuser and Oversight blocks. NW (Talk) 22:44, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

  • well, I'm not a sockpuppet. But that's ok. This is probably not the right place for me. I've been thinking of retiring anyway. So this makes it easier. Thanks. MathewTownsend (talk) 23:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
    b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, summary style and list incorporation:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
    b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
    c. no original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
    fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    no edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Great job! Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Place this on the article's talk page:{{GA|date=~~~~~|topic=Philosophy and religion|page=1|oldid=530681854}}
  • Add to Good articles

Thanks, MathewTownsend (talk) 23:28, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I am passing the article. --Rschen7754 23:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


Hi Mathew, thanks a lot for helping with the GA of Annamalaiyar Temple. It also sad to see you go - wish you all the best. Ssriram mt (talk) 01:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I am also very appreciative – your feedback was insightful and helped me become a better writer. I wish you the best as well and hope you and Wikipedia can figure things out and work together soon. Ramwithaxe 02:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Editors Barnstar Hires.png The Editor's Barnstar
Sock or not, you did a great job at GAN in my eyes, and I worship what it represents inside a community which has fallen awry; a community which seems to be shaking the very foundations of what this encyclopedia means; a community that is putting the vested interests of soap opera above the interests of humanity. Me, as the leader of an international company, I am pretty sure that if we were one of those enterprises I run, we'd already filed bankrupcy. — ΛΧΣ21 02:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I miss you for reason, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

ps: did you know that your barnstar keeps me going? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:09, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I miss her too. But I guess that nothing can be done now... — ΛΧΣ21 19:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I understand that you wrote this, found on User:Philcha, "I can't write this without becoming overwhelmed with a painful sorrow. He was so upbeat and special and above all, kind. He had just written me that he had already lived two years beyond the one year he was given after diagnosis, but his deterioration was evident. He never complained."
Respect --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I remember talking about brightening blackness, - my last GA attempt was more successful ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


I have no idea if you are Matisse or not. I rather hope you are not. But no matter the reality, I was happy to work with you on the DID page, finding your contributions of high quality in both prose and sourcing. Enjoy your off-wiki activities! WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 02:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

"More sad news"[edit]

Project Good articles January 2013 member news --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:42, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

GA and FA Thanks[edit]

Symbol support vote.svg This user helped promote the article Columbian half dollar to good article status.

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Columbian half dollar, which has recently become a GA and then an FA. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

FA Thanks[edit]

I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Look Mickey, which has recently become a FA. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven[edit]

Check out the Teahouse Easter Egg Badge, awarded for helpful suggestions about improving the Teahouse.
Check out the Teahouse Genie Badge, awarded for solving issues on the Teahouse Wishlist.

Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 02:25, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Precious again[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

reviewing eyes
Thank you (again) for reviewing Noel F. Parrish! If you have time please turn to the PumpkinSky CCI, 7 left of 729. I have been labelled an "absolute supporter of the copyright violator" and would live happier without that. Quoting you: It has been stressful, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 38th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize (now I struggle without you and him), repeated in br'erly style. I put "Letting go of the past" on top of my talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Cherry blossom Frauenstein.JPG

Precious and missed

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:28, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven (special Birthday recap)[edit]

A celebratory cupcake from the Teahouse Birthday Badge

It's been a full year since the Teahouse opened, and as we're reflecting on what's been accomplished, we wanted to celebrate with you.

Teahouse guests and hosts are sharing their stories in a new blog post about the project.

1 year statistics for Teahouse visitors compared to invited non-visitors from the pilot:

Metric Control group Teahouse group Contrast
Average retention (weeks with at least 1 edit) 5.02 weeks 8.57 weeks 1.7x retention
Average number of articles edited 58.7 articles 116.9 edits 2.0x articles edited
Average talk page edits 36.5 edits 85.6 edits 2.4x talk page edits
Average article space edits 129.6 edits 360.4 edits 2.8x article edits
Average total edits (all namespaces) 182.1 edits 532.4 edits 2.9x total edits

Over the past year almost 2000 questions have been asked and answered, 669 editors have introduced themselves, 1670 guests have been served, 867 experienced Wikipedians have participated in the project, and 137 have served as hosts. Read more project analysis in our CSCW 2013 paper

Last month January was our most active month so far! 78 profiles were created, 46 active hosts answered 263 questions, and 11 new hosts joined the project.

Come by the Teahouse to share a cup of tea and enjoy a Birthday Cupcake! Happy Birthday to the Teahouse and thank you for a year's worth of interest and support :-)

-- Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 20:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To add or remove yourself for receiving future newsletters, please update the list here


Hello! I'm contacting you because you were one of the editors who reviewed Istanbul's FA candidacy. I just created a RFC concerning its lead (Talk:Istanbul#RFC). If you have time, we would appreciate your input. Thanks! Cavann (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre[edit]

Good Article Recruitment - Completion Award.png
Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members).

So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:

  • Recruiters: The main task of a recruiter is to teach users that have never reviewed a Good article nomination how to review one. To become a recruiter, all you have to do is meet this criteria. If we don't get at least 5-10 recruiters to start off with (at the time this message was sent out, 2 recruiters have volunteered), the Recruitment Centre will not open. If interested, make sure you meet the criteria, read the process and add your name to the list of recruiters. (One of the great things about being a recruiter is that there is no set requirement of what must be taught and when. Instead, all the content found in the process section is a guideline of the main points that should be addressed during a recruitment can also take an entire different approach if you wish!) If you think you will not have the time to recruit any users at this time but are still interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still add your name to the list of recruiters but just fill in the "Status" parameter with "Not Available".
  • Co-Director: The current Director for the centre is me (Dom497). Another user that would be willing to help with some of the tasks would be helpful. Tasks include making sure recruiters are doing what they should be (teaching!), making sure all recruitments are archived correctly, updating pages as needed, answering any questions, and distributing the feedback form. If interested, please contact me (Dom497).
  • Nominators, please read this: If you are not interested in becoming a recruiter, you can still help. In some cases a nominator may have an issue with an "inexperienced" editor (the recruitee) reviewing one of their nominations. To minimize the chances of this happening, if you are fine with a recruitee reviewing one of your nominations under the supervision of the recruiter, please add your name to the list at the bottom of this page. By adding your name to this list, chances are that your nomination will be reviewed more quickly as the recruitee will be asked to choose a nomination from the list of nominators that are OK with them reviewing the article.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along.

A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.--Dom497 (talk)

This message was sent out by --EdwardsBot (talk) 14:55, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Christine Beauchamp (pseudonym) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christine Beauchamp (pseudonym) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christine Beauchamp (pseudonym) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DreamGuy (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2015 (UTC)