User talk:Rkitko/Archive1

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


Hey, nice job on Greystone Park Psychiatric Hospital. I'll hopefully be adding some stuff but will certainly build around your paragraphs. JDG 04:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing

I had a tussle with an admin who turned out to be a bit off his rocker. Once that was established I felt ok about coming back. I hope to add a few tidbits to the Greystone article, even though really it lacks nothing. JDG 23:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Conrad Black

Please stop targeting one or more user's pages or talk pages for abuse or insults, unwarranted doctoring or blanking. It can be seen as vandalism and may get you blocked from editing Wikipedia. 03:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

(I left the following message for the user who left this message for me on their talkpage)
I re-removed the linkspam put there by Sox First to a blog article on that user's webpage for the following reasons: 1) Blogs are generally to be avoided as external links (See: Wikipedia: Links to normally avoid (#10); and 2) It could also be considered vanity link because the user linked to their own website--this is also to be generally avoided. Thanks for your concern. --Rkitko 03:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Common Broom

Please don't move this again. Doing so is very offensive - in Scotland, the term 'scotch' used in that sense has much the same connotations as the term 'nigger' does in the US (and for broadly similar reasons). The reason the google count for 'common broom' is relatively low is that the species is generally known as simply 'broom', but that doesn't distinguish it well from other species of broom. - thanks, MPF 22:29, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

My reply, which can be found on Talk: Common Broom
I won't move it back immediately because I don't want to get into a revert war, but please explain your rationale more carefully using Wikipedia policy. Instead of accusing me of unfairly representing US interests, please review WP:NC(CN). I see no mention of imperialism. I'm also unfamiliar with the policy that states offensive article titles (to some) are to be avoided (personally, I think words have no meaning. Intent to offend behind a word is what has greater meaning. And of course no offense is meant here. I digress). From what I've read, the common name of this species is Scotch Broom. If you can provide a source that notes that simply "Broom" is the most common name of all, then I will have to re-examine my position. But for now, you can't simply change article names based on an unsourced opinion that it offends someone. Have you gone and moved Scotch whisky yet? Instead of reverting immediately, I would have liked the opportunity to respond in this manner before such a decision was made, just as I allowed ample time for anyone watching this page to respond. Thanks. --Rkitko 23:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


Those are good, thanks. Sorry about tagging them right after you uploaded them. --Rory096 04:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Time I say thanks.

I "borrowed" your little box on your page with your photo (but obviously changed it) etc because I was clueless at the time. I am now thanking you. Indeed. tyx

Photo attribution

Sorry for not noticing that your license requires attribution! Maybe you could change the link from a User link to external format, Ryan D. Kitko, but that is just an idea that maybe only I have, I don't even know if there's any convention. A reader might expect an encyclopedia article on you instead of your user page when clicking the link. It also wouldn't show up Special:CrossNamespaceLinks, which is how I found it. Feel free to disregard this idea if you don't like it, as in any case I'll make sure to check attribution requirements from now on! Thank you kindly, and sorry again. --Gnewf 07:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Book-Cadillac Hotel

Ahh! thank you! i'm sorry about putting in the wrong date. I was just going with what official information i had. User:Raccoon FoxTalk 23:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

"all these beautiful pages"? why thank you! i'm just trying to fill in gaps of wikipedia's buildings section. For the two categories, i thought they were fitting....but i don't know what they exactly do. User:Raccoon FoxTalk 23:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Tree of Heaven

Hi Rkitko - there's no rules on if or when they should be used (other than that short articles should avoid using excessive numbers of headers; my interpretation of this is to aim for an average of not less than 20 lines per header over the length of a page, i.e. a 60 line page only merits 3 headers). On the Tree of Heaven page, I stuck 'notoc' in after the preview showed the page as looking rather badly designed with it in; if you think it is better with the toc, remove it if you like. - MPF 09:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


Done with the speedy :-) Feel free to come by my talk page if there are other cleanup things I can do for you anytime. --HappyCamper 20:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)


Hello Rtkitko, at the CP-project-page I saw you are especially interested in Stylidium. A friend of mine brought some seeds from Australia and grew wonderful plants of it, but couldn't determine them exactly. Would be able and so kind to do that? This would be fantastic. Regards, Denisoliver 16:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


Hi Rkitko - it's been discussed on numerous occasions in the WP:TOL talk archives; take a look through. Generally, there has been a small majority in favour of caps for various practical reasons, e.g. a wild cherry (any species of Prunus growing in its natural environment) is not necessarily the same as a Wild Cherry (the common name of the particular species Prunus avium). Also, please, whatever you want to do, it is not a good idea to subdivide species into two different groups based on the (often very obscure) etymology of the name (e.g. is Pohutukawa a proper name? Do you know the Maori etymology?? I don't!). As for what tradition it follows - you'll find that most field guides use caps for plant (and other living things) names (and have done so for a long time, e.g. Preston's (1948) North American Trees). - MPF 17:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Discussion continued at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants#Common name capitalization (article titles and in text) --Rkitko 18:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Common names

Hi Rkitko--I've just looked over your edit history and see you've tangled with MPF over common names in the past. Let me say upfront that I agree with MPF on one major point: that articles about plant genera and species should appear under the botanical name, and never under a common name, in part because of such disputes. But beyond that, I have had several disagreements with MPF regarding the inclusion of common names within the articles and I consider the claims of "cultural imperialism" to be mostly hogwash (and quite moot anyway as long as the botanical name is the article title). I don't buy into the claim that any one group--Americans, Europeans, Australians, whomever--has any claim over a particular common name, regardless of the origin of the plant. As long as the names exist and have any kind of widespread or common usage in English-speaking regions, they should be included without editorial comments except to note which names are in use, to what extent, and in what areas. BTW it's nice to encounter another queer Wikipedian! MrDarwin 15:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Harrisburg State Hospital article and citation

Hi Rkitko. I included the entire citation from the Historic Asylums website in the Harrisburg State Hospital because sometimes it just isn't enough to have the external link to it ! To wit, (1) when the site goes away, and (2) the timeouts are too long. At least it would be in-line. Plus it's then IN Wikipedia, solidly. I favour this as opposed to leaving just the citation, depending on the circumstances. One might have to resort to the Internet Wayback Machine [1] to get an old copy of the page for the external link's contents, but even sometimes the Wayback Machine fails with all its terabytes of history. In-article quotations are very useful, too, sometimes. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC) (talk)

Hello Rkitko. Thanks for your kind reply and insightful thoughts. Your points are very well-taken. I do remember that press release, on paper, floating around about the time the movie "Girl, Interrupted (film)" was previewing with the press kit. There may have been some spelling mis-transcriptions by the editors of "Historic Asylums". But the gist is about the same as what I had read in 1999. Will ponder your points further. Many Thanks and Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC) (talk)

Hi Rkitko. I see you've just taken action and removed the large quote from the press release on the movie, in the Girl, Interrupted (film) article as well, albeit belatedly. Looks okay now as well. Let's hope readers actually click on the link to read the information as opposed to having it directly in this article and of course that the website persists with this information ? Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 20:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC) (User talk:Wikiklrsc)

Hi Ryan. Thanks for the kind reply. I am basically in agreement with you and so it goes. As I mentioned before above, The Internet Wayback Machine may come in handy someday with this if the original drops off the radar. It was last archived there in 2005 [2] ... Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)


Hallo - you removed the link to This page and other pages linked to it deal extensively with franchising. As a franchisee with 6 years experience I feel that I can give valuable information. The pages do not promote any company or affiliate and as such is totally unbiased. Tavernier 07:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:LuckyBamboo 2005 SeanMcClean.jpg

Greetings! I wonder if this might be misidentified. I think, contrary to the image description, that this really is Dracaena sanderiana and not D. fragrans 'Stedneri'. Was wondering if you had specific material or sources that identified this particular variety as looking like that. (D. fragrans is much larger and has a much different growth habit from the plant in that photo, in my opinion.) Your thoughts? --Rkitko 07:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey there. I think you are probably correct, the only info I had to go on was the tag when I bought it that described it as lucky bamboo - unfortunately that doesn't really help with the detail... It wasn't myself who added the Dracaena fragrans 'Stedneri' description. Please feel free to change it - I just don't know enough to say one way or the other. Regards. SeanMack 12:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
On the identity, the previous ident was made by an anon editor here. - MPF 11:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Stylidium papers

Rkitko, I have 16 different papers on Stylidium, consisting of 3 revisions and about 30 descriptions of new species, all by A. Lowrie. Wanna get some work to do :) ? Denisoliver 19:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

All papers are Word .docs and already published (from 1989 to 2000, mostly from the 2nd half of the nineties). They are rather large, approx. 25 MB altogether. Send me an e-mail through my e-mail account on de and I will reply them one by one. Regards, Denisoliver 23:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


Hi Rkitko - the underscore was accidental, I'd not noticed the change (not really sure it is important either, it doesn't affect the appearance of the saved page). On the common names, mainly because there isn't room to have every recorded option in that situation, as they won't all fit on one line; a species list is best just having the single standard common name (or even none), and put the rest on the species page as/when it gets written. On caps, I'm still waiting for someone to produce some reasoned arguments in favour of the lower-case-except-for-proper-nouns style, rather than blind religious dogma . . . "the chicago mos says so, so therefore you must do so" - reminds me of "the holy bible says so, so therefore you must do so". Conversely, there are plenty of good practical reasons why consistent capitalisation is useful, and plenty of historical precedent for its use, too. - MPF 11:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Image release procedure

Checkout WP:ERP - it has the procedure in full (especially regarding posting an email copy of the permission). If they are releasing the images under cc-by-sa it's best to upload them onto the commons ( that way all the wikipedias can use the images. The template {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}} can be overloaded as {{Cc-by-sa-2.5|Megapixie}} to provide accurate attribution. Also the commons upload description template/block is useful for describing the exact circumstances {{Information |Description= |Source= |Date= |Author= |Permission= |other_versions= }} Good job finding the images. Let me know if you need anything else. Megapixie 10:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikinews account

n:User:Rkitko has indicated that they are the same person as you. Just to be safe, can you confirm that here please? Cheers, Daniel.Bryant T · C ] 03:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure is. Thanks for checking :-) --Rkitko 03:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Nepenthes rajah

Hi. I've been working on the Nepenthes rajah article on and off for a while, but these days I usually make only minor edits. Please feel free to make any changes you wish. I'm unsure about nominating it for FAC, as I think it would fail in its current form simply because it is too long and too detailed. Mgiganteus1 16:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


Hi Rkitko,

in August I asked you if you could ID some Stylidium-photos. Finally I loaded the photos onto the commons, it would be great, if you could determine them. Thus we can get rid of these botanical drawings only. The seeds of this plant have been collected at Howard Springs, Northern Territory. See the photos here. Regards, Denisoliver 01:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Those are excellent! As for identification, I initially thought that it was S. fimbriatum but the growth form is all wrong. I lean more towards S. turbinatum now. See page 215-216 of the "Eight new species of triggerplant (Stylidium: Stylidiaceae) from northern Australia" paper you sent me (Lowrie and Kenneally, Nuytsia, 1997). The growth form matches, the description fits, and the flower form looks like one of a kind. The description also notes that some specimens of this plant were found in Howard Springs. Were the seeds pale orange? I will definitely add those in to the Stylidium article on the en wikipedia. I also wanted to let you know that I'm waiting on some help with identification from the photographer, but I'll be uploading these photos that the photographer has agreed to release under one of the licenses acceptable for the Commons. So we will be able to use those beautiful photos as well. Thanks again for those! And let me know what you think about my tentative identification. Best, --Rkitko 04:06, 27. Dez. 2006 (CET)