User talk:SylviaStanley

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


Hello, SylviaStanley! Welcome to Wikipedia! We're so glad you're here! If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills, the sandbox is for you. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 14:54, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles

May 2008[edit]


Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to James Marjoribanks, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: James Marjoribanks was changed by SylviaStanley (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2008-05-27T13:03:29+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 13:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

James Marjoribanks[edit]

Thanks for swiftly adding more info to this info. However, it appears that most of it is taken literally orsemi-literally from his obituary in the Telegraph. While this is a prefectly good source, we should not post copyrighted text in Wikipedia but write our own articles. Slightly rewriting the article while maintaining most of the original is not sufficient: you must base the article on good sources, but completely write it in your own words (apart from quotes, obviously). There is no hurry to do so, the article will not be deleted if it is not expanded soon. Fram (talk) 15:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Fram, Thanks for your comments. I thought I had read somewhere that if references are quoted, you could use information from other sources. I therefore thought that if I quoted the obituaries at the bottom of the page I was at liberty to use the information in them verbatim. Obviously not. I will try to rewrite the new parts of the article. Actually the Daily Telegraph obituary is only a minor part of the new sections I included. But it is true, I used several times sections I took from all four obituaries as the easiest way to write and article. How do I "...base the article on good sources.." Is the obituary a good source? I'm not sure I know how to quote a reference repeatedly. I suppose it must be in the instructions somewhere. Incidentally, you previously deleted sections on James Marjoribanks saying they were unverifiable. One section (on the cocktails at the Peking Embassy) was mentioned in Sir Roy Denman's obituary of Sir James. Should I put the obituary as a reference? The section on the fiancées coming to China and the entry of the Japanese troops to Hankou were in his unpublished memoirs. Should I reference these? He also, before he died, told me one or two things verbally which I would like include in the article. Is this permissible? How would I reference that? SylviaStanley (talk) 15:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

You can reference by using the template template:citenews. Repeated use of the same source can be achieved by using "refname" instead of "ref". Wikipedia:Footnotes has more info on this. As for the parts I removed earlier: I assumed all of them came from the unpublished memoirs, which are not acceptable as a source on Wikipedia (neither are conversations you had with the subject). Everything on Wikipedia must be verifiable, and those additions are not verifiable. The part I removed which did not come from these memoirs but from an obituary can obviously be reinserted (as long as it is not a verbatim copy of course). These obituaries are good sources, since they are published in wellknown newspapers. Our reliable sources guideline has more info on this. Fram (talk) 07:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for you help Fram. I have re-written the sections France to Retirement and added more references. There were six obituaries on Sir James in the major UK newspapers. Often they all mentioned similar information, so rather than naming all six obituaries each time, I usually used just one or two that I thought were best. SylviaStanley (talk) 11:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Help re. image[edit]

{{helpme}} I cannot view the image "Regent Terrace Edinburgh2.jpg" on subject page called "Regent Terrace." Can someone please help me? I uploaded the image "Regent Terrace Edinburgh2.jpg" to Wikimedia Commons and it seems to exist OK there. I have tried Firefox, Internet Explorer and Google Chrome browsers but I get the same result - I cannot see the image. I uploaded another file (Regent Terrace Edinburgh.jpg) to Wikipedia and tried placing it in the page "Regent Terrace" but I gor the same result. I tried adding image of the Beltane Fire Festival (copied from the page "Calton Hill") to the page "Regent Terrace" and I could see this image fine. So maybe I am doing something wrong when uploading my images? SylviaStanley (talk) 09:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Regent Terrace Edinburgh2.JPG
The image is fine, as hopefully you will see here. The exact name is File:Regent Terrace Edinburgh2.JPG - I can only imagine that you were typing it incorrectly - capitalization is important.
I will add it to that article now. For more help, you can either;
  • Leave a message on my own talk page; OR
  • Use a {{helpme}} - please create a new section at the end of your own talk page, put {{helpme}}, and ask your question - remember to 'sign' your name by putting ~~~~ at the end; OR
  • Talk to us live, with this or this.
Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  09:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
P.S. I have now added it to Regent Terrace - it was not working there because it had "jpg" in lower-case, not "JPG" in upper-case. I fixed it with this edit.  Chzz  ►  09:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Very many thanks for your help. SylviaStanley (talk) 14:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


Hi Sylvia, I just wanted to drop you a note to say thanks for your work on GMO related articles. It's always good to see someone adding well referenced information to what is a topic full of controversy. A couple of things you might find useful if you are referencing scientific papers are {{cite pmid}} and {{cite doi}}. These templates allow you to just add the pmid or doi of a paper as a reference, and then a computer automatically comes along and fills in all the details for you. I might not have explained that tremendously well, so here's an example. If you look at the article, the reference will be complete. I find these save me a lot of time! Smartse (talk) 19:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank for pointing out the templates {{cite pmid}} and {{cite doi}}. I was always mystified in the past about what doi in a reference. SylviaStanley (talk) 07:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Genetically modified food[edit]

Hi Sylvia. Like Smartse above I have noticed some good contributions to GM articles. Unfortunately I do not think your recent one to Genetically modified food had a reliable enough source (, so I have reverted it. Looking at the paper it say "Greenpeace contributed to the start of the investigations by funding first statistical analyses in 2006, the results were then processed further and evaluated independently by the authors". I don't think we can say more than that until something is published in a more reliable source. Regards AIRcorn (talk) 07:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Aircon. I agree. The reference was not a good one and I wasn't sure about including it. I will include a reference from GMO Compass which I think is a better sourceSylviaStanley (talk) 09:50, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


Rod of asclepius.png

If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to check out the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in contributing more to medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here).

JFW | T@lk 22:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

WRT referencing requirements please read WP:MEDRS. Cheers Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:47, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Invitation for a Short Research Survey[edit]

Hi, I am a PhD student at Carnegie Mellon University doing some research into editing and reverts on Wikipedia. I am asking Wikipedians that I have found have made contributions to biological sciences articles on Wikipedia to complete a short survey that will help me develop interfaces and tools for newcomers and administrators. The survey will take about 10-15 minutes, and will involve you pretending that you are editing the page on genetic engineering and making some quick judgments on how controversial or likely to be reverted a word sampled from an edit might be. This will help me to validate a model that predicts which words will be reverted based on the history of an article, which if successful will be turned into an interface to help with Wikipedia editing and encourage newcomers. If you would like to participate, please complete the survey on SurveyMonkey here. You can find out more about me on my user page and personal home page. I'm more than happy to talk more about this research on my talk page or by email, and thank you for your time. JeffRz (talk) 02:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Refs again[edit]

As previously stated high quality refs are required per WP:MEDRS Cheers Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

The preferred references are either review articles or major textbooks.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:49, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Your last ref was excellent BTW and welcome to Wikipedia :-) It takes a little time to figure everything out. If you have any questions feel free to drop me a note.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:51, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments SylviaStanley (talk) 16:02, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Calton Hill[edit] A discussion is continuing related to some comments you earlier added so I thought it was only fair to let you know.RafikiSykes (talk) 19:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


Hi - I have been working on a lot on the suite of articles in the genetic engineering family. I noticed you have been dipping in and out during this time. Just wanted to ping you to get your thoughts on what I've done to try to rationalize them and to pull together bits of information that were spread all over. Some of it has been pretty dramatic and I've been a bit afraid of offending .... but I followed the Be bold guideline and just did it. Do you hate it? do you like it? Ideas to change it? Just looking for overall feedback... if you don't want to talk generally, that's fine too!.Jytdog (talk) 23:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I think your changes are very good. Like you, I felt that, in general, the articles on genetic engineering needed a lot of attention. People had stuck in bits that were in the wrong place, were at odds with information in other articles and/or had become out of date. I congratulate you on following the Be bold guidelines. I think you have been very successful. As you say, I dip in now and then when I feel that a piece of information is incorrect or out of date. I hope I haven't messed up some of your major changes with my minor ones. I have one more, relatively minor, thing that seems to me poorly described in the genetic engineering articles - the exact procedure used by the European Union when a member state invokes the safeguard clause for GMOs. There is lots of rambling stuff about individual states banning some GM crops but, in my opinion, there is no description of the procedure followed. SylviaStanley (talk) 06:52, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for replying! I am glad you find the changes to be helpful. I have found all your changes to be great, so from my point of view, rock on! I am an American so am not familiar with EU procedures. If you know the story please fix it! Thanks again. Jytdog (talk) 14:45, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi - you may be in the middle of changing this but I notice that there are significant differences between the GM sugar beet legal sections of the articles "Genetically modified food controversies" and "Sugar beet."SylviaStanley (talk) 17:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

comments on my userpage[edit]

Thanks!! That was very kind of you to say. :) Jytdog (talk) 19:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Warrender Baths Club was accepted[edit]

Warrender Baths Club, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

-- Wywin (talk | contribs) 19:13, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing[edit]

Hi. I noticed that your edit here introduced content fairly similar to some lines in this article. I have a conflict of interest with The Atlantic, so I'm not going to revert your edit, but I'd encourage you to be more careful about this kind of thing in the future, and to see if maybe you can reword what you wrote here a little bit. I don't think you were trying to do anything wrong, but we're very careful about copyrights here, and really try to avoid anything that could be seen as copying from other sources, even if it's only a few sentence fragments. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 02:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi PinkAmpersand. Thanks for the message. This is very interesting. I have never read the article in the Atlantic you refer to. I didn't even know it existed. If you think my entry is somewhat similar to the Atlantic article which I have never seen, perhaps, if I have time, I will read the Atlantic article carefully and try to reword my entry a bit. SylviaStanley (talk) 15:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Gerald Shields leading the masses to improve Wikimedia one cosmetically fashionable photograph at a time. North Korean Fashion Watch Barnstar
Gerald Shields, founder of the North Korean Fashion Watch, awards you the North Korean Fashion Watch Barnstar for your continuing efforts to add reliable and poignant discussions about North Korean topics, such as Ri Sol-ju. Geraldshields11 (talk) 14:56, 28 April 2014 (UTC)|}

Battle of Waterloo[edit]

With this edit on 27 Nov 2014, you added an inline citation to a book but you did not include a page number. Please could you add it now? -- PBS (talk) 19:31, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Will do PBS. However, Simm's book "The Longest Afternoon: The 400 Men Who Decided the Battle of Waterloo" describes in minute detail the battle of the 400 German and British soldiers at La Haye Sainte holding off Napoleon's soldiers during the battle of Waterloo. This citation comes next to the Wikipedia text: "But these brave Germans had held the center of the battlefield for almost the entire day. This had stalled the French advance." This is essentially a description of Simm's whole book. I had purposely left out the page number when I entered the reference. I will insert the pages where there are the final conclusions in the book when I get a copy out of the library again.SylviaStanley (talk) 22:34, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Larry Fogle[edit]

Hey, thanks for your addition to List of wrongful convictions in the United States. Would you be able to create at least a stub article for Larry Fogle? That's one of the requirements for addition to the list. Otherwise, the list would be unrealistically lengthy. Bali88 (talk) 17:49, 15 August 2015 (UTC) OK. Will do.

Help us improve wikimeets by filling in the UK Wikimeet survey![edit]

Hello! I'm running a survey to identify the best way to notify Wikimedians about upcoming UK wikimeets (informal, in-person social meetings of Wikimedians), and to see if we can improve UK wikimeets to make them accessible and attractive to more editors and readers. All questions are optional, and it will take about 10 minutes to complete. Please fill it in at:

Thanks! Mike Peel (talk) 18:11, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Re: "as of" in Asperger's syndrome[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, SylviaStanley. You have new messages at Kranix's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, SylviaStanley. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Gene therapy[edit]

Hi! In case you haven't watchlisted it, I've made some additions to the article. Some additional ref's as well as adding "a committee of" to your edit, because the report didn't come from the entirety of the 2 academies. DennisPietras (talk) 21:27, 2 March 2017 (UTC) Thanks!SylviaStanley (talk) 00:02, 3 March 2017 (UTC)