User talk:The garmine

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


NOTE: i forgot my password. Sorry for delayed responses.(you might actually get a faster response Here)

NOTE: if you have tried to talk to me and haven't gotten a response yet, don't forget to metion my name in the comment!
NOTE:Please put your comment at the Bottom of the page,not at the top or somewhere in between. click here to do so.


The garmine is currently:
Symbol oppose vote.svg Offline
Update: OnBusyClassAway
WikibreakAsleepHolidayOff


⚠

March 2018 +[edit]

Request on 17:20:54, 7 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Marshall.624[edit]


Hello, I have been trying to publish an article about Prof. John Kagel, with no luck. I tried to get answers on the chat forum that you have and a person with the user name @Chrissmad was extremely rude. Is there any way I can get help on fixing the article? I had an response that I need to add footnotes, and I tried to do it, but I am not sure if I did it correct. Can you suggest what to do? Thank you,


Marshall.624 (talk) 17:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@Marshall.624: sorry. I haven't been online for a while, so could you please explain what you mean by 'the chat forum I have'; do you mean the teahouse? Also, i will see what i can do on your draft. The garmine (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

01:57:18, 1 April 2018 review of submission by KarWelsh[edit]


KarWelsh (talk) 01:57, 1 April 2018 (UTC)


I'm confused. As the article states, Puckett invented the process for printing with rhodium. You seem to be saying that if something was invented it should not be written about? That wikipedia articles must only be historical in nature. But there are plenty of articles about new things, new processes. I am worried that I misunderstood you, because that would not make sense at all.

On the issue of previous use of rhodium in photography -- prints were toned with rhodium in the 1800s. The historical record shows that. But toning a photograph with, for example, selenium, is very different from printing a photograph in selenium. Day and night. The point in the second paragraph was that although prints were toned with rhodium, those toned images were not formed from rhodium. The rhodiotype is a way to print images formed from rhodium, a way in which rhodium forms all or most of the image. Consider for example, that a kallitype is a photographic print toned with platinum. A platinotype is a print in which the image actually is platinum.

Agreed, someone with a knowledge of photography should review this.

@KarWelsh: Sorry about the misunderstanding. I felt something felt unusual especially compared to other Wikipedia articles. It would make a nice wiki stub article, but (still) needs Footnotes(links to other articles). The article itself is fine by me, but usually on Wikipedia articles, we have links and not plain text. The garmine (talk) 04:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Flag[edit]

Hi, The garmine.
I've noticed that you are an AfC reviewer but don't yet have the New Page Reviewer flag. Would you please consider heading over to PERM and requesting it? (check the flag requirements HERE)
As part of a larger plan to increase cooperation between New Page Patrol and Articles for creation, we are trying to get as many of the active AfC reviewers as possible under the NPR user flag (per this discussion). Unlike the AfC request list, the NPR flag carries no obligation to review new articles, so I'm not asking you to help out at New Page Patrol if you don't want to, just to request the flag.
Of course, if it is something you would be interested in, you can have a look at the NPP tutorial. Please mention that you are an active AfC reviewer in your application.
Cheers and thanks for helping out at AfC, — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 06:43, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done @Insertcleverphrasehere thanks for opening my consideration into New Page Reviewing. The garmine (talk) 05:00, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much[edit]

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   23:11, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT

Huh?[edit]

User talk:Michellevaz1984 has been reverted by god knows how many editors, and you leave a warning on my page and not on User talk:Michellevaz1984? Explain please!! Pdfpdf (talk) 14:02, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Discussion is active here 96.41.142.76 (talk) 14:13, 30 May 2018 (UTC)