User talk:Wikid77.html



"I'm comin' back, come rain or shine..." - Wikid77 is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon.

Speedy deletion of Template:Minnesota counties

A tag has been placed on Template:Minnesota_counties requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. ... Thanks. --User:MZMcBride 21:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Article on Maurizio Giuliano

Hi Wikid77, thanks a lot for your comments on my talk page. I really think the information you gave in your short essay (notability guidelines rejecting UN officials) contains some really important thoughts that should be brought to the attention of administrators. Yes, how is it possible that we have so many articles on little known sports people and child stars, and we should not have them on United Nations officials who reguarly appear in the meadia ? I had earlier stated that I would be neutral on this UN issue, as I focused on the subject's books and his notability as Guinness record holder. But in light of what you say, I think that's food for thought. And... as I write this, Maurizio Giuliano who was now working in Chad until now, was evacuated from there a few days ago amidst the war, and is currently in Cameroon talking to the world media about the conflict in Chad. See for example this article in the Washington Post. Anyway, with or without the UN status, what next ? Which admin do you suggest I contact to have the article moved back to mainspace ? Cheers, --CCorward (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Wikid77, I see that between you and I, we managed to improve the article and get it back. Well done to both ! Yes, the issue of notability for UN officials, or for that matter humanitarians and development workers in general, is an issue you have raised which I think needs to be discussed. True that the world works on demand and supply, and there may be more demand for child starts than for UN officials. But if this is an encyclopaedia, maybe there needs to be more common sense, and UN officials working in wars and refugee crises should be no less notable than child stars or local sport stars. Cheers, --CCorward (talk) 00:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Georgia counties/doc

A tag has been placed on Template:Georgia counties/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. ... Thanks. --MZMcBride 05:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Hofburg fires - 1881

Hello Wikid77! I saw you edited Hofburg fire in 2006, adding fires of 1945 in 1881 at Burgtheater each. Could you please specify your sources? Because, being Viennese myself, I've never before heard about a fire at Burgtheater in 1881 (which, by the way, must have been the Old Burgtheater situated next to Hofburg Palace), but that very year there was a horrible fire in Ringtheater (see de:Ringtheaterbrand or Ringstraße#Buildings, near the end), claiming some 400 lives. But this theatre was situated at Schottenring - far away from Hofburg which is closest to Burgring. So with your help, I would like to verify this. Yours, --wg (talk) 11:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello again, saw that you already deleted the entry. Thanks! Yours, --wg (talk) 10:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:U.S. state counties templates

A tag has been placed on Template:U.S. state counties templates requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. ... Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

• Untagged from Deletion; plus comment "{{transclusionless}}" +"Category:Subst'd Templates" -Wikid77 (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Commons links

I have noticed that you recently added extra links to commons links on bird pages; was there any particular reason for this? Surely the interwiki links should be between specific subjects - a species should link to a species and family to a family, not indiscriminate linking up and down the taxonomic tree? Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand the point about genus-category does not yet exist over [in the commons] as a rational for creating extra redundant links, but let's be clear, they are redundant. The commons links that exist are ones that have been added manually, where no commons page exists they would not have been added. The only bot created commons links were those created by Polbot, and Polbot again only created them where it found a corresponding article on the commons. So there should only be a tiny number of instances where the link is broken where someone has moved an article due to taxonomy, and the number is small enough that I feel we can risk not creating ridiculous looking link boxes. Oh, and mostly just 2 links (as a form of data-redundancy):? You've lumbered tanager with 5, and there isn't much danger of the tanager family getting moved around. Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:01, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

9?!? Do you mind if I raise this with WP:BIRD first before you do? I understand that the placement of individual genera is chanageable, what I meant was that the family page should link to the family page, and not to every conceivable page on the commons. It took me a second top even find the correct link from tanager to Thraupidae, through in 4 more and you're just going to confuse the hell out of everyone. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:Location map CanadaGeo/doc

I was looking at this with the idea of using it in infoboxes for various places in the NWT/Nunavut. However, there seems to be a bit of a problem. Looking at the second of the two examples shows Yellowknife in Alaska even though the coordinates are correct. I tried it with a few other northern communities but none of them end up in the correct place. Is it possible to fix this? Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 17:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

No need to apologise. I figured that the problem was more along the lines of something that I was omitting rather than it be impossible. The fact that it's something I'm doing wrong is obvious from the fact that I still can't make it work. So can I ask for another favour. Whenever you get the chance can you put it into Aklavik, Northwest Territories. From there I should be able to figure it out. No rush because I'm going out of town for a week and won't be able to edit much. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 21:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 10:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Alabama counties/doc

A tag has been placed on Template:Alabama counties/doc requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Neckar watershed closer.gif

Dear Wikid77,

I've found an error in your map of the Neckar watershed. There is an "R" in Tübingen. It would be nice if you corrected that with the next update. Respects --MaiusGermanicus (talk) 14:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:C2YearEnd

A tag has been placed on Template:C2YearEnd requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:C2YearInTopic

A tag has been placed on Template:C2YearInTopic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Collapsable sections

Hi! You have done considerable work on the {{nazism}}. There has been considerable discussion on the issue of the collapsable sections of templates like that one. I created a centralized place for discussion about this issue here. I hope you can bring your views to the discussion. - C mon (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Categories

Hey, just letting you know that your userspace is categorized here I think that that template is adding the cats automatically.. Acer (talk) 21:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

great user page

I just read your userpage and found it interesting, engaging, and informative. Thanks.--Asdfg12345 13:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Format

Hi Wikid77 see below that resulted from your message - I mistakenly contacted BozMo, instead of yourself -

Opposed to merging all Years by Country into Year

Hi BozMo - no objection to making each year consistent (as per 1850), but do not see why Years by County have to be merged into the year (eg 1809 in France) and the many hundreds of other years by country articles. A lot of us have spent substantial time ensuring we have Years by country articles (eg Ireland is very comprehensive) and these articles form a vital part of History by country.

Support 1850 format, but not merging of Years by country articles which stand very much in their own right. Ardfern (talk) 14:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

1809

Have had to restore 1809 in France as it had been merged before any discussion completed. If this goes on many hundreds of articles will be lost that are part of History by country. Ardfern (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ardfern, we got a request on the helpchannel that the data was copied into 1809, and the page should be a redirect, and i didn't notice the merger was opposed, so sorry for that, the user requesting it in IRC is named IngerAlHaosului. Cheers. Mion (talk) 15:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mion - ok as long as article reverted. Why are you taking requests on the helpchannel (whatever that is} to merge articles from people who are not registered and cannot be involved in discussion? Even if merging was right, I should have been consulted as the author of this and a large series of similar articles. Happy that info is now in 1809, but 1809 in France remains a legitimate article in its own right as part of the History by year/by country series. Ardfern (talk) 15:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes i took for granted that the discussion was followed, which wasn't, the 1809 page is also reset to 3 mar, to prevent double data. Cheers. Mion (talk) 15:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Bonsai - transwiki the 'how to'

In response to your concern about loosing the 'how to' material from the Bonsai article, I am wondering if you would be interested in finding 'the best' 'How To' version of this article, so that we can get it transwiki'd to WikiSource. It may have been back in January of 2008? TheRedPenOfDoom (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Nerve colors

Per your recent change of the nerve coloring from yellow to tan -- would you mind changing it back? In anatomy contexts, yellow usually refers to nerves, and tan usually refers to muscles. --Arcadian (talk) 14:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

THANK YOU!

Thank you for showing me to how to have two maps on the info boxes! I hope this is the solution that the people on Scotland could get their heads around. On a side note, would you know how to add color to a country info box? When I visited the Ireland page I saw how nifty Ireland looked in a green display... I was hoping for something simular for Wales, but in shades of red (the colour of Wales' rugby team).♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 17:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, I was wondering if you know how I can have created a new maps of europe created displaying Wales within that. I need a few different versions to display for people as examples to offer.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 17:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the colour for Wales... the red present may be too red... is there a way to get a lighter colour? Along the same hue as the Island green? By the way.... are you the unknown contributer who created the map for Scotland?♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 16:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

One further question... it seems the left side of the info box color displays wider then the right side. Can you confirm this? This is the link to our discussion on the Wales page so that you may see. ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 16:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow! That map of Wales is FANTASTIC! Might I entreat just two more maps for use too? I would like to have a Wales within the EU map, and also a three coloured Wales within the UK within the EU map. These would give Wales members something to vote on.The last map would need three colours... THANK YOU very much for helping with this! It means a great deal. As you can see, we are trying to make the Wales page both more professional and distinctive. ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 21:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I decided to be wiki-bold and added yrou amazing work to the Wales artlical. The only thing we have to fear is other editors that wouldnt want us to be so distinctive. I love it. I plan on doing these info box colours on the Kingdom of Gwynedd, kingdom of Powys, and Kingdom of Deheubarth, and Principality of Wales ariticals. If it is a matter of simply cut and paste, then I can do this. But where do I find a selection of other colors to chose from? This is exciting, thank you fro teaching me about this!♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 01:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Info box glitch

I think I am expierencing this on Kingdom of Gwynedd page too, where the side bar widens again. Also, I can not seem to change the header color there... I think because this info box is for former countries, not current countries. Might you fix that there? Once fixed, I can copy that for Principality of Wales, Kingdom of Deheubarth, and Kingdom of Powys articals.

Thank you!! Thank you again for this! I am very appreciative in your continued patience in assisting me hi-light Wales.... a country and people which far too often does not attract the interest other higher profile articals does. The borders really make the info boxes pop out and are distinctive. I have another question for you... is it possible to get maps of Wales in the style of User:David Liuzzo? For styalistic consistancy and for a tighter professional look... in the info box for Gwynedd (and subseqent pages) I was hoping to have Gwynedd (redish?) within Wales (Orange) high-lighted in one map. England would be in camel..and only the borders with Wales would be seen in this context. I searched wiki commons for maps by Liuzzo but could not find any for Wales...so was thinking that prehaps we could blow up the one on the British Isles possible.

I do not know what of Wales you already know about, but Gwynedd's historical borders are almost exactly the same as the current borders of North Wales.

You've been so generous with your time and talent that if you chose not to contribute further I would completly understand. You have advanced the cause of Wales greatly! It is odd for me to look at other country pages now that Ive seen what could be done!♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 06:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

What do you think of borders around picture boxes? Too much?

 -[ 08:16, 9 April 2008 Drachenfyre ]

Wolves circuling=

It seems the wolvs are circuling. Where do we go to be sure we continue to have the freedom of this?♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 03:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit: I think the thiner border will work better too. Can you do that for Kingdom of Gwynedd? Then I will go in there and do that for Principality of Wales and Kingdom of Powys, too. If we stick to the argument that this does not detract I think that is good, because it does not detract from the page at all.♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 20:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

1623

Some time ago you added an entry to this article about a fleet of Dutch ships setting out to conquer Peru on April 29th. I can't find a source within Wikipedia for this. Were you thinking of the Dutch occupation of Valdivia, Chile in 1643? Or am I missing something? Brianyoumans (talk) 06:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

• Update: Looking off-Wikipedia, I do see some references to this expedition. Google Books finds a reference in "Empire: How Spain Became a World Power" by Henry Kamen, but that source says the expedition was intended to intercept the treasure fleet, not to conquer territory. Perhaps I shall simply reword the entry a bit... Brianyoumans (talk) 06:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Styled infobox

Hi - Can you clarify whether the intent of Template:Infobox_Country_styled is to be a sandbox to try new features that will ultimately be offered by Template:Infobox_Country, or is the intent for this template to be a fork? As MJCdetroit has suggested (at Template talk:Infobox Country styled) the mechanism that has been previously used to try out new features of the template is to create a sandbox version and discuss the new version at template talk:Infobox Country (before using it on existing articles). Ignoring the specific change for the moment, IMO forking a new version of this template rather than pursuing a change to the existing template is not the right approach. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Very Sorry

I am profoundly sorry for dragging you into the colored infobox borders and title headers, I had no idea at the bureaucracy and entrenched resistance. I mean... wow. I am sorry. ... ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 05:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Box moved, not deleted

Hi Wikid77. I noticed that your styled infobox came under attack today. So I went in and handled it. I think we might have reached a decent compromise for the time being. Take a look at my explanation at Template talk:Infobox Country/styled sandbox#Move, not copy and delete.

--David Göthberg (talk) 17:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Biloxi-Beau-Rivage-concept.gif

A tag has been placed on Image:Biloxi-Beau-Rivage-concept.gif requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 23:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Help needed in (on) 1616

Please visit 1616 in your time machine and help prune the years' events. Thanks, Bill Overal Wloveral (talk) 01:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your time, help, and kind advice. Year 1616, in spite of all the misfortune it contained, may yet be a model year. Perhaps you would like to visit Timeline of Amazon history, Timeline of zoology , and Marajó, to see some works in progress and give me some pointers. BTW, is there a set format for timelines? Cheers, Bill Overal (Belém, Brazil) Wloveral (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for your kind comments, not to mention the Rosetta barnstar. Cheers, Trishm (talk) 12:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

1280s in architecture

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 1280s in architecture, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://medlibrary.org/w/index.php?title=1280s_in_architecture&action=edit. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

NRHP2 infobox, NRHP map infobox, Protected areas, Jefferson Memorial

Hi Wikid77. I just posted a note at Talk:Jefferson Memorial. Would you please see that and the discussions it references at WP:PAREAS and WP:NRHP? I would really like for your input to discussions to revise the NRHP infobox, perhaps to the new version NRHP2 developed by Dudemanfellabra, which incorporates some features of the NRHP map infobox that I see you created. Also, NRHP2 facilitates usage at NRHP sites such as Jefferson Memorial, which is not a natural area so should not properly have had the Protected areas infobox. My change of infoboxes there, however, doesn't look that great just yet. So there are substantive and presentation issues with the NRHP2 infobox. Sincerely, doncram (talk) 11:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Math style

In re this edit. Please: read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics) if you're going to work on articles like that one. There's a difference between these three things:

n1

n1

n₁

Michael Hardy (talk) 21:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Question about Gaming the System

Hi, I saw this (EDIT: and this) revert you made to the Gaming the System page. I'm working on a paper about the Wikipedia community that more or less focuses on the Gaming guideline. I was wondering if you could tell me why you added "reverting for minor errors" (EDIT: and "various levels of intent"). They make sense to me, but I was hoping you could elaborate on particular events/examples that led you to feel the need for these additions. If you have the time and are willing, I'd love to hear as much detail as you can tell me. I'd also love to hear your take on Gaming the System in general and any other examples of Gaming you might remember. It would really help me out. My email is ryan_mcgrady@emerson.edu. Thanks so much. —Rhododendrites (talk) 18:58, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:UGA-University-of-Georgia-1785-seal-variant.gif

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:UGA-University-of-Georgia-1785-seal-variant.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 19:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC) --TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 19:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment

The gif format of this excellent map you made showing the location of Meroe has been deemed outdated: Image:Sudan map narrow.gif Perhaps you could upload it under png? I just noticed it on the aricle for Meroë The map is clearly needed for this article. Regards, Leoboudv (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

16-Aug-2008: I have untagged the GIF version as "not obsolete" and noted it is a "detailed variation" of the PNG. There has been a bizarre obsession by some on Wikipedia to convert all GIF files to PNG, and when not convenient to convert, the GIF files were simply deleted to avoid using GIF format (as a psychotic tendency); however, even Google logos have used GIF images all during 2007/2008, so the peculiar attitude to force all GIFs to be PNG is an attempt to ignore reality, and Wikipedia does not ignore/subset reality (ya, right). Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, and I hope the PNG-fanatic conversions will cease, but psychiatric help might be needed for some Wikipedia editors. -Wikid77 (talk) 08:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Year nav

Thank you for inserting {{Year nav|...}} in the articles 1289 through 1386 on April 19–23, 2008.

That leaves just 1202 to 1288, which have nonstandard appearance, and 301 to 670, which have standard appearance but should be standardized by using the template.

Other ways that year articles can be improved include standardizing use of b. for born, d. for died, c. for circa, en dash (–) for ranges of dates, and em dash (—) where hyphen or en dash is sometimes used to separate a word or short phrase from the detailed explanation. Anomalocaris (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

Please don't add "News" sections. Please read WP:RECENT. This is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. We have Wikinews for that. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 13:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

"05-Sep-2008: Several people couldn't handle the concept of "News" as a grouping that normal people would use, so they axed the "News" grouping without discussion, which was typical behavior of how articles were chopped in September 2008. -Wikid77 (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)"

Let me suggest that you watch your tone. You added it without discussion, and in violation of WP:RECENT. And words like "axed" and "normal people" (implying that those who disagree with you aren't normal) serve no purpose other than personal attack. Ward3001 (talk) 16:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• 05-Sep-2008: Actually, I added the section "News" when opening discussion on the talk-page (that's how discussions start), and rather than enter that discussion, the section was axed. The term "personal attack" requires a "person" to be identified, and I emphasized that "several people" acted to remove the "News" grouping, and also, I noted that "axing" was "typical behavior of how articles were chopped in September 2008" rather than the behavior of some extreme fringe person to be personally attacked. Considering those points, then I sense some mental issue has triggered the above complaint (not a direct result of the comment above concerning "Several people"). -Wikid77 (talk) 03:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

And I commented in an edit summary when I removed the News section, so your statement "without discussion" is untrue. It also is untrue that personal attack requires naming a specific user. Your use of the phrases "Several people who couldn't handle the concept of 'News'" and "normal people" clearly indicates that those who disagreed with you did not fall into the category of "normal people". That is a personal attack. In any event, your tone is quite condescending and accusatory. In this edit, what purpose does this statement serve: "Some writers on Wikipedia are just stubborn against change"? It certainly doesn't improve that article. It is not directed at content, it is directed personally at editors. Please read WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 04:19, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't usually template regulars, but you asked for it

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Ward3001. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 04:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

• User talk:Ward3001 posted "Welcome to Wikipedia" (above) when I have been an active user for 3 years, then added "Take a look at the welcome page" as if I had not read it during the past 3 years. What kind of mindset does that indicate? -Wikid77 (talk) 04:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

How much has a 3-year-user failed to learn when he focuses on slurs toward other editors rather than content? Has that 3-year-user learned anything about WP:CIVIL or WP:NPA? When a 3-year-user makes personal attacks (here and here), that 3-year-user deserves to be templated and asked to read the Welcome page. Ward3001 (talk) 18:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Topaze (disambiguation)

I have nominated Topaze (disambiguation), an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Topaze (disambiguation). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 06:48, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Reminder of hurricane ref-tags

12-Sep-2008: REMINDER: I noticed that the Gustav NHC advisories have been specified in footnote ref-tags ("<ref>") named with "publicXX" as the tag name (where "XX" is the advisory number). The general format of the ref-tag is as follows:

<ref name="public22">{{cite web
| author=Blake/Avila | publisher=National Hurricane Center
| date=2008-08-30 | accessdate=2008-08-30
| title=Hurricane Gustav Advisory Number 22
| url=http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2008/al07/al072008.public.022.shtml
}}</ref>

Note that "author=Blake/Avila" (or "author=Knabb") is from the names at the bottom of the particular advisory webpage. The latest advisory webpage is linked from:

• url=http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATCPAT2+shtml/

The advisories coded as "xxA" are named "Intermediate" compared to the other advisories (named as just "Advisory"), so the titles are:

• title=Hurricane Gustav Advisory Number 22
• title=Hurricane Gustav Intermediate Advisory Number 22A

Intermediate pages are in folder "public_a" with URL for 22A as:

• http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2008/al07/al072008.public_a.022.shtml

I hope this helps people to add ref-tag footnotes to the article text; however, just stating "NHC advisory 22A" would be technically a "verifiable" statement within the article text, to meet the Wikipedia requirement for verifiability.

Talk:H_Gustav no longer contains this topic, so I recreated it here to have some sanity in follow-up information. So much gets flushed in WP that it has become the "sum of all survivors" after axing. -Wikid77 (talk) 06:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Ike subarticles

I noticed you created the one for Texas. I am currently working on a second one, involving the inland states (to cover the remarkable wind and flooding event that took place there on September 14) at User:CrazyC83/Ike-Inland. That leaves you open to do Louisiana, or the Caribbean (of course you can also feel free to contribute to my sandbox - it will be at Effects of Hurricane Ike in inland North America). CrazyC83 (talk) 04:14, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Please review the edit I made here

Hi there. Please review the edit I made here. I noticed that all other flat keys' articles contained the flat symbol (♭), so I altered the page on D-flat minor to read similarly - however, this was before I got around to reading the inline note.

We should either work towards either making all flat keys consistent with ♭ and all sharp keys consistent with ♯, as all but one of the flat major keys' articles was, or flip back to using just using # for each - but this is not now used in any of the sharp major or minor keys.

If you could shed further light on whether I should have stuck to the instructions in the inline note, please inform me. Thank you. Bobo. 15:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Stubs

Hi Wikid77 - good to see you making a few new stubs for wildlife reserves in Texas. If you mke any more could I ask you to add {{Texas-geo-stub}} rather than just {{Geo-stub}}? It'll save a bit of sorting further down the line. Cheers, Grutness...wha? 21:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Horse articles

Hi there, saw some of your edits in the various horse articles. Your attempts to clean some of them up are much appreciated, but be sure you aren't being TOO "helpful," OK? Some of the things are where they are, the way they are, for a reason -- particularly reference sections for articles that are start-class and just contain bibliographical info in absence of footnotes. Please don't make them "external links" when they are actually sources for the article. Also watch red links and disambiguation of links, OK? You may also be interested in looking at the "convert" templates that make it easy to put in both metric and imperial measurements. Overall, your efforts are (mostly) appreciated, but maybe ask a few talk page questions before making drastic changes -- at least to see if there is anyone out there who cares. (grin) Thanks. Montanabw^(talk) 20:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Answered your reply on my talk page. Thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 18:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Lady and the Tramp

Claiming someone has "mental problems", and advising someone to "seek professional mental help" because of a content dispute is a violation of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Please do not make such comments in the future or you may be blocked from editing. Green caterpillar (talk) 17:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, it isn't really Wikipedia's job to give mental health advice. And, no, Wikipedia cannot be sued because Wikipedia is not responsible for its users' mental health. So, yes, you could say nicely "I consider your behavior off-balance", but leave the mental health issues outside Wikipedia. Green caterpillar (talk) 20:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Ada comments

You wrote:

if you can't understand the details, someone else can - or put 10-word phrases in Simple Wikipedia, not here...

Leaving aside the unwikipedialike insult, let me mention that I was responsible for the Ada Test & Evaluation activity at Intermetrics in 1979-1981, where we worked with Ichbiah to refine his Green language into Ada. I think I understand Ada pretty well. And the use of "nested comments" in this section is completely idiosyncratic. --macrakis (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

04-Nov-2008: I'm sorry that you interpreted my comments against excess simplicity as an insult. I was focused on the idea of over-simplified text, hence the mention of "Simple Wikipedia" there. I have worked with numerous intelligent people, and they can understand "complex" ideas, which should be included in articles, so long as the details are limited to a few sentences. Many people have complained that Wikipedia articles are kept "too simple" in coverage.

Ada comments are in fact not a complex subject. The current text is unnecessarily convoluted, especially since everything it says applies to any end-of-line comments, whether in Ada or in SQL (which also uses the --...EOL convention along with the /*...*/ convention or in Lisp (;...EOL). Please see my remarks in Talk:Ada (programming language)....

Sometimes, when involved with prior conflicts with several other people, it may seem as though "everyone" is tossing insults. However, it might also help to go on wikibreak, and rethink ways to avoid seeing other people's viewpoints as insulting. Could those people be merely expressing a strong opinion about the subject? Typically, when others instantly cite WP:CIVIL, then the situation has already escalated in their minds.

I find your tone condescending. Peremptorily reverting my edits without comment is not "merely expressing a strong opinion".

I don't know what else to say to assure you that I am quite calm and happy. Just remember that many people think Wikipedia is far too over-simplified, or even "baby-fied" (as a "Kid-opedia"), and I hope that focus will ease your troubles and allow you to think of clever ways to include more complex issues without swamping general readers. Anyway, those issues can wait, and I just hope you get feeling better soon. -Wikid77 (talk) 12:27, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I feel just fine, thank you. --macrakis (talk) 03:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)