User talk:Chaosdruid/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

License tagging for File:LCA NEW LOGO.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:LCA NEW LOGO.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Unified login

Thanks for the message on my talk page. To learn more about UL, take a look at m:Help:Unified login. Basically it is a mechanism that allows you to log into any Wikimedia Foundation project, including all of the various language Wikipedias, with a single user name and password. – ukexpat (talk) 16:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Glad I could help - try accessing UL via your Preferences, that may work. Yes lived in Manchester for 30+ years, and my Dad still lives there. And don't forget to sign your messages on talk pages! – ukexpat (talk) 01:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem, it's easy to forget. BTW, which userbox put the Wikignome image at the top of your user page? – ukexpat (talk) 01:21, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

No it's not a problem, just curious as to how you put it there. I am from South Manchester, Sale actually. You mentioned images - which ones were you referring to? Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 01:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC) 11111

OK got it. The images are just thumbnails using the thumbnail parameters: [[File:Imagename.xxx|thumb|caption]]. If you want the thumbnail on the left (the default is on the right), you add |left after |thumb. You can also add a size parameter, such as |200px. They key thing is that if you want a caption, it should always be the last parameter. – ukexpat (talk) 01:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:GM

Hello, Chaosdruid/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikiproject Greater Manchester! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a Greater Manchester Project Wikipedian! As a project we aim to have all our articles comply with the various editing policies and guidelines. If you are contributing to an article, it is good practice to ensure that it's properly referenced with reliable sources, otherwise any contentious content may be removed by another editor. A good starting point for articles about settlements in Greater Manchester is the WP:UKCITIES guideline. If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your ideas. Again, welcome, and happy editing!

Nev1 (talk) 01:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: tidies

Hello there! Wasn't sure if you wanted me to reply here or on my talk page, but I thought it easier for you if it's here.

I really hope you enjoy being part of our wikiproject - WP:GM is one of the big successes in terms of a local project in the UK (infact I think we're way ahead of the London and Yorkshire projects!). That said though we're always looking for new editors as our team is quite small, and some parts of the region, like Trafford, tend to get more attention than others (which is still good in a way!).

As for being online, it's unlikely I'm on much tomorrow. I may be on late at night however, but not so much during the day. User:Nev1, User:Malleus Fatuorum or User:Parrot of Doom may be online though (just give WT:GM a nudge on the talk page), I trust their judgement on Wikipedia very much. Was there something in particular you wanted help with? I don't know much about Dukinfield (I've passed through a few times), but I know enough that we've got to try and replace that town hall photo! lol --Jza84 |  Talk  02:39, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Stephen Chow and IMDB refs

Sure, take your time! I don't really have the inclination right now to do any major overhauling of the article, so I won't be going in and looking for stuff to change...I only removed that one article because I noticed a formatting problem there during your last edit, and I went there to fix the formatting problem....when I noticed it was an IMDB ref I figured, "well it's going to have to get removed eventually anyway, might as well do it now." But I'm not going to go removing all the IMDB refs right now, so you still have lots of time to look for other refs.

Of course, references outside of IMDB are desirable (and, in the long term, IMDB refs aren't really much good)...but for now I don't think there's anyone who's going to delete stuff from the article right away. At the very worst, people might remove the remaining two IMDB references and replace them with tags while you look for better references...but the facts themselves won't be removed for a while. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 05:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Stryi River

A tag has been placed on Stryi River, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Gilo1969 (talk) 12:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for your message - I have removed the delete tag, and replaced it with stub and under construction tags. Gilo1969 (talk) 13:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Help !!

I have been editing the page Stryi and when i put in the first reference, it did nto work properly
The [1] appeared as expected, but the ==Reference== section did not.
I manually added the section, and resaved the link but it still does not work.

If someone could help it would be much appreciated!

I have reverted it to the state it was in before i included the frist reference and hopefully this will cure the prob.

Chaosdruid (talk) 17:21, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Did you add {{reflist}} below ==Reference==? That should make it work. Nev1 (talk) 17:28, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I fixed it. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 17:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Yup, I fixed it.  :) And you're most certainly welcome. Let me know if you need help again. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 17:37, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Stryi

Not necessary. :) - Darwinek (talk) 18:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

There are many naming conventions referring to more specific areas of Wikipedia. Some WikiProjects also manage them. In this case, the WikiProject Rivers. -- Darwinek (talk) 18:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of User:Chaosdruid/sandbox

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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 [[ Talk:User:Chaosdruid/sandbox|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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Chaosdruid (talk) 21:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Uh... was this a mistake or did you just want to delete the page? - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 21:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

You just need to use WP:CSD#G7 by applying {{db-self}}. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 23:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that info - I spent about an hour looking through searches and articles just to find the tag I used lol

(and that was after I already found it yesterday !!} I was about to ask you when I came across it again.

What part of robotics do you work in ? It is a fascinating field to be working in these days, I would have loved the chance to work on something like mapping and AI. I cannot imagine how it must be now we have minituarisation of components, like gyro's, and the expansion of processing powers coupled with the understanding of thought processes.

I find the work being done on FMRI quite intriguing, especially one experiment i saw about tonal responses and the surprising directions the pathways interact - keep up the good work !!

Chaosdruid (talk) 23:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, another robotics guy. It's good to know when I see people interested in robotics. You should join WP:ROBO. It's a relatively small group of editors focused in editing robotics articles. You should check it out some time! :) Next time instead of researching for hours going fruitless - just send me a message.  :) - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Useful books

Thankyou for the links :) I think I've already seen them, but I appreciate you spending the time to link them in my talk page. I already pinched the Radcliffe Tower image from there, hehe :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 00:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Robotics! :)

Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Robotics! Our goals are to standardize the structure and content of all Robotics articles, improve Wikipedia's coverage of these articles (hopefully propelling them to featured article status), and serve as the central resource for all discussions and information related to Robotics on Wikipedia.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has a few expanding departments, which handle article quality assessment, member recruitment and project awareness and article improvement collaborations.

If you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask one of the project participants or post a question on the talk page. We'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! —- Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 06:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK

I'm nowhere near as active on Wikipedia as I used to be, but thank you anyway for your comments.

Regarding Wikimedia UK, I am not active in this at all currently, but from reading the mailing list I don't think that paypal can currently be accepted. The information should be somewhere at the WMUK pages on Meta - m:Wikimedia UK. If it isn't there will be contact information there for someone who will know. Thryduulf (talk) 10:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Norfork edits

I just did basic cleanup of the article to remove extra blank lines. To see what I did, go to the article, then click the history tab. Look down the changes and select the right radio button by my edit and the left radio button for the previous edit. That will bring up a screen that shows you what I changed. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

images and things

If the photograph was your Grandad's, its best to put that in the image description, and how you came by it - inherited, presumably. It just stops anyone else asking the same question at some point. I wouldn't upload images to Wikipedia - upload them to Wikimedia Commons. You don't have to register, just click 'my preferences' top right of the screen (while on wikipedia, as you are now), and create a global account. Then upload your files there, that image would be 'my own work', but for most other things personally I click 'i got it from somewhere else', and insert the appropriate licence. Always try and be as descriptive as you can, for instance look at the work I had to do to establish copyright on that image :) Always make sure your image is categorised as well, there is a funky little helper on the wikimedia uploader, but I usually search wikim commons first to see if there are similar images, and then see how they're categorised. OS maps are out of copyright after 50 years, the railway map is probably ok, something tells me that because it became government property more than 50 years ago its similarly out of copyright. Parrot of Doom (talk) 01:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Just a thought, did your Grandad take the photograph, or simply own it? Maybe his was a copy, and the bloke that took the picture died after 1939 - copyright expires on things like that 70 years after the death of the author or first publication, and if your Grandad isn't the author (merely the owner of a copy) then it may not be public domain. If the photographer is unknown or cannot be established, then copyright usually expires 70 years ago today. :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 01:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Nordic music template

How u going to fix it? Article was deleted, Do u know about Valkyria band? —Preceding unsigned comment added by UnholyFreezz (talk • contribs) 15:02, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: 71.246.98.35

Re your message: I already dealt with them. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Re your message: You lost me there. Reporting him to where? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Re your message: The edit summaries used were uncivil, though the actual additions are fine. If he just waited out his block and didn't take shots at another admin, things would be fine. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Hi

Sorry about not replying to your message on my talk page for a week - have been a bit busy lately. Your questions about astronomy don't seem to be questions - I can't see a single "?" amongst them... :) I'll still give them a go...

We can only see out to the horizon - no further - so will likely never be able to tell whether there were multiple big bangs or a single one (there are theories that can cope with multiple ones - e.g. successive big bang-big crunch-big bang series, or branes colliding in higher dimensional planes). We make the assumption that the universe is isotropic and homogenous - i.e. everywhere that we can't see is basically like that which we can see - when talking about the mass of the universe; more correctly, we measure the density of mass in our universe (at different points), which determines the evolution of everything that we can see.

The LHC never took any proper images of collisions, I don't think. It certainly wasn't intending to - the first circuits were just to make sure that the beams stayed within the ring, rather than colliding with the edges, and hence were low power and only circulated in one direction at once. The power in these beams would have been increased over time (i.e. the particles would have been sped up more, and more particles would have been present), before collisions after a fair few months of tests. Obviously that's all delayed now, though.

Hope the above makes sense. :) Mike Peel (talk) 21:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Mario Andretti

Hi, thanks. That is the system I would have suggested. Looking at the article history, it appears that some one else fixed the references before you started work on the article, so that problem has been dealt with.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thats OK, anytime.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Mr P helps again

Hello, Chaosdruid. You have new messages at Politizer's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You don't need any script for it, you can just write {{talkback|Chaosdruid}} at the bottom of someone's user talk page to notify them if you leave them a message at your own talk page (you can also optionally add a third parameter with the name of the subsection on your talk page...for example, {{talkback|Chaosdruid|Mario Andretti}}, although it's not necessary.)

As for keeping track of others' talkpages...there's not much you can do, other than hope that they either respond on your talk page, or leave you a talkback notice when they respond at theirs. A lot of users have a notice at the top of their page (as I do) explaining where they will respond when you leave them a message...usually before I give someone a message, I check that notice to decide what to do. If it says they will respond at their own talkpage, then I usually add their talkpage to my watchlist temporarily, by checking "watch this page" when I post them a message. Of course, there are some users that I know well by now and I know that they'll respond at my page or leave me a talkback...it's generally when I leave a message for a user I don't know well, or am not sure how they'll respond, that I put their talkpage on my watchlist just in case. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 01:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Norfolk

Hello Chaosdruid

Sorry I have been so long in replying to your communication on my talk page. Firstly I thank you for your kind words on my contributions to North Norfolk articles. I have barely scratched the surface as of yet, with many pages needing improvements. There seem to be only a handful of editors who have an interest in all things Norfolk, so I am glad you have made contact. Looking at South Norfolk you will be busy for some time down there as looking briefly at what has been done there is certainly a lot more information that can be added.

Looking at South Norfolk, one suggestion I would make is that it needs a Navigation box the same as Template:Civil Parishes of North Norfolk which would help in moving around articles in the South Norfolk area. I have found it useful to add each village, town, ect to the Post code page(IP postcode area, NR postcode area) which can be linked to the info-box as they are added to pages.

You are correct that there is, at the moment no project dedicated to Norfolk, and I agree that it is time there was one but I have no idea how you go about creating one. If it did happen I think a good place to start would be to revamp the Norfolk county page as it defiantly could do with improving. I have cooperated with editor in the past with lifeboat pages and found this to be a good way to operate and some good work can be achieved in that way.

Here is a list of editors I know have a keen interest in Norfolk articles who you may want to contact and get some consensus together on creating a Norfolk project. They are :

• User talk:Arbus Driver
• User:Palmiped

• User:GraemeLeggett
• User:Northmetpit

There is also a Category:Wikipedians in Norfolk which i have added to your categorys you may find useful.

I hope this information is of use to you and do keep in touch
regards  stavros1  ♣ 23:31, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Scouting in Ukraine

Yeah, I was just going to tell you about that. "Sich" Scouting is one of the three component parts of the new federation, and we can't find anything about them, hence my search/query. Can you read Ukrainian and find a website or something for them? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 17:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Meant no offense, just resolved is for when all parties are satisfied, and I wasn't yet done. It was a premature close when there are more issues. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

And thank you for finding the links for me. Plast and Sich, according to international info, are two separate orgs. Thank you for the lead! Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Then should I start a fresh topic on "Sich" Scouting, separate from "Plast", so that you will not be upset I removed the tag? Being so publicly upset instead of just asking me privately and assuming good faith was surprising, and frankly, quite heavy handed. I do not want to believe you are that kind of editor, as helpful as you seem otherwise. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi - Norfolk and such

Hi, no I`m not from North Norfolk, just have an interest in certain articles. cheers --palmiped |  Talk  22:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Cloverfield image

I replaced it so that only one non-free image of the monster was being used (per WP:NFCC criterion 3a "minimal usage"), as that was the image being used in the lead of Clover (creature) article and showed a bit more of the creature I thought it might be the better of the two. If you disagree feel free to change it back but then I think the other image should also be switched - I don't see how two non-free image both being used for the same purpose can be justified under the non-free content criteria. Guest9999 (talk) 20:27, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem, just to clarify though Wikipedia is not censored and contains spoilers. I think the discussions were before my time here but I think the general consensus is that we should seek to include all relevant encyclopaedic information in an article and that providing that information to those whose seek it trumps potentially revealing information that some readers might not want to know (see also Wikipedia:Content disclaimer). Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 20:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Hamilton - youngest to lead, etc

Hi Chaosdruid. There's not currently an inconsistency in the article - the text says Hamilton succeeded McLaren as the youngest driver to lead the World Championship; the box at the bottom says Hamilton succeeded Alonso as the youngest driver to win the Championship. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 03:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

No worries. We all make mistakes - I've certainly made plenty! Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 01:44, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Chaos - I think you misread my bit on Jack's page - it was about a page assessment for Carl Lewis, not for anything related to Hamilton or F1. Cheers. Canada Jack (talk) 20:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Webber and Hamilton

Hi chaosdruid,

Please, please feel free to work on the article -- I rarely have any time on weekdays so help is appreciated and probably necessary to make sure Webber passes GAR.

Thank you for adding to the article.

I haven't checked Hamilton, but the people at WP:F1 can likely assist with feedback. -- Guroadrunner (talk) 05:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Villeneuve

Please do - this one was probably always going to take the longest of the five, as it's needed a significant re-write. Do whatever you think necessary - if I disagree we can discuss on the talk page. Cheers! 4u1e (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I've replied on the GAR page about peacock terms. If you need help with anything, please ask. I do not and will not think of you as a "thickie", don't worry! Please ask about any and all problems relating to the article, I am happy to help.--Jackyd101 (talk) 02:25, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem, happy to help.--Jackyd101 (talk) 11:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm probably WP:OWNing the article a little - my apologies if so. What I'm aiming for is variety of sentence length - sentence length wasn't in general something I objected to in your edits. And I did leave the majority of them unchanged! I hope I at least explained myself where I fiddled with your edits. Please continue to make improvements - I'm always open to discussion. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 17:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Need help

Hi Chaosdruid. This page Collaboration with the Axis Powers during World War II is being vandalizd by the same IP from here [[1]]. He just keeps inserting the same false informantion there. When you get a chance can you look at it ? Thanks--Jacurek (talk) 23:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for a very good comment you left on my page. --Jacurek (talk) 01:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

It was a joke

As I explained, the edit summary was intended as jocular phrasing. My sense of humor got the better of me there (argh, I should know by now, never make jokes on Wikipedia :-(). Sorry for any confusion. It was a jargonistic way of saying "Because I as a columnist for The Guardian have the power to write material which qualifies according to Wikipedia guidelines as reliable sources, and I have therein cited Jimbo as co-founder in September 2008, I refute you thusly". Anyway, here's a 2009 cite not by me for good measure. - Seth Finkelstein (talk) 00:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Norwich edit

Hi. In reply to your message on my talk page, I think you must be a little bonkers. There aren't any "warnings" on the talk page for Norwich about "too many lists". Gresham's isn't anywhere near Norwich. As it happens, it isn't older than 1555. Mentioning the notable schools in Norwich (whether private or LEA) isn't "advertising", it's important information. If there are too many lists on that page, you need to reduce the size of the lists, not the text. For instance, you could create a new page for "People from Norwich". RF75 (talk) 20:07, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Not a good faith edit, surely

I assume this link catalogued as good faith was just pressing the wrong button in TW. Editor was blocked.  :-). -- Alexf^(talk) 12:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Translation

Hello,

Translation is here[[2]]--Jacurek (talk) 19:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Argentina

I wouldn't mind discusing the pertinence of including the genetic information in the Ethnicity section. But after two years of trying to reach a consensual solution in the matter, I am getting tired and frustrated of arguments such as "the source [a scientific research] is retarded, false or opinionated", with absolutely no references to back their position up but their own opinions, and in which most users are unwilling to debate or abandon the debate when things don't go their way. In my experience here in the English Wikipedia, there seems to be a competition in the Latin American articles to prove which country is "whiter" and "richer" with the corresponding edit wars in the sections of demographics and economy. --the Dúnadan 00:17, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Chaosdruid. You have new messages at Rjanag's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Andretti

So you know, there's been lots of bickering and compromising on the whole Istria / Italy / Croatia mess in Mario's article. The wording presented took a lot of compromises. There were lots of nationalists fighting. I don't think that you're part of these groups. I wanted you to be aware of the problems. I worked with User:4u1e to get the article up to WP:GA and I've been watching it for a long time. Mario is one of the most important racers in American Open Wheel Racing. Royalbroil 05:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't complaining to you about your actions. I just wanted you to be aware that there are people out there who did some major whining to arrive on this wording. I've been careful to leave this wording alone since it took so much effort to reach this compromise. Like I said, I never thought you were one of these nationalists. Look at the archives on Mario's talk page to see the huge mess that was discussed starting here. My head spins just thinking about it! Royalbroil 06:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Good, I'm glad that you were aware of the situation. I knew that you were part of WP:F1. I was expecting to do the required edits to keep the article at GA standards. I was very pleasantly surprised to see your effort on the article. I owe you a big THANK YOU! Royalbroil 06:19, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Cham Albanians reversion

Hi, sorry, didn't mean to jump on you on it. I just saw that on that page someone mentions that they have a copy of the Mazower book and they can't find the reference to this. So I went and looked through the copy available online [3] and did all kinds of searchers but nothing even close came up. My impression of the consensus on that page was that while the Mazower book was obviously an RS, it didn't support the included sentence. There could be other sources that do, I don't know that much about this topic. I'll self revert on it but we should figure it out and act accordingly.radek (talk) 06:11, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

It's cool, I'll try to find out something tonight.radek (talk) 06:20, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Chaosdruid. You have new messages at Xeno's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–xeno (talk) 00:22, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

The Graphic Designer's Barnstar

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		For taking the time to help me out with something as trivial as a userbox and lending your graphics skills, I award you The Graphic Designer's Barnstar. Thanks again =) –xeno (talk) 00:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Collaborators etc

Sorry, reverted my past editions by editing an old version. --Erikupoeg (talk) 01:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Ongoing problem.

Chaosdruid:

Thank you for your interest in all this.

You should know that you also accidentally deleted certain grammatical errors and other fixes unrelated to the problem.

Dunadan's contribution was not deleted, though it lacked a primary source (the "reference" is an article on the study, a "secondary" source subject to misinterpretation). He's been insisiting on it despite a total lack of consensus, as well.

No one's deleting his preferred point of view, though perhaps someone should: the study is amply quoted in other Argentina-related articles (Demographics of Argentina, White Argentines, and others) and NO other Latin American country page includes genetic studies. I recall that that this one, in particular, was taken from 320 samples from public-sector hospitals (which 60% of Argentines do not use, for reasons akin to why most Americans avoid public hospitals).

You should know that this contributor is writing from Mexico (Veracruz, I believe), where the subject of white Argentines is a highly contentious one as a result of the disdain and/or discrimination most Mexicans experience among white people in the U.S. (something Argentines normally don't have to). He's spent a year pushing the (one secondary source) point of view on Argentina and a month doing nothing but - after a four-month absence.

Forgive my frankness, but I felt we needed a little, lest the 600-pound gorilla in the room crowds the discussion out! I noticed that you had earlier advised him to leave the easily-misinterpreted sentence out. If you'd delete the item, I'd be happy to make sure its entry in the Demographics of Argentina and other similar pages stay. Others have tried to delete it from there, as well, and I've never supported their doing so, you know. Genetics studies relating to Brazil and the United States can only be found on their Demographics page, where they belong. In the flagship country page, it's bad form and needlessly offensive.

Please, write me back, I look forward to it.

My regards, Sherlock4000 (talk) 04:17, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I am flabbergasted by the above comments, and deeply frustrated to see that Sherlock fails to read the debates. The genetic source is not a secondary source, it is a primary source and much superior to the CIA Factbook! Moreover, he has failed to provide any source at all!

i am not writing from Mexico, and would be more than happy to stand an IP verification, but even if I were, my location, whether it is the US (where I am located), Europe, Mexico or Argentina does not prove that my arguments are wrong.

--the Dúnadan 08:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Vietnam women's national football team

I tried to clear the article up, I hope it looks okay. DeMo N2009 10:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Possible solution

Chaosdruid:

Thanks for your prompt response.

Minimizing pointless (and offensive) discussions on the issue of race in Argentina (or anywhere else) has always suited me best, since I started contributing last year. I usually devote my Wikipedia time to translating Spanish-language articles and hate having to argue about this.

You're great to brave researching Argentine statistics, let me tell you. The fact is that no Argentine census has inquired as to ethnicity since 1947, when 90% described themselves as "white, with no native ancestry." You won't find it on the internet, as it's something you'd have to look up in dusty tomes at a good university library. More recent estimates (Britannica, World Statesmen, etc) have the figure at 85-86%, and I've deleted any figure much higher than that whenever anyone has tried to insert it. This is a consideration few editing many other Latin country pages would have, by the way: I often see the "whitest" percentages anyone can find put up with little or no debate. It's none of my business, so I don't interfere.

Like my great-great-grandparents and those of virtually everyone my parents knew, 6 million Europeans migrated from 1860 to 1950 to a country with 1.5 million people. This, of course, does not make Argentines (or Uruguayans, who went through something similar) better than other Latin Americans, nor has it spared them many of the same tragedies, God knows. It's simply historical fact. This has a long and opprobious history of causing resentment among some, south of the border (though, by no means everyone).

What "Dúnadan" (read his reason on User:Dúnadan for choosing the moniker) is referring to is ONE among numerous such genetic studies, this one out of the University of Buenos Aires' (suffering) Social Sciences School whereby, having taken a few samples from public hospitals, 56% of them were found to contain at least one haplotype typical of indigenous peoples (which, as any geneticist will tell you, can be shared among all ethnicities on God's green Earth). The study went on to point out that only a few (something like 20%, I can't remember) possessed a gene peculiar to them.

Dunadan won't quote that part, and the Wiley Science web page that had made it available has taken it down, so he relies on secondary and tertiary articles on the study - rife with misquotes. To my knowledge, one must use a primary source for senstive material such as this.

If he can't find the primary source, it does not belong on the country page. Its mention of the Demographics of Argentina and other pages is plenty (that's standard practice, I think). We should keep ANY genetic study to the Demographics page.

I'm sure he would tolerate no less from anyone putting studies disputing, say, the Mexican government's claim that their average woman bears "2.2 children" over her lifetime (I could cite one that puts the number closer to 4, but I'd hear it from him! As well I should). It does not, however, entitle to him to cry wolf and to claim that "referenced material was deleted," when his favorite passage (as you can see) stands. He's done this to other users REPEATEDLY, pidgeon-holing them as "paranoid" when they point this out - watch him!

Thanks again for your time.

All the best,

Sherlock4000 (talk) 06:58, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Chaosdruid:

I hate having to waste time on this as much as you do.

The user going by Dúnadan insists on pushing his POV with only a secondary source and without any consensus. His wordy and choopy additions clutter the page, moreover, and as he lacks a primary source or justification, borders on vandalism.

You once advised him to leave the material out of the country article. I've given him my view that its ample mention on Demographics of Argentina and other pages should suffice.

Please, intervene, if you can.

Thanks again.

All the best,

Sherlock4000 (talk) 01:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I hate to waste my time as well. Especially when you (Sherlock) ignore the fact that the sources are primary sources, despite you calling them otherwise. You do not have the consensus to delete all genetic information, you refuse to debate, and you delete all our comments and requests for comment. Your view about moving the ample mention of genetics on Demographics of Argentina is, precisely, your POV. Three users have agreed with me in the talk page. Do you call that pushing my POV? Your accusations are ludicrous.

Chaosdruid, I would appreciate your mediation in this matter. --the Dúnadan 01:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Chaosdruid:

Well, I've caught the Dúnadan on a lie: the reference he's referring to is an educ.ar article on the subject, written by a public (Education Ministry) official whose strong personal bias comes off in the last sentence of the article. It's not the study itself (which was taken down by Wiley and Sons, some time ago). He's fluent in Spanish and knows that, so he intentionally lied about it, just then (as well as trying to hide the fact that several other readers are against him on this).

Let's remember, all these genetic studies (including Dunandan's favorite) have been given generous mention elsewhere. Wikipedia readers are free to access them at will.

Thanks for putting up with this.

Regards, Sherlock4000 (talk) 02:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

The_Siege

Chaosdruid, thank you for informing me on the decision to submit this particular aspect of the article to further revision. When I came upon the article I was simply reading on films, and was very surprised to find that in the controversy section there was a completely unverifiable statistic that seemed to support (without anybody actually requesting it, or the article demanding it in any way for encyclopedic knowledge to be assured) one side of the controversy. That is why I proceeded to delete it, because I found that it was neither relevant nor substantiated, and that additionally it could also be interpreted as prejudiced and/or intolerant of Islam. Had the article been any other, I wouldn't have bother to do anything else than to point out the lack of citation. In any case, I hope that whoever is reviewing it will consider what I had to say on the matter also. Thank you for your notice, and for your hard work.

220.41.26.175 (talk) 04:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Miss England

If I had known the correct link, I would have inserted it. DuncanHill (talk) 15:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I will add that there is nothing in the article about the person in question to support your contention that she is from Yelverton, Devon instead of Yelverton, Norfolk - I did check this before adding the {{dn}} tag. DuncanHill (talk) 15:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

advice needed

{{help}} I would like to know what the procedure is when someone deletes text that I have written in an article discussion.

You can restore it if you want since you have your own signature on it. The same applies to heavy refactorization. -- Mentifisto 17:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Argentina/demographicdisscussion

Hi there. Just noticed this while surfing Recent changes - would it be better to move this to the Talk namespace?

All the best. Bobo. 03:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Gotcha. I never normally patrol registered users' changes - just happened upon this one and was unsure whether it was intentional.

I'll keep a second eye on everything to make sure it gets moved as you intend. Bobo. 03:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleted

I have deleted it for you - thanks for the notification. If there's anything else that needs sorting, just ping me back. Bobo. 03:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Good night :)

No, I'm in Vancouver (Canada) Just going to bed. Will look at all this tommorow. Thanks--Jacurek (talk) 08:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Kung Fu Hustle image

Hi, thanks for contacting me on my talk page. Looking over File:Kung fu hustle matrix parody.jpg, I would recommend expanding the fair use rationale from its current "To explain a parody present in the film", specifically stating that the image is being used to illustrate the parody of the Matrix Reloaded scene. State that the article talks about the reference and that the image focuses on this. Examples of other images that may help you could include: File:LittleMissSunshinePageant.jpg, File:Evanark.jpg, or File:Stauffenberg and Cruise.JPG. As a side note, the image should also be reduced so that one of the dimensions is not larger than 300px. If you have any questions, let me know. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:Argentina immigration/demographic

Yes, I did take it as a criticism of my post. Sorry for the misunderstanding, then.

I'd be happy to take back the comment about misciting if it isn't warranted. But first we need to find out whether or not it is. I was talking about the number of Italian immigrants from 1857 to 1940, not to 1947. It was "2,970" thousands (see Table C [4]). Where in that document does it say that 2,600,000 of any group arrived by 1940, as you stated?

Secondly, you also miscited the population figure (which I did not mention): it was 16 million in 1947, not in 1940 (see Table B). (In 1940 it was 13 million, per John Gunther's "Inside Latin America", 1941.)

Again, if I'm wrong, I will retract the relevant comment without hesitation. I assure you. SamEV (talk) 02:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Consensus

I thought SamEVs proposal was to have a footnote with genetic information. Did I misunderstand? --the Dúnadan 03:29, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

That's indeed what I proposed. But on the noticeboard you seemed to oppose implementation until everyone else weighed in. A tall order, as some of those editors appear to be inactive or barely active. (Lehoiberri even states on his own page that he's semi-retired.) SamEV (talk) 03:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry - Wiki servers had a problem so couldn't get back in. I am unsure of what Sams exact proposal was, only that he suggested making it into a footnote in the summary comment on the edit he made.

To be honest, if people wish to know more about the demographics they would normally click on the link to the Demographics of Argentina which is listed just above next to the header for the section, as well as at the end of the paragraph.

Surely we could just put any information on the study in the Demographics of Argentina article, as the paragraph already states "based on self-identification, 600,000 Argentines (1.6 %) declared to be Amerindians"

The genetic study shows a large percentage have Amerind ancestry still doesn't affect the fact that only 1.6% of them claimed to be Amerinds. Perhaps tagging on "...to be Amerinds, with Amerinds contributing to around 17% of the genetic makeup."--Chaosdruid (talk) 04:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I meant this: that the content ([5]) which kept being reverted by Sherlock and restored by Dúnadan be moved to a footnote within the Argentina article. SamEV (talk) 04:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Schumi

I checked them all. D.M.N. (talk) 12:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Argentina

I closed it, yes; I'd advise you open a fresh one. Before doing so please try to make sure people involved in the dispute are actually interested in mediation, otherwise it wastes everyone's time. Ironholds (talk) 01:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. "Homonymous" in Spanish ("homónimo") is also a formal word (perhaps more frequently used than in English, but not by far), but it's the type of word one can use in "encyclopedic" writing. Thanks for putting the links. Take care.Nordisk varg (talk) 13:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Cyprus

Hi Chaosdruid. I changed the dates at Cyprus because there was a mixture of BC and BCE. It doesn't look good to have both styles in the same article. Most of the dates were BC so I set the remaining three that weren't to that standard. Hope that's OK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.7.131 (talk) 20:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: Cyprus demographics

Thanks for your note on my talk page. I have read the ongoing debate on Talk:Cyprus and I have thought it best to bypass the heated discussion by focusing on Demographics of Cyprus. The pdf file with the 2007 Republic of Cyprus abstract is downloadable, but it is a huge document (420 pp.) so maybe it looked to you as if nothing was downloading or possibly your computer/server timed out. In any event, the file is now on my computer and I will study it carefully before moving on with any updates. The main problem, however, is the territorial coverage: it seems to me that the CIA World Factbook covers the whole island, while the Republic of Cyprus abstract covers only the Republic of Cyprus. But I am sure that we collectively will be able to resolve this knotty problem. --Zlerman (talk) 02:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton

Yes, the current link at the top is a redirect to SS Indus (1945). I was trying to pipe it so it wouldn't be a redirect, but the template tried to add a "and" instead :(. If you know what you're doing, then please have a go at fixing it... I'm quite a novice Wikipedian, so I don't always know what I'm doing! Darth Newdar (talk) 08:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Mario Andretti

The IndyCar name was supposed to link to the American Championship Car Racing page, which explains the politics of the American formula motorsports community down through the 20th and into the 21st centuries. In 1979, there was an extremely acrimonious and volatile split in the American motorsports community between those who favored a more sprint and midget racing background and/or source for prospective incoming drivers to American championship-level racing (the USAC supporters), and those who felt that the influence should be more like what already existed internationally, specifically in Formula One (CART, and eventually "ChampCar", supporters, even though the "Championship Car" name is as amorphous as it has been universally used in the majority of American racing history). Despite other reasons for the original "split" also coming into play, the issue of divergent philosophies was and still to this day remains the strongest point of unbelievably bitter contention between the opposing factions (equivalent to a Wikipedian Edit War going on unchecked for more than thirty years)...to the point of certain websites (ChampCarFanatics.com, for instance) existing solely, if one reads carefully enough, for the purpose of piling hatred upon the opposing side.

With this now considered, the fact is that Mario Andretti won four championships in the highest-class of American single-seater automobile racing, a class which has been defined since May 30, 1911 as the kind of cars "that run at Indianapolis": three of the championships were sanctioned by USAC, and the fourth, with the exception of the Indianapolis 500-Mile Race, by CART. The difference in the sanctioning did not have any effect in the slightest on the objective overall equivalence of "the two kinds" of title, just as the shift in 1956 from American Automobile Association to USAC sanctioning had changed nothing except some politics. When Mario won the title in 1984, he had competed, as had every other CART team, at the USAC-sanctioned 500-Mile Race; a decade before, in 1974, the cars had sometimes been called IndyCars...'84, they were still sometimes called that, and thus hence my linking of the IndyCar name to American Championship Car Racing, to allow, via that method, explanation of the thorniest issue in the history of American automobile racing.

Apologies if this is an exhaustive response to your inquiry...but stating Mario as winning four "IndyCar" titles is entirely accurate, and separating the USAC and CART championships, as if they were different to any significant degree outside the technological level of the machines in question, does a disservice to the ebb and flow of AOWR history. --Chr.K. (talk) 20:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about how long this took to reply to... My current theory for an appropriate wikipedia explanation of matters would be to state the years in question of all the championships Andretti won, and sanctioning involved as well when it comes to the three USAC, and one CART, IndyCar titles. Also, our WP:AOWR project needs to put effort behind adding up our portion of Mario's driver results table, so as to further detail when the changeover occurred, and, shown in one box together, revealing how they are basically equivalent, as mentioned above. --Chr.K. (talk) 10:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Norfolk & Suffolk Project

I feel like being bold and creating the project! Shall we do it? ++ MortimerCat (talk) 09:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I have various connections with Norfolk, which I why I want to do some work on Norfolk articles. The lack of a Norfolk project made it difficult. This is why I was suggesting a project for each county, even if a project is inactive, it groups together all the articles.

There were no objections from the WikiProject Council proposal and 5 supporters is high! so I don't see a problem with going ahead. I think we both agree on [[6]] but I was considering a final vote on the scope, Norfolk or Norfolk & Suffolk. Possibly on Talk:Norfolk, with a deadline of next weekend?

As for next steps, once we have a name, we can create the project page. There is no need to have a fully functional project prepared for a specified launch date. It can be a basic "This is a new project looking for members". I will be able to do technical stuff like setting up the templates. Once we have templates, we then start to add them to the various articles, hopefully attracting more members and the project can grow. ++ MortimerCat (talk) 11:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Places of interest in Norfolk is an article that is maintained independently of Category:Visitor attractions in Norfolk. Any article given a visitor attraction category has to be manually added to the Places of Interest list. People have added categories but not added to article to the list which explains the discrepancy. I would say the Places of Interest list needs to be deleted. It does not do anything the the category system already handles, and it is difficult to maintain.

I think you are referring to the numbers in brackets on the Category:Visitor attractions in Norfolk age. This is the number of sub-categories, not the number of articles. This is another area for the project, tidying up the categories. Category:Visitor attractions in Norfolk as a parent category should not really have entries. Grimes Graves for example is in the subcategory of Category:English Heritage sites in Norfolk so should be removed from Category:Visitor attractions in Norfolk.

By the way, [[:Category:Visitor attractions in Norfolk]] is how you type a category on a talk page, note the initial colon, otherwise the talk page ends up in the category. ++ MortimerCat (talk) 13:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Cyprus Demographics

Hey Chaosdruid. I wrote the demographics part. It's in the discussion. Have a look and perhaps help out with the referencing? :) I included the link but I cannot reference properly. WhiteMagick (talk) 15:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Cyprus

Response on my talk page. 94.192.38.247 (talk) 05:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Grand Prix 2

I've done a bunch of edits to Grand Prix 2 and I wanted to ask if you have a copy of the game manual in your house. If you do, then a lot of areas can be referenced through that. -- Guroadrunner (talk) 09:30, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Gilles Villeneuve

I agree that Gilles is hard to reference. I personally do not have any book reference materials that I can use for Gilles' article, and it seems most articles on the Web are about his death. What's the rough deadline Jacky gave us? -- Guroadrunner (talk) 09:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

14th SS

Sorry for the late response, I'm away. I have asked user Molobo to help answer your question. Cheers.--Jacurek (talk) 00:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Cyprus Demographics: your feedback needed

If possible, I would like to have your feedback to the latest version of the Demographics section on Talk:Cyprus (including WhiteMagick's comments). Thank you. --Zlerman (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Cyprus passport

Hi,

can you please give your input on Template talk:Passports on whether the Cyprus passport, sharing the common design of the European passport, should be listed under Asia as some users insist?

Thanks--Avala (talk) 12:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== Re: Hi ==

I have no idea what you're talking about or why you're commenting on my page, but not everyone uses any sort of tools to revert vandalism. I have never caused any problems on Wikipedia and was simply doing something that I have seen many well established users do. Please go harass someone else. Tad Lincoln (talk) 03:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Editor with bee in bonnet who I am sure did not really wish to attack me--Chaosdruid (talk) 00:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Cyprus Demographics: archive discussion

It seems to me that, out of consideration to other users, we should archive our very lengthy discussion of demographic issues on Talk:Cyprus (starting with section 38:Demographics and through section 42:Demographics section: next iteration, possibly skipping section 39:Political terminology). If you agree, will you do it please? Thank you. --Zlerman (talk) 04:47, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

• Could you re-check please? On my screen Archive5 is identical with the old Archive4. --Zlerman (talk) 07:32, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks for re-creating Archive5 in full. Sorry for the confusion: I was clicking in the icon field, not at the top line. Everything looks OK now. There was another reason for dearchiving: WhiteMagick complained that everything had been archived and he could not check the consensus claims. But now your archives are in good shape and everything can stay as is. Regards. --Zlerman (talk) 02:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Original Research?

As I already pointed out the him/her the CIA book is using data (2001) it states as being obtained before the dates of the creation of the article (Feb 2002), and that if the editor wishes to use them they would be unable to as that would be OR.

It is true that the CIA book used data in 2000 that was updated in 2001, as shown by the CIA factbook 2000 extract on the first edit of the Cyprus page subsequently changed in Feb 2002, but that data is probably (almost definitely) from the census done in 2001--Chaosdruid (talk) 02:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

You are saying that it is OR if the editor wishes to use what exactly? The Transhumanist 15:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey

ping. 71.155.238.140 (talk) 05:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Collaboration page

Hi, no problem please adjust my edits to the version you think is apropriate. Thanks--Jacurek (talk) 07:12, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Mark Webber

Thanks and you are welcome. I was actually away because I have a new job that takes up a lot of my time, that also why I'm trying to run through the remaining reviews I have to do, so I can tone down the time I need to spend on wiki. Congratualtions to you and the rest of the F1 team for all your work bringing these articles up to standard - very impressive.--Jackyd101 (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Its a good thing: the dream job I studied 7 years to get the required qualifications for, but its very demanding. You are more than welcome, and if you need any pointers in the future don't hesitate to ask, although I apologise if I take a while to respond!. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 02:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Academia is the closest guess, thanks for the congratulations.--Jackyd101 (talk) 12:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

re: Buenos Aires

Hi Chaosdruid, I've left a response to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 20:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Demographics of Cyprus

You are saying that it is OR if the editor wishes to use what? The Transhumanist 15:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

That if the editor was using his/her own figures (purportedly used by CIA) then that would be OR to use them in the article.--Chaosdruid (talk) 00:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I doubt he conducted his own census, so by "his own figures" I assumed he meant statistics he gathered from various sources. And that's not original research. Though without the sources cited, it makes "his" stats rather difficult to verify. The Transhumanist 17:17, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine

Hi, I remember that a while ago it came up that you were interested in the Manchester Mark 1; I'm wondering if you might be interested in the SSEM as well? It's currently at FAC, but Malleus won't be around for the end of the review and I'm looking for people who might be able to guide it through FAC. All the hard work is done by the looks of it. Nev1 (talk) 01:51, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester June Newsletter, Issue XVI

Delivered on 3 June 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 14:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Not Retarded Userbox

Just letting you know that the userbox "this user is not retarded, no matter what anyone says" has been deleted and you may want to remove the template. Subverted (talk • contribs) 08:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Stephen Chow "Sing girls"

I just started working on Sing girls (I'm using the zh-wiki article as the basis for the list, although not word-for-word); thought you might be interested. You're welcome to make additions if you like. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Norfolk Project

Hi There

Has there been any progress in the setting up of a project for Norfolk.  stavros1  ♣  22:02, 29 March 2009(UTC)

Hi, re the wikiproject proposal. Suggest a Wikiproject to cover East Anglia (defined as Essex, Cambs, Norfolk and Suffolk - this would allow for future child projects to be easily formed) would be a good start. There is WP:CAMBRIDGE which would appear to cover the city of Cambridge but is inactive. I started WP:MILLS with just 5 members, we've now got 9 members and almost 750 articles. Mjroots (talk) 10:55, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester July Newsletter, Issue XVII

Delivered on 4 July 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 20:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater Manchester August Newsletter, Issue XVIII

Delivered on 5 August 2009 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.

Nev1 (talk) 18:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Kung Fu Hustle

Kung Fu Hustle has recently gone through several improvements and is again nominated for a WP:FA. Any useful comments can be given. World Cinema Writer (talk • contributions) 13:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Please sign contributions to talk pages

Thank you for your contribution to Talk:Lviv. Please could you sign your contributions to talk pages as follows: --~~~~. --Toddy1 (talk) 09:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry - at the time I read it, only your 09:39 edit was visible.--Toddy1 (talk) 10:16, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Lvov

It would be a good thing if you edited the articles on Lvov and other towns to put in citations for material, and remove material that cannot be backed by citations because it is one person's view of what should be true, rather than what really is true.--Toddy1 (talk) 10:27, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for including me in your post; however, I was only at Lvov to gather some info, not because I have any particular interest in working on the article. Good luck in your endeavors though! Brittle heaven (talk) 11:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Sing girls

Hey Chaosdruid, not sure if you got a chance to see this message from me before MiszaBot archived it, but if not, just wanted to let you know that I started a new Stephen Chow-related article and you're welcome to contribute if interested. Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

14th SS Division

I have just started editing the article so I dont know what new war crimes material has been added there does seem to be a problem with some users adding details of the SS Police regiments that were resp for war crimes and later amalgamated into the division stating that the division was resp for the crimes. The article wasalso locked prior to me starting to edit because of an edit war. Thats what got my attention so I tried to edit as a neutral. Along the way I have added a lot of fact/reliable source tags etc --Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Freiwilligen

I have nominated Freiwilligen, an article that 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/Freiwilligen. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ironholds (talk) 01:08, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to respond on the AfD. One moment. Ironholds (talk) 01:31, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Yup, I'm notified. Ironholds (talk) 01:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi from PeterEastern

Nice to be in contact with you and we seem to share a broadly similar worldview around transport, cycling, peak oil etc etc. I am well aware of the campaign against the NDR and some other campaigns. The local council in Ipswich have some 'ambitious' road schemes of their own including a 'Northern Bypass' and a £90m urban 'Wet Dock Crossing'. I am involved in the consultation on our Local Development Framework and will get to speak against the road at the LDF public inquiry that is coming up.

One thing I didn't mention about our thinking re 'Transport in xxx' articles is create top level headings for 'urban' and 'extra-urban' (or some more suitable name) and the discuss the context and modes for urban travel foot/cycle/car/bus and the plans there. Roads in Norwich will be covered in the urban section, and trunk roads between places in the extra-urban section. In the other section one will travel to other places and discuss options (car/train/coach) and the issues with each mode. Doing this way one should be able to see what is being done to create a modal shift for urban journeys and also longer journeys. If you haven't already do please check out the OpenStreetMap mapping for the Norwich area - there is one guy who has pretty much done all of the current town by himself and if you live in an unmapped part you might like to give him a hand with your local patch! OpenStreetMap is a hugely important campaigning resource in that it a) shows cycle paths/footpaths/barriers/gates etc, b) can be completely up-to-date, and c) is available for reuse whoever you feel (for example adding it to Wikipedia). PeterEastern (talk) 08:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

See my talk page for a couple of responses re editing OpenStreetMap. PeterEastern (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Cyprus edit "Britain"

Well its my understanding that generally Great Britain is for the island itself. United Kingdom is for the entity including GB and Northern Ireland. So if you are talking about the nation state, use United Kingdom. If its just the island itself, then it'd be Great Britain. "Britain" is often used as shorthand for United Kingdom in the world media and such (much like "Russia" was once used for the Soviet Union). So I'd go with United Kingdom in this specific case though if you use Great Britain, its not totally incorrect. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 07:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

There's always the choice of not linking it all. There's a good number of Wikipedians that are against linking country names anyway. So just removing the link wouldn't be a bad thing by any means. And its for the reason you mentioned. So maybe go with that? Honestly, I don't have a preference outside of that it shouldn't link back to the disam page Britain. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 07:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I'm fast. Explains my 10K or so edits every month. :) --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 07:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, that's what I would go with. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 08:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Apologies for butting in on this conversation, however this article explains the terminology of the british isles very well Terminology of the British Isles.PeterEastern (talk) 09:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

edit warring on Northern Cyprus

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Chaosdruid (talk) 13:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Outline of Cyprus

You mentioned you were interested in working on Outline of Cyprus.

Please, edit it to your heart's content.

Keep in mind that this outline shares the same general format as the rest of the country outlines, to make it easy to compare to them. But there is a fair amount of customization to the various country outlines because no two countries are exactly alike.

Have fun!

I look forward to seeing your improvements to the article.

The Transhumanist 00:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
• Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.
• The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 03:34, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Northern Cyprus

Between 1975-1983, the name of Northern Cyprus was Kıbrıs Türk Federe Devleti (= Turkish Federative State of Cyprus)... This is important so I used bold text then they changed it. Böri (talk) 09:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

POV tag removed without addressing issue

Hello. You recently removed POV tags from sections of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society article. You state in the talk that "the others are unecessary, and should have been section pov tags if needed at all". I'd like you to re-read the section you removed the tag from. The section addresses the public opinion of the Sea Shepher Conservation Society and quotes mainly celebrities and TV personalities. You may notice that they are all glaringly positive opinions. You may notice that not one negative opinion is represented. This is clearly a POV issue in the article. (as a quick google survey will show you plenty of negative public opinion to choose from) Since you know about tags and are the one removing them, would you please place the appropriate tag back in that section until the issue is resolved? Thanks. --68.41.80.161 (talk) 00:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, just wanted to drop another note on your page to say thanks for your edits. You've done a bunch of good work at the SSCS article. Please keep it coming. --68.41.80.161 (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Legion infobox

Hey, how's it going? You're not bothering me, I'm here to help when I can. To add an infobox to the article, use Template:Infobox film. You can see very detailed instructions on how to use it on the page's documentation. I'd recommend pasting in the infobox, filling in as many parameters as you can, and make sure you use preview often as the smallest of errors can sometimes throw it off. Look at other film articles for examples if you need help. If you'd like further clarification, please let me know. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries, glad to help. I remember starting my first articles, definitely nothing to brag about. Luckily I avoid all that stress by just working to improve pre-existing articles. In the future, if you want to play around more with the article, you can always start it in your user space and then move it to the main space when you think it's ready. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Ukrainian village names

Hi Chaosdruid. It seems as if you are the only other person in the WikiProject:Ukraine besides myself currently who is at all interested in the subject of developing any kind of a standard for naming articles about villages whose names have multiple occurrences in Ukraine. Is there some way, then, that you and I could figure out a standard we both agree on, and then present it to the WikiProject:Ukraine community to vote on, giving a deadline for when we'll then implement it as "The Standard Naming System" for the whole project? What say you? --Saukkomies ^talk 14:04, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about your conjunctivitis, that must truly be miserable. I do hope that my entreaties haven't seemed to be too pushy... Indeed, I'm not impatient about setting up a naming standard, I just don't want it to be forgotten or shelved for "later". I believe that we are mostly in agreement about things, so it shouldn't take too long to wrap up, once you're back on your feet. I will put together a concisely-worded proposal that presents a couple of options for consideration to choose from, and then post it to the WikiProject:Ukraine's talk page where we can discuss it further along with anyone else who may materialize who might be also interested in giving some feedback or input.

I am glad to hear you enjoyed your visit to upperstate New York in the winter, in spite of it being so cold. If you can imagine how much difference there is between Manchester, England and Niagara Falls, then compare that to the same level of difference between Niagara Falls and where I live in the Upper Peninsula, you'll get an idea of what it's like where I live - a LOT more wilderness and a lot more rugged. It's nice to be where the wild critters outnumber people, I think it feels more "balanced" that way. Anyway, best wishes in getting over your conjunctivitis. --Saukkomies ^talk 12:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Chaosdruid. You have new messages at Marine79's talk page.
Message added 15:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Marine79 (talk) 15:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Stryi River map

So CD, have you seen the new map I made from scratch? What do you think? I don't have access to any program that can create SVG files, but I believe that, given the limited resources available to me, I did a fairly decent job of making it - using (of all things!) Microsoft Paint! LOL!! --Saukkomies ^talk 00:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I dont like to use the talkback but as I was swearing I thought it best...

"Fucking Hell !" That is amazingly detailed - you must have spent hours on it...hence the award !! Chaosdruid (talk) 00:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Heh! Well, thanks so much for the compliment and the barnstar! I'm kind of a map freak, so when I saw that article without a map, well, I just had to do something about it. I sort of got carried away. But yeah, about 20 hours of work is what it took, over about three days. --Saukkomies ^talk 01:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I can't resist. I actually drew the route of the Stryi River in by hand. I used a base map that had some of the coordinates in it, as well as the Dniester River route. Then I went to GoogleEarth and plotted out the grid for the region. I then transfered the coordinates hex-by-hex from the GoogleEarth grid to a temporary grid I'd made on the map (which I later erased). Then, using each grid hex, and having both windows open (the editor for the map was on top of GoogleEarth), I drew in the route mile-by-mile all the way from the source of the Stryi to its confluence with the Dniester.

I debated about whether to add the borders of the different raions, but decided it would make the map too cluttered with all those lines. Still, I wanted there to be some reference to the raions that were on the map, so I came up with the idea of including the names of all of the raion's administrative cities, and locating them on the map. To make it prettier than simply putting dots where the cities were, I decided to paste copies of the raions' various coats-of-arms in lieu of dots, to indicate where the cities were located. I had to use GoogleEarth again to locate the precise spots where these cities would be. After copying and pasting the coats-of-arms into the Paint editor, I then had to go into 800x edit mode to clean the images up, pixel-by-pixel. This required a bit of skill, since the images were so incredibly small that a lot had to be insinuated in the final product of these micro-thumbnail images.

Finally, I decided to add the Lviv Oblast's coat-of-arms just for good measure - again, going into 800x edit mode to clean it up. Oh, and of course, a bunch of other stuff. :) In case anyone reading on wants to see this, I've included it here. --Saukkomies ^talk 02:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

So, have you ever noticed that the heraldic lion is facing different directions, depending on the context? Sometimes the lion in the coat-of-arms is facing west, and sometimes it's facing east. This makes a big difference. When it is facing east, it is guarding against Russian/Slavic aggresssion/settlement. And when it is facing west, it is guarding against German/Scandinavian aggression/settlement. A case in point is when Finland was captured an absumed by the Russian Empire. Before this time, Finland's emblem was a lion with a raised sword, facing east (to the right). This represented the fact that Finland was part of Sweden. Then, after Finland was conquered by Russia, the emblem was reversed, and the lion (with raised sword) was turned around to face west - against Sweden! I believe the same sort of symbology was used in the region of Ukraine/Poland... --Saukkomies ^talk 01:21, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Naming standard guide created

CD, I just wrote up a detailed step-by-step guide on how to go through the process of naming articles about Ukrainian geographical locations. I'd love if you could look at it and give me your thoughts. It's located here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ukraine/Subdivisions#Villages, Towns, Cities. --Saukkomies ^talk 21:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Operation Apostle

Glad I can help as much as I can! I'd love to work on Apostle, but although there's a fair bit on Google Books, it's rather patchy; pages missing, chapters only half-complete, and there doesn't seem to be a complete work in English on it. It is a tempting subject, however, as it's quite far off the beaten track - and those are my favourite articles! Skinny87 (talk) 22:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Hiroshi Takeyasu

Easy tiger, I reverted all the BLPs that are in my namespace to the state they were in before the mass deletions started occurring. I have not even begun to address them yet. I wasn't aware that it was both improved and then deleted anyways. I see the version in history that contains your references and will remember to take a look at them. Of course you're always free to simply make your own user copy and start working from there, if you put something out there before I do I'll just merge my additions with yours.  æronphonehome  18:44, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

It's okay, I can understand your frustration over this debacle. That's why I just let them go cause I knew I'd be pulling hair if I tried to give a damn at the time. Thank God for decent people like Lar, who's putting all the lost articles into my user space so those of us who know about this kind of thing can take a serious look at them for what they could be rather than what they are at the moment. All those users who go off like dogs in heat deleting anything they can get away with really set the Wikipedia project back. Wikipedia isn't here to stroke egos or entertain someone's fantasy that it should conform to what they believe it should be. "Sum of all human knowledge" - No room for mis-interpretation there.  æronphonehome  23:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Cypro-Minoan script

There was a chronological gap between the disappearance of the Cypro-Minoan script and the first inscriptions in the Cypriot syllabary (perhaps the only writing material used at that time was perishable, presumably papyrus or something like that). Both Ugarit and the Cypro-Minoan script disappeared together with the Bronze age collapse, around 1180-1170s BC.
You may have noticed from the history of my edits that I am interested in European and Mediterranean prehistory and protohistory. I would be glad to be helpful if you are interested in the same problems. --Dmitri Lytov (talk) 19:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/March 2010

You name has been added to the page as a coordinator candidate, but the nomination seems to have been added by a third party. Standing policy on this point is that all noms should be self noms, consequently would you please indicate whether you accept this nomination or not, and if so, please add your own statement to the section. If you decline the nom, please remove your name from the section. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Although it is mentioned very briefly in the instructions for nominating on the page that nominations MUST be made directly by the candidate, it is not completely conclusively stated to someone unfamiliar with the "standing policy" (whatever that means) that a third party cannot nominate someone else - indeed, it does not state that. Further, having my nomination more-or-less removed by the only other nominee in this way (without attempting to contact me for any explanation) strikes me as being a bit disengenius and self-serving. I would strongly suggest that the nomination instructions on that page be changed to make sure that others do not end up going through a similar negative experience in putting forward the name of someone they believe would do a good job in this capacity, which ought to be something that is encouraged rather than otherwise... --Saukkomies ^talk 22:15, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Invasion of Cyprus

I removed them because I created a new category, to which all these a re parent categories. There is no need to list the article in them, if the category dedicated to the subject is already listed there. Constantine ✍ 20:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure, if you feel that it makes the article easier to find, go ahead. Categories are supposed to do just that, after all :) Constantine ✍ 20:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Chaosdruid. You have new messages at Connormah's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Connormah (talk | contribs) 05:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)

The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:05, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Tikal site map

Hi Chaosdruid. I've managed to grab 5 minutes on a scanner, not enough time to do a proper job but I've got verious bits I can email you if you switch on your email temporarily. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 16:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've sent you a bunch of scans. I've had problems with stuff bouncing back 'cause of the file size but hopefully most of it got through. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Coordinator elections have opened!

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Spelling

Just as a general note, WP policy is that when it comes to US/UK spelling differences, the spelling style first used in the article should prevail, except in the case of US or UK topics. Poitiers is not a UK topic. I know there's been a bit of an attempt by UK editors to assert dominion over all topics relating to Europe, but this is not supported by policy, mate! 174.111.116.162 (talk) 08:50, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Neither is it american - it is french

And in French the word centre is spelt "centre"

you should try and get your facts right - mate

Chaosdruid (talk) 22:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Having spent much of my early life in France, I'm aware of this, but this isn't the French-language version of Wikipedia, so there's little need or reason to use a French form of a word. For topics not directly relating to the US or UK, the original spelling used in an article should be preserved, not changed to reflect a preferred national variety. I have to be honest - I doubt you go around changing other articles on French topics so that English-language words are re-spelled in a similar and closely-related French form..."material" to "matériel", for example. I think that this change occurred primarily because you have a stated preference for one national variety over the other, as per your userpage. I didn't mean to be unfriendly, and I'm not a Yank spelling warrior (I'm a dual citizen who has spent much of his life in the UK), and I think you do good work on this project (I actually ran into your enlightening comments on the East Anglia talkpage before I ran into the spelling change), but I disagree with the change you made in that article. 174.111.116.162 (talk) 17:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

My userpage supports the english english language - is that what you are referring to ? I do object to pigeon english, franglais, Jamaican english, gangster, cockney, any term that divides north from south and many more.

I did not change the page because of any thoughts against the US usage or spelling. There are 4 places where the word is used and there are half centre and half center

I consulted the MOS as I am well aware of the problems with people becoming defensive of changes where it may appear to be merely US to UK.

I considered the examples in the section "Strong national ties to a topic". I realise there is no "French English" lol, but as the English spelling is actually the same as the french then it seems reasonable to me to use that spelling and convert them to a more "French English" spelling

THe example given says "Institutions of the European Union (British or Irish English)" and as France is part of the European Union, and the word correctly spelt in French is the same as the English spelling I changed it. I was going to do the same to the others.

It seems absurd that a French person, person of French descent, Canadian (part Quebequois) or other of French descent/influence/speaker may be suprised to find it spelt the non-French way when reading this or any other article about France or French subjects.

As you can see this change was not because of a small minded decision as you were perhaps misled into thinking

Chaosdruid (talk) 00:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Just checking in...

So, CD, I have not abandoned the Ukrainian projects. I did get sidetracked for a while with the squirrel people, but they finally managed to drive me nuts (pun intended) enough to throw in the towel and return back to projects I'm more interested in (and which I don't have to put up with nutcases). So I've returned to my Promethean task of creating a highly accurate working map of Ukraine and its oblasts, with major water stuff included. This has taken up a huge amount of time already, and probably won't be done for another month or two - I've discussed it a little in the UkraineProject page. So although it may appear that I've vanished off of the horizon, never to be seen again, I actually am incredibly busy working on Wikipedia each and every day, creating this map. Eventually my efforts will pan out, I hope, since it will be by far the best map I've ever created. At any rate, just thought I'd let you know what I'm up to - not that you've probably wondered about that, but I'm still around if you need me for anything. Oh, and we got through with "Jericho", and are now almost through watching "Prison Break". LOL!! --Saukkomies ^talk 05:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Humming along with the Ukraine map. I have to say, if you really want to get to know a country - as far as its layout - create a detailed map of it! It's amazing how much about Ukraine I'm learning just from drawing a map of its borders and waterways. --Saukkomies ^talk 06:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Styri River

Hello, I noticed you left a comment about me removing the rivers of europe category. The reason I did this is because there was a more specific category that it could go in and the move appeared to comply with the guidelines set forth in WP:Categorization, considering all the other rivers were in more specific subcategories. Pepper543210 (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Waco deletions

Hello, Sometimes I have been brazen in editing; other times, I prefer to discuss changes in Talk before editing. I read WP:Consensus policy as edit with summary in comment, then if there is a conflict, take it to Talk; however, some articles are so radioactive, I feel better to discuss changes in Talk to avoid conflict in the first place. Naaman Brown (talk) 10:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:27, 5 June 2010 (UTC)