User talk:Curly Turkey/Archive/2013

Archives
2006 2011 2012 2013 2014

Laura Secord

I've begun the GA review at Talk:Laura Secord/GA1. It's excellent work, with only some small issues requiring your attention. Thanks! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments on my Secord edits. C7286D (talk) 13:24, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bringing Laura Secord to Good Article status. -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, thanks a lot! CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 01:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Another GA review

Hi Curly, I just started a GA review of Goodman Beaver without noticing this one was you (you've got quite the range of interests!). Hope you don't mind getting two back-to-back reviews from me; if you'd like a fresher set of eyes, I won't be the least offended to hand it over to another reviewer. In the meantime, though, I've got a few minor action points for your attention at the review page. Enjoy the day! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:56, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

The Wikipedia Store was all out of Laura Secord chocolates, so enjoy some baklava instead. Thanks for your contributions to another Good Article. Khazar2 (talk) 15:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Layout/formatting

On this edit you undid some layout changes I made saying that it limits accessibility. The changes I made were in keeping with the vast majority of the articles that I have seen. I am curious to know what effect it has on accessibility and why the format I use is in common use. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 03:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Toccata quarta really doesn't like me

He deleted one of my comments. CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 13:43, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

There is now a discussion about your behaviour on WP:ANI. The section is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive780#Discussion(s) at Talk:Harry Partch. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I believe this was the last edit before it was demolished. Apparently nobody bought Toccata's story. CüRlyTüRkey^Talk_Contribs 01:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Maus volume 2 page 50 panels 3-4.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Maus volume 2 page 50 panels 3-4.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Maus page 103 panel 2 HITLER DID IT.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Maus page 103 panel 2 HITLER DID IT.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Art Spiegelman - Maus (1972) page 1 panel 3.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Art Spiegelman - Maus (1972) page 1 panel 3.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Sotsugyō (Yuki Saito song)

Did you look at the edit history for this page? JoshuSasori (talk) 06:37, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I did move it and it was reverted back (check the history), so I assumed that made it controversial, thus the move request. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 06:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Please stop moving this article all over the place. It makes it extremely difficult to do anything when the title keeps changing (especially in the middle of an edit). I've moved it back to Sotsugyō (Yuki Saito song) as Zone has a song with the exact same title. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

(ec) The fact that someone's moved it before is not evidence that the move is "controversial". If the mover doesn't provide an adequate reason for a non-standard move like this, then there's no reason not to move it back. The onus is on the editor of the non-standard move to gain consensus that it should be moved. Most likely the editor who moved it wasn't familiar with WP:SONGS, and now that it's been pointed out, will be very unlikely to make the move again. Anyways, there are two of us backing up the accepted standard, so the other editor better have a good explanation if they try to move it again. Curly Turkey (gobble) 07:08, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

It is not uneccessary when I'm going to be creating the Sotsugyō (Zone song) article in the next few days. Putting the Sotsugyō (Yuki Saito song) article at the current title makes it so it doesn't have to be moved again once the other one is created. Rather than running around like a bull in a china shop and moving articles all over the place, perhaps it would be better to ask why an article was placed where it was, especially when the editor in question has been editing for many, many years now. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:20, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

(ec) Or, you could just wait to move it back again. What's the screaming rush? "Bull in a china shop"? ちょこっと大げさじゃない？ Curly Turkey (gobble) 07:29, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

You may also be interested in perusing ja:卒業 (曖昧さ回避)#楽曲 to see just how many different songs there are with this title. I may even translate some of them into English so they will be here, too. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Or, I could, like, not. Nobody questioned whther or not there were a lot of songs with the same title. It's totally irrelevant. What's relvant is what requires disambiguation at this wiki. As of now, that article does not. As someone who "has been editing for many, many years now" (and feels the need to bleat about it), I'm surprised this is news to you. Curly Turkey (gobble) 07:29, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

As I already stated, it was placed at the current title because I didn't want to have to rename it in a few days when I get the other article created. It creates less work (which has now turned into all kinds of extra work because you can't seem to grasp that). Please leave the article where it is so this nonsense can stop. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Maus volume I cover.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Maus volume I cover.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you see these from Japan?

Moxy (talk) 02:55, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

• Pierre Berton (May 18, 2011). Flames Across the Border: 1813-1814. Random House Digital, Inc. p. 63. ISBN 978-0-385-67359-4.
• Same passage at Berton's book 1812 Pierre Berton (November 1, 2011). Pierre Berton's War of 1812. Random House Digital, Inc. p. 593. ISBN 978-0-385-67650-2.

Thank you for the wikilove :-) - yes I can see the pages as linked above - Moxy (talk) 03:45, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

can you see this copy?.. Moxy (talk) 03:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit

I just started editing Herriman as per your request. Within moments you reverted me and screwed up my next edit. If you really want help on your article, I'd suggest you rethink your approach. This isn't how to get it. Instead, if you object to something that another editor is doing, get in touch with them and work it out. Your style is not mine, and I don't engage in edit wars, so I'll get out of your way. Cheers. Lfstevens (talk) 01:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The edit in question that I reverted. Curly Turkey (gobble) 04:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Jesus Christ. Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Then deletes the whole shebang. I can't wrap my head around the mentality of people who do this. Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Curly Turkey. You have new messages at Hazard-SJ's talk page.
Message added 21:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Hazard-SJ  ✈  21:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

I like pecan butter tarts so thanks! and I'm glad you liked the 1812 article. (It's really more about Wikipedia than the war). We also share an interest in comics! Rjensen (talk) 15:56, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

George Herriman

Hi Curley Turkey, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested for the above article which you requested at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, or to correct or revert my changes if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 18:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm considering removing 'Book collections' and most of the third paragraph of 'New York again, and Krazy Kat (1910–1922)' leaving a brief summary per WP:COATRACK (off-topic) as they're about the characters' stories rather that Herriman himself. Do you think they could go into Krazy Kat or another article about his characters? Can you suggest other options? There might be other text in the article that may similarly need excising but I haven't read it all yet. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 07:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for taking on this copyedit!

Most of the third paragraph? I guess it could use compression.

Is the "Book collections" really so overdone? As you can see from Krazy Kat#Reprints and compilations, it only covers the more prominent collections (plus non-KK collections). Given how prominent Herriman is in comics criticism, I think it's pertinent to point out how much material remains out of print, and what a struggle it was to get what there is into print. Curly Turkey 08:00, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking ahead about the organisation of the text. I wouldn't call 'Book collections' overdone, though it and the paragraph I mentioned seem a little off-topic for the article.Given that Krazy Kat is so comprehensive in its coverage, a summary here would be fine I think. I do think it's important to cover what happened to the material and characters after his death. To be honest I'm unsure of what to do with this material, so I'll leave it in place for now. Perhaps text about Herriman's unpublished/out-of-print material could be incorporated into 'Critical reception and legacy', and the book collections noted in 'List of comic strips'. Anyway, I'm happy to do a straight copy-edit of the prose and leave the organisation up to you. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I've done some cutting up on my own. Could you let me know if it works? Curly Turkey 00:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the major cut is an improvement, it keeps the article on-topic and works well. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm declaring the copy-edit done as I don't think there's anything else for me to do now. It's an interesting article which i've enjoyed working on, and I wish you well with your planned FA nomination, though I suggest seeking a Peer Review before nominating. Please feel free to contact me about any issues arising from the copy-edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Jungle Book

Hi, I've gone over the new images you've added to Harvey Kurtzman's Jungle Book and commented upon them at the GAN. The fair use issues are the last thing to sort out before the article can be passed. Thanks for your hard work so far. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Buz Sawyer

Since I'm the editor of the Buz Sawyer books for Fantagraphics, I don't think I'm objective enough to make the change myself. Rick Norwood (talk) 23:35, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Comics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lowbrow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata and Interwiki links

You are receiving this as you have recently deleted an interwiki link on a page that is not currently on Wikidata.

Please either make sure ALL links are on Wikidata before removing them OR leave the removal of interwiki links to bots.

·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 00:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Tintin in the Land of the Soviets

Hello there! By all means make the changes that you suggest; I don't have the time to do it myself right now (the real-life work piles up...). Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:01, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

The Adventures of Tintin

Hello Curly Turkey, thanks for watching and editing the article The Adventures of Tintin. I have watched it for years, sometime after it because a Featured Article, and I enjoy working with other editors who are interested in the article's success. May we discuss a few of your recent edits? My intention is to keep the article improved and I have no wish to put forth any personal egotism or agenda.

Let us consider linking to the "Franco-Belgian comics" article, an important comic movement mostly begun by Hergé. If so, perhaps we should actually mention the phrase "Franco-Belgian comics" as well as link to it, as opposed to what the article was doing in the past. What are your thoughts?

The redirect "comic album" to the "Formats" section of that article is a pretty good explanation of what a comic album is, isn't it? Shouldn't we keep that link? The fact that it is a redirect is not a reason to not use it, right?

We can use the term "cartoonist" if you feel strongly we should (the article had been avoiding that term, and I personally don't think it fits.). If so, shouldn't we probably link to the "cartoonist" article?

The sentence "Hergé himself features in several of the comics as a background character, as do his assistants in some instances." has been there for many years, since before I started watching it, and I am trying to find out if it has been there since the article became FA. If we are going to use it, it probably should contain a reference. I believe it refers to a true statement; Hergé did indeed feature himself and some of the other artists, and it is an interesting fact for our readers. What do you think?

The reason why we "correct" the template when mentioning "ligne claire" is not because of italicization but because without doing so, the text reads: "Hergé's French: ligne claire style" instead of "Hergé's ligne claire style". We make similar usage elsewhere in the article. The former seems to be what we want, isn't it?

In a section that explains Hergé's legacy, I personally believe the word "proven" is justified, as Hergé legacy truly has proven influential. We don't have to water it down to the bland word "been" do we really?

The reason we have "Book 10 was the first to be originally published in colour" instead of "The first to be originally published in colour" is the table shows that phrase to be associated with, not only book 10, but books 10 to 15. As only Book 10 was originally published in colour, we are saying so. Isn't that all right? (Note: The table was only recently added. For years there was only a list.)

The word "engaging" is referenced, apparently the work cited states that Hergé's work is engaging (although I don't have that reference book), so isn't it appropriate to keep the word then? This has been in the article for many years, since before I started watching it, and I am trying to find out if it has been there since the article became FA. Can't we keep it?

Thanks for your feedback! Cheers. —Prhartcom (talk) 16:50, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response on my page. It makes me sad to learn that the article would not pass FA today. I believe you if you say so. Learning that makes me want to get it back to the status it deserves. Maybe with your help the two of us and other editors can strive to do so (although this article has not seen many decent editors lately). On some specifics:

1. Yes let's actually mention and link to the "Franco-Belgian comics" article in a context that's obvious to the reader, we are both saying the same thing here.

2. I see what you mean about keeping the lead from being overburdened with minutia and keeping it a summary of what is said further in.

3. I'll look through reference books for proof of "Hergé himself features in several of the comics as a background character, as do his assistants in some instances" and put it back into the body of the article at that point, until then we'll leave it out.

4. I didn't know "proven" is weaselly; I enjoy looking for weasel words in articles but this surprises me. I suppose I reluctantly see what you mean. Still, I'm in favor of bold writing over bland writing while keeping NPOV.

5. I appreciate you admitting when you're wrong and apologizing. Hey, no problem.

I watch all the Tintin articles, and lately I've been very big on consistency across them. For example, I recently ensured the opening sentence of all the articles of each type (i.e. each character article, each book article) open the same way. Can you please help me keep that consistency?

Again, thanks for your expertise. Cheers. —Prhartcom (talk) 20:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Photo consensus discussion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on the matter discussed at the bottom of this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of TestMod for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article TestMod is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TestMod until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. smileguy91^talk 02:45, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Smileguy91 actually hit the wrong notice, s/he nominated TestMod for G1. I deleted it under G2 as a test page but did you intend to do that? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:55, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Hi Curly Turkey-- Thanks for fixing the problem at Faulkner. My example that I had posted was just that - an example. I don't now remember what the article was, but over a year ago I removed the same sort of uncited OR stuff from a different writer's article, and was reverted; so I haven't bothered with it since. I've never really looked through the various WP policies and procedures for infoboxes, but now in a very quick glance just through the project itself, nothing caught my eye about citations, one way or the other. One particular editor, however, did catch my eye as being active in the project, and from having seen his posts and general attitude in other discussions, I want nothing to do with it.
I haven't seen your signature around until this latest discussion on JK's page, but chances are that you have no real interest in infoboxes either. If by chance you might agree that uncited "influences/influenced" garbage ought to be generally deprecated across Wikipedia, then perhaps you may know of someone willing to make some noise about it with the infobox project. My own familiarity with serious editors (which I am not - I'm really just a reader) is very limited. My thinking is that in infoboxes bald biographical facts are fine as is, but that even "known for", or variations of that phrase, need to be cited within the infobox because that is nearly always opinion. (That is, "known for" popularly by the public, or by critics and practitioners of the art? These are frequently very different.) Milkunderwood (talk) 00:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reasoned response. I guess my thing is that I wouldn't so much mind having fields like those as long as they are cited in the infobox itself. But you see the problem - apparently you, JK and Gerda each have different ideas of what info would be appropriate even for someone like Partch; and the three of you are knowledgeable, not passers-by. Faulkner's were collapsed; but I think a number of others are not. And in any case, I don't recall ever seeing any cites in infoboxes at all, whether or not collapsed; but then I've never gone rummaging looking for examples - only the people I needed to look up for one reason or another. And my more general question is that it seems the WP infobox guidance and rules appear not to address the problem at all, unless my quick glance there happened to miss it. Milkunderwood (talk) 18:09, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I guess the question is whether the infobox info is discussed per se in the article, as opposed to being available only in a cited source, but not otherwise mentioned in the article. Milkunderwood (talk) 21:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I have to admit I still haven't tried to wade through those guidelines. If you have, does this seem to be stated clearly in an obvious place? My impression is that a number of articles have this problem, but I haven't been keeping track of them at all. Milkunderwood (talk) 21:46, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

(watching) My understanding is that ideally - like a lead - the infobox should only contain information that appears cited in the article, and then doesn't need a ref. - I am learning, - one thing I came to understand is that "known for" and "influenced" are frowned upon, as not factual, "known for" of course lacking something like "by whom". - Do you know a better term? - Infoboxes are not given, we make them, including the keywords, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:06, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks, Gerda. As I mentioned above,

• even "known for", or variations of that phrase, need to be cited within the infobox because that is nearly always opinion. (That is, "known for" popularly by the public, or by critics and practitioners of the art? These are frequently very different.)

But if there's adequate discussion in the article, then a cite in the infobox should not be necessary. Milkunderwood (talk) 23:17, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I try to get away from "known for" because of "by whom". What would we say for Wagner's "Leitmotiv"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:23, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Anyway, I agree that infoboxes should ideally not have refs within them, because of the clutter; all that info should be clearly and easily findable within the article. [Gotta run - RL calling] Milkunderwood (talk) 23:25, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think "by whom" is a problem at all. "Known for" should only be used when it would be a disservice not to use it. In the cases of Ralph Ellison, George Herriman, Marcel Proust, and Charles M. Schulz, a strong case could be made for using the field. In most cases, it should be avoided, like the "signature" field. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:31, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Congrats!

Very happy to see Laura Secord up to Featured Article status, even if she is a chocolate-y traitor to my country. -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:58, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:00, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hi Curly Turkey, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! INeverCry 22:11, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

empty section in the Robert Crumb article?

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to the article on Robert Crumb... However, i did notice that you at one point added a (mainly empty) section on "Style", that includes only a reference, but no statement to NEED referencing. Could you please fix this issue, or at least add some HTML comment that explains what is going on? TY. -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 12:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Crumb, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Robert Williams and Mr. Natural (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:44, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For your article improvements, particularly at Maus, and for your spirit of continuing refinement. MarchOrDie (talk) 00:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Wordless novels

Hi there. Small issue at the nom which you need to fix. Otherwise looks good. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:31, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Wordless novel

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Very cool article! AbstractIllusions (talk) 14:58, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, thank you very much! Curly Turkey (gobble) 02:57, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Watchmen

That's a great tool — I appreciate your showing it to me. I should learn to use it. In general I'd say you're right, and if I jumped the gun, it was only because he'd made the accusation against one or somehow two other editors here. I did avoid using the term at Talk:Watchmen — which I hope you'll go to, to see the extent of that editor's reversions, which extended to reinstalling dead links! (LOL!) I do try to be careful about what I say — we're old colleagues, so you know — but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate someone letting me know when I might have stepped too far. So, thank you for that. At least my having kept it off the talk page is something. With regards, Tenebrae (talk) 21:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Neutral notice

A Request for Comment has been called at Talk:Watchmen. As a registered editor who has edited that page over the past year, you may wish to comment. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:17, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

"crossed a line"

Curly Turkey, I'm about to go to sleep (it's 4 am here in India :)), and I do wish you would redact the above comment. As I've tried to explain, Tenebrae made four kinds of edits, sans any discussion: a) adding a PH section, b) adding ref templates, c) replacing dead links and d) removing "seminal". You seem to agree with me that a) wasn't a necessary addition. b) is clearly disallowed by an editing guideline. d) you may agree with Tenebrae, but I hope you can see (with the dictionary definition, other reliable sources and the text in the article supporting it) that it isn't an altogether absurd claim. As for c) I immediately agreed they were necessary to fix, and offered to restore them myself once Tenebrae and I reached a consensus on the rest.

Don't you think I was thus well within my rights to edits all his edits and ask for a discussion first (as Wikipedia:OWN#Featured_articles specifically allows)? Or do you still think I have crossed the line?—indopug (talk) 22:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

sigh. I guess it's clear that you're 100% with Tenebrae on this; the fact that you agree with his edits is all that seems to matter.

this is clearly true as you don't even feel that the obviously out of place, redundant and abrupt PH section he added to the beginning of the article should be removed immediately. (If there indeed is more info abt W's contemporary reception, a new section can easily be started by moving the small reception out of P&R. The remaining Publication section is the PH section you want; there's no more need to move stuff from other parts of the article).—indopug (talk) 01:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough.—indopug (talk) 03:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for calling out the increasingly personal comments made against my character ("what kind of a person does that?") on the RfC. —indopug (talk) 00:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Jungle Book

Always good to collaborate with you, CT. I have to say, overall that is one well-written article. I recently discovered the existence of this book, and have managed to get hold of the original 1959 paperback (as well as the later Kitchen Sink version that I could actually, y'know, read!).

I hear what you're saying, though I disagree that Sabre's influence was minuscule — while Contract with God got mainstream press, I was around at the time that both came out, and Sabre was an incredible breakthrough. It's hard to imagine now, but everyone told Dean Mullaney no one would buy "a five-dollar comic book" (I thnk comics were 25 or 30 cents at the time), and Sabre, being the first such creation sold in the still-new retail venue of direct-sales comic-book stores, was the first exposure virtually anyone in comics had to the form. (1971's Blackmark was only known to a few cognoscenti by then).

I completely see how reasonable minds can differ, though. The more I look at that sentence, in fact, the more I'm unsure it belongs there at all. It seems a tangential point that graphic novels became popularized after 1978: The fact has no bearing on Jungle Book itself, and it's not something mentioned at Bloodstar, It Rhymes with Lust, Sabre (graphic novel) or Blackmark, for instance. I'm not sure why the fact is any more pertinent to Jungle Book than to the others. What would you think about keeping the focus on Jungle Book itself and just ending the paragraph at "however"? That seems like it might be clearer and more tightly about Kurtzman's work. What do you think? --Tenebrae (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm can feel that we're working toward some middle ground. I'd have to say that while Eisner got more press for Contract, even to the point that people erroneously credited him with coining the term, which he graciously denied, Sabre was actually followed by the entire comic-book graphic novel industry. Neither Marvel nor DC were doing anything like it. When they saw Eclipse prove the concept would work in comic-book stores, and that comics fans would spend that kind of money (both Contract and The Silver Surfer were sold through book stores, where comics companies normally could not place product), it opened the floodgates to graphic novels in comics shops. Without Sabre and its follow-ups, there might have been similar graphic novels in bookstores, but who knows how long it would have been before Marvel and DC would pursue the format in the comics direct market.

But this is my OR analysis, and while I'm sure there are citations available from comic historians about Sabre's place, it's actually a tangential point. I do see that the Contract analogy is cited, but it's from a book co-written by Denis Kitchen, who is one of Kurtzman's champions and who republished Jungle Book. I'd hesitate to call him a disinterested source. Not for any mendacious reason but simply because he loves Kurtzman, it's in his interest to make it seem as if there's a direct line from Jungle Book to Contract and that nothing else was important in the development and acceptance of the graphic novel. That's just not accurate — and look who I'm telling. You know all this stuff as least as well as I and anybody else in WikiProject Comics. Actually, you know it way better than most, which is one reason I enjoy collaborating with you.

I agree with you the comparison provides context to Jungle Book — but the comparison would provide context to any of the other early, proto-graphic novels. So singling out Jungle Book provides a false context for graphic novels overall. Contract is clearly a milestone, but the way the passage is written suggests that it was the only milestone. I dunno.

I'm not averse to removing the Sabre mention. Or we could find a cite for its "milestone-ness" as well. (I'm tired, long day, can't come up with the right word!)

But let me ask: What do you think about keeping the sentence, but making it simpler: "Graphic novels did not start to become widespread until 1978." That still provides context for Jungle Book without getting into tangential issues of particular milestones' relative importance. Does that seem like a fair, accurate compromise? --Tenebrae (talk) 22:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

By the way, I swear I didn't realize it was you who wrote the bulk of the article until after I'd made some edits. If I had, I never would have made the humorously snarky edit summary about "overwrite much." Sometimes my desire to be funny gets the better of me. I really meant it when I said what a well-written, well-researched, scholarly sounding article this was. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

You're very gracious — I like to think we all get that way as we get older; my God, I've been doing this eight years come June! I'm a writer-editor for a living, so I really shouldn't even make jokes in my edit summaries about writing — that fact that so much of WikiProject Comics is as well-written and well-researched as it is by, largely, non-professionals is something in which we all can take great pride. I mean, have you seen, say, the Superman and Batman articles? They were pretty much that way already when I got to Wikipedia. The scholarly tone of this article is equally impressive. If you ever have the urge to say — and I know anonymity is important here — I'm curious to know if you're, say, a professor or a grad student or some such. Our colleague Doczilla is, if I remember correctly, a psychology prof at a university.

"Late 20th century" is fine with me, although I certainly agree with you that 1978 was the watershed year, and I'm sure there are additional cites besides Kitchen's we can use if we need. I'd advocate for 1978 (we already see the second Blackmark book, adapted into magazine form, specifically called a graphic novel the very next year), but I'll go with either phrasing you choose.

I have a feeling you don't live in New York — you're English? — but if you're over this way on vacation or anything, there's a Kurtzman exhibit currently at the Society of Illustrators with original art from Jungle Book, the unpublished Christmas Carol, Mad and much else. Judging from your work here, I know you'd enjoy it. Seeing his line work up close and in person — it's a little overwhelming how talented he was. --Tenebrae (talk) 13:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, that's nice of you to say. Likewise. And honestly, I've found Triiiple Threat, BOZ, J Greb, Fandraltastic, Darkwarriorblake, Nightscream and many other WPC regulars to be extremely collegial, pleasant and genuinely willing, like yourself and hopefully myself, to work toward some mutually workable middle ground.

Honestly, I'm OK with just "1978" since graphic novel explains it in detail, but I'll tell you what: I'll look for cites that establish Sabre's significance in its time — I hate to say how old I am, but I was in college when it came out and trust me, it was groundbreaking. Since contemporaneous citations mostly won't be online, it might take me a couple weeks, but I'll nose around. I've still got fanzines from that era.

Holy cow, Japan! That's very, very cool, being a Westerner living and teaching there. You're going to have exotic stories for your kids someday! --22:49, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Requesting your opinion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on a photo in this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Tintin in the Land of the Soviets

Hello there Curly Turkey; apologies if I offended you in any way, for that was certainly not my intention. Having been responsible for bringing this article up to GA, I admit to being a little protective of it – I am very happy with your recent edits to the page, but it is those of Prhartcom that concern me, and they are the only ones that I reverted. Without consensus, this user decided to completely reorder the introductory paragraphs, something that actually reduced the quality (in my opinion); I accept however that this was done in good faith, and hold no malice to that user. As you should be aware, they moved the plot synopsis to the first paragraph, and the information about publication and purpose to the second; this seems to contravene the "ethos" of Wikipedia, and may well be contrary to policy too (but I don't have time right now to rummage through policy articles). I would ask you that you revert your own revert on this issue, leaving the introduction as it was when you first finished with it, lest we end up with an edit war or something awful like that. All the best, and once again thanks for the good work that you've been doing on the page, Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey there, and thanks for getting back to me. Looking at the FA literature and theatre list (some of which seriously require demotion in my opinion; if The Adventures of Tintin went to GA review today, I doubt it would pass, let alone an FA review), it seems that a great number of them place information regarding publication and purpose before that of plot synopsis. My use of the word "ethos" was probably missplaced here, but what I meant to convey was that being an encyclopaedia, the immediate focus should be on the facts of publication, authorship and context rather than synopsis. Otherwise this ends up reading a little like an "in-universe" fan site. I was wrong to undo the technical changes, and am happy to take the blame on that one, but my primary concern is with the text in the introductory paragraphs. I really disagree that we should be tailoring this article to what might be most interesting for an English-language readership; instead we should be placing the most important and significant facts first. I'm happy to discuss this issue further on the article's talk page, in the hopethat we can come to a happy agreement. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:47, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Cheers again Curly Turkey; hope all is well. I'm so glad we have some good editors who want the article to be of the highest quality. I am amused at the revert of Midnightblueowl and confess I was pleased at your undo of that revert—and confess I especially enjoyed your edit summary. A humorous story: I remember a few years ago improving an unrelated article and one day noticing a previous editor of that article, who had disappeared for several months, had reappeared and decided to revert about a hundred improvements back to the last edit he had made. Ah, that wacky Wikipedia community. Cheers. —Prhartcom (talk) 14:16, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Disinfoboxes

Hi. I've undone this edit of yours. I think the {{essay}} tag is sufficient to indicate that this view does not apply to everyone. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:03, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Your FAC review of Duino Elegies

You had commented on the FAC for Duino Elegies--found here Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Duino Elegies/archive1--and offered several suggestions for improvements. Would you now be able to offer the article your support?--ColonelHenry (talk) 14:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

FYI

• Talk:How a Mosquito Operates/GA1.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Winsor McCay

Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for How a Mosquito Operates

Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Sinking of the Lusitania

Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Bongo Comics logo.jpeg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• File:Bongo Comics logo.jpeg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 08:44, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The End of the Road, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rodopi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

George Herriman

Congrats on getting this promoted to FA! I'm always impressed by your prolific contributions. -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, thank you, sir, for the kind words! Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

A co-operative barnstar for you!

		The Half Barnstar
		For co-operating with myself and User:Prhartcom over at Tintin in the Land of the Soviets. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:59, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reciprocating barnstar! Hopefully we can continue to work towards FA status for the article! Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

The Biologic Show

Hello, I wanted to apologize for my mistake regarding the external link in the Biologic Show article. I had no intention of violating anyone's copyright. The files in question were in the Internet Archive collection and were labeled with a Creative Commons license, and for those reasons I naïvely assumed that their release was authorized. I have removed an identical link to the files from the Al Columbia article. InnocuousPseudonym (talk) 21:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate - FA nomination

• Freedom for the Thought That We Hate

Notifying you because you performed the GA Review for this article.

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate is currently a candidate for consideration of Featured Article quality status. The discussion page is at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Freedom for the Thought That We Hate/archive1.

Thank you for your time, — Cirt (talk) 04:41, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Gertie the Dinosaur

I've begun the review for Gertie the Dinosaur; it looks like it only needs a few tweaks to be ready to go. Take a look and let me know your thoughts. And thanks for writing such an excellent article, this was a treat to review. -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:16, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring Gertie the Dinosaur to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:51, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Idea (book)

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for The Idea (1932 film)

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

FYI, mentioned you in discussion

FYI, I've mentioned you in discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Freedom for the Thought That We Hate/archive1 due to your recent formatting and copyediting to the article. — Cirt (talk) 04:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

What a whiny bitch

[1]

Do not contact me again. If you chose to be bitter, I would rather you not waste my time by contacting me. You misread my comments on what I described as "subjective" and imputed them as if they were an insult against your dignity when they were not meant as such. If I disagree, I state why. In a situation like a FAC, it doesn't serve a purpose to assist me in improving the article or from your position to judge it by offering subjective comments that are unactionable or are unsupported by an objective or policy-based rationale. I did not expect you to be so incredibly sensitive to my disagreement and moreso to the reason of my disagreement. So we disagree...so what? Every act of creation is by its nature a violent act, and anything worth doing is worth struggling over. I thank you for your comments and observations, and I appreciate that several of them that were actionable helped improve the article. Sorry you had to be sensitive to my disagreement because some weren't actionable. Again, if all you have is bitterness, please do not contact me again. --ColonelHenry (talk) 22:22, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I made it explicit to you that I withdrew because I didn't like the manner in which you wrote to me, and that it had nothing—nothing—to do with disagreeing with you. Of course, you've blanked that comment so that you can spin the situation any way you want. I put it here so I could keep a record of it.

"Bitter"? "Sensitive"? Who's slagging whom on an admin's talk page? Who's blanking other editors comments with "removing uncivil material" as an edit comment, when the comment was clearly not in the least uncivil? When I withdrew, I assumed it was all over. It appears you intend to keep dragging me through the mud; to what end is beyond my imagination. But, as you are slandering me behind my back, I do feel it's necessary to monitor your edits so I know where you'll slander me next. Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:52, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The manner I wrote to you was in my disagreement, so I can't see how you can logically separate the two. Must be convenient. FYI, I archived your recent statement--not that I had to...my talk page, my prerogative...again, so what? I thought it was over too, but the fact that you commented on that FAC and I addressed those comments on the FAC, it's a matter of history--whether you participate further or not. Just because the war was over and Napoleon was secured on Saint Helena doesn't mean Wellington or von Blücher no longer have occasion to talk about the impact of l'ancien empereur. I'm well within my right to discuss your contribution to the FAC if I'm having a discussion on that FAC. Again, you're taking things too personally, or should I say "subjectively". Fact is, we disagreed. So what? You're the one who walked off "in a huff" just because you didn't like simply that I disagreed, and IMHO, I did so with good reason. If you characterise that as "slanderous", that isn't my problem if jaded and persecutory is your preferred vantage point for viewing the world around you.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:11, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

This is becoming very unpleasant, beginning with the section header. Why don't the two of you avoid each other for awhile. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:16, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I was avoiding him. Nothing was said between us for weeks, and then all of a sudden Henry was mischaracterizing my withdrawal on an admin's talk page. I have no confidence that he intends to stop. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:40, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Comic Cite Template

Hi. Did nothing come of the discussion in which I proposed a change to the Comic Cite Template? Didn't you create a version with the number sign? The discussion was archived before any resolution was achieved that I am aware of. I'm trying to provide full cites to the Pepper Potts and Iron Man's armor article, and it's really hard to discern, at a glance, the cites already in those articles, because the volume numbers and issue numbers simply aren't clear at a glance. I use the comic cite template as much or more than any other editor I notice on the Comics Project articles. Can we add the number sign and the word "vol" inside parentheses for clarity? Nightscream (talk) 00:14, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thanks very much for all of your help with successfully getting Freedom for the Thought That We Hate to Featured Article quality. I really appreciate the assistance in getting this article about freedom of speech to FA. — Cirt (talk) 23:35, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to William Lyon Mackenzie may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Dalhousie University CE

Thank you very much for copy editing The Dalhousie article, and not to mention for the rather quick response time (I really wasn't expecting anyone to had begin copyediting for at least a month). All of the edits you've made so far seem to be both very reasonable and perfectly fine to me. As for the question regarding Edinburgh, according to Lives of Dalhousie University: 1818-1925, Lord Dalhousie's College (there's a free preview of it on Google Books), the university was modeled off its administration, specifically the idea of admittance for all, regardless of religious creed (among other administrative details, though changed to suit the circumstances of colonial Nova Scotia). I've incorporated that into the article to address that fact. Once again, thank you very much for the time and work you put into this. Leventio (talk) 18:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I've followed through with the suggestion and capitalized the letter C where the word campus had been used in the sense of a pronoun.Leventio (talk) 04:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Everything seems to be great. Thank you very much for the time and effort you put into copy editing this article, it is very much appreciated. All the best! Leventio (talk) 18:24, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Presidency University, Kolkata

I guess you are a participant in wikiproject united kingdom. Can you take a look in the article and let me know whether you have any info on the biographies of pre - 1947 principals of Presidency University, Kolkata. Solomon7968 (talk) 11:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Laura Secord TFA

Hi Curly Turkey. Just a quick note to say I've put together a draft blurb for the article's front page appearance as the request will need to go forward in the next few days ready for the anniversary. I think I've covered the main points, but the prose may need a bit of copyediting. Let me know what you think anyway. Cheers Paul MacDermott (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

That's great. Thanks for taking a look. I'll add it to the request page shortly. Paul MacDermott (talk) 11:43, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

ok, it's on the list. Paul MacDermott (talk) 11:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries. Paul MacDermott (talk) 12:16, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Good picture. I couldn't work out how to do that myself. I tried one, but there was a line of text next to it followed by about an inch of whitespace. :) Paul MacDermott (talk) 12:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much

Thank you for the copyedit for Bacon: A Love Story, much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 23:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Weather Machine

Hi Curly. Just letting you know that I have further expanded the Weather Machine article and nominated it for Good article status. Feel free to take another look, if you are interested. Otherwise, thanks again for your assistance. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for taking another look at the article! --Another Believer _(Talk) 23:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

As you might already know, the article is currently undergoing GA review. If you have any comments for the nomination page, feel free to chime in! Would "Today's weatherman Willard Scott" or "Today weatherman Willard Scott" be more appropriate? --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Harvey Kurtzman's Jungle Book. LittleMountain5 01:22, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Great work! LittleMountain5 01:22, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fantasmagorie (1908 film) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:10, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Little Nemo (1911 film) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Laura Secord

This is a note to let the main editors of Laura Secord know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on June 23, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or one of his delegates (Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs)), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 23, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Laura Secord (1775–1868) was a Canadian heroine of the War of 1812, who undertook a 20-mile (32 km) walk out of American-occupied territory to warn British forces of an impending American attack. Secord's husband James was wounded at the Battle of Queenston Heights in 1812, and was still recovering when the Americans invaded the Niagara Peninsula in 1813. During the occupation, Secord learned of a planned American attack, and stole away on the morning of 23 June to inform Lieutenant James FitzGibbon in the territory still controlled by the British. The information helped the British and their Mohawk warrior allies repel the invading Americans at the Battle of Beaver Dams. Her contribution to the war was little known during her lifetime, but since her death she has been frequently honoured by Canada. Honours bestowed on her include schools and a chocolate company named after her, as well as monuments, a museum, a memorial stamp, and a statue at the Valiants Memorial in the Canadian capital. Her story has taken on mythological overtones in her home country, with many embellished versions of the tale, and she is the subject of books, poetry, and plays. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:03, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties

If you enjoyed Freedom for the Thought That We Hate, hopefully you might also like Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties.

The book is quite a fascinating read.

I hope you're doing well, — Cirt (talk) 07:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

re Wordless novel GA

Oh, just due to all the problems I saw at the image page, it might not fare well at FAC. — Cirt (talk) 05:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's pretty much it. — Cirt (talk) 05:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Beguiling logo 610.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Beguiling logo 610.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:08, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

The End of the Road

I've begun the GA review for The End of the Road, and it appears to be largely ready to go; I just need your input or fixes for a few small points. Thanks for all your work on Boyz II Men-related topics! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK for McIntosh (apple)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Laura Secord featured article

Hi Curly Turkey. I just wanted to stop by to say "great work!" on the Laura Secord article. All the best, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:10, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, thank you, sir! Curly Turkey (gobble) 20:34, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thanks for your work to bring The End of the Road to Good Article status--your contributions are always terrific. -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:01, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Barth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Lang (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Kind of you, Curly. It was outpatient surgery but still general anesthesia, and together with what they were looking for, it was a little scary. Slowed me down a little, but health seems good. Thank you for your kind post! --Tenebrae (talk) 20:03, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Gertie

I've supported, but I think a footnote about the apple/pumpkin thing would be nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations on the promotion! Do let me know if you go ahead with a WP:TFA request for the film's anniversary. I'd like to support such a request. Erik (talk | contribs) 17:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

TemplateData is here

Hey Curly Turkey

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:17, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Tintin

I had noticed that; someone had pointed that out to her; and then I laughed when I realized she was going for FA instead of GA.

Hey I've brought the main article to a certain point, more to do on the To-do list, but if you'd like to take a look be my guest; I'd appreciate it.—Prhartcom (talk) 12:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi CT, I hope you spot this message. Thanks for telling me about the script that spots harv errors! Yes, those types of errors are incredibly hard to spot and I have been manually checking for them up until now, so I really appreciate your telling me about this. Plus, I like a good script and you seem to know about some good ones. I got it installed and found a couple of those types of errors on the main Tintin article (that I had caused) and fixed them.

I saw the user article you left Midnightblueowl, very interesting. I am a huge fan of perfection in grammar and am always willing to learn more about it. I have been helping MBO on the topic of passive/active voice and left her this page if you are interested: User talk:Midnightblueowl/Voice.

Hey something has been bothering me with the main Tintin article, maybe you can offer your thoughts. I have been finding plenty of "personal websites" on the subject of Tintin, and I have included the best of these sites in the bibliography. But of course these probably do not qualify as reliable sources and I will probably get dinged for it later. I am torn because I always try to obey the rules around here, but those that I included are incomparable in their excellence and in the knowledge they impart. While these sites have no editor checking their work, it's upsetting to think that a Wikipedian will probably delete them all someday without a second thought. What do you think? I have identified those sources in the bibliography with "[a personal website]". Thanks. —Prhartcom (talk) 19:10, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I just took at look at your edits to Congo, and just wanted to say good work; for the most part I agree with every single one. I wanted to ask, why the aversion to the use of the "with phrase", i.e. "with Mondondo calling it "racist and xenophobic"? Is there a grammar mistake there that I am missing? Why is replacing them all with an "and phrase" considered so much better? I think some of those fixes were unnecessary unless I am missing something. Cheers. —Prhartcom (talk) 19:43, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Japanese serow may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[File:8Yen stamp in 1952.JPG|thumb|left|alt=|The Japanese serow featured on a 1952 {{Japanese yen|¥]]8 stamp.]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:31, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Tintin in the Land of the Soviets Featured Article ~ You were the first to let me know

Excellent. This should be a proud moment for our friend Midnightblueowl; she did excellent work. This is good news, thanks for letting me know; I believe this is a glimpse of what is to come. Thank-you, my most irritating friend Curly Turkey, for your part in it; honestly—perhaps without your early support and your rare moments of brilliance it may never have reached this far; you are to be commended. All editors of all of the Tintin articles are to be commended. Cheers! —Prhartcom (talk) 23:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

List of The Adventures of Tintin

Hello CT, hope you are well. Don't be too mad at me, but do consider stopping by the List of The Adventures of Tintin characters someday soon and giving it a fresh pair of eyes. I have been working on it lately, and of course also The Adventures of Tintin; I intend to bring both to FA quality someday soon; fell free to copyedit what you can. Arigato, and cheers. —Prhartcom (talk) 23:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I also copyedited Cigars of the Pharaoh for Midnightblueowl. —Prhartcom (talk) 23:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi CT, great to hear you are doing well, if a bit busy in life, which is certainly understandable. Great to hear you will be forever willing to work on Tintin! And great to hear you and I are OK; thanks for that explanation, it makes sense and I believe I understand you. I remember you once said you have seen others in altercation with you here, and I believe at the time you said that it pretty much rolls off you. That's a good attitude. I like that, it is good for the articles, and for that reason, I will strive to be more like you in that regard. I think I will take a moment and go deeper, since you say it probably won't hurt you (and feel free to do it to me). I have seen two types of editorial style from you: flashes of brilliance, and for that I never want to let you out of my sight, and flashes of "the opposite of brilliance" or whatever, and for that I will strive to look closer to see if it could be unrecognised brilliance (for example, you were right and I was wrong about acquiring the source of the Lenin photograph), and if it really is not, then be prepared to give up quickly and allow me to stand my ground and win whatever point it is we are discussing, knowing that I really did consider your point of view as best I could before rejecting it (for example, User:Midnightblueowl and I were right and you were wrong about stating the month/year rather than just the year). If it is the former, congrats, the article is now better for it and you win, and if it is the latter, too bad for you, the article is now better for it and you lose. If it is the former, no problem, and if it is the latter, I pray you will stop sooner rather than later with the arguing, as we don't have unlimited time and we don't intend to write more in the talk pages than we do in the article like we did on Soviets. None of us are right all the time, all of us need to quickly recognise the brilliance in each other's ideas if it is there, and recognise that our idea may sometimes be sh*t. I should probably take my own advice too, don't you agree?  :-) Anyway, as long as you and I have enough time to get away from real life and edit our articles, it's all good.

I intend to focus almost solely on Tintin articles now. This week I have been doing the thankless task of building the "plumbing" for the Tintin articles and ensuring it all works correctly and consistently: the redirect pages, the disambiguation pages, the category pages, the links in other articles. I intend to bring the main article: The Adventures of Tintin to Wikipedia:Featured Article again; that will be exciting; I have been working hard on it and have only the "Characters" section to work on now; the other sections are in good shape. I intend to bring the list article: List of The Adventures of Tintin characters to Wikipedia:Featured List; that too will be exciting, I have been improving it for the past few years and have now really started to dig into it (the "plumbing" for it has been difficult but is nearly done; citations are next). I intend to edit all ten of the main character articles, a big job, and someday start working on the Tintin (character) article and maybe bring it to FA or GA. Other than the characters, I intend to merge Settings in The Adventures of Tintin with List of The Adventures of Tintin locations into the latter, and then bring it to WP:FL also. I intend to create a new article for the list of books (or probably use the word "albums"?) and do the same there; I hardly ever get to create a new article. Eventually, I intend to see the entire topic of Tintin be Wikipedia:Featured Topic status, as so many of its articles will either be featured or good. Take a look at this example: WP:FT#Literature and theatre and scroll down to "Tokyo Mew Mew". Those four articles are the model of perfection I intend to reach and even surpass. Its "characters" article is what I am currently striving for with the List of The Adventures of Tintin characters article.

Thanks again for agreeing to take a look at either the main article or the list of characters article I am working on.

—Prhartcom (talk) 15:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

As you were making a point of some sort, you recommended an article: Accuracy and precision. Great article! Thanks for pointing me towards it; I found it interesting. —Prhartcom (talk) 03:14, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Japanese serow

Hello! Your submission of Japanese serow at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 18:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Settings in The Adventures of Tintin

An article that you have been involved in editing, Settings in The Adventures of Tintin, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. —Prhartcom (talk) 04:04, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Whaam!

You may be aware that I was on a 48-hour block. I am behind on a lot of things. What is the likelihood that you will be able to callibrate the detail of the article on the contentious issues with Bus Stop.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for taking some time with this article. I just read your edit summary saying that you were considering the last paragraph of the WP:LEAD. Keep in mind that the LEAD is a summary of the main body and all elements of the main body need to be summarized. In the past this has meant that each section of the article should be summarized in the LEAD. Also be aware of a recent edit I made to the LEAD.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 11:45, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Frank Book

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on The Frank Book, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Ben Ben (talk) 06:04, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

"Unambiguous" advertising? Of course, the evidence was obliterated before the accusation could be defended against, so I guess this accusation of spamming will have to remain as a permanent blot on my otherwise spotless record. Curly Turkey (gobble) 14:14, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Photo consensus discussion at Talk:Rick Remender

Hi. Can you offer your opinion regarding the Infobox photo discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 19:20, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1

If you are done with Bus stop (talk · contribs), are you near ready to make a support/oppose decision.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 05:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Now that Bus stop's comments have been cast aside at FAC, he is making noise at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#addressing_a_similar_issue_at_two_articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 20:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Japanese serow

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1 is now three weeks old and has now had over 250KB of discourse. I don't think I have ever been involved in an FAC like this. As I stated at the beginning of this FAC, Whaam! will experience the 50th anniversary of its first exhibition on September 28 that I hope can be celebrated at WP:TFAR. Before that, however, we must make a decision on the quality of this article here at WP:FAC. Please consider making a Support or Oppose decision some time soon.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 00:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

We now have both a bolded support and bolded strong oppose under your signature at the FAC.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 10:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes that other one is confusing though in bold.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 11:50, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Could you move some of your comments to the FAC talk page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 19:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry. I have special permission to renominate after 48 hours instead of 2 weeks in order to take another shot at the 50th anniversary.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 00:15, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

List of comics publishing companies

Hi, since you`re one of the main contributors to said list, i`m very interested in your opinion regarding Column for "Titles". Thanks in advance, regards, Gott 20:29, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Loggorhea

Wow, can't shut up, even after the thing was closed. Promptly reverted. Even a filibuster must come to an end. Curly Turkey (gobble) 13:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive2

Since you supported FAC1, your opinion is quite welcome at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 17:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I have removed the term royalties and hope you can find the time to swap in the better citations that you have mentioned.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 17:59, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Tintin in the Congo

Just a note to say thanks for the message; I can't promise I'll understand all that stuff, but I'll give it a try! Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:34, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for Wordless novel

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Wordless novel. TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 08:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 08:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR RFC

There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Blind Leading the Blind, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tate Publishing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Little Nemo (1911 film)

You'll be pleased to know I've passed this to GA. An excellent article. I've made some suggestions for further improvement while getting it to FA in the review, which follows. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 22:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Little Nemo (1911 film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adam Cuerden (talk · contribs) 22:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Well. Let me start by saying this is quite a good article. I've gone through it once, with only minor problems noticed, so I expect that the more detailed review won't find very much.

General

• Why is the actual film the second image of the article? Wouldn't it be better to have it as the first, and a bit larger, so it's unmissable?
• On the film, a foreign-ölanguage subtitle came up for me at around 26 seconds in. Any idea why?
• It talks about checking it on the mutoscope. Would it be original research to mention this can be seen in the film? (Around 5:30 or so)

On the whole, though, this is a very good article, and well on its way to Featured Article status. That said, it's a little short. Things you could do to expand it before FA would include:

1. Discuss the comic strip a bit, to provide background for the film. For example, people who don't know the comic won't know the premise (Nemo going to a fantastical world when he sleeps) or know the characters, so some background wouldn't hurt.
2. A brief description of the earlier and later films of McCay wouldn't be out of place
3. I suppose you could mention other adaptations of Little Nemo, such as the relatively recent animé, so long as you don't go into too much detail.

I hope this helps. In any case, ✓ Pass. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 22:49, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Pieter Bruegel the Elder - The Blind Leading the Blind - composition analysis.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Pieter Bruegel the Elder - The Blind Leading the Blind - composition analysis.jpg. 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) 08:05, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:NPA

This is your last warning. The next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at How a Mosquito Operates, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.

Cute message. Maybe we should bring up edit comments like this before we talk about personal attacks? Of course, we don't have to look too deep into your edit history to turn up the mountains of turds you habitually drop on your fellow editors. Curly Turkey (gobble) 14:06, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Please read WP:OWN too. And stop with the personal attacks - that's your final warning. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 14:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Fuck you and your "final warning". Curly Turkey (gobble) 14:12, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at How a Mosquito Operates. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Tiptoety ^talk 17:39, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Been there man. settle it at the talk page rather than the article itself.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:14, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

This surprises me. —Prhartcom (talk) 13:47, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Not me, it was pretty obvious TBH. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 06:27, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Curly Turkey/Archive (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have zero history of either editwarring or making personal attacks of any kind. I had completely ceased the personal attacks and contacted an admin for help, admitting that I had been wrong with my language. Following that, I asked Lugnuts politely to take his proposed changes to the FAC discussion page. I don't believe this block will accomplish anything but prevent me from generating content, which is what I spend my Wikitime doing.

Accept reason:

Purely a procedural close of the unblock template, as the block expired an hour ago. Yunshui 雲‍水 18:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

• Hi Curly, sorry about the block. I didn't touch it as 1) I would possibly be involved and 2) it would perhaps be considered showing favoritism, particularly as I made my feelings about Lugnut clear at my talk page. Glad to see you've bounced back. I am watchlisting the page and hope that I can intervene next time before it gets this far out of hand again (although I hope the other user recognises that the changes s/he suggests are controversial and thus discusses them beforehand). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict)Oh, I figured from the start that you weren't in a position to do anything. It wasn't the edits themselves that made me flip out at Lugnuts, though—they were obnoxious, but not so obnoxious that I would've defecated on him like that. I flipped out because it was so obviously sprang directly out of the Categories for deletion discussion. The edits were not an attempt to improve the article, but to get my goat. He wanted a reaction, and he got it, to a more spectacular degree that he hoped. I can only imagine him creaming himself with delight with every F-bomb. Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Don't count on that, Crisco. Unfortunately Curly, there will always be people willing to bait you into reacting. In this case, take some solace in the fact that it boomeranged on Lugnuts, and try not to let them bug you in the future. Easier said than done, I know. Resolute 00:58, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
    • Thanks. I flipped out because it was clear that reasoning with him wasn't an option. I thought reporting it would scare him off his tactics rather than result in a block for either of us. The most unfortunate thing about the block, to me, was that my attacks were highlighted in the summary while his were unacknowledged. He has used that to make himself out like a poow widdow victim. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:05, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

And again, please stop with the persona attacks. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 06:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I just noticed you guys are a couple of fellow Canuckleheads. I sure miss the weather.... Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• I don't. I haven't had a winter in six years, and that's just how I like it (and I came from Windsor, so our winters weren't that bad!) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:53, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Supposed to be about 27 and sunny today. But hockey weather won't be far off now... Resolute 13:40, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• I've spent my summer showering twice a day and still feeling sweaty and gross. I'd rather put up with shoveling snow! Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:48, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• Har har, sounds like fun (at least in Japan running hot water is standard... I think) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:19, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Final warning

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Lugnuts_reported_by_User:Curly_Turkey_.28Result:_both_blocked_.29, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. If you or your antagonist continue this unedifying squabble I'll block either or both of you again, and for a longer period this time. Please learn from your previous experience. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 11:06, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

The Sinking of the Lusitania

Hi. Please can you link me to the guidelines for 400px lead images? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 11:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Thumperward ponted it to me a few months ago, and a number of Visual Arts editors made a big deal of it (some of them use it as a reason to exclude infoboxes, as some infoboxes don't allow for image sizing). I don't know where the actual guideline is, so I've asked Thumperward. Curly Turkey (gobble)

That seems to be for a non-film article sans infobox. I'm going from the {{infobox film}} template which states (for the image size parameter) "This parameter should not normally be used." Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 11:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• Curly, in this situation I'd likely knock the image size down to 300px maximum. With an infobox at 400px wide, people on smaller displays (1024* whatever, for instance) will have a very cramped read. The visual arts one is, in part, because the image itself is so important, and in part because paintings are often of different dimensions than photographs (The Nude Maja, for instance, doesn't look terribly impressive at 220px, because the length/width ratio is completely different). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:51, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

In the case of McCay, he's best known for his artwork (large, full-newspaper page editorial cartoons and comics), and the level of detail in it. The picture in the infobox was originally at the default size. I bumped it up because I found it near-"illegible" at that size—grainy and in black and white, full of smoke and debris. I've got 2.0 vision—I can only imagine how bad it must look to others. Curly Turkey (gobble) 12:56, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Crisco 1492: I tried resizing to 300px, and the image refused to display, even after refreshing the screen—the alt text displays instead. Do you know why that would happen? Curly Turkey (gobble) 13:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• That's... odd. Be right there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• Not working for me, either. Perhaps it needs to cache a new thumbnail? Mind you, my connection sucks so... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:05, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• No forced size works. Google Chrome doesn't (it shows a blank box, as if the thumbnail is broken). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:10, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah, I tried it with numbers like 301 as well. But 400 and the default are working. Curly Turkey (gobble) 13:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

The resize has decided to stick today. Curly Turkey (gobble) 04:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• See it, and it is good. A lot easier on smaller monitors. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bois Protat

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bois Protat you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Moswento -- Moswento (talk) 16:14, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

How a Mosquito Operates

I've done what I feel is needed to clear it up. I think a few more bits of copy editing is required. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:18, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:TFAR nomination of Whaam!

Given your active participation that resulted in the recent WP:FA promotion of Whaam!, I am informing you of a discussion that you may want to take part in at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#Whaam.21.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:09, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	You got How a Mosquito Operates to FA. Keep it up bro! -- Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:05, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks ;) Curly Turkey (gobble) 13:16, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. Please do lemme know of your future FACs. I wanna contribute too. :) --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, the "future" is now: check out Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Little Nemo (1911 film)/archive1. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:48, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		Thank you for your attention to the Whaam! WP:FAC discussion. You kept things moving in a positive direction. It might not have gotten promoted without you.TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:21, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Japanese serow

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Japanese serow you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sasata -- Sasata (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Wow! That was fast! Thanks! Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Robert Redford wasn't available

I'm not thrilled with "indigenous" or "native", but "domestic" was repeated in the same line, so that was (somewhat) out of bounds. The three are roughly interchangeable (in film terms, anyhow). Since that's the kind of subject... TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 05:27 & 05:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

FAC

Hi, I'm afraid I won't be able to help you out much in the FA; given how inexperienced I am in an FAC; as you have seen in the review of Little Nemo. But I can help out with General copyediting, grammar fixes and paraphrasing. Ping me if you need help. :). Cheerio, --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 16:36, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:123+Bruegel-Parable+of+the+Blind.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:123+Bruegel-Parable+of+the+Blind.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 16:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:End of the Road film still.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:End of the Road film still.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 14:10, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media ({{{1}}})

Thanks for uploading [[:{{{1}}}]]. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 14:22, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

The End of the Road

Hi, I have reinstated the preferred first edition image of The End of the Road as per the infobox guidelines, hope that's OK. I think you'll need to tidy up my references though (principally for cover artist, not sure if reference for publisher and pages are really necessary) Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 17:13, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

...for your message. I have only just received it.

I am rather under the opinion that there are times when consensus is not enough.

I have recently changed the lead picture of the Leonardo da Vinci article. In general, scholars have agreed for many years that the red chalk drawing of the old man with the long beard is Leonardo, and it is used to represent him in most books. However, their has been a steady stream of criticism about the use of the image, because a significant number of scholars, and increasing number of lay people doubt it. Nobody doubts the profile image which appears to be by Leonardo's pupil Melzi.

While the red chalk drawing is a magnificent drawing in itself, the other proves more widely acceptable.

I don't go with nut-case opinions, but if Martin Kemp prefers the Melzi image, then I am prepared to use the less striking but less criticised portrait as the lead to Leonardo da Vinci.

In that case, I didn't seek a consensus for change. I am the principal editor of the article. It was sufficient for me as editor to take on the fact that there was very real reason for criticism, and that it wasn't about to go away. The aesthetics didn't not weigh heavy enough against the objections. Sometimes flexibility is called for.

Amandajm (talk) 09:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Blackstone image

I plan to work some magic here (no telling you how, sorry) but just a note: the file uploaded seems to be flipped from the original. My new upload will be the original orientation, as people are not symmetrical. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:38, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Okay, Crisco, I won't tell ayone how you're going to break into the LoC and steal the original. You're secret's safe with me! Curly Turkey (gobble) 20:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

• Nah, I just travelled back in time and took an original copy, then scanned it. Or something like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:06, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Congrats on the Whaam! article making it to the main page today! I believe you worked hard on it and deserve some western food for a change. —Prhartcom (talk) 11:52, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, thanks! Though my contributions to the actual article were pretty minimal. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Japanese serow

The article Japanese serow you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Japanese serow for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sasata -- Sasata (talk) 16:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

lang-ja

I'm unable to find how to correctly use that template as done here [2]. I'm unable to find it in WP:MOS-JA. However, the lead=yes parameter on the nihongo template seems to give it a similar functionality [3]. Thoughts? I'm thinking about asking the Wikiproject about this repetitive template. « Ryūkotsusei » 22:46, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Did you catch my edited response above? « Ryūkotsusei » 22:53, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Blind Leading the Blind, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phaidon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

ISO dates and #

Curly, now I've finally had the chance to push that hilarious talk-page link of yours; it brought a smile to my face when I first saw it. On the hash, I was pretty sure MOS insisted on "No." for comics, but maybe that has been overturned as an exception. I'll raise this with Ohconfucius, who maintains the script.

Do you really want the phone-number dates? My personal pref. is for the more readable; but please revert my edit to that article if you wish. I don't mind at all. Tony (talk) 05:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Françoise Mouly may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |Charles Burns]], [[Robert Crumb|R. Crumb]], [[Chris Ware]], [[Lorenzo Mattotti]], Marisca], [[Joost Swarte]], Ever Meulen, [[David Mazzucchelli]], Richard McGuire, Jacques Loustal, [[Drew

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Françoise Mouly may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• s book artists and writers such as [[Maurice sendak]], [[Lemony Snicket]], and Barbara McClintock]]. Mouly researched the role comics could play in promoting literacy in young children, and

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:33, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Beguiling

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Beguiling you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Beguiling

The article The Beguiling you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:The Beguiling for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:22, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Memory Lane

[4]

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		For your contributions to bring The Beguiling to Good Article status. Your excellent articles are always a pleasure (and a breeze) to review--keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again! Your reviews are always a pleasant experience! Curly Turkey (gobble) 02:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Beguiling

The article The Beguiling you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Beguiling for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:12, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: George Herriman

This is a note to let the main editors of George Herriman know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on October 28, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 28, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

George Herriman (1880–1944, seen in a self-portrait) was an American cartoonist best known for the comic strip Krazy Kat (1913–44). He started as a newspaper cartoonist in 1897 and introduced Krazy Kat in The Dingbat Family in 1910. A Krazy Kat strip began in 1913; in its main motif, Ignatz Mouse would pelt Krazy with bricks, which the naïve Kat would interpret as symbols of love. The strip was noted for its poetic dialogue, fantastic backgrounds, and experimental page layouts. Herriman was drawn to the landscapes of Monument Valley and the Enchanted Mesa, and his artwork used Navajo and Mexican motifs against shifting desert backgrounds. More influential than popular, Krazy Kat had an appreciative audience among people in the arts. Gilbert Seldes' article "The Krazy Kat Who Walks by Himself" was the earliest example of a critic from the high arts giving serious attention to a comic strip. Newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst and gave him a lifetime contract with King Features Syndicate, guaranteeing him a comfortable living. The Comics Journal placed the strip first on its list of the greatest comics of the 20th century, and his work has influenced many cartoonists. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:03, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Congrats!

Just saw the good news about Little Nemo reaching FA in the Singpost--well done!! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Curly Turkey (gobble) 16:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Building Stories unboxed.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Building Stories unboxed.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.  Ryan Vesey 20:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Eisner

Not a biggie. If you want to move the cite to EL, I'm with you. It's just that I'd seen that footnote in the infobox and I know that's discouraged, yet I thought the cited source was worth preserving. --Tenebrae (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gods' Man

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gods' Man you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ColonelHenry -- ColonelHenry (talk) 02:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• I have posted a few comments regarding the organization and minor concerns at Talk:Gods' Man/GA1. It is excellent work, and I should promote it soon. I do have to thank you considerably...our argument earlier in the year, although unfortunate, introduced me to wordless novels--when you said you could have been working on the article instead of wasting time arguing with me. I happen to love woodblock prints, and NYC based artist Nick Sperakis and I recently had a lengthy and insightful discussion about how some of the wordless novels and graphic novels you've written about were a major influence on his artwork. The more I read them, and the more I've come across your articles on them, I might attempt one of my own in the next year or two.--ColonelHenry (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Infobox photo consensus discussion

Hi. Can you offer your opinion on which photo would be better for the Rebecca Housel Infobox in this discussion? If you are unable to, I understand; you don't have to reply to this message. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 03:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

PR

Your remark about PR without a single comment made me think you might want to look at mine, a first, after GA, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much for more improvement! Can we show somehow that in the "normal" mass, Osanna and Benedictus belong to the Sanctus? (Only then the number of movement 5 makes sense.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:43, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Gerda: I'm sure there is a good way to do it, but my mind is drawing blank this morning ... Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Could we put it "sideways", columns become rows? - It sometimes helps to look a a thing from a different angle. - Did you know it's your day today? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:13, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

No, I didn't! I knew I had Christ-like superpowers, but I had no idea Sunday was my day! Curly Turkey (gobble) 07:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Not Sunday, but 27 October, - wait and see, I am still in my wake-up procedure ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gods' Man

The article Gods' Man you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gods' Man for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ColonelHenry -- ColonelHenry (talk) 13:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Winsor McCay

Category:Winsor McCay, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 13:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the reference

Thanks for that Congo reference, Curly. I am not sure whether I will be able to obtain a copy of that book, although I shall definitely work the information that you have provided into the article. Much appreciated! Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:05, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Precious again

Comics
Thank you for quality articles on comics, such as Louis Riel, and on Canadian-Japanese relations, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:09, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 286th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. Today I would add thanks for your detailed work on my promised article (teaching me more one tables) and your comments on informative boxes that should be concise. Happy TFA day tomorrow! (We watch any TFA.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, isn't that a pleasant surprise! Thank you very much, Gerda, and have a happy George Week! Curly Turkey (gobble) 10:12, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Great to see George on the Main page. Why they had to flip the pic to not follow the MOS I don't know ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Was the image not supposed to be flipped? I did that myself, because I thought it was supposed to be. Curly Turkey (gobble) 08:14, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

(smiling:) You reminded me of pics better on the right, per MOS and per making sense. (Did you know that I mentioned that when I promised the article?) On the right, George would have looked in. But now TFA doesn't follow MOS, day by day, so flipping was needed. Same for one other George. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I get it now–I didn't really think of it that way. Has there been much discussion about it? Curly Turkey (gobble) 10:23, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

No discussion at all, the rules of TFA are like holy scriptures, progress ever so slow. We still have point math, useful to "bump out" the suggestions of others, as if we couldn't discuss priorities in peace. Promise and dream are about a year old now ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Next table: Jahrhundertring#Singers, - would you know a good way to highlight the singers who sang in both 1976 and 1980? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Is this what you wanted? Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:17, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

This looks a lot like what I had before, which you can sort only once, and not even once for the 1980 people. I remembered that you said colspan is in the way of sorting and found it true. So I looked for a different way. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:34, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, sorry—you just want to highlight it? I suppose you could do that with an asterisk—or maybe a footnote, with the notes at the end of the table instead of the end of the page, à la George Herriman#List of comic strips. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

You gave me an idea, thanks! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:01, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:08, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Quality check / source hunt

I know comics are more your area of interest than film, per se, but you do good work, and I noticed that you've spent some time with silent-era short films (if admittedly the animated ones!). Having noticed a redlink in the National Film Registry list, I assembled an article for the silent-era (but live-action) short A Cure for Pokeritis. Sadly, it looks like I'm running out of reliable references to draw on; film's not usually my thing. I'd love for you to take a peek, just to get a independent sense of how it's going so far, and if you've got any ideas where else I might need to look...

I have a suspicion that there's just not a GA's worth of material out there for this little project. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:16, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

You're right, it's pretty far out of my field of expertise. I did look around, but it seems all the sources I found were ones you've already included. I'm disappointed there wasn't more at the Internet Archive—sometimes you can find contemporary reviews of works there, but it looks like all they've got is the video.

I'm not so sure about the "just not a GA's worth of material out there". There are plenty of short GAs, and even FAs, out there (look at some of the hurricane ones). At a glance at least it appears "comprehensive". Since it's Public Domain, it'd be nice to include a video file. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was saddened the the (lack of) coverage at the Internet Archive. I'm used to them having a lot more historical context available for this sort of work. Perhaps I really am close to exhausting the available material. I'll look into what's involved in adding video to the article directly; I've got the link to the Archive, which hosts the complete short, but I've got some sources that comment on the police raid scene directly, so with a little rewriting, I think I can fit that clip in nicely. Do you know of any GA/FA-quality articles with embedded video clips? Never done this before, so I'd like to take a look how people who know what they're doing have done it! And, thanks! Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

The only ones I know off the top of my head are the ones I've done—Little Nemo (1911 film), How a Mosquito Operates, Gertie the Dinosaur, and Dream of the Rarebit Fiend. To be honest, I don't even realy watch films very much (aside from over my kids' shoulders), so I'm not very familiar with how the articles are handled. The McCay articles were a tangent from working on the main McCay article, which I still haven't gotten around to finishing. I wouldn't recommend handling the video the way I did—I blew them up because McCay's known for the detail of his artwork. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:25, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Looks like I may be playing this by ear. Just about every influential silent-era film, short or feature, that I could think of has its article in truly wretched state right now. Silent film is pretty far from my usual area of expertise (and on-hand sources), but some of these might have to pad out my to-do list, once I'm happy with the state of this smaller article. I've scraped up a few more sources of information, so I may try to tidy up the article this weekend, get a clip working, and get in line at GA. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I threw in a clip in the "Production" section—I'd've put it in the "Synopsis" section, but the infobox was in the way.

I remember coming across some references to contemporary reviews in one of my McCay sources. They had the magazine at the Internet Archive. The contents weren't searchable from the archive site itself, but that doesn't mean they don't necessarily have something. If you could track down issues of film magazines from around the release date, maybe you could come up with some reviews. Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:22, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Excellent, and thanks! I've got a little bit scraped up from Moving Picture World and The Motion Picture Story Magazine already. Sadly, Photoplay appears to have never covered it, nor did Variety. I need to see if I can find any more film mags with archives that cover early 1912. Sadly, collections of the lesser known titles tend to be pretty fragmentary. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 22:49, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Paul Auster

Category:Paul Auster, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 22:08, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Three Lives, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tender Buttons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• University of Saint Thomas Aquinas|Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas, ''Angelicum'']] (''The Irish Ecclesiastical Record'', Vol V, Year 32, No. 378, June, 1899, p. 570, http://books.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:13, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ukiyo-e may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {{sfn|Weisberg|Rakusin|Rakusin|1986|p=7}}—who coined the term "Japonism"{{sfn|Weisberg|1975|p=120}}{{efn|Burty coined the term {{lang|fr|''le Japonisme''}} in French in 1872.{{sfn|{{sfn|Weisberg|1975|

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:16, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Sinking of the Lusitania/archive1

Sorry I'm jumping into this one so very, very late in the FAC cycle! I'd largely passed over it because the discussion looked well in hand, but I just found myself writing a Lusitania-related article today (The Carpet from Bagdad) and so found my way back here. I don't think I've got any objections that should significantly stall promotion, though. Just a few tweaks and perhaps an extra source or two to suggest. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 22:12, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, thanks for taking a look! There's nothing more depressing than to have an articl sit there for two months just to have it archived for lack of interest, especially when you've got other articles queued up ready to go. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:12, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem! I'll see what I can do about finding you more McCay stuff from the period film mags. I know for The Sinking of the Lusitania, all I could find in Motography was that bit you added. The Moving Picture World had that advertisement and a trivial mention that wasn't good for much of anything, and I couldn't find anything in Motion Picture News or Photoplay. Especially with shorts, it's sort of random what gets covered (and shorts aren't generally in the otherwise very awesome AFI database, sadly). As far as general information goes, SilentEra should have coverage of all this stuff, too. Sometimes they have more information (Dream of a Rarebit Fiend) than others (The Sinking of the Lusitania). Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 02:46, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I'll check that stuff out sometime. Curly Turkey (gobble) 03:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

The Reviewer Barnstar

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		For the your thorough and engaging review of Manuel Buendía, I hereby award you this Reviewer Barnstar. It was a pleasure to work with you. Best luck in your future projects, and thanks for the review. All the best, ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 01:12, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, wasn't that pleasant! Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Lusitania

In trying to answer the question about McCay's ringbinder I retrieved several documents from JSTOR that you might not have access to. They don't answer the question as far as I can see but you might still like to see them. If you do, send me an e-mail and I will send copies by return. SpinningSpark 01:31, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Done. SpinningSpark 11:16, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Ukiyo-e

I have to say, I'm enjoying watching your edit summaries and massive content changes to ukiyo-e. I wanted to ask if you might be able to reincorporate this image by Yashima Gakutei at some point during your overhaul, as I was intending to use it as evidence of encyclopedic value for the image as a featured picture. Thanks, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 03:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Cite isbn/978480531098

Template:Cite isbn/978480531098 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. The Banner talk 22:03, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Many thanks for taking the time to review the Spanish conquest of Petén FAC - and, of course, for supporting - the article was recently promoted. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 11:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! It won't take more than half of that fucker to have me on the floor screaming obscenities—I'm not one of those "congenial" drunks, but I am easy on the wallet. Curly Turkey (gobble) 07:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

The Content Creativity Barnstar

		The Content Creativity Barnstar
		Thank you Curly Turkey for going the extra mile to help promote The Sinking of the Lusitania to FA status. On behalf of the article's future audience, I hereby award you the The Content Creativity Barnstar. Please accept it --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 11:57, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! A new decoration just in time for Christmas! Curly Turkey (gobble) 07:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Best wishes on upcoming projects

Just noticed you are committing to many new GAs and I wish you great success on them. Prhartcom (talk) 15:05, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013 FA Thanks

This user has written or significantly contributed to Whaam! Featured articles on Wikipedia.

Thank you for your editorial contributions to Whaam!, which recently was promoted to WP:FA.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:04, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Glad to see it made it to TFA in time for the anniversary! Curly Turkey (gobble) 07:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

A favour for a turkey

Done! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:38, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Roxy Ann Peak FAC

Hi Curly Turkey! If you have time, could you revisit Roxy Ann Peak's FAC? I think that I have addressed all of your concerns. Thanks, LittleMountain5 05:00, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library's Books and Bytes newsletter (#2)

Books & Bytes

Sign up for monthly delivery

Welcome to the second issue of The Wikipedia Library's Books & Bytes newsletter! Read on for updates about what is going on at the intersection of Wikipedia and the library world.

Wikipedia Library highlights: New accounts, new surveys, new positions, new presentations...

Spotlight on people: Another Believer and Wiki Loves Libraries...

Books & Bytes in brief: From Dewey to Diversity conference...

Further reading: Digital library portals around the web...

Read Books & Bytes

The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs) 16:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:27, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Hurricane Katrina (1981)

Hello Curly Turkey, I'm just wanting to let you know that I am finished with addressing your issues for Hurricane Katrina (1981). Is there anything else needed? Regards,--12george1 (talk) 19:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Baiōken Eishun may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''Baiōken Eishun''' ({{lang-ja|梅翁軒永春}}; active {{circa|1710–1755) was a Japanese painter and print artist of the [[Kaigetsudō school]] of ''[[ukiyo-

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:57, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Miyagawa Chōshun may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''Miyagawa Chōshun''' ({{lang-ja|宮川 長春}}; 1683 – 18 December 1753}} was a Japanese painter in the [[ukiyo-e]] style. Founder of the [[Miyagawa school]], he and his

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:11, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Curly Turkey/Archive. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thank you for the GAR!

Just a note to say thank you for carrying out the GAR of Popol out West; much appreciated! Have a nice Winter break! Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:31, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Latest issue

I am shooting for at least a WP:GTC of Four Freedoms (Norman Rockwell). There is a current WP:PR open for the main article and WP:GACs have been nominated for three of the four paintings. I imagine some experts will come around and the licensing will get cleared up, I am sure.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:16, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Prhartcom (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec13}} to your friends' talk pages.

Your GA nomination of Winsor McCay

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Winsor McCay you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Diannaa -- Diannaa (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Winsor McCay

The article Winsor McCay you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Winsor McCay for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Diannaa -- Diannaa (talk) 19:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Comics - Scott McCloud

Cool. My copy of Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud has arrived. My first scholarly book on comics. Thought I would share the unboxing with you. What ... wow, I did not know this ahead of time ... I'm just now looking at the book for the first time ... everythng is actually described in comic book form. That's excellent. Hmm, only six in the bibliography; that's a little surprising. Ah, here it is, Tintin is mentioned on pages 42–43; that's what I needed (the page number). Prhartcom (talk) 22:35, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I got that the year it came out—pretty inspiring to a comics-obesessed teenager! Unfortunately it was stolen along with almost everything else I owned back in 1999—by a "friend" I'd left my stuff with when I first moved to Japan. All my books, CDs, videos, three guitars ... Glad you're having a merry Christmas! Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm enjoying McCloud's book. I'm glad I was introduced to it from that one quote. I wish everything was explained to me in comic book form. I hope you'll replace the book into your library.

Would you care to review the Tintin (character) article I have submitted to FA? (This is my first FA, hopefully.) I'd be honoured if you were to contribute to the review. It's here: Wikipedia:Featured article_candidates/Tintin (character)/archive1. Cheers! Prhartcom (talk) 23:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it, but probably not until next week. The holidays are a bit busy for me to do anything too involved. I do notice, though, that the prose has a flavour to it at times that would be more appropriate to ad copy or a magazine article than to a Wikipedia article—it'd be a good idea to copyedit it for tone. Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:54, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Chinese characters

Just to give you a "leg" up, I respectfully moved "Chinese character" back to "Chinese characters" for reasons I explain on the Talk Page. Cheers,ch (talk) 18:15, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Winsor McCay

The article Winsor McCay you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Winsor McCay for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Diannaa -- Diannaa (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Turkey

I'm just dropping by to thank you for the holiday turkey. It may be just a chunk of code to some, but to me it's a neat little pick-me-up to help fend off the holiday madness.

I haven't touched Mulberry Street in how long now? Ugh. Do you think we should just nominate it for FA now? Or what else do you think it needs? The last thing I remember you saying about it was that it was just about ready. Frankly, I'm hardly enchanted by the FA process, but I would like to make at least one stab at it.

My main Wiki-plans for 2014 are GAs – 12 of 'em, one for each month. But that might just be New Years Eve cockiness talking.

I know I've probably come off as unreliable, but I've liked collaborating with you – what little we've done – so if you have any big wiki-plans for 2014 and would like some help, just let me know. Thanks again! Bobnorwal (talk) 00:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Blind Leading the Blind

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Blind Leading the Blind you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LT910001 -- LT910001 (talk) 05:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

FAC for Eliot's A Song for Simeon

I nominated A Song for Simeon for FAC, located here Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/A Song for Simeon/archive1. I would be grateful if you had some time to stop by and offer some comments and suggestions for its improvement. I hope the holidays went well. Best wishes for a healthy and prosperous 2014!--ColonelHenry (talk) 00:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

It's been probably more than a decade since I've read any Eliot—a refresher would be nice. I'm a bit busy for the holidays to do anything very involved, but I'd be happy to take a look at it next week. My memory for these things isn't to reliable, so don't be afraid to give me a ping if I forget. Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:56, 31 December 2013 (UTC)