User talk:Kusma/Archive 19
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Kusma. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 15 | ← | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | → | Archive 25 |
Mosze Kusewicki redirect
Hi Kusma, The page redirecting Moshe Koussevitzy to: Mosze Kusewicki has been deleted by you. Actually, this famous cantor spells his name almost always, on his records and anywhere else, e.g. Google, as Moshe Koussevitzky. Mosze Kusewicki in turn is a very rare alternative Polish spelling form. Since your deletion, whoever looks for Moshe Koussevitzky under the universally known form, will not find him, nor will (s)he be redirected properly. This counterproductive deletion should be reconsidered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.157.180.36 (talk) 12:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- I just renamed the page to Moshe Koussevitzky (as you say this is the most common spelling). If you know anything more about this person, please expand the article. Kusma (talk) 19:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- Funny, I had just recently cleared my watchlist of all SU-related pages, figuring him to have finally given up. Then just now I notice this comment on your talk page and check the history of the article in question, only to find him back in full force. This is the first sock I have noticed since May but since I haven't been looking my guess is that there are more. Anyway, if you'd like to help revert/delete here feel free, otherwise I'll just do it myself when I have some time this week. shoeofdeath 05:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- I don't have much time these days. Good to see that you're dealing with it. Kusma (talk) 18:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- Funny, I had just recently cleared my watchlist of all SU-related pages, figuring him to have finally given up. Then just now I notice this comment on your talk page and check the history of the article in question, only to find him back in full force. This is the first sock I have noticed since May but since I haven't been looking my guess is that there are more. Anyway, if you'd like to help revert/delete here feel free, otherwise I'll just do it myself when I have some time this week. shoeofdeath 05:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Need help in taking article to Class A status
Hi,
I have been trying hard to take Jagdgeschwader 1 (World War II) from B class to A class. This article is pertaining to a Luftwaffe geschwader (wing) in WWII. Today I discovered this article was not part of German military history task force, I did add the tag to make it part of. However I am having a really hard time trying to find an administrator that has knowledge on the topic. Would you be able to help ?
Another problem is regarding unit designations & names. I did contact Military History project Administrators. But there are different opinions on the way Unit names should be incorporated. Some opine that English equivalents should be used with German words in bracket. For example, Squadron (Staffeln). Other contend that since this is a German article, you need to put English equivalent in bracket only at first occasion and use German word alone subsequently. I fall in the second group. But the first group raises the concern that this makes the article full of jargon. Any help is truly appreciated. German Military History project provides only equivalent words for some words but does not lay down any guideline. Besides that list does not have any Luftwaffe terms. Thanks Perseus71 (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but I don't really know anything much about the Luftwaffe. Personally I don't think the article should have the German words all the time, but I don't know anything about the conventions used in English-language WW2 military history books. Good luck with your article, and happy editing, Kusma (talk) 05:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
moin
moin Kusma, question: can you review the mathematical aspects of a latent class analysis-article or is it impossible?, best regards --Jan eissfeldt (talk) 13:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
- I am not trained in statistics, so I don't really understand the article (I think I got the general idea, though). I think there should be a little more examples for what type of situations one uses the model in, and explaining better what is assumed a priori about the data. I could probably understand it better by reading the Biometrika reference (which looks readable to me), but I have to prove some theorems about PDEs right now and can't really help you. Sorry... Kusma (talk) 08:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- all right, thank you for the immediate answer :). best regards from leipzig --Jan eissfeldt (talk) 00:45, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Old story
Hello, maybe this is difficult to answer for you as the story is quite old, but maybe you have a quick answer or a clear opinion. The Thomas & Berghof introductory article to A voyage round the world is mentioned twice in the list of the references. Maybe this should be only once? Another point is that the first one mentions "Introduction" while the second one "Preface" as the title of the article. Maybe this should be unified. The version of the book on books.google.com has "Preface" rather than "Introduction", but the bibliography note for that mentions as the year of publication 2000 while the first reference to Thomas&Berghof 1999. I tend to unify that to what's there in books.google.com. What's your opinion? alx-pl d 09:35, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Alx, great to hear from you! The book has both a "Preface" and an "Introduction", and checking Google books carefully again, it seems like I really intended to cite both of them to explain two separate claims. I now own the beautiful edition of "Reise um die Welt" that includes many of Forster's own images ( ISBN 9783821862033 ) but haven't really had much time to do Forster research recently :-( All the best, Kusma (talk) 13:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
A nice book, indeed. I realised now, thet the google.books version is somehow misleading as far as the table of contents is concerned. Thank you a lot with that. :-) alx-pl d
Ughm, I have another question concerning Forster. Maybe you can make a peek to one of the Forster's books you have and see where did the information come from on that Forsters discovered new species in theirs Russian expedition. I've seen the pointer to Introduction to: George Forster: A voyage round the world, ed. by Nicholas Thomas and Oliver Berghof, University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu 2000. There are some people who complain that there is no mention on which species were discovered during the journey. I need at least the source of the remark in Thomas' and Berghof's book. Bests, alx-pl d 17:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
- I'm always happy to help if I can (but I currently only have the biography of Harpprecht and the book of Enzensberger that I can use to look up things for you, and some books about the time in Mainz). The Thomas-Berghof remark cites as a source JR Forster's report to the Royal Society (J. R. Forster, Specimen Historiae Naturalis Volgensis. Royal Society of London Philosophical Transactions 57 (1767), 312–357). Apparently the archive of the LRS is currently freely accessible (or my library subscribes to it): if you can access it, the DOI is 10.1098/rstl.1767.0035 (if you can't, contact me again). The article is mostly a list (in Latin) of the new species observed. If you can't read Latin, I can try and understand it better over the weekend and answer any more detailed question you may have. Best wishes, Kusma (talk) 09:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you a lot. This is just right enough for me. :-) Of course, I'll bring it back to the article soon. alx-pl d 21:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Zuckermandel
Why did you delete this page back in June 2007? I am trying to find out about him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.48.20 (talk) 12:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 42 | 8 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 43 | 10 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 44 | 17 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 11:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
"English spelling"
I'm leading the 'rail transport in Germany' project and have been busy adding existing articles to the project and giving them an initial assessment. En passant I have also changed a number of titles to English spelling. This seems to be in line with general Wiki policy about minimising the use of foreign words and also making articles accessible to non-experts (i.e. non German speakers). It is also the proposed convention for the project. That was my logic, but please understand that personally I am a great fan of Germany and am also very happy with "ß", but the articles are for the general reader not for us specialists.
I have done a little research and discovered that a sister project, WikiProject Germany, proposes using the German spelling as their convention. However, 2 of my 3 Berlin guides, as well as the well-respected Michelin guide to Germany, turn "ß" to "ss" every time for clarity. Existing Wiki articles vary in their approach. So the jury's out and I won't make any more "ß" moves until a fuller debate has been had. BTW I'm not into "lame wars"! ;) Gruß. Bermicourt (talk) 16:54, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps the repeated abuse should be reported to Big Pipe? What do you think? Enigma message 18:40, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
- I won't stop you, but I think just blocking for increasingly longer times is enough. Nothing about the vandalism is interesting enough for me to pursue this. I usually just believe in revert, block, ignore. Kusma (talk) 20:14, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Mother (Danzig song)
I know it was awhile ago, but when you deleted this, how much was in the article? Just curious.--Rockfang (talk) 22:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Just as the deletion log entry says, "Mother is one of the most popular song by Danzig." Nothing useful, I'm afraid. Kusma (talk) 08:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- Dang. I was hoping there would be more. Thanks for the reply.--Rockfang (talk) 10:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Madge Wildfire
You have proposed Madge Wildfire for deletion and deleted it immediately. Why the haste? I contest deletion. Biscuittin (talk) 10:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- Oops, you deleted it in 2006. Sorry. Biscuittin (talk) 10:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- And there was not much worth keeping, the article essentially just contained the info that "Madge Wildfire is a fictional character in the Heart of Midlothian". Kusma (talk) 10:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I have restored it as a redirect to The Heart of Midlothian. Biscuittin (talk) 11:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds good (I should have thought of that!). Happy editing, Kusma (talk) 12:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I have restored it as a redirect to The Heart of Midlothian. Biscuittin (talk) 11:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- And there was not much worth keeping, the article essentially just contained the info that "Madge Wildfire is a fictional character in the Heart of Midlothian". Kusma (talk) 10:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Permanent
I humbly suggest to reconsider your vote again. The expansion of the "proof" page was an attempt to game the system. This expansion belongs to a general page Computation of the permanent of a matrix. Laudak (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Happy Holidays!
Yupik would like to wish you a Merry Christmas, a Happy Chanukah, or whatever you may be celebrating at this time of year plus warm wishes for a good 2009!
Hyvää joulua ja onnellista uutta vuotta! Buriid juovllaid ja ráfálaš ođđajagi! Pyereh juovlah já luholaš uđđa ihe! Lahkoe jåvle jih buerie orre jaepie! Buorre javla ja buorre ådå jagev! God jul och gott nytt år! Hyveä roštuota! Hyveä rastavoa! С новым годом! -Yupik (talk) 20:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Frankfurt Wikiproject
Hello! I have been tagging some articles for the WikiProject. If you want, do you mind rejoining the WikiProject? WhisperToMe (talk) 07:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
|
Dear Kusma, I hope you had a wonderful New Year's Day, and that 2009 brings further success and happiness! ~ YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:16, 2 January 2009 (UTC) |
|
Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
| WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
New straw poll
You are a user who responded to RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — talk 23:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 — talk 00:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 2 | 10 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 19:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Portal:Munich
Hi Kusma, I wondered if you could help me with Portal:Munich. I found it at MfD (actually I stumbled across it on KingJeff's talkpage which I still watch) and think it might be worth saving. I started updating to make it usable and presentable and wondered if you could give me some pointers with your experience of the Germany portal. BTW did Portal:Germany ever make "featured"? Agathoclea (talk) 10:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- I don't currently have much time to do anything about it. The Germany portal became Featured after this discussion. Currently Carabinieri does the updates to the News and DYK sections (the DYK section is pretty good). I think for a smaller-scale portal (with not even a semi-sleeping WikiProject behind it) I would try to reduce the amount of content that needs updating, and focus more on giving a structured overview of the topic's Wikipedia coverage. But on the whole, I found Portal work to be lonely and (in the end) boring, so I minimized my efforts for the Germany portal (I even shifted from monthly pictures to random selections). For the MFD, why don't you just delete it now and create it again later? Then you won't have to argue for more time, and there's really not so much worth saving on the old portal. Good luck with it anywya, and happy editing, Kusma (talk) 10:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
RfA thankspam
|
|
| Thank you for your participation in my recent RfA, which failed with 90/38/3; whether you supported, opposed or remained neutral.
Special thanks go out to Moreschi, Dougweller and Frank for nominating me, and I will try to take everyone's comments on board. Thanks again for your participation. I am currently concentrating my efforts on the Wikification WikiProject. It's fun! Please visit the project and wikify a few articles to help clear the backlog. If you can recruit some more participants, then even better. Apologies if you don't like RfA thankspam, this message was delivered by a bot which can't tell whether you want it or not. Feel free to remove it. Itsmejudith (talk), 22:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC) |
something to make you smile
User:Agathoclea/Löschkönig - Agathoclea (talk) 17:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hübsch, danke :-) Kusma (talk) 17:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 4 | 24 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Delivered at 04:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)
thank you
| My RFA passed today at 150/48/6. I wanted to thank you for weighing in, and I wanted to let you know I appreciated all of the comments, advice, criticism, and seriously took it all to heart this past week. I'll do my absolute best to not let any of you down with the incredible trust given me today. rootology (C)(T) 08:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC) |  |
Final version
As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — talk 21:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- re:"Oppose, allows unnecessary non-free images, thus violating policy." In what case would an unnecessary, non-free image be allowed? Please give a specific concrete example because I can't think of one. — BQZip01 — talk 04:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- It says "a copyrighted image may [only] be used" in the season articles. That is unnecessary. Kusma (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- What it actually states is "a copyrighted logo...may only be used if no free alternative exists." You left out that all-important conjunction and the following phrase. In reality, I found a "free alternative" for every single FBS team, so this part of the guideline would only be used in the rarest of instances. Like I said before, I cannot even think of a single instance in which this part of the guideline could be invoked. Can you provide a single example in which it could be used? Because I can't. This is a phrase tacked on to the original wording to appease certain contributors. I understand their point that an exception should exist for the rarest of instances in which a free alternative might not exist, but the fact is that no exceptions currently exist (of which I am aware) and this part of the guideline cannot be currently used. I'll happily back you (and anyone else) up on this if you invoke it and try to remove an image because it is a non-free image and a free image exists. That is the whole point of this section. Schools choose to identify themselves in many ways. One of those is using logos that are free. Since they are available, they should be used appropriately instead of non-free images. — BQZip01 — talk 04:26, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- It says "a copyrighted image may [only] be used" in the season articles. That is unnecessary. Kusma (talk) 05:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
There are no free logos for most sports teams. There may be free logos for many college teams, but that's not something that should affect a general sports team guideline. I gave a pro sports example at the guideline discussion. Kusma (talk) 07:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- That simply isn't true either. Give me a team and I'll produce a free image for you. — BQZip01 — talk 18:28, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- So you say that for every team, a free image can be created? In that case, WP:NFCC #1 tells us that we must not use a non-free image instead. Kusma (talk) 06:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Interested
Hi! Regarding this edit, I was wondering why you did it? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 21:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- The category contained non-free images. These may only be displayed in articles where they have a valid rationale for use per the non-free content criteria. The category page does not met these criteria, so the images had to be hidden. Kusma (talk) 05:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- How rude of me! I never replied. My apologies - thanks for the explanation. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 6 | 8 February 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 07:00, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Your removing of a paleontologist name!
You are removing scientists (paleontologist / university professor pages) on wikipedia, the name of which is attached to fossils he described and to fossils thta where dedicated to him ... and you retain soccer players who nobody will remember in les than twenty years time ... what is that joke ! Please let us add the paleontologists' names we started editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.83.247.25 (talk) 14:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- What page is this about? Looking through my deletion log, I assume it is Bruno Granier. I deleted a page with the content "French Geologist, born in 1958." If this is a notable academic, I would welcome it if somebody writes an article about him. But what I deleted wasn't an article. Kusma (talk) 15:27, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:
- Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
- An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
- News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
- Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
- Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
- Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 02:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:
- Books extension enabled
- News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
- Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
A-Class
There is some major discussion about A-Class assessment going on at the moment getting me to think if if we should try and start to introduce this to WP:GER. Drop me a line when you are back editing. Agathoclea (talk) 10:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:
- News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
- Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
- Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009
— 16 March 2009- News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:08, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
: 23 March 2009
- From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
- Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
- News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
: 30 March 2009
- From the editor: Follow the Signpost with RSS and Twitter
- Special report: Community weighs license update
- News and notes: End of Encarta, flagged revisions poll, new image donation, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Censorship, social media in schools, and more
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
: 6 April 2009
- Special report: Interactive OpenStreetMap features in development
- News and notes: Statistics, Wikipedia research and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikia Search abandoned, university plagiarism, and more
- Dispatches: New FAC and FAR nomination process
- WikiProject report: WikiProject China
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:16, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Plasmodium
Hi
I see that one of the Plasmodium species was deleted under a G7 request. This might have been an error. I am the main if not sole author of the page and I have not requested a deletion. There was nothing violating copyright on the page. I can say this safely as I wrote most/all of it. I's sure there is a reason for this action: I would be grateful to learn it.DrMicro (talk) 16:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- I don't really know what you are talking about, but you were the sole author of Plasmodium pulmophilum and Plasmodium species infection mammals other than primates. You requested deletion of the first page at 14:48, 25 November 2008 (with the edit summary "Error in the name -missing 'i' at the end. Moving page to new entry. Please delete this blank page.") and of the second page at 15:37, 28 April 2008 (with the edit summary "This page needs deleting. It was created with a typo") Your only other deleted contribution was to create an empty article at Aopheles: Taxonomy, which was subsequently deleted. Do you want me to undelete the Plasmodium pulmophilum article for you? Kusma (talk) 19:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. The species I was referring to was Plasmodium adunyinkai. Thank you also for deleting the two pages you refer to as both were the results of typos by myself. Any idea what happened to Plasmodium adunyinkai? DrMicro (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
- The article Plasmodium adunyinkai was written in Indonesian, and its author, Mimihitam asked for deletion after mistakenly creating it here. You can see the full article at id:Plasmodium adunyinkai. Hope that helps, Kusma (talk) 05:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. The species I was referring to was Plasmodium adunyinkai. Thank you also for deleting the two pages you refer to as both were the results of typos by myself. Any idea what happened to Plasmodium adunyinkai? DrMicro (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
WP GER members
For some time I have been looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Members to weed out the inactive ones. Today I started marking the admin to get an overview. Just wanted to run that by you just in case you object. So far I found a lot of flyby editors who sign up and disappear. OTOH there are a lot of editors who quietly work away in the background without showing their faces at WT:GER. Some of whom might make excellent admin material. Basically I am trying to take stock and see where we can move from where we are now. Agathoclea (talk) 10:34, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- I think figuring out who is really active is quite useful; the "members list" is a bit useless otherwise. I think I've only ever used it to spam out the project newsletter. If you find out who actually does all of the assessment work, maybe it's worth talking to these people to reorganize our assessment process is a way that benefits them most. (I sort of stopped caring about assessments). It is quite enjoyable to try to find admin candidates (and very useful). As you have noticed, I'm a bit inactive these days. I probably won't become much more active unless I find some new topic that I'm excited to write about or some collaboration that I want to take part in. In any case, you certainly shouldn't let any kind of "project leadership" role that I might have played stop you from doing what you think is right -- I never wanted to be a "project leader" anyway. All the best, Kusma (talk) 12:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well I won't let you of the hook - I will always need some sanity check. Keep your eye on User:Sebastian scha. - seems an asset to the project. I'll get the listings sorted and then put out another newsletter. Let us see what happens then. Agathoclea (talk) 13:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- Sounds great. I'll pop in every now and then, but won't volunteer for any serious heavy lifting. Kusma (talk) 14:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well I won't let you of the hook - I will always need some sanity check. Keep your eye on User:Sebastian scha. - seems an asset to the project. I'll get the listings sorted and then put out another newsletter. Let us see what happens then. Agathoclea (talk) 13:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
: 20 April 2009
- Book reviews: Reviews of The Wikipedia Revolution
- Wikipedia by numbers: Wikipedia's coverage and conflicts quantified
- News and notes: New program officer, survey results, and more
- Dispatches: Valued pictures
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Film
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
editing bias very clear, need intervention
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julia_Griggs_Havey&action=history
Rhode Island Red is again using Wiki to further his vendetta against Julia Havey for disagreeing with him on his Juice Plus wiki article.
someone should look into this to keep the article neutral, wouldn't you agree?
Dana Reese, assistant publicist for Julia Havey 70.250.53.34 (talk) 22:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Removal of promotional material is necessary to keep an article neutral. Whether too much of it was removed I don't really know, but I don't see anything negative in the article at the moment. Kusma (talk) 06:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
There is nothing negative, but there are issues. RRR removed calling her husband "Dr. Patrick Havey" because he said "Dr." is an ambiguous phrase. RRR doesn't think that Chiropractors deserve to be called doctors despite tens of thousands of graduates of various Chiropractic schools with "Doctor of Chiropractic" hanging on their office walls. RRR erased links to various works of Haveys. Agreed that commercial links have no place on Wiki, but to removed valid references is ridiculous and puts this editors bias further into question. Honestly, does it not seem a bit vengeful to you?or just a super coidcidence that RRR takes great interest in all things "multi-level marketing" and science related,.......and Julia Havey?
: 27 April 2009
- Book reviews: Reviews of Lazy Virtues: Teaching Writing in the Age of Wikipedia
- News and notes: Usability study, Wiki Loves Art, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia Art dispute, and brief headlines
- WikiProject report: Interview on WikiProject Final Fantasy
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Request to un-protect page
Hi Kusma, I am interested in creating a page for the Morgan J. Freeman film “Just Like the Son”, which is currently protected from being created. You were the last person to comment on the discussion page on May 15, 2007. Could you possible assist me in un-protecting this page so it can be created? Many thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2009nyc1 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- I never commented on Talk:Just Like the Son, I just deleted it in a routine maintenance procedure. Does the problem that caused the article to be deleted still exist (i.e. not many sources, none of them talking about why the film hasn't been released)? If reasonable sources exist for the film, I expect that it should be easy to get help at WP:RFPP to allow recreation. Kusma (talk) 06:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Doubts about Myrsina fairy tale
Hi, Kusma,
I must find out the year of publication of the "Myrsina", the greek fairy tale written by Georgios A Megas. I read that it was published in the year of 1970, but I don't know if it's right. Do you have this information? Can you help me?
Thank you,
Camila Pastorelli —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.157.1.170 (talk) 16:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- Unfortunately I know nothing at all about that fairy tale; I only did a maintenance-type edit on Myrsina once. Happy editing, Kusma (talk) 07:59, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
: 11 May 2009
- News and notes: Wikimania 2010, usability project, link rot, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Quote hoax replicated in traditional media, and more
- Dispatches: WikiProject Birds reaches an FA milestone
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Michael Jackson
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
: 18 May 2009
- From the editor: Writers needed
- Special report: WikiChemists and Chemical Abstracts announce collaboration
- Special report: Embassies sponsor article-writing contests in three languages
- News and notes: Wiki Loves Arts winners, Wikimania Conference Japan, and more
- Wikipedia in the news: Arbitrator blogs, French government edits, brief headlines
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Opera
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
ThankSpam
Thank you for participating in my "RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 153/39/22. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (Ceoil, Noroton and Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record. ~~~~~ |
 |
: 25 May 2009
- License update: Licensing vote results announced, resolution passed
- News and notes: New board member, flagged revisions, Eurovision interviews
- Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia: threat or menace?
- WikiProject report: WikiProject LGBT studies
- Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Formal Mediation for Sports Logos
As a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos/Archive_1, I have included you in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, I hope we can achieve a lasting solution. — BQZip01 — talk 06:35, 31 May 2009 (UTC)