User talk:Begoon/Archive 8

A beer for you!

 * There's probably a WikiLove button to "slurp and burp" that, but I turned WikiLove off cause it was breaking stuff, so "Cheers, and "burp..." for now. Thank you. Begoon &thinsp; talk  22:19, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Email
Hi. I'm afraid I can't access my WP mail right now. If this concerns the edit request you made which I marked as answered, it's not necessary or desirable to use email for that anyway, it should be discussed here on WP. I marked it as answered because it had been answered (answered is not equivalent to "done exactly as requested"), and there had been, so far as I could tell, no new discussion since it had been answered. Edit requests should have consensus, and reliable sources. Anyway, I see you reopened it. I don't have anything to contribute to that discussion at this point - so I'll just encourage you to continue the discussion right there, and attempt to reach a consensus there. Thanks for the note. Good luck. Begoon &thinsp; talk 12:55, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for all the helpful links, and I am sorry I emailed you inappropriately, novice mistake. Just wanted to let you know that the "in the meantime" comment you spoke of in response to my response to you, has nothing to do with me. It is part of a comment by techandchess. My edit request is actually above his paragraph-long comment, and it finishes with my sign-off at 11:05 am March 24th, when I initially opened my request. I am beginning to think Mdann52 may have confused me with Techandchess as well.Marching2 (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Oops - you're right. I should drink my coffee earlier. Sorry. I responded there. Begoon &thinsp; talk  23:59, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Need help on improving my arguments without help of essays and policies
I have been warned in my talk page to avoid canvassing any more in Talk:Madonna (entertainer). In fact, I have rebuked opposing votes because I didn't find their arguments strong. I need training on improving arguments to help people support the cause, not the other way around. Or I have to argue my stand without persuading them to change their minds. What should I do? --George Ho (talk) 17:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I saw that RM, and I nearly said something myself. Sometimes it is quite clear that opinions are not going to alter, and moving Madonna to Madonna Ciccione is probably one of them. I wouldn't support that either, and I can't imagine who would, really. The surname is pretty unknown, and, well, she is Madonna.


 * I don't think you need any help with your arguments there at all. Everyone understands your position. They just don't agree with you. That point where nobody agrees with you and nobody is likely to is pretty much when you should stop arguing, generally.


 * This is one of those occasions where you could make any number of technically sound arguments, but Madonna ain't gonna move to Madonna Ciccione. We know her as Madonna, she is Madonna. Look at it this way - that's the name she chooses to put on her work, that's the name she chooses to go by, it's how she is known - thus her common name.


 * Now the disambiguator - well:
 * She needs to be disambiguated because the other usage is more well known.
 * You choose the best disambiguator that will identify which one she is to the most people.
 * Most people know she is an entertainer.
 * Most people would not have heard of Ciccione.


 * It's pretty straightforward, really - so far as common sense goes. Begoon &thinsp; talk  22:52, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, and I should have added, with regards to responding to every opposer, it always looks poor, and aggressive (even when it was done defensively). It ends up looking like you are trying to dominate a discussion or have the last word. And it never, ever, will help you win people around - you'll get the opposite result, as you did there.


 * I know this because it's something I have to fight against in myself, constantly - so I know how difficult it can be to let a discussion develop when you want to say "no, you are wrong, and here's why (again...)" to everyone you disagree with. Sometimes I fail, and have to try and back away gracefully. Begoon &thinsp; talk  23:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on User talk:Anne Delong/AfcBox
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User talk:Anne Delong/AfcBox. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:39, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Photography
Cosplay photography is another one I came across and added a prod tag to. Category:Photography by genre has a few more we may wish to look into. Some may rate a merge, some deletion, and some are probably fine as articles. I haven't looked at any others in case I end up being accused of drive by tagging. Thoughts?--Canoe1967 (talk) 13:25, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * If it were me, I'd go here: WikiProject Photography and start this same discussion. That way you can get good input from editors involved in the area, and nobody can say you're acting as a "Lone Ranger". I think you may find a lot of support for rationalising some of those articles, as some of them are a mess or pointless. Don't do anything that could make it look like you are trying to do sneaky deletions, or mass tagging though - that will get you grief - guaranteed. That's about all I've got, at first glance - sorry if it's not much help. Begoon &thinsp; talk  15:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I find that project quiet but I will post there. If response seems slow after a while I may try help desk or the pump to see which other fora may be concerned. Some would fit in OR, RS, notabilty, and various other boards. I wouldn't want to cross post so we may create a central discussion somewhere to sort them all out. I will consider this resolved on your talk page.--Canoe1967 (talk) 15:20, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a plan. I'm happy for you to link me to any discussions you start - I do tend to agree with most of what you said here. Begoon &thinsp; talk  15:33, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I removed the tag I put on cosplay. Tag all or tag none. I think I will just start an RfC thread on the category talk page. I will link that to the photography project and village pump. The thread won't be a true RfC unless we decide to open it there or elsewhere. I will also mention the pet move in case we want to revive it for discussion. Seems unfair that it was the only one dealt with by only two of us.--Canoe1967 (talk) 15:43, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries. On the pet one, if I'd thought the content had any merit as an article, I would have reverted your redirect. As it is, I almost just removed the whole thing - I found it hard even to justify in my own mind the sentence I left/moved. Begoon &thinsp; talk  15:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Category talk:Photography by genre. I linked it to the project and village pump/misc. Add to your watch list to join the fun if you wish.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Added. No time left tonight, and my wiki mood was just dented a bit for today by other stuff. Promise to look tomorrow. Thanks for updating me. Begoon &thinsp; talk  16:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Wishing that people are very nice to me
I am very tired of being berated by Wikipedian fanatics, not limited to administrators (see WP:VPP. I am trying to be nice, but I get berated for being repetitive when I'm exactly... not. And all my posts there are treated as if they belong somewhere else, but WT:TITLE is nearly non-responsible. Where else can I go outside Wikipedia? --George Ho (talk) 19:04, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Now another one is turning against me. Great; when I leave Wikipedia, will people give me a farewell speech? Will people commemmorate me or give me a bad reputation as disruptive editor? --George Ho (talk) 20:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I crossed out my angry posts. I didn't mean to say what I said. I felt unappreciated; rather people would view me as disruptive when I'm exactly... not. I'm tired of it, of having no close friends in Wikipedia, and of having no nice remarks from others. After all hard work I've done without enough praise, even with barnstars, maybe I should find someone who is very supportive and parental to me. --George Ho (talk) 20:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

George - I'm pleased you felt you could come here to deal with it, and I'm sorry I wasn't around to react straight away. I think sometimes you confuse people disagreeing for people disliking you. I do agree, though, that it's a shame people don't praise each other enough here. I know people do appreciate what you do, though - you can see that just in the increased amount of respect people have for your opinion over time. Begoon &thinsp; talk 21:59, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

WP:AN request
Thanks for the talk page note, because I didn't get anything else. Wonder why not? Anyway, I think I redacted everything problematic, but I'd appreciate it if you went back to check; please let me know if I missed something. Nyttend (talk) 00:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought as I was adding the link, "hmmm... I bet this might not work with echo in his own userspace...", that's why I dropped the talk page link. All looks fine to me now, thanks for fixing it. Begoon &thinsp; talk  00:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * p.s. Because I love silly little solutions - if you'd asked me to create the page in my userspace with a on it, that would have worked swimmingly, including the echo notifications, I'd hope.   Begoon &thinsp; talk  00:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!
Heh... I looked at the edit request yesterday, then I looked at the page, and I thought "I'm not throwing another pic in that mess until I've got time to play with it" - so I left it. Then I had a few minutes to play today. It's still not perfect, because the top table is still pushed down by the "clicky" map template (which would be a major job to resize, with all the click co-ordinates) on smaller screen sizes, but I think it's better. Thanks for the biccy... Begoon &thinsp; talk 13:48, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Reverting edits
Hi - firstly it is interesting. Im sure many others would be interested to see ho else they are related apart from being father and son. Not sure it needs to be cited, as this has been worked out using Wikipedia itself which links paternal and maternal patronage.

cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wallaroy (talk • contribs)


 * Hi
 * Firstly, please sign your posts on talk pages - it took me a few seconds to work out what you were talking about - see WP:SIGN
 * Secondly, obviously I disagree with you about its relevance or suitability for inclusion, but that's fine - we don't have to agree. You have followed WP:BRD, except this would have been better on the article talk page.
 * Anyway, it's all good. You can make the edit again, if you like - I won't revert it twice, and if it sticks, it sticks.
 * If another editor does revert it though, you need to discuss on the article talk page. That's how we work here: WP:CONSENSUS
 * Thanks for taking the time to discuss it - that's always good. Cheers. Begoon &thinsp; talk  17:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Ideasthesia
Dear Begoon,

Thank you very much for your kind and informative message -- and explanation of why you reverted my edit.

This made me think a bit more about it. It turns out that this section is kind of "messy" in respect to synesthesia/ideasthesia of Tesla. What has been described is partly unrelated to synesthesia. Other things are incorrect. I have made one correction in that synesthesia is not a form of disease and hence it does not have "symptoms". There are more corrections that one should make.

The problem of that section is that it claims that synesthetes report similar form of visualization during a creative engineering process. However this is not a case. Synesthetic associations are supposed to be fixed over lifetime.

The only research that shows otherwise is my own research. In my lab we have demonstrated that changes can be made. For that and other reasons we needed to introduce the term ideasthesia.

You are right that claiming that Tesla was ideasthete is speculative. On the other hand, claims made before that trying to relate Tesla's creative process to synesthesia are plainly incorrect.

Unfortunatelly, there is no scientific reliable source known to me that would discuss either Tesla's ideasthesia or synesthesia.

I made another edit that reduces the problem.

Regards,

Danko. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Dankonikolic (talk • contribs)


 * Of course the other solution is to remove all the speculation about both terms. Probably we should not be trying to "diagnose" him at all, just presenting the sourced facts about the events in his life if we have no reliable 3rd party sourced discussions to back up our "diagnosis". The problem that may occur with the edits you have made is that they may appear to have been made under a "conflict of interest". You probably should read WP:COI. We really shouldn't have anything in the article that cannot be reliably sourced to a 3rd party publication. See WP:RS. I can understand the points you are making, and you may possibly be 100% correct, but, and sorry to hit you with another bit of alphabet soup, it could be perceived as "original research" to a greater or lesser degree: WP:OR. Have a read of the material at those links, and tell me what you think. Begoon &thinsp; talk  08:04, 2 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, you are right that there is my own interest involved: to promote ideasthesia. This is not deniable.
 * But what is better, my interest satisfied with more correctness or free-of-my interest and incorrect/less correct?
 * Currently, I am a bit confused with the customs about editing on wikipedia. My latest change was reverted back by someone else than you and this time the comment was related to another change made not by me, but someone else then me. So, did this person made a mistake by deleting inadvertently my changes? Or is it kind of custom to delete everything that has been changed recently without a need to elaborate on details? This confuses me.
 * A result is that we still have even the obvious mistake of calling synesthesia concurrents "symptoms". That is a very simple error, and a correct term is free of my interest. Why would that be deleted?
 * But let us say that this somehow gets through and symptom is corrected into experience, then we have still the problem of "incorrect diagnosis", as you call it.
 * The sentence we talk about is preceded by: "Just by hearing the name of an item, he would be able to envision it in realistic detail." There is no study known to me that demonstrated that this happens to other synesthetes. The connection made between that statement about Tesla and synesthesia is a kind of "original research made in wikipedia" -- a research that resulted with incorrect conclusion, and obviously made by someone who has only superficial understanding of the issue at hand.
 * In other words, there is an implied speculation that Tesla used synesthesia like skills for his creative work. There is no evidence for it presented in the text or in the link. In addition, the theory of synesthesia as a phenomenon presumes that this is not even possible. Ideasthesia at least remedies this problem a bit.
 * So, what do we do?
 * Danko — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Dankonikolic (talk • contribs)


 * I think you are correct, and the other editor reverted your addition inadvertently.
 * I'm fairly convinced now that the best thing to do is to remove the content about synesthesia as well. There is no reliable source to support this, or your addition, so far as I can see, and I should probably have removed them both as speculative when I made my first reversion of your edit. My mistake.
 * Because this is my talk page, we won't get much input here, so I'm going to copy this discussion to Talk:Nikola Tesla, and hopefully more editors can give input there. You shouldn't add anything to the article itself related to this in the meantime, now that a discussion is ongoing. WP:CONSENSUS explains our consensus process, which will apply. You should make further replies at Talk:Nikola Tesla - I'll pop a link to the precise discussion section on your talk page in a few minutes.
 * I understand it is confusing when you first start to edit here, but if you can find the time to look at the blue-linked policies and guidelines I have linked for you it should help you to become more familiar with the process. Thanks for discussing this openly - that's very helpful. Begoon &thinsp; talk  13:49, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Malaysia Rainfall
Thanks, just sharing my knowledge with wiki.(Sky Zuan (talk) 13:12, 1 June 2013 (UTC))


 * That's great. It's a lot of work, and appreciated. I'm confused by the numbers, though - so I asked you a question at User talk:Sky Zuan. It may just be the headings that are confusing me. Begoon &thinsp; talk  13:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry the average is for 2013 means that for whole year January 2013-December 2013, while ranfall for 5 month is year to present 2013 cumulative

Here's the links http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/index.php?option=com_content&id=959&Itemid=111&lang=en

http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1011&Itemid=111&lang=en

http://161.142.139.60/NO_RAIN/Norain.htm

http://www.met.gov.my/index.php?option=com_weathertimeseries&purpose=rainfall&Itemid=589

http://infobanjir.water.gov.my/real_time.cfm?CFID=5173837&CFTOKEN=3360390f3d6b830f-F1522891-E0DB-5505-BAA273A5A1CE2E02 (Sky Zuan (talk) 13:26, 1 June 2013 (UTC))

also you can click the link in location name for more info. (Sky Zuan (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2013 (UTC))


 * Ok, that helps - but I'm still confused - are the 2013 "total" figures a projection? If so, will it need updating every month? And how is the projection done? Sorry if these are dumb questions - but I still don't quite get it. Begoon &thinsp; talk  13:37, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

don't feel sorry, maybe you can compare like this to clear your confusion;

This is an actual figures counted daily basis and total for each months

 Principle Meteorological Station - Petaling Jaya 

(Sky Zuan (talk) 18:36, 1 June 2013 (UTC))

Nope, I'm still dumb. What is the pink number? It can't be "Average Rainfall 2013 [January - December]" or "Total Rainfall 2013 [January - December]" because 7 of those months have not happened yet. Begoon &thinsp; talk 20:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * oohh now i see, i strongly believe that you are not an engineering/statistics/sciences & maths students right?
 * because when we have the data for a few years back, we can predict or project where the next figures data will be lingers in. the more samples will be more accurate.
 * Ok let me give you examples, average means like this in mathematic/calculus point of view;
 * let say data recorded since 2008 till now


 * december 2008 rainfall recorded : 220
 * december 2009 rainfall recorded : 350
 * december 2010 rainfall recorded : 180
 * december 2011 rainfall recorded : 400
 * december 2012 rainfall recorded : 210
 * december 2012 rainfall recorded : 140
 * 6 years data recorded


 * Prediction for December 2013 : [220 + 350 + 180 + 400 + 210 + 140] / 6 = 250mm
 * so the average (mathematical point of view) rainfall for December 2013 is 250mm
 * the data like this cannot be skipped
 * like if no data recorded on 2010 and 2012, so the average will be as not accurate. so the data need to be recorded simultaneously
 * I hope you get what i mean =) (Sky Zuan (talk) 01:19, 2 June 2013 (UTC))


 * Lol - er... yes, I know exactly what averages and predictions/projections are. Read again what I asked you up above.
 * I asked "are the 2013 "total" figures a projection?" and you didn't answer that... we could have both saved a bit of time, but no matter.


 * We'll need to label the column something like "Projected total annual rainfall (2013)" to avoid confusion, then.
 * I think, when it's finished, we may need to collapse the table (with something like the green "box" I used above (but not horrid green)), because it is quite big, and tends to dominate the article a bit for one set of statistics.
 * We can adjust the final table headings and cell number alignment to make it "pretty".


 * One thing I often do with a big "chunk" of additional content like this is to prepare it in my personal sandbox and then add it in one edit to the article by copy/paste, to avoid building it in the "live" article.


 * Thanks again for taking time to explain it, and thanks very much indeed for the work you are doing, it's a good addition to the article, and very useful.  Begoon &thinsp; talk  04:21, 2 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh well sorry, my mistakes =P. Yup, you are right, also pls do whatever necessary while I'm just fill the datas in the table that you created bcuz I'm not very familiar with these wiki's templates & coding etc2 @__@ (Sky Zuan (talk) 06:11, 3 June 2013 (UTC))


 * Misunderstandings happen all the time here - I never worry about them - it's a consequence of the way we have to communicate.
 * Wikitables are a nightmare to format unless you do a lot of it. I hate editing them. I changed the headings and justified the data columns to the right. I think that's about the best that can be done.
 * If you hadn't done all this, there would be no table there at all - so the credit is all yours. It's an excellent addition. Begoon &thinsp; talk  06:18, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Frank Iero
Hey sorry about the edit I made to the page Frank Iero. Via his twitter he wanted it up there but I can see why you wanted it to come down. No hard feelings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiger JackKnifeJR (talk • contribs) 05:28, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If you're referring to the trivia, that's unencyclopedic. If you keep altering the band page and the pages of the band members to say "is" instead of "was" after being warned, you'll probably end up blocked from editing, incidentally. I'm not sure why you are doing that. Begoon &thinsp; talk  05:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Cheers (season 5)
I expanded episodes, so can you copyedit only ones that I expanded? --George Ho (talk) 04:41, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'll try to have a look in the next day or two. Thanks George. Begoon &thinsp; talk  04:51, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your kind comments : )
 * User_talk:Jc37

And incidentally: "Weather is dreadful - wish you were here" - made me smile, then chuckle, then laugh : ) - jc37 22:08, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Great to hear from you! The weather thing is probably a bit "English" from growing up there - comes from the habit/custom of sending everyone picture postcards when on holiday, usually saying "Dear Aunt Gertrude, Having a good time, weather is lovely, wish you were here." because you didn't know what else to write. (...but you probably knew that...)
 * Same here as always, really. Everyone fights about nothing, stuff still happens, stuff still doesn't happen, Malleus is Eric, we have a new, spiffy, notification system, and nobody seems to want to close my ANI report. So, life goes on the same as ever really. Don't be a stranger. Begoon &thinsp; talk  23:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you. There was a serious point, though: we've all blown off a bit when we feel we're being ganged up on, even when the 'gang' is very right and 'we' are very wrong. Once the topic-ban/appeal/rinse-and-repeat cycle begins, though, it can be a bit hard for a user to climb back out of that black hole. Sure, the guy is ranting now, but he may have other good things to contribute in time. Like I said - old softy... Begoon &thinsp; talk  16:27, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

No probs
Martinvl (talk) 13:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

My Day
I am retired and have plenty of time. Your points were constructive. This all started back in 1997 when I read R.J. Rummel's books and put his numbers on spreadsheets, I believed him back then, I no longer accept him as the gospel truth. In 2002 I discovered Matthew White's webpage, he is a diligent librarian who introduced me to different sources like Boris Urlanis. Having a reading knowledge of German and Russian as well as access to the New York Public Library gave me the ability to track down the secondary sources behind the numbers. Since 2005 I have put the data from the these secondary sources on Wikipedia.--Woogie10w (talk) 13:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Constructive perhaps, but I missed the "due diligence" of doing the extra reading that would have assuaged my borderline OR concerns before confusing everyone with them. This internet thing can be far too "immediate" sometimes - I need to increase my internal "delay loops", because, invariably, considered opinion is better than instant reaction, and I really know that... At least I know where to find the local expert now. Thanks for the reply, and the understanding. Begoon &thinsp; talk  13:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

just to make sure you noticed...
(wrote in in Module talk:Chart, but wanted to make sure you notice, so i copy it here...)

so i taught chart 2 new tricks: "tooltip value accumulation": this has effect only with "stack", and will cause the tooltip value to display the accumulation of all the block up to the current (including), and "hide group legends" which prevent displaying the group legends below the chart (the 2nd one works for pie chart also). the 1st can be useful for the use you need for casualties, i think. i believe the 2nd one can make the "overflow:hidden;" and the div height unnecessary. peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 21:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that's excellent - I replied there. Now I can simplify the templates used at User:Begoon/sandbox/casualties a bit by removing the "work arounds" - cool. Begoon &thinsp; talk  01:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Charts
Go ahead be bold and finish the job when you have the time, I look forward to seeing the charts updated. Regards --Woogie10w (talk) 02:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm converting the data from the big wikitable at the moment in preparation for entering real data in the data template. That will take a while, because there is a lot, and I can only pull it out from the wikicode, which I then need to convert - I have to do semi-manual splits for high/low estimates because there is no separation of data in the table (all in one column/cell like "3,000,000 to 4,000,000" .) I'm checking it for consistency at the same time. Then when I have it all in a neat format I can look at adding it and fiddling with the presentation. So if nothing seems to happen for a few days, that's why. I'm guessing overall, with the limited time I have spare at the moment, and not ignoring other stuff, the whole process could even take a couple of weeks. No point in rushing and making errors . I'll probably ask you to check it at some point. Cheers. Begoon &thinsp; talk  03:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bishop Bell School
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bishop Bell School. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I am sorry
I saw the deletion forum on Commons, and voted delete myself. I count you a friend and would never knowingly have put you in an uncomfortable situation. I've explained at the deletion request, but I also want to say sorry here, and I don't want you to think ill of me, I never had any malintent. Your friend--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 22:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for cleaning up my entry om the Caprice Bourett page I forgot where I saw the report that she was having a child via surrogate Thinking now it was a report in the Uk Newspaper 'The Sun' Anyway thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guyver Mark (talk • contribs)
 * No problem - I used FoxNews and The Express as references in the end, but I would have preferred something 'better', really - all of those can be a bit gossipy, and FOX quote the Sun in the report I used anyway. Begoon &thinsp; talk  14:45, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you kindly. Added to article. TCO (talk) 05:55, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I see how the text makes labelling unnecessary. Cheers. Begoon &thinsp; talk  06:14, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the edit request on the Atatürk page
I have translated the Turkish text into English so it can be taken into consideration now. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.184.31.13 (talk) 02:08, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much indeed for doing that. I've marked the edit request as unanswered again, and replied there. Begoon &thinsp; talk  02:29, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Leaving a message again so you can see that I've replied once more, I'll go sleep now as it's getting late so I'll probably reply back in a few hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.184.31.13 (talk) 03:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Great stuff. I'm going to wait for other comments on the talk page - there are many editors who know far more about this than I do - I originally ended up there when I was helping out processing some edit requests. You've certainly provided some good material to digest. Thanks again. Begoon &thinsp; talk  03:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC)