User talk:Bkwillwm/Archive 2

DC Meetup notice
Greetings. There is going to be a Washington DC Wikipedia meetup on next Saturday, July 21st at 5pm in DC. Since you are listed in Category:Wikipedians_in_Virginia, I thought I'd invite you to come. I'm sorry about the short notice for the meeting. Hopefully we'll do somewhat better in that regard next time. If you can't come but want to make sure that you are informed of future meetings be sure to list yourself under "but let me know about future events", and if you don't want to get any future direct notices \(like this one\), you can list yourself under "I'm not interested in attending any others either" on the DC meetup page.--Gmaxwell 22:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:John sweeney aflcio.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:John sweeney aflcio.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. High on a tree 20:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Buttefly 1999 dvd.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Buttefly 1999 dvd.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Giralda madison square.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Giralda madison square.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Che Guevera
If you are going to edit the article, please join our dicussion on Featured article review/Che Guevara and also on the discussions on the talk page before making edits. We are all working to save the article and would be happy to have you help. Mattisse 17:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Autograph book
A tag has been placed on Autograph book requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article consists of a dictionary definition that has been transwikied and the author information recorded.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kkmurray (talk) 04:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Economy of the United States
Thanks for your recent contribution to that article. I'm far from an expert in economics; I was attempting to neutrally reword that passage. What do you think of the current intro? OhNo itsJamie Talk 05:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the rewording was generally good, you just happened to use a word according to English common usage instead of its technical, economic definition. I noticed I made a mistake too since the sentence talks about output and the data was GDP per capita. Generally, I think the intro is OK. New economy changes frequently, so it seems hard to maintain a high quality static version on articles like these. I'll take a closer look and see what else I can find.--Bkwillwm (talk) 18:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Environmental issues in India
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Environmental issues in India, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Beeblbrox (talk) 02:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This talk page is becoming very long. Please consider archiving.

Your revert on Gift economy
Pls. read Economic system and give reputable sources where the expression "gift economy" is referred to an economic system. As long as you are not able to provide this, I will delete this POV. --Meisterkoch (talk) 12:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Your edits at State of nature were mentioned at the 3RR noticeboard
Hello Bkwillwm. It does not appear that anyone notified you about this report. EdJohnston (talk) 16:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Francisco Franco
To state that Franco was not a fascist is not POV. It is a fact of history and political science. It is the overwhelming consensus of scholars on the subject; Payne says as much. I provided two reliable sources to support this, Payne and Laqueur (although you quibble over Payne's words). The fact that he may have borrowed the trappings of Fascism is beside the point. Many interwar governments had policies in common with fascism, including the New Deal. As to the Roman Salute, even American school children early in the century used it during the pledge of allegiance. If you insist, I will demonstrate the point for you on the talk page. It is fair to say Franco was authoritarian and a dictator and that some of his supporters early on were fascist but going beyond that is not accurate. Mamalujo (talk) 17:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

List of price index formulas‎

 * I was thinking of shifting the article form away from being a list and convert it to regular article with more discussion of each index (background, technical properties, usage).

Excellent! As it is, it's great to have these assembled in one article, but more history and critical apparatus would significantly amplify the value of the article. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 04:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Foreign aid to Thailand
Hi Bkwillwm, I see you have a history of working on the article Foreign aid to Thailand. I am looking at it from the project Unreferenced articles where it is one of the longest unreferenced tagged articles that does not meet at least the barest minimum of verifiability. It has been tagged and completely without references since July 2006. It would be extremely helpful if you had some references you could add to the article to help support its verifiability and notability. Thanks for any help you can give. PhilKnight (talk) 23:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed change of article title to "Monetary economics"
Thank you for your help on the above. Now comes the more ocmplicated part of making the change without losing the history of "Monetary economics" which is now a REDIRECT. My plan is to put the history of the earlier ME article and Talk page on the MT Talk page, then chamnge the name of the MT Talk to ME Talk. If you have any thoughts on this, please let me know either here, on MT Talk. or on my Talk page. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 10:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

About "Economy of the Iroquois"
I have translated into French the (great) article about the "Economy of the Iroquois" and I'm now proposing it as an Article de qualité (equivalent to FA). I've put some questions and remarks on the talk page, could you have a look at it? Thanks. --Fanfwah (talk) 09:41, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for catching the word I neglected in the caption of Joseph Leavitt. Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 03:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Iroquois again
Yet another question on the talk page! Fanfwah (talk) 01:24, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I've done some edits to the False Face Society article, specifically to the Modern Conflicts section. Since you created the article and are quite knowledgeable about the Iroquois in general, maybe you could help me with some questions I left on its talk page. Sorry for usurping this section of your talk page, but it seemed appropriate and I was at a loss for where to place a new one. Apwith (talk) 18:28, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Autograph Book
Greetings. I noticed you commented on the autograph book stub article a while back and voiced the hope that it would be expanded. I just wanted to let you know that it has been – I wrote a full-length article last night, when I stumbled onto the page and found it disappointingly short. --Xiaphias (talk) 21:49, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

CRA and housing bubble
What caused the housing bubble if a mandated increase in sub-prime mortgages didn't? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.123.42 (talk) 17:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

FWIW
I've started a talk section of “Marginal utility” which you might want to use, but I wanted toput a sort of restatement here.

There is a difference amongst the claims The passage that you removed speaks to the last point. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 13:12, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * that utility need not be quantitified
 * that marginal utility need not be quantified
 * that marginal utility can diminish without being quantified

Scrappage
Hi. I just added alot of information about the Cars for Clunkers bill and wanted to confirm with you that: a. the content is appropriate for Wikipedia b. the references are done correctly (i referenced after each paragraph, should i do it less?)

Please advise if you don't mind. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariabaena (talk • contribs) 03:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Velocity charts
Good addition, and I agree with the caption on the first chart, but we really need a citation for that interpretation. I thought that I'd ask you on your talk page for a citation before tagging it, as you might have a citation immediately at hand. —SlamDiego&#8592;T 04:47, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the chance to throw in a citation. Mishkin's textbook also has a chart showing that money velocity is unstable and economically correlated. I realized by caption was a little one-sided, but the chart ended up being more one-sided than I expected.--Bkwillwm (talk) 05:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

OR tag on Search for a Method
I replied to your message on user:chzz/talk a few days ago; sorry, I forgot to let you know until now.  Chzz  ►  22:03, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Economy of the Iroquois
Thank you very much for such interesting article. Now it is translating to russian. May be you know where I can find any statistical data about Iroquois? Lime82 (talk) 14:12, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

HOET
Thanks for your updates, mate!  Wik idea  10:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Neo-Keynesian?
Thanks for the cite about what macro-economists now agree upon. The list according to the cite you provided is:

1) coherent intertemporal general-equilibrium foundations

2) base quantitative policy analysis on econometrically validated structural models

3) model expectations as endogenous

4) real disturbances are an important source of economic fluctuations

5) Monetary policy is now widely agreed to be effective

Of the above, the original Keynesian model was completely lacking in 1) and 3). It was not general-equilibrium, it was partial-equilibrium of the worst sort. Expectations were not endogenous, they were in fact not a factor in consumption decisions (which were simply a fixed proportion of income).

The above two shortcomings made Keynes be thought of poorly by theoretical economists.

2) and 4) were at best tangential to Keynes, not really related or relevant.

5) was an alternative view of the world, a competitor to Keynes.

If there was anything at all that is similar to Keynes' model in the above list, it was that wages and prices are sticky.

So if the above 5 are the current "mainstream" then I fail to see how this "mainstream" has anything to do with Keynes.

And also if you look at the cite carefully, the only time the word Neo-Keynesian is mentioned is in the sentence "In the 1960s and early 1970s, the main division was between the neo-Keynesians and the monetarist school." That hardly is support for neo-Keynsian being the current "mainstream".

Steel2009 (talk) 03:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Your points about Keynes don't have anything to do with the issue on Neo-Keynesian economics. The paper I cited states that New Keynesian economics forms part of current mainstream economics, and that's what the article says. New Keynesianism developed out of Neo-Keynesianism which came out of Keynes.  I could discuss Keynes's theory, but it's not even relevant here. It's twice removed from the statement in the article.--Bkwillwm (talk) 04:12, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


 * If anything a multi-generational model with endogenous expectations is a rational expectations model. If you introduce features like sticky wages and prices into it, then it is more a modified rational expectations model rather than anything Keynesian. Be that as it may, it appears to me that the reference you provided does not say the "mainstream" is Neo-Keynesian.
 * If you are claiming that the "mainstream" is Neo-Keynesian, because the cited article is Neo-Keynesian, you are committing two bits of "original research". First you are claiming that the article represents the "mainstream". Secondly, you are claiming that the article's content is Neo-Keynesian.
 * Either find better cites for your claim that Neo-Keynesian is the "mainstream" (a poorly defined weaselish word to begin with), or remove the text.
 * Steel2009 (talk) 20:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


 * From your non-answer I presume you are okay with the removal of the disputed text. Steel2009 (talk) 23:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I had limited internet access for a few days. Don't read too much into it. First of all, you don't seem to understand even the basics of what you're debating.  The text you've removed from the article says that "New Keynesianism" forms part of current mainstream Macro.  The current status of Neo-Keynesianism (the predecessor for New Keynesianism) isn't the subject of the text issue at issue. Second, the article I cited clearly states that mainstream macro is a synthesis between some New Keynesian and New Classical ideas.  Several other articles also mention this synthesis and state it makes up the current mainstream.  I will add them to the article soon.  This discussion is better suited to a talk page. If you want to debate this further, please discuss at Talk:Neo-Keynesian economics.--Bkwillwm (talk) 03:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Spare me stuff like "ou don't seem to understand even the basics of what you're debating". If I told you my qualifications, be assured I would leave you behind by a mile. So stick to the subject and don't make this personal.
 * Where in the reference that you provide does it say "that "New Keynesianism" forms part of current mainstream Macro"? And where does the reference "clearly states that mainstream macro is a synthesis between some New Keynesian and New Classical ideas"? Steel2009 (talk) 22:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Until now, you've always used the term "Neo-Keynesianism" when the text in question and my arguments are regarding "New Keynesianism." It doesn't matter what your credentials are if you're missing the subject of the debate. Please see the cited section in Mankiw, and I'm adding another paper on the "New Neoclassical Synthesis", cited by Woodford and Mankiw.--Bkwillwm (talk) 04:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

You should follow the discussion, and not make obvious factual errors. If you keep making factual errors it becomes hard to discuss anything. You wrote "you've always used the term "Neo-Keynesianism" when the text in question" I had actually never used the word "Neo-Keynesianism" except to quote you once. I had used the word "Neo-Keynesian" (which is bad enough) without making it worse by saying "Neo-Keynesianism".

The text which I had originally edited was "This is known as the new Keynesian synthesis, and currently forms the mainstream of macroeconomic theory."

After a series of edits the text that you currently have written is "The new Keynesians helped create a "New Neo-Classical synthesis" that currently forms the mainstream of macroeconomic theory."

The current text is much much better than saying "new Keynesian synthesis" is the mainstream, as it says that "New Neo-Classical synthesis" is the mainstream, and that "new Keynesians" only "helped" create the "mainstream".

"New Neo-Classical synthesis" sounds much more like rational expectations and Neo-classical economics than anything Keynesian. If it incorporates Keynesian ideas like slowly adjusting prices and wages, that is acceptable to me.

There are still weasel words like "helped" and undefined and convoluted terms like "New Neo-Classical" (what next, New Nuovo Notun Naya Neu Neuf New-Classical?) in the current text that are a disservice to the lay readers, but it is not something I would like to spend any more time fixing.

Cheers,

Steel2009 (talk) 19:19, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Open Currency Areas
Having not followed the particular Keynesian source, it seemed like the Criticism section was a place for pot-shots from various theories, and since Keynesians were the only ones shooting, I figured I'd even the score. Open Currency Areas are not exactly common subjects for discussion in Austrian circles, but the notion of market determination of pretty much everything--and especially currencies--certainly is... so I thought I'd add the general information (which included in one of the sources a biographical note about Hayek favoring competing currencies), and then I synthesized the rest from the ether of Austrian readings which is stored in my personal cache (and, potentially, though not immediately, sourceable). Nonetheless, it's better sourced now and I even discovered that there is ONE article specifically about OCA's in the Austrian literature (don't worry, though, there are hundreds of tangential and supporting general competing currency/anti-monetary policy articles). I also have an inkling that just because something is unsourced it doesn't mean it's speculative, and I prefer it left to improve rather than just reverted. so long, 71.224.206.164 (talk) 10:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC).

Scalia
Could I ask you to revisit your oppose on Scalia? I've thrown some criticism in there, including in a crucial spot in the evaluation section. Many thanks,--Wehwalt (talk) 21:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Economics census
Hello there. Sorry to bother you, but you are (titularly at least) a member of WP:WikiProject Economics, as defined by this category. If you don't know me, I'm a Wikipedia administrator, but an unqualified economist. I enjoy writing about economics, but I'm not very good at it, which is why I would like to support in any way I can the strong body of economists here on Wikipedia. I'm only bothering you because you are probably one of them. Together, I'd like us to establish the future direction of WikiProject Economics, but first, we need to know who we've got to help.

Whatever your area of expertise or level of qualification, if you're interested in helping with the WikiProject (even if only as part of a larger commitment to this wonderful online encyclopedia of ours), would you mind adding your signature to this page? It only takes a second. Thank you.

Message delivered on behalf of User:Jarry1250 by LivingBot.

DYK nomination of Royal sites of Ireland
Hello! Your submission of Royal sites of Ireland at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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!  Sp in ni ng  Spark  02:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for alerting me to these issues. It looks like I missed adding a reference so you were looking in the wrong book. I corrected the citation issue and tried to deal with the hook problems.--Bkwillwm (talk) 03:32, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Royal sites of Ireland
Wizardman Operation Big Bear 06:01, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Bkwillwm. I just noticed your article. Nice one. It was fun to read.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 08:57, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I just noticed something, does the Méig Uidhir in the article refer to the Maguire kings of Fermanagh? If so, we could wlink that to Kings of Fer Manach. Maybe Kings of Fer Manach and Maguire of Fermanagh could be merged too.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 09:04, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing this out. My referencce mentioned some of the same kings listed at Maguire of Fermanagh, so I think its safe to say that they are the same.  I added the ilink.--Bkwillwm (talk) 02:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Um...
Do you realize the content of the link you posted onto the talk page here? Perhaps you might want to...reconsider. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 20:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I think my clipboard got hijacked. I'll make sure to check before a save anymore. Thanks for catching that. I'll put in the correct link.--Bkwillwm (talk) 21:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Ferment/foment
Haha. That was amusing. I have a very phonetic way of thinking, so that explains it. ValenShephard (talk) 18:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

the Public Policy Initiative Assessment Team wants You!
Hi Bkwillwm,

I saw some of your contributions on an article that falls within the scope of Wikiproject: United States Public Policy, your expertise in economics would be valuable to the project, and I was hoping you would be interested in assessing articles with the | Public Policy Initiative. There is more info about assessment on the 9/13/2010 Signpost. If you're interested or just curious you can sign up on the project page or just contact me. Thanks! ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 23:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia DC Meetup, October 23
You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #12 on Saturday, October 23, 6pm at Bertucci's in Foggy Bottom. Special guests at this meetup will include Wikimedia CTO Danese Cooper, other Wikimedia technical staff and volunteer developers who will be in DC for Hack-A-Ton DC. Please RSVP on the meetup page.

You can remove your name from the Washington DC Meetups invite list at Meetup/DC/Invite/List.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:00, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ramón de Bonifaz
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 12:02, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Oyster Wars
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 12:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia DC Meetup 13
You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #13 on Wednesday, November 17, from 7 to 9 pm, location to be determined (but near a Metro station in DC).

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can join the mailing list.

You can remove your name from future notifications of Washington DC Meetups by editing this page: Meetup/DC/Invite/List. BrownBot (talk) 13:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Maelsuthain O'Carroll
The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for catching this. Atm, I don't have access to Mankiw and Romer, but you bringing it up makes me think that something from that should be included in the article. Like at least a general sentence or two on how the coconut model fits in with the broader neo-Keynesian framework (essentially because it establishes the importance of expectations and non-uniqueness of the natural rate of unemployment). If you do have access to M&R and could do some expanding, that'd be greatly appreciated. Volunteer Marek (talk) 04:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Five-Year Plans of Vietnam
Seeing that you created this page, with several missing plans, you do realise that Vietnam still uses five-year plans? --TIAYN (talk) 06:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I started the article with text from a public domain source. I don't know much about the subject myself, so I can't round out the gaps or make updates.--Bkwillwm (talk) 06:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for St. Mary's Abbey, Trim
Thank you Victuallers (talk) 21:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiXDC: Wikipedia 10th Birthday!
You are invited to WikiXDC, a special meetup event and celebration on Saturday, January 22 hosted by the National Archives and Records Administration in downtown Washington, D.C. Please RSVP soon as possible, as there likely will be a cap on number of attendees that NARA can accommodate.
 * Date: January 22, 2011 (tentatively 9:30 AM - 5 PM)
 * Location: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), downtown building, Pennsylvania Avenue & 7th St NW.
 * Description: There will be a behind-the-scenes tour of the National Archives and you will learn more about what NARA does. We will also have a mini-film screening featuring FedFlix videos along with a special message from Jimmy Wales. In the afternoon, there will be lightning talks by Wikimedians (signup to speak), wiki-trivia, and cupcakes to celebrate!
 * Details & RSVP:  Details about the event are on our Washington, DC tenwiki page.

Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Meetup/DC/Invite/List. BrownBot (talk) 01:57, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:51, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Congrats
The work you have accomplished on the Economy of the Iroquois is to be commended. Where did you find sources by the way? Congratulations again. ValenShephard (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Most of the sources I found at my college library. A few of the professors specialized in Native American history, so I lucked out.--Bkwillwm (talk) 20:24, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
 * This permission does not give you any special status or authority
 * Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
 * You may wish to display the Autopatrolled top icon and/or the User wikipedia/autopatrolled userbox on your user page
 * If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
 * If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 14:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Edward Stevens (general)
Thank you for your contribution to the wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:37, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

You are invited to the "All Things GW" editathon on Saturday, April 20
The "All Things GW" editathon on Saturday, April 20, 2013 from 12:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. is a rare chance to go behind the scenes in the University Archives of the GW Libraries and use their unique resources to research and update Wikipedia pages related to The George Washington University and the Foggy Bottom neighborhood. Did you miss our last D.C. history editathon? This is your is your chance to come edit with wiki-friends using different great collection! The event includes a behind-the-scenes tour of the University Archives and a show-and-tell of some of its most interesting treasures, snacks, and the editathon.

Participation is limited to 30 volunteers, so RSVP today! Dominic·t 07:22, 15 April 2013 (UTC)