User talk:Celithemis/Archive 1

Beast
Yeah, sorry about that, that was a mistake. That anon IP had made most of the info in the box set beneath one another with the  so I reverted it, accidentally also reverting your work. My apologies. Kusonaga 09:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Not a problem at all. Thanks for clarifying. --Celithemis 09:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

John Reber
Got your message. All sounds great; feel free to proceed, or I'll do it in the morning. --Grahamtalk/mail/ e 08:15, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Many thanks, for the advice and the chore! --Grahamtalk/mail/ e 17:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Hey, I just noticed... thanks for reverting that attack on my user page. Funny guy; he actually took the time to edit a second time to add his signature. Anyway, thanks for the support. --Grahamtalk/mail/ e 17:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Liane de Pougy postcard.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Liane de Pougy postcard.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 13:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Leela's wristband
ok, thanks for pointing out some flaws in my article. but, i still believe that it deserves a small article, as it is an important part in the show. Problem is, i am a new user, and i have no idea how to merge articles. if anyone can help me, please leve a message on YaddaYaddaBlahBlahBlah's talk page, or the Leela's wristband edit page in the summary! thank you! 11 september: thanks for merging my article!

Welcome!
 Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Biography WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of biographies.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Starting some new articles? Our article structure tips outlines some things to include.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every biography article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! plange 00:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Biography Newsletter September 2006
The September 2006 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. plange 00:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

MoMA links on van Gogh page
I appreciate your insight on the best way to use external links on the site. Although, in general I think providing external links in an article gives the user more opportunity to explore the topic. Jmaldonado 04:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I've noticed that on some artists' pages there is a subsection of "External Links" for "Museums". I think this is valuable for the user because can they can see at a glance a list of museums that house works by the artist. Would you consider it appropriate/useful to create such a subsection in the External Links of the van Gogh page? Jmaldonado 02:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

expatriate
Where can I see the peer review of Natalie Barney in which the word "expatriate" is considered confusing? I hate to see articles dumbed down in order to gain an "improved" status! - Nunh-huh 11:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It was a Wikiproject Biography Peer Review. The expatriate article led a reviewer to think she had something to do with the Lost Generation (which she preceded).  I figured that since the sentence already said she was an American who lived in Paris, "expatriate" could be taken as read, though it is used further down in the article.  &mdash;Cel  ithemis  11:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't see the review at that link, only a link to the article. I think it's better with expatriate there, and I'm not sure why one reviewer's mistaken assumptions should militate against it, but I'd be interested in reading the original comments. It's obviously not a big deal, but... - Nunh-huh 11:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * That's strange, the link works for me. Try WikiProject Biography/Peer review?  &mdash;Cel  ithemis  11:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, I was misled by the peculiar use of headings there. I see it now. I think wikification and retention of the term would be a better answer to Electrawn's unfamiliarity with the word. It's not clear from his comments that he understands the term even at the time of writing. - Nunh-huh 11:47, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; I'm happy to be emboldened to restore the original version, which did sound better.  &mdash;Cel ithemis  11:49, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yippee! - Nunh-huh 12:00, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Aww, thanks! I'll put that on my mantel userpage.  *shines it*  &mdash;Cel  ithemis  06:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
For putting link to article on The 101 Most Influential People Who Never Lived giving details on the book. I had begun entering the numbers on various sites. I got to Sherlock Holmes before I delved into Category:Public domain characters. 24.176.0.225 01:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

User:The Moneycruncher
Since your message left on The Moneycruncher's talk page, he or she has uploaded Image:Epguides tome.gif, claiming GNUFDL for now apparent reason. Just in case you want to take any further action... Mr WR 14:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography/Peer review
C. -- Per your comment, I added a discussion on the WikiProject Biography/Peer review talk page. -- Jreferee 01:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the barnstar! Even the computer is blushing. Keep editing with integrity, JNW 00:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * And thank you again, this time for your supportive remarks. You need not feel at all responsible for this little imbroglio: your encouragement may have emboldened me to edit where I had not before, but it was, of course, my decision, after all. Any circumstance that prompts some reflection, and humility, can't be bad. Still, it is difficult not to be partial to one's own edits. Your explanations of the technicalities of appropriate links are way over my head--let's just say I'm a country painter who is spending way too much time at the computer. And again, thank you. JNW 03:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Augustus John
I am waiting for you now to add the pics as previously agreed...and also please take a look at the changes I made to the Gwen John page with a view to converting some of the better links into pics to embellish the article. That would be great if you could oblige. thank you Peter morrell


 * Thanks, you made a very decent job of that, which is much appreciated. This article is now superb in my view. kind regards 86.112.229.50 21:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)sorry I was not logged in! Peter morrell 21:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Gwen John
Many thanks for adding the pic but I think the pictures The Convalescent and The Precious Book are extremely fine examples of her work and these would greatly embellish the article if you care to do that? I also have more text and quotes to go in to the article in the near future when I get the time. thanks again Peter morrell 17:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Many thanks, you have done a very nice job, as expected. I will also try to add some text as time permits; regards. Peter morrell 06:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I wonder if I might prevail once again upon your image insertion skills? There is a nice pic of Pissarro's grave at Pere Lachaise I wonder if it could be added to the article...it is mentioned in it. Thanks in anticipation. Peter morrell 09:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Showoff!
As I was looking up the shortcut to No Original Research by preparing to revert someone's cut-and-paste of their high school paper into the William Blake article, you stole my revert! I guess it never occurred to you to put a brief note on the talk page of any past contributor to an article before reverting an obviously-broken contribution so that we'd all have a chance to revert it. Wikipedia is going downhill so fast, these days... :-)


 * So sorry -- I'll try to be slower next time!


 * That same IP inserted big blocks of text copied from websites into the Delacroix and Goya articles as well -- along with a few random bits of tagging like "Victor Li is so cool".

... and since you have a clue, here's a random question for you: I added an in-line comment warning people away from making random edits to a frequently-vandalized section of an article. Is this a good idea? Here's the diff:. There's no controversy or anything, I am just trying to understand best practices.Strom 02:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've never seen that done specifically to deal with vandalism, but people have used HTML comments to try to ward off spam in external link sections, so it seems worth a try. I can't think of any policy it would violate, anyway. If it works I might try it myself on a page or two.  &mdash;Cel  ithemis  03:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

El Greco
Thanks a lot for all your detailed comments on the article. I tried to implement most of your suggestions (and I'll keep working on them), but, I also left some comments (including further questions) in response of your remarks in WikiProject Biography/Peer review/El Greco. You might be interested to take a look. Once again thanks a lot both for the review and the copy-editing.--Yannismarou 13:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

JS reviewer
Hello Celithemis, I just edited your monobook.js to replace the coding from the PR script with js. This allows for me to keep track of who is using the PR script and to let you use the most recently updated revision of the script (well, at least since the last WP:BYC). Thanks, AZ t 02:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

New article how?
Can you please tell me where in wiki the 'start a new article' help page is located? I have searched for hours without success. If you know, then please point me in the right direction. many thanks Peter morrell 15:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Once again, thanks so much for your help! I did eventually stumble upon the 'start a new page' thing but I was searching for the wrong rubrics and really I think wiki should have thought of people trying to home in on that page via other words like 'make' or 'write' or 'new' all leading hopefully through the wiki maze to the 'start a new page' Mecca! Oh well, a lesson learned. Thanks also for the advice about tagging. best regards Peter morrell 21:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
I know you were just doing routine vandal patrol. Still, thank you so much for catching the vandalism to the Langston Hughes article.TonyCrew 03:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Gluck (Hannah Gluckstein)
There seem to be references on the internet to Hannah Gluckenstein as well as Gluckstein. I had made an article for "Hannah Gluckenstein" then noticed yours. I have assumed that you are correct and have redirected my article to yours. Have also made an article Hannah Gluckstein with a redirect to yours and entered the name in the disambiguation list for Gluck (disambiguation)

Collywolly 22:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Celithemis
A damselfly, no doubt--not a dragonfly?

Collywolly 22:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Nope, my namesake is 100% Anisoptera :) Damselflies are slenderer, though the body's mostly covered by the wings in that photo.  &mdash;Cel  ithemis  22:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Gluck
I am not sure how much of the info. I entered is correct as I got it from glbtq.com, so I won't put any of it there. Sorry, In missed you point about the name, on the discussion page.

I am scanning in The Well of Loneliness for Project Gutenberg of Australia and the cover (a detail from Medallion by Gluck) attacted my attention. Hence my interest in her. I have recently posted The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas at Project Gutenberg of Australia. I notice your interest in these, from your page.

Regards

Collywolly 23:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Authors who died before 1955 and whose work was published during their (his/her) lifetime are public domain in Australia. Unfortunately, as a result of the Free Trade Agreement with the USA, our copyright law was recently changed and authors who died in or after 1955 are still copyright until at least 2025! Stein's The Making of Americans is eligible but, at 900 pages, is more than I could bear to scan and proof.

The cover of the Well contains most of the painting shown at the link you gave me. I found the androgynous nature of the subjects very intriguing. I saw in an article about J. Lyons and Co. that there was an external link to here, and that there didn't seem to be a JOSEPH GLUCKSTEIN at Lyons, so that leaves another question mark about my source. I won't do any more to your article. My original intention was simply to ensure that there was something at Wikipedia about the interesting Gluck. You had already achieved that!

I don't know much about the technical aspects of Wikipedia as I spend most of my spare time with Project Gutenberg of Australia. For mine, you can add a "bar" to the "The Barnstar of High Culture" already awared to you.

Regards

Collywolly 00:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)



The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For your tireless altruism. JNW 01:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
I just wanted to offer my very sincere thanks for putting the Langston Hughes article on the watchlist for vandalism. Thank you so very much.TonyCrew 20:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Please, don't get tired of me saying these words. Thank you :-)TonyCrew 20:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Heh!
(rv to version in which Sam is not cool) Adam Cuerden talk 08:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thurgarton priory pic
Please check the comment at my user page about the pic...I do not understand what they want and would welcome it if you could reply direct about this...if so, then thanks in advance Peter morrell 13:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * pls forget it, this matter is now sorted! thanks Peter morrell 20:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Camille
Confusion re: Camille Pissarro and the painting link. The landscape painted on his palette is linked to an unrelated image, Monet's portrait of his wife, Camille, which is now mislabeled as the Pissarro painting (the mind reels)--that is why I corrected the title of the image. If there is anything you can do to help, I suspect both impressionists will rest more easily. Thank you, JNW 04:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * My mind no longer reels--not so much, anyway. Thank you. JNW 05:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Well done
Thank you for your very productive edit to Lesbian American history. Cheers! Chuchunezumi 08:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Romaine Brooks
Congrats on your latest GA! I just passed it. It's a nice companion piece to Natalie Barney and I have also added it to the list on WikiProject LGBT studies. I will give it another look, but I think it's getting close to featured status. Well done! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 16:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, may I invite you to join WikiProject LGBT studies? We have a lot of Wikifaeries, but are a little short of FA writers. We'd love to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, thankyou! I've wrestled with that bloody thing for hours! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah. Which is why I'm so delighted. One thing though - can you center the text? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I had a read-through of Well of Lonliness last night! Whew! That is one large article though it really is very good. The only complaint I have would be that occasionally titles are not italicized, but besides that, I don't see anything missing. It really makes for a pleasant read. If only we could have more writers like you around...do you know anything about theatre? Playwright Paula Vogel could use some work. :-) Before you submit this for FAC, might I suggest you ask User:SandyGeorgia to look it over? She does a great deal of work on FAs and might be able to make a few suggestions before it's candidacy. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 15:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There isn't an article on Censorship of the theatre, there are articles on specific pieces of legislation like the Licensing Act of 1737 and the Theatres Act 1968 and such but nothing on the general censorship of theatre. It's certainly something that's needed. Let me know if I can to help you out. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 20:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Review
Hey, Celithemes. I had a quick glance at the article, and don't see any reason it shouldn't hold its own at FAC. The structure and referencing look sound. It's on the long side, though, and since I'm facing 20 airport/airplane hours this week, I'd like to print it out to read later. Just some very quick notes, in case you want to go to FAC: That's all I can add without having read it, which I will do on my trip; if you put it up at FAC and it's still there when I return, I'll weigh in at the FAC. Good luck !! Sandy Georgia (Talk) 18:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The size is currently at 41KB prose, which makes it a long article, but not too long (borderline, but I don't see any areas that seem to be likely candidates for summary style). If there are objects on size, refer them to WP:LENGTH, and the discussion of prose size and how to calculate it - it's long, but within limits of readable prose.
 * Are there authors on these two NY Times articles? If so, they should be listed.  "Customs Seeks to Bar 'Well of Loneliness'", New York Times, May 16, 1929, pp. 18. "'Well Of Loneliness' Held Not Offensive", New York Times, July 27, 1929, pp. 11.
 * The Ellis listing in References should have a retrieve date, as well as the Time magazine listing in Notes. (See next point - hard print sources don't require a URL, but as long as we've given it as a courtesy, we might as well include retrieval date, in case the link goes missing in the future.)
 * I don't add retrieve dates on journal listings such as Jstors, but I've seen people object if every websource doesn't have a retrieval date (I was asked to add them on my FA, and found it easier just to do it than to resist and muck up the FAC) - you might want to add them "prophylactically" on your Jstors websources, although I don't believe they're required. Certainly no one will object if they're there, but someone may if they're not.
 * I saw a Geocities website, which could be interpreted as a personal website (questionable reliable source), but followup reveals it's Hopkins, Ph.D. with good credentials - looks good to me. You may be asked to justify his/her reliability.
 * I like to follow WP:GTL exactly, although it says it's OK to alter the sequence of the appendices. My thinking is that Wikified content is always preferable to non-Wiki content, so External links should go last, as suggested at WP:GTL - however, that's not grounds for an object.
 * Make sure you've checked your Fair Use rationale on every image - I don't speak Fair Use, so can't help there.
 * Just found something new, based on something that came up on another article, causing me to have another look. There are multiple Taylor References - all Taylor footnotes need to specify which Taylor ref they came from.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't worry about adding anon or anything on NYTimes author - I was only inquiring because sometimes editors forget to include bylines. Good luck !  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Question
Hi, Celithemis. Maybe you can help answer a question: There are many entries for major artists which are thin on information, and which I would like to improve over the coming months--is it considered acceptable to use a 1990's version of Brittanica as a primary source? It would make the work ever so much easier. Thanks for your help, JNW 04:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the clarification. I have an excellent library, but do not want to spend the time on the heavy lifting of poring over much text when a better biographical overview is what is needed. Nonetheless, I can appreciate the distinction between scholarly sources and encyclopedic ones, and would prefer to use the former. JNW 05:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

 * I get the feeling you're going to be earning a lot of Featured Article medals. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Gay icon
Thanks for your comments on the gay icon article. If you have a free moment, please check out the change I made to the entertainment section, for the international gay icons. Jeffpw 22:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

There are actually sources for all of them--I was just too lazy to add them in. I only got into the article because it was nominated for speedy deletion. I spent 6 hours straight working on it (see the diffs for the before and after). Once it was declared a keep, I only visited it sporadically to remove vandalism. Jeffpw 22:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Comics
I tried re-wording what was thrown in but was as happy to see you rm it later. Gwen Gale 23:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

The Well of Loneliness
Has been selected as the Featured Article for the LGBT Portal. It will be displayed on the Portal page until 24 February. Just a head's up, and a small reward for writing such a great article. :-) Jeffpw 23:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out to me. I hadnt checked the FU status. I will look into it, as the terms vary per image sort. If necessary, I will delete that image (though it would make me sad). By the way, we got into an edit conflict over there--I was removing that hanging ref at the same time you were! Jeffpw 23:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Changed to the pretty picture of the woman with the gorgeous fur cape. Jeffpw 23:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

scope question
You had some concerns about the project scope, and I've tried to incorporate them into a new statement. Please have a look at the end of WT:LGBT and leave whatever comments you might have. =) — coe l acan t a lk  — 00:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Righto. I'm not entirely certain of the need, but I believe the purpose of it is to have something to point to when someone is accused of trying to gay up all of Wikipedia. =P — coe l acan t a lk  — 00:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

{| width=100% cellpadding=10px 10px 5px 5px;
 * style='border: 2px solid #9B75AD; background-color: #EED8EE;' |

WP:LGBT Coordinator Election Notice
This is just a quick, automated note to let you know that there is an election being conducted over the next 7 days for the position of &quot;Coordinator&quot; for the LGBT WikiProject. Your participation is requested. --
 * }

List of LGB people.
Only if you can also write it into your script to add birth dates and nationalities (professions I think would be too difficult), otherwise I may as well do it myself when I convert all the references. Can your script do that? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That would be, in the words of Mr Kipling, exceedingly good. :D Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 01:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Excellent. I still have to go through every one, but it's certainly going to cut down my time per person. Thank you! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 07:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

histrionics
I fixed the link to wiktionary, "Exaggerated, overemotional behaviour, especially when calculated to elicit a response; melodramatics." --South Philly 23:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

List of bisexual people
Hi, I saw what you did to List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people, the wikitable conversion. Could you perhaps do the same to List of bisexual people. Since the article (most likely) will be kept I thought I would clean it up and give reliable sources. To have everything neatly in tables would help a lot there. Cheers, Garion96 (talk) 00:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. I was thinking of fields the same as List of HIV-positive people. Enough for every name (including long ones) to be in one line, and enough for comments etc. Garion96 (talk) 01:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Erm, could you not do that? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 02:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Forked? No. Hand written? Yes, and it's taking a bloody long time, do you want me to put in where I've got to so far? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 02:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It has been mentioned at least twice, and certainly all the regulars ought to know if they read the talkpage. I committed myself in the AfD to finishing it this month, and I was planning to keep that. So not for much longer. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 04:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I had no idea indeed about this, sorry about that, hope it wasn't that much work for nothing. Garion96 (talk) 12:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)