User talk:Choess/Archive6

Re: deputy lieutenants
I agree these appointments should be placed on separate pages, as there are quite many of them for each county. I will update now and then, and appreciate to be able to use your User page on DLs until they can be official. Takvaal —Preceding undated comment added 19:39, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

RE: Godfrey of Godfrey of Bouillon
The very article you linked asserts my "claim". See: Siege_of_Jerusalem_(1099)#Massacre. Would be nice if you better spent your time properly verifying information and checking edit notes. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.228.133 (talk) 07:17, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Bradford Colliery GA review
Thanks for the review, very much appreciated. And of course I think you came to the right decision. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 16:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Green Bay and Western
Thanks for your comments re RR articles. The GBW article is now at the point where it needs a route diagram. I have the info but remain mystified as to how one actually constructs the diagram despite having reread the various articles on templates. If you can point me at fifth grade how-to article it would be a help or suggest a user who could draft a diagram from written info. Please reply to my talk page. Many thanks for your help. --Wickifrank (talk) 15:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

George Villiers (1759–1827) GAN
I enjoyed reading the article - it is well written and appropriately informative. I don't see any serious issues with it; however, I have not been able to verify the main source used, and that independent verification is what a GAN is about. Normally I am able to order books from my library or simply buy them from Amazon. However, it is not available from my library and it is an expensive book. If you have access to a copy, would you be able to scan the relevant pages and email them to me? I have put the GAN onhold until I am able to do the verification. It looks like there are only three pages needed - 405, 452 and 453.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  17:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Well done.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  10:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello
Just wanted to let you know that I saw that you created the new article John Wallop, Viscount Lymington--The citations and references look great.However, I think the article seems to contain a few errors: the article currently does not have appropriate sections and headings. It would be great if you could also Wikify the related article Earl of Portsmouth. Jipinghe (talk) 04:37, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for J. Wesley Gephart
Materialscientist (talk) 00:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

List of Privy Counsellors of Ireland
Thanks for helping out with this article! Tryde (talk) 14:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Office Hours
Hey Choess. Brandon Harris, Howie Fung, Fabrice Florin and I will be holding a second Office Hours session on IRC in #wikimedia office on Thursday, 3 November at 24:00 UTC. This unusually late time is aimed at permitting East Coast editors, who would normally be at work, to attend. We will be discussing the new Article Feedback Tool designs; if you have any questions about Office Hours, or how to get on IRC, feel free to leave me a message on my talkpage. I hope to see you there; thank you for your comments thus far :).Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Your DYK note
I just felt like to drop a comment - virtually all those "snarky threads" are generated by one editor (with no admin privileges, i.e. can't edit main page and related areas). So I guess we just take them too seriously. While usually ignoring, editors are starting to rebut the claims of DYK copyright violations, as those claims are often arguable at best. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 06:35, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Yankeesrule3 (talk) 17:58, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Adiantum alarconianum, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Pinna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Knight of Glin
I noted that you'd made great Discussion webpage Comments regarding the Knight of Glin Article and wondered now that he's passed if you'd care to review what I've revised from the most recent rendition?Matthew 15:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Pygmy Rabbit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sarcobatus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:18, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

List of Ranunculus species
Thanks for your questions about this list. I replied there at Talk:List of Ranunculus species. — Nonenmac (talk) 14:36, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Sage Grouse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Artemisia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for Adiantum viridimontanum

 * Congratulations! I just saw in the SIgnpost that this was featured! Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Labour Government 1974–1979
Have just come across old edits to this list, which show Jim Wallace, Baron Wallace of Tankerness as a Lord-in-Waiting during the 1970s. I think you must have meant some other Lord Wallace - Jim Wallace did not become an MP until 1983, and his peerage is much more recent.--George Burgess (talk) 12:53, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear Choess,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 02:35, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thanks, I try to review living organism articles when I can, and I'm good at nitpicking  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:42, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Corema conradii
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Pteridophytes Initiative
In response to your invitation for help with this. I'd be pleased to help improve the accounts of Pteridophytes of Eastern North America. A little bit about myself - I'm based in Northern England and a veteran of 20 years as an ecologist/botanist working for British Government Nature Conservation bodies, although now I work as an IT consultant. Each summer I spend time with family in the Mid West and Eastern Canada and do a lot of botanical excursions. I believe my experience and situation gives me a useful perspective as I am familiar with the same lower plants on both sides of the Atlantic. I am willing to take photographs specifically for the project if needed.

Richtid (talk) 09:08, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I've added an account of Asplenium ebenoides. I'll tackle one or two of the other empty accounts next...

Richtid (talk) 18:49, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. I may be spending a couple of weeks in NB in June so I could go to the Gaspe for a couple of days. What I don't have is the exact localities of any of the interesting ferns there. Also, in my opinion, the Wikimedia images of Woodwardia virginica leave something to be desired. I'd like to see W. virginica in the wild but again I don't have any clues about where to look. I should be able to travel to the Bay of Fundy and northern Maine areas which I think is the northern edge of its distribution.

Richtid (talk) 10:19, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Hisnrh
Hello! Things are going well, although I haven't really done anything substantial on Wikipedia for awhile (it's suddenly more imperative to get things published in the real world, of course). I guess Hisnrh is Natasha Hodgson, or a student...either way that's pretty interesting. Thanks for the note! Adam Bishop (talk) 11:30, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Good Article nomination
I did the film article without watching the documentary. I started watching it today on Netflix instant streaming so I could give the article a better flow. Crisco let me fix the current Good Article nomination for a week and he did mention that I jump from idea to idea. Hopefully I can fix it all. I have had many complaints about how deletionist I am and how my main focus is deleting articles. Having a Good Article will show that it isn't true. SL93 (talk) 19:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Notholaena standleyi
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Aristolochia chilensis help
Thank you, I appreciate the offer. I am doing this for a final project for my undergraduate biology class and am still learning how to do this properly. I'll make sure to change the words and use different sources. One question I do have is that I contacted the author of that website and he gave me written permission to use his photos and information, but the pictures get taken down, what is the correct way to go about it? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ab022688 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I sent the permission email to permissions-commons-at-wikimedia.org last night for the first picture but have not gotten a response yet. Sorry for all the trouble, but I really do appreciate all your help. I've always been pretty good with computers and tech but Wiki is a bit more complicated then I presumed. I am attending Stony Brook University, and yes you probably have helped some other students in my class. It's a Plant Diversity class with about 75 students and this is our final project. I'm still trying to figure out the picture situation, it's still a little confusing to me but the pictures can wait until the end (I did upload 2 more pictures to the commons with the "Users who have sent a permission to OTRS but haven't received confirmation yet can use [subst:OP] to tell others that it's in progress." template, I hope it's correct). Thanks again for all your help.

TUSC token eb245650182b4d3d240d46eaf6d4957b
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! Choess (talk) 02:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Plant edits
Thank you very much for stepping in and sorting out some of the edits my bot made yesterday. --Traveler100 (talk) 06:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Sclerocactus sileri and Pediocactus sileri
It seems that actually these two names are (probably) not synonyms after all. So I've restored two separate articles and put an explanation at Sclerocactus sileri#Taxonomy and Pediocactus sileri#Taxonomy. It appears that editors (including me) had been following Anderson (2001) in treating these two as synonyms, which is wrong according to the Flora of North America and the nomenclature history in IPNI (they could still be heterotypic synonyms, but Anderson seems to have mistakenly thought they were homotypic synonyms). I've also left notes on their talk pages for the students who have been editing the Sclerocactus sileri article; I'm not sure if they ever read them. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Botany class and privacy
See Education_noticeboard. Thanks! Dcoetzee 21:53, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Agalinis paupercula
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:36, 10 May 2012 (UTC) 16:03, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Lycopodium minchegense
Hi, I was wondering where you got the information that this species belongs to Huperzia or Phlegmariurus. It would be good to link this up with a redirect and a "formerly place here" section in Lycopodium, especially since The Plant List gives it as an accepted species. Nadiatalent (talk) 12:21, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry to have goaded you to spend so much time on replying to me. What a mess that is. It sounds like an excellent scheme to let Lycopodium and the others lie quiescent. Nadiatalent (talk) 12:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That's very weird that TPL and Tropicos (its source, presumably) don't list Huperzia varia. There must be quite a bit of material in old publications that still needs to be rediscovered, so perhaps this is such a case in the process of being unearthed. The IPNI entries, though, date from 2004 and 2009, quite a while ago. Nadiatalent (talk) 15:27, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!
Dear Choess, another wikipedia editor, who is also a friend in real life, pointed out that you have been defending me, so I've signed on specially in order to thank you. You are perceptive and kind, thank you indeed. As you no doubt guessed, the editor that you took to task is not the first to have slighted me in wikipedia along with the entire gender that he perceives to be my affiliation. Unfortunately some people seem to have gender discrimination completely tangled up with all their thought processes. Along with the sheer hopelessness of combatting the flood of poor material that has been added to and is being defended at many Lauraceae pages and others that relate to island biotas, that bout of sexism became too much. The same friend mentioned above and another have encouraged me to return with a non-gender-marked signon, and I have made some small efforts in that direction, but I find that my enthusiam has disappeared, just as User:Obsidian Soul remarks has happened to them. It also seems quite wrong for a scientist to disguise their identity, so contributing under the new signon feels wrong. If there is any matter for which you could use another voice, please edit my talk page and I'll get email. Wikipedia puzzles can be entertaining, I think, if memory serves. Very best wishes to you, Nadiatalent (talk) 13:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Tropical plants
Hello, How are you? I need your help. I thank you your help in the articles. I ask you: Can you find more people willing writing in tropical trees, genera and families? I ask you if you could enlarge some articles making better known this group of trees in Wikipedia, adding links to genera and families and writing information and asking people if they are interested in writing about topics as tropical trees articles, tropical forest articles or botanical or biodiversity articles. Do you know Wikipedia forums that could be interested about these type of articles? They are welcome too. I thank you very much.

I am from Spain and my mother language is not English language. Many country side areas, and Natural areas and Living beings are in Countries where population cannot collaborate with Wikipedia, but their Natural World and its highly economically valuable species are very important too in the human knowledge and developtment of the mankind. People should have information because these matters are important, not just a curiosity only. This unknow world is from Poles to ecuator, in unoccupied oceanic areas closely to Europe, in Deserts as Sahara, or whatever. But to me the main aim is to gather the abundant information disperse about living communities and living beings that have existed for millions of years because they are disappearing and in 20 years they will are not longer exist.Curritocurrito (talk) 12:45, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Asplenium tutwilerae
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:05, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

ANI - Sarek and Don
I left a message there, but you are obviously the right person to mediate here. I would be happy to help, but you have the experience that would make much shorter work of the problems, and it is clear you can be objective. I had already figured there were some innocent mistakes and misunderstandings on both sides, but you have cut through it rather neatly. Perhaps a subpage here with a talk page to move any unnecessary topics, and I will be happy to clerk to keep it on topic and we can hash this out in a couple of days instead of a couple of weeks. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;  14:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Info-boxes
This is the briefest of notes to thank you for your splendid remarks on the Georg Solti talk page. I've been disheartened lately by being told repeatedly by those with a monopoly of wisdom that I'm doing everything wrong; your robust and judicious rebuttal of carping criticasters restores my faith in, and desire to go on contributing to, Wikipedia. Bless you! (Noting your HHGG allusion I add the irrelevant but possibly pleasing fact that I have, less than three hours ago, had a visit from Hotblack Desiato). – Tim riley (talk) 14:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

User_talk:Jimbo_Wales
As a courtesy, this is to let you know that I've begun a thread on Jimbo's talk page which takes as an example the content of an interaction in which you were involved. As I've written in a prominent disclaimer, there's ''No intention to canvas here about infoboxes, involved individuals, or anything else. Rather, to use this concrete example to raise an issue which goes beyond individual personalities or any particular dispute. —Misty MORN '' 18:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Raabbustamante
Hi, Choess. I saw on this user's talk page that you had tried to work with him on a few issues since he was, at the time, new to Wikipedia. I just stumbled upon several of his contributions and have been going through, cleaning them up. I could use a bit of help if you have the time because my efforts at explaining copyright violations don't seem to be getting through. He has been lifting phrases directly from this Cootes, J. (2001). Orchids of the Philippines. I've been using the "Look Inside" function on Amazon and found almost every article Raabbustamante has written includes either too close paraphrasing or outright copyright violation. On a few articles that I've gone through, e.g. Grammatophyllum martae and Dendrobium bullenianum, Raab has, at times, reverted some of my edits that eliminated the copyrighted material, thus he reinstated the copyrighted material. He claims to have permission from the author to upload some photos, and I have tried to indicate the proper consent and OTRS avenues, but I know that for me those ideas were rather difficult to grasp when I was a newbie. Would you mind checking in on this editor? I'm going to walk away for a bit so that they don't feel like they're under attack, but the copyrighted material has to go in the remaining articles I haven't gotten to. Rkitko (talk) 17:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Diff of your comment on WP:Ownership
I read your comment at SlimVirgin's talk page on WP:Ownership, and agreed that it was an excellent one. In this diff, I've pointed people there to what you said. I think it should be quoted in full, but thought you might want to expand on your argument there, so wanted to point you at that first and see if you had more to say. Carcharoth (talk) 21:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Wawa and Leni Lenape vs. Obijwe
Hi! I checked out a Philadelphia Inquirer article, and it said that the word Wawa is Lenape. The reference for it being Obijwe was that of a personal website. So I changed it back to the Lenape because I would rather source it to the Inquirer and to Wawa then to a personal website.

Do you have an RS that says that Wawa is Obijwe? WhisperToMe (talk) 22:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It might be helpful to check if there is any source that says explicitly something like "people mistakenly believe it was Lenape, but in fact..." and quote that in the reference citation. It may also help to see if it appears on Google Books so readers can see right away where it comes from. In many cases there are source conflicts, and it is good to document what all of the sources say so you can determine what is "correct" or who says what. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * On Wikipedia you have to be aggressive in telling people "hey, there is something in dispute, see the talk page." The reality is that not everyone is going to go to the talk page, or someone may assume there is no talk page discussion. One cannot rely on Wikipedia editors on being savvy in that manner, especially with anonymous editors and editors with little experiences. That's why you need to use page notices and "commenting" to tell people editing the page "Hey, don't change this! It's like this for a reason, see the talk page" - The newspaper source saying it was a Lenape word dates from 1989, before the 1990s. When you have a source conflict one will have to document everything and demonstrate to other editors why X is definitely correct over Y or, if there is no consensus over whether something is correct (often a "truth" is not established and there are merely multiple histories/stories) one will have to say "A said W, B said X, and C said Y" WhisperToMe (talk) 04:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for making me "awww!" out loud
...with the belatedly-discovered comment here. Not sure if I've ever told you this, but you're probably the editor who most allowed me to write my content and succeed as an editor. Back when I was writing miscellaneous articles on various justices and MPs, your encouragement and support was the thing that kept me going and gave me the confidence to write my later, greater articles. So, really, they're GA and FA credits you should share too! Having you approve of my work to try and bring the community and WMF closer together as well has me genuinely smiling :). Ironholds (talk) 11:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lindbladia tubulina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stipe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:38, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

William Selwyn disambiguation
Thank-you very much for looking at my first attempts at creating a disambiguation page for the name William Selwyn and for the Governor of Jamaica's page. I have now provided more detail on the Governor's page. I am amazed at how you managed to find so much about his military career in the relatively small amount of time that you could probably find to help me. Chris.selwyn (talk) 22:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Brand new world for cite templates
Thanks for your note about the Lua templates. Although I am concerned that Uncle_G disappeared around 11 September 2012 (over six weeks ago), I was later able to finish the complex Lua script modules, which he had started, and verify that the formatting of the citations was carefully designed, although it could perhaps be made even faster. Now, on balance, I regret that the Lua script is so complicated for non-computer programmers; however, eventually, enough editors will write clear examples of how the modules work, and after several months, more people will see how to create and expand these modules. Meanwhile, our current and future capabilities will be amazing, so I am thinking the following:
 * Lua can auto-detect a page-range or lone page, so the Lua templates already choose to show "p." rather than "pp." when a user puts just "pages=67" (that will fix the one-page "pp." in over 45,000 articles).
 * The templates are so fast that we can auto-correct for double-dot text, such as "Washington, D.C.."
 * The template could also warn the user about misspelled parameters, such as warning how "frist=xx" should be "first=xx", or "titel=zz" should be "title", etc.

Plus, the initial Lua test2:Module:Citation, which performs the role of Template:Citation/core, was written just to handle the "250" myriad cite parameters, rather than also being extremely fast. Hence, it might be easy to make it format citations even faster, increasing from 125 cites per second to over 200 per second (of 900 total), as finally so fast that no one would complain that an article would be faster without 350 cite templates. Anyway, I feel assured that the free Lua software can greatly improve article editing, and it was good to learn that the Lua Module:Citation has been written to handle all 24-25 forks of {cite_web}, as {cite_book}, {cite_video}, {cite_document}, etc. Already, {cite_encyclopedia} seems to be working correctly on the test2.wiki. Perhaps Uncle_G will return, some day, but if not, he has given us a great headstart on improving all of our complex citations. -Wikid77 (talk) 02:10, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Asplenium × gravesii, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Costa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gentianella amarella, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Börner (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Silly Gib Falls sourcing issue
Tell me if I am barking up the wrong tree, but a source being used solely to assert notability because of the notability of the orgin of the source (disputed, by myself and another editor) is not really acceptable right? I would love it if someone would actually use the source to provide info, but no one is actually doing that. Only in death does duty end (talk) 09:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Lineages of Outremer
Hi Choess, thanks. I'd say that's an appropriate topic for an article, but I'll keep an eye on it. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:08, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Asplenium × trudellii
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Harry W. Trudell
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Polistes exclamans/GA1
Choess, the nominator hasn't edited since December 10, and a trio of edits were made by someone else on December 19. Can you check on the status, and decide whether the article can be closed one way or the others? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:12, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Further information: this was from a class at Washington University in St. Louis, the class ended in December, and the next semester there begins on Monday. If you want to give the nominator another week in that case I can understand, but absent any editing action or response by then I think the review should be closed. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay, my error: I hadn't noticed that jeremy.winkler had returned: in fact, he made several edits to the article a few days ago. So that's even better: the author is active and making fixes. Glad to see him back and pursuing the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:46, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Choess, as you may know I have recently made some new edits on the page. I will still be making minor edits to grammar and flow etc. but as of now, I don't think I'll be making many more major edits. If you have time, I was wondering if you take another look at the page and comment on its status. Thank you very much for the all the help you've been on this page. Jeremy.winkler (talk) 17:40, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram opened
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram/Evidence. Please add your evidence by, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, ( X! ·  talk )  · @812  · 18:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Custos Rotulorum of Down
Remember me? I edited a few succession chains today and came across this article, which says that its subject became Lord-Lieutenant of County Down in 1664. Lord Lieutenant of Down, however, says the post was created in 1831; I suppose Dungannon was actually Custos Rotulorum? If so, and in case you have access to the necessary information, could you fill in the appropriate line in the succession box? Or don't you do isolated articles? Waltham, The Duke of 01:21, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Orixa japonica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orixa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Re:Dalea compacta
I honestly have no idea, I'm not terribly well versed in botany. I will defer to your judgement. Asarelah (talk) 18:53, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Bush Derangement Syndrome for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bush Derangement Syndrome is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Bush Derangement Syndrome (6th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Yworo (talk) 18:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

National Register Information System at AFD
Because the nominator of Articles for deletion/National Register Information System and the page's creator have just been interaction-banned, I've closed this discussion. Because it's not fair to participants like you to force you to start all over again, I've reopened it at Articles for deletion/National Register Information System (2nd nomination), and I've copied your comments over there. Feel free to participate further over there. Nyttend (talk) 13:24, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment
Hey Choess; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:44, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for helping make Lua CS1 cites 6x faster
Although you were gone a while recently, I am thanking everyone for helping in the 3-year effort to improve the wp:CS1 cites to allow major articles to edit-preview, or reformat, 2x faster. Due to your comments about {cite_journal}, the plan is to upgrade from {cite_journal/lua} within the next week, as 6x faster, to double the edit-preview of most major medical/science articles. It was your support for User:Uncle_G (who has left again for another month), in his writing of the massive Lua version (now Module:Citation/CS1), which prompted me to finish the many hundreds of Lua details each month when he left. Previously, he had seemed only combative in my view, not inspiring cooperation. Yet, because there were over 300 tedious unfinished details, I am not sure anyone else would have tolerated the Lua work needed, to be ready this month, without your comments. Also, based on that work, other editors further tested and optimized the Lua module to run another 50% faster (over 125 cites per second). Hence, I am sending you this special note, extending the general note of thanks:
 * Module_talk:Citation/CS1

Again, without your many comments about the citation speed, complex priorities of {cite_journal}, bypassing with section-level edits, and support of Uncle_G, the whole Lua-cite effort would have been greatly delayed, or perhaps considered unworkable to match the 430 cite parameters. Thanks again for your thoughtful comments and support. -Wikid77 (talk) 15:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Cite_journal transitioned before current delays: Just barely in time, Template:Cite_journal was tested and upgraded to use the Lua Module:Citation/CS1, at 00:58 23 March 2013, to quicken most medical/science articles to edit-preview under 9 seconds. Even {cite_book} was upgraded to Lua at 23:00 on 24 March 2013. However, as I had feared weeks ago, the tedious upgrades have come to a halt, due to minor (but loud) complaints about a few tiny format differences (such as "&" between author names). The whole situation is a typical case of "paralysis of analysis" of irresistable, hand-wringing debates over rare options used in "35" articles with 1.8 million pages ready to upgrade. Consequently, Template:Cite_web (the BIG cite), used in 1.35 million pages, did not get upgraded to use Lua and restore the COinS metadata, while the rare-option debates have created a work stoppage. I have begun to ask for wider admin support, to resume the transition to Lua, but the DASHBot will likely see articles with only half the citations containing COinS data. Also denied upgrade is Template:Citation, which unfortunately is used in many articles as the exclusive template (due to unique comma separators), and those articles are essentially stuck with the old, slow cites. The Lua version auto-fixes many double-dots (in "Inc.."), or auto-detects singular pages=7 to show "p. 7" (formerly "pp.7"), and unbolds long volume names. Anyway, that is the status of the Cite-asaurus, and I think other admins will see the crisis and come to help with upgrades. Most volunteer admins will burnout trying to support all the 23 various {cite_*} forks, so I had scheduled the {cite_journal} and {cite_web} upgrades early, in the burnout zone, but unfortunately, the {cite_web} upgrade was bypassed, and now the future upgrades are uncertain. However, the humorous news is that Template:Cite_quick, the markup-based fast cite template (only 45 parameters), runs as fast as the complex Lua monstrosity, because most actual cites use only a few parameters (of 430), even for Harvard referencing. In articles stuck with slow cites, consensus can be requested to use {cite_quick} if needed. -Wikid77 (talk) 11:08, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

List of Vice-Admirals of Devon
At your convenience, I wonder if you could take a look at Talk:List of Vice-Admirals of Devon and see if you have any insights on the comments I left there. Thanks. KConWiki (talk) 22:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Lua functions to delink external or wikilinks
The Lua editors have been busy writing various extravagant, but workable, Lua functions to extract the text from wild combinations of external, interwiki or wikilinks; see: Module:WikiLink or Module_talk:Delink/testcases. They use the complex Lua built-in pattern-matching functions, such as:
 * s = mw.ustring.match(s, "%[%[.-:(.*)|%]%]") to match "[ [...]]"

Because of using Lua pattern-matching functions, they process whole strings, rather than subscripted substrings, and there is little danger of "Script error" as when trying to use "xx:substring(index,-1)" or such. Because Lua is lightning-fast, for internal strings (thousands of characters checked per second), then those highly extravagant, search-the-text-27-ways tactics are likely to be both rapid and effective. In a sense, Lua can create "handheld jackhammers" to either push a thumbtack or fracture a concrete slab with the same tool. Of course, the greatest problem is not Lua speed, but rather, few other people can understand how those Lua tools work, but when asked, typically someone will emerge from the "Lua depths" to offer help. -Wikid77 (talk) 16:56, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

1910 College Football All-America Team
Thanks very much for sorting out the "sic" problem at 1910 College Football All-America Team. I had another look and found that I can use the template as long as I suppress the internal link, which is great as it still gives the other benefit of it not showing up in search results for the misspelling "concensus". Sorry I hadn't noticed the link issue (despite the red warning!) on my first try. Cheers DBaK (talk) 09:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the nice message! :) Cheers DBaK (talk) 08:00, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

AFT5 re-enabled
Hey Choess :). Just a note that the Article Feedback Tool, Version 5 has now been re-enabled. Let us know on the talkpage if you spot any bugs. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 00:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Representative peer
Well done. ww2censor (talk) 08:46, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

My RFA
Greetings, I just wanted to let you know I answered your questions at my RFA. Kumioko (talk) 00:20, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Just a note that however you decide to vote, Support, Neutral or Oppose you might want to do so pretty quick. Its clearly not going to pass so its likely someone will snow close it soon. Kumioko (talk) 17:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Focus on auto-correcting edit-conflicts
Wikid77 here. This is just FYI, no action needed. My next major focus (now that wp:CS1 Lua cites run 13x faster) is to fix most edit-conflicts, which seems to be a decision needed by community consensus. At first I thought there was a technology limit (as if "some conflicts" impossible to solve, but no), and instead all edit-conflicts could be auto-corrected according to set rules; however, we need to set some "policy" rules for how multiple edits will be applied at the same lines in a page, so the developers can make the software resolve the edit-conflicts, by default, following those rules. For example, when 2 editors try to post a reply at the same line in a talk-page, or add after the same line in a list article, then "edit-conflict" leaves the decision to the 2nd editor, rather than auto-correct and insert the 2nd reply after the 1st reply from the prior edit. I think the developers could auto-correct all edit-conflicts, if we get consensus on the rules of order.

Background: Extensive auto-correction for many edit-conflicts has existed since 2004, when re-combining separate parts of a page, such as the 1st editor changes the infobox parameters, then meanwhile 2nd editor changes a later paragraph, and the 2nd editor's paragraph is inserted with the 1st editor's infobox (conflict resolved). The next fix would be for 2 replies added after the same line, in a talk-page, or a list (etc.). However, the editor community needs to reach a consensus, so the developers would have a specific rule, to append a 2nd reply, after the 1st reply, at the same line number, which is currently treated as "edit-conflict" and extremely common in fast-moving talk-pages. I suggest to use FIFO order (first-in, first-out), so the 1st reply takes precedence over the 2nd reply, to be inserted after the 1st. The developers have already finished "90%" of the bigger, complex Edit-merge operations, and what is left is to decide the community's choice as to which order to append two replies at the same line number, such as FIFO order. Perhaps we need an RfC to decide that issue. Any thoughts? -Wikid77 (talk) 15:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Frederick and Pennsylvania Line Railroad
Thanks for the comments on my posts.. I appreciate the page on air-lines as I can't find it on anything else... something I will research more when I get a chance... on this railroad... I can understand those railroads where "air-line" is in their name but what about RRs which were promoted as an "air-line"... the reference to "line" in the corporate name is unfortunate... but contemporary newspaper reporting to promote the RR used the term "air-line", or "almost" an air-line... Your thoughts... (The following material is from my user page)
 * The Frederick Republic reported that the Commissioners of this road held their first meeting at Woodsboro,' Md., on the 20th of April, 1867, and inaugurated measures for the opening of subscription books to the stock of the company. The route from Frederick to Woodsboro, Maryland will be almost an "air line" and the grades exceedingly easy to overcome. The topography of the country between those points is such as to make the cost of the road very light. Beyond Woodsboro' the cost will necessarily be greater, as the surface is more undulating, but as a through route, it is one of the most eligible in the State.

Lastly, my interests are in the York, Hanover and Frederick RR... the F&PL was one of the subsidiary roads Pennsy stitched together to make a branch out of it... anything on the original construction or rebuilding of the roads would be appreciated... Many thanks ... Risk Engineer (talk) 16:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

any update on this?... Risk Engineer (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

TemplateData is here
Hey Choess

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

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

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

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

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:03, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

High Sheriff of Radnorshire
I was plesed to see that someone had got the info to correct the Radnor High Sheriff dates. For my own benefit I subtracted three years from some of the dates following your corrections. However I still think another year should come off. It seems to me that the entry for 1555 (as it now reads) for John Bradshaw might be a bogus one, which is causing all the following dates to be one year too high even now. So I will be interested to see whether your obviously detailed source includes that entry. Incidentally if your source is on the internet I could give you a hand with the update. Plucas58 (talk) 18:14, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Belemnotheutis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dorsal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Removing access dates from citations
Why? I can't find information about when and why to use it, but I started noticing it in citations. --AfadsBad (talk) 22:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, Wikid77 here. The CS1 {cite_journal} template has strict rules about using accessdate only with a URL, and will display a red-error message otherwise:
 * {cite journal|last=Kim|first=Chang Sook |title=Reactive oxygen species as causative agents in the ichthyotoxicity of the red tide dinoflagellate Cochlodinium polykrikoides|journal=Journal of Plankton Research|year=1999|volume=21|issue=11|pages=2105–2115.|accessdate=1 July 2013} Result:
 * There have been months (years) of debates about improving templates to not display red-error messages, or just allow any accessdate, at any time, to help a reader pinpoint a source based on that date, but the {cite_journal} template remains overly severe about restricting the accessdate parameter. The edit-protected templates, such as the wp:CS1 cite templates, often get stuck for 2-3 years without major improvements, and better alternatives (such as Template:Cite_quick) are typically deleted to restrict further progress. The problem is not just in cite templates, but all of Wikipedia, as an ageing bureaucracy which amasses ever more restrictions. Instead, consider hand-coding the date outside the template, such as putting "Viewed 1 July 2013" or such, as a clue to readers for when the document was seen. -Wikid77 (talk) 11:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you both for the information. I will start linking the abstract. This should be changed, though, but I see the bureaucracy issue, and the senseless, lengthy, go nowhere, sidetracked and ridiculous discussions that arise from it. Thanks to both of you for the edits, the discussion and the information. --AfadsBad (talk) 14:19, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Red herring
I'm curious to know what your thoughts on my recent red herring posts at WT:FAC are. Pumpkin Sky  talk  12:31, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: Baronet of Anstruther
I wonder if this discussion on thepeerage.com about Toby's legitimated status as first son is relevant? http://www.thepeerage.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=299. I do know that it is him living at Balcaskie. He's visitting my work on Thursday is it acceptable Wikipedia practice to just ask, or does it need a publicly available citation? Dumbledad (talk) 16:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

FAC
I think I've done all I can - so let me know if anything else outstanding...cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Alexander Stables, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madras Cavalry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR RFC
There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update
Hey Choess. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:42, 1 September 2013 (UTC)