User talk:Corinne/Archive 25

Timothy Birdsall
Hello, Corinne, and season's greetings to you. Do you know how to make the Gallery work at Timothy Birdsall? Thanks! Rothorpe (talk) 18:44, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Never use thumb in galleries. But the main problem is that there are no image names. -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:08, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Redrose64, I'll remove. Rothorpe (talk) 01:23, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Corinne hasn't edited since 15 December
Hope you're OK and just busy with Christmas, Corinne. Rothorpe (talk) 02:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 *  Thanks for your concern, Rothorpe. My computer was in a repair shop for a few days. I only got it back today. I missed being able to edit on Wikipedia! – Corinne (talk) 03:31, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh, good/bad. I almost put that in as an alternative theory. Welcome back! Rothorpe (talk) 04:49, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! – Corinne (talk) 14:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

It's a wonderful time of the year!

 * Thank you, Atsme! Your visual creation is quite beautiful! I wish you all the best at this time and in the new year. – Corinne (talk) 16:01, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

GOCE templates
 Hello, Twofingered Typist -- I've been admiring the incredible pace at which you have been copy-editing articles for the GOCE this past year. If it weren't for your participation, I think we'd be much farther behind than we now are. I also like your collection of user boxes. I can relate to your memory of typewriters. I saw that you had accepted the Rommel myth article at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. Just out of curiosity, I glanced at the article, not to see your copy-edits (I didn't even look at the article history) but because I didn't know anything about the topic of the article. I saw you had posted the "GOCE in use" template at the top of the article, but it rendered incorrectly and showed up in red. The correct template is, with no spaces in between the words. In case you had not already seen it, you might be interested in my collection of links, GOCE templates, other templates, external links (the Merriam-Webster link might be wrong, but I haven't gotten around to fixing it) and other useful things at the top right of my talk page. You are welcome to copy all of it, or whatever you think might be helpful. I got tired of asking people how to do things, or looking for things only to forget where I had found them, so I decided to put them all in one place. Best wishes for a happy holiday season, and best regards, – Corinne (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Corinne: Thanks for the heads up on the GOCE tag on the Rommel article - a silly typo on my part. I was setting it up so I can begin editing it tomorrow. I will have a look at your links - thanks. You're right, it can be difficult at times to sort things out. There is certainly lots to learn. Wikipedia has become a bit of a hobby for me. I try to edit at least one article a day if I have time. Thank you for noticing. Happy to help. Cheers! Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, Twofingered Typist. I hope you are enjoying the holidays. Just now, I went to the Requests page to begin working on Matthew Lyon, and I was surprised to see that you had already completed the copy-edit. I archived it, and removed the request from the Requests page, but I just wanted to ask you whether you had seen that I had already posted a "Working" tag there, as you'll see . It's no big deal. Just wondering if you saw the "Working" tag or not. – Corinne (talk) 18:20, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Corinne: I am so sorry ... the tag was at the end of the request line and somebody else had written a comment about the article, and I just completely missed it! I'll be more careful in future. Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:52, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi
I have reviewed your noms at TAFI. Great noms by the way. If you want to, please review Javine Hylton at TAFI. I nominated that article because I think it could benefit from being included.BabbaQ (talk) 23:14, 5 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you, . Happy New Year! I skimmed the article on Hylton, and I think you're right. However, I believe the figure of 4,140 daily hits that you gave may be wrong. You click on "Page information" in the menu at the left-hand side of the page, then scroll all the way down to the bottom of the page and click on "Page view statistics". Just below the graph you'll see "Javine Hylton", and to the right of her name you will see "12/16/2016 - 1/4/2017 · 3,318 pageviews (166/day)". The large figure, 3,318 pageviews, is all the page views for the approximately seventeen-day period. The smaller figure is the average number of daily page views. I think that is what is meant by "Daily hits" in a TAFI nomination. If I am wrong, I would be happy to be corrected and learn something new. – Corinne (talk) 01:14, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Henry Hoʻolulu Pitman
Hello, can you take a look at the blurb at User:KAVEBEAR/sandbox and copy-edit for any mistakes? I think you also copy-edited the article Henry Hoʻolulu Pitman when it was being reviewed for FAC--KAVEBEAR (talk) 10:04, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 *  I made a few small edits, but I'm wondering about the phrase "a female member of the Hawaiian nobility". It just sounds a little odd. I think you should consider using her name. We don't often see Hawaiian names on WP, so it's interesting. If you use her name, I would leave out "female" and follow the name with "..., a member of the Hawaiian nobility". Otherwise, it sounds fine. Good luck with the FA review. – Corinne (talk) 19:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Changed to "to a merchant from Massachusetts and Hawaiian chiefess Kinoʻoleoliliha". In your opinion, would it be fine not to mention his father's name?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:54, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 * If the father is not particularly famous, I think you can leave his name out in this main page summary. (I assume it's in the article; haven't looked at it to see.) However, the reviewers at FAC have more experience with deciding these sorts of things than I do. (As I said months ago, I still find "chiefess" odd. I think "chief" would be sufficient. Notice how female actors often use the word "actor" instead of "actress" to describe their profession.) – Corinne (talk) 19:58, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Hadrian/Public service
Dear Corinne, I will be working a little bit more on this section of the Hadrian article. What I intend to do is to supply sources on the various opinions expressed since Antiquity about Hadrian's late adoption by Trajan, Hadrian's relationship with Plotina, etc. I will tell you when my work on this section is finished. Cerme (talk) 14:53, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Corinne, I've added a few additional sources, mostly in French. I will leave the text alone so as to allow you to copy-edit it. I believe in the near future I might use some additional Anglophone sources, available through JSTOR. However, I do not want to make the text far too cluttered with scholarly sources, so please tell me when you think that "enough is enough" - bis repetita non placent. Cerme (talk) 20:11, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

To rob Peter to pay Paul
Hi Corinne, it's been a while. I hope the new year is going well for you. I was hoping you'd be willing to copyedit an article I recently created (as usual when I post here), To rob Peter to pay Paul. Best Regards, — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 13:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Need your help
 I wonder if you could help us out at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests? The list of requests for copy-edits has grown quite long, and there are only a few of us copy-editing on a regular basis. If you have time, and would like to help, perhaps we could catch up a little. – Corinne (talk) 04:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Improved diff view
Some time between my edit made at 19:51 on 23 January 2017 and 00:31 on 24 January 2017 (see my Contributions), something changed in the view of diffs. When I go to an article and click on "Revision History", then click on "Compare selected revisions", everything looks as it always has looked, with the two columns for the previous and the new version. (Sometimes I have the "Improved diff view" enabled and sometimes I don't. When I have the "Improved diff view" enabled, it stays enabled until I disable or get rid of it, and I've had it enabled for a while now.) But sometime between those two edits, something changed. Now, there is the small green triangle, then the improved diff view in a box, and then, below that box, there is another green triangle that wasn't there before, with a narrow light gray horizontal box below it, and after that the two usual before-and-after columns. When I click on the second green triangle, the improve diff view goes away, and then there are two green triangles, one above the other. Can you look to see if anything was done to my account or pages in that time period so that now there are two green triangles instead of one? Can you tell me how to get rid of the second one and the horizontal gray bar below it? – Corinne (talk) 01:42, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * This sounds like a question better suited for the Village Pump. Primefac (talk) 02:10, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi and Asa Gray
Hi Corinne. I do hope you are well. I've decided to try to dip my toe into wikipedia again. You were a big help on getting Cucurbita to FA and I and User:Sminthopsis84 have tweaked Asa Gray. I was wonder if you had time to copyedit Gray's article up to GA standards? Thank you for your consideration and prior help on Cucurbita. HalfGig  talk  22:20, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello, HalfGig! It's great to hear from you. I'll take a look at Asa Gray now. – Corinne (talk) 00:21, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. I am most appreciative!  HalfGig   talk  01:38, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Apologies
I had a look at my talk page on the offchance that I had missed something---and I had! Rothorpe (talk) 03:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Special Barnstar

 * Thank you so much, HalfGig! I'm glad to be of help. – Corinne (talk) 14:41, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

End of marriage
Here you write a mistake: the marriage ended on 22 December 2015, not "three months later" as you written. Belen is the third Argentinian host of Sanremo (Festival della Canzone Italiana di Sanremo - Sanremo Music Festival), plaese correct here your edit. You can control on IT.WIKI --151.67.43.10 (talk) 00:04, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Hey!
Hey! Would you please help me with What's Your Raashee? by copyediting it? I am intending to take this to GA and then FA. I would appreciate your gesture. Krish |  Talk  18:59, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your confidence in me, Krish, but I would prefer if you posted your request at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests (new requests go at the bottom of the page). There are quite a few requests ahead of you, so you'll have to wait a while, but it will get done. If you ever have a specific question about vocabulary, usage, or wording a sentence, please do not hesitate to ask me. Thank you. – Corinne (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Never seen "narrow-gauge railway"?
Corinne, Andy D has accused me here of calling you a liar because I found your statement "not credible" that you had never seen narrow gauge hyphenated when used as an adjective, as in narrow-gauge railway. I want to assure you that I took your comment to be in good faith, not an intentional distortion or lie or anything like that. Yet I don't find it credible, as I said, since the term usually has a hyphen in books, in news, in web pages, in dictionaries such as the OED, etc. I won't be responding directly to Andy's ridiculous complaint, but wanted to be sure you know that I took your comment to be in good faith – yet not credible. Dicklyon (talk) 03:17, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * To paraphrase my post at User talk:Corinne/Archive 22, "narrow-gauge" is a compound adjective and "railway" is the noun. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 10:12, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Corinne, obviously I would have had no opportunity to express lack of credulity if you had said "I don't remember seeing the phrases written with a hyphen", and I presume that's what you really intended. You also note "I think the hyphen is distracting," and I off course believe that's what you think. But look at it this way instead: if you don't remember seeing the hyphen, yet the hyphen is used most of the time in sources written for a general audience, and presuming you're not most looking at railfan-targeted writing, maybe the hyphen is actually not distracting you enough to notice it. I'm pretty sure this is the general way it works in English: that putting hyphens to help people see word-pairs as single units does not distract them, they do not notice or remember the hyphen, they just read more easily. Please review some of your English style and grammar guides and us know whether this makes sense to you in light of what they document and advise. Dicklyon (talk) 16:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 *  Thank you for your note. Don't worry. Your comment did not upset me in any way. Of course, when I wrote, "I've never seen...", I should have written, "I don't recall seeing." By the time I read your post just above, so much more had been written that it took me a while to read through the comments. I added a comment of my own just now. I hope people are not annoyed by its length. I wish you all the best and hope this issue gets resolved amicably. Best regards, – Corinne (talk) 00:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your gracious reply and other comments. From your comments, it sounds like you'd be more neutral than oppose on the Saxony RM. Dicklyon (talk) 00:37, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * You're right. – Corinne (talk) 00:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Belén Rodríguez copy edit
Hi Corinne, Are you going to finish copy editing the Belén Rodríguez article? It looks like you were busy talking to other users. It says on the edit summary on January 29, "Removed "GOCE in use" template. Will resume copy-editing tomorrow". You didn't resume copy editing the next day. If you're free from talking to users, could you finish copy editing the article before it gets the article unprotected. You better finish it as quickly as possible. Thanks for your help and I hope the copy edit will be finished as quickly as possible. Talk to you later. 2001:569:70DD:7500:39EA:19D8:DF90:EF4D (talk) 20:38, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Good work
You are a miracle of patience.  E Eng  03:44, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

...but of course you were wasting your time.  E Eng  20:42, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Robin Meyers
Unfortunately I have little personal knowledge about him; I came across the article only in a maintenance-tagging batch, and have never had much to do with the content at all. But my instinct, nonetheless, would be that if we can't properly and reliably source a middle name or initial for him, then it probably shouldn't be there. Bearcat (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Caracalla
 First, I want to thank you very much for the information at Talk:Caracalla about the existence of two Roman emperors at the same time for many years. I love to learn new things about history. Your explanation refreshed my memory of history, both lessons in high school many years ago and things I've read since then. I didn't realize, though, that the Byzantine emperors were emperors of an Eastern Roman Empire. I thought it was just the Byzantine Empire, with the Roman Empire being in the west.

I'm also a little confused as to why the emperors in Europe in later centuries had the title of "Holy Roman Emperor". Why was "Holy" added to "Roman Emperor"? Also, why were they called "Holy Roman Emperor" when they were not in Rome at all, but rather in places like Austria (I think)?

If you don't mind, I'd like to point out some errors you made twice in that comment, the one in which you gave me so much information. First, early in the comment, you wrote,


 * The name of the Byzantine Empire comes from the city which was it's capital; Byzantinum.

There's "Byzantinum", which I am certain is just a typo. That's not the reason I'm writing. In the clause "which was it's capital", "its" should not have an apostrophe. The word is a possessive adjective (like my, your, his, her, our, and their; it is the third person singular form for things, and maybe also animals; the other two third person singular possessive adjectives are his and her). Also, though it seems more common in the writing of speakers of British English, "which" really should be used only for non-restrictive (or non-identifying, or non-limiting) adjective clauses. If the information in the clause is necessary to identify, restrict, or limit the noun being modified/described, we call it a restrictive clause, and we should use "that". So, the sentence should read:


 * The name of the Byzantine Empire comes from the city that was its capital, Byzantium.

 Another way to write this that avoids the problem of choosing between "which" and "that", and uses fewer words, is:


 * The name of the Byzantine Empire comes of the name of its capital city, Byzantium. – Corinne (talk) 01:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC) Fixed ping.  – Corinne (talk) 01:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Later on, you write:


 * Istanbul as a name was used for hundred's of years but did not become the city's official name until 1928.

The word "hundreds" does not need an apostrophe. It is simply the plural form of "hundred", and most plural nouns are formed simply by the addition of "s".

I hope you are not offended or annoyed by my pointing these out to you. I won't do this again if you prefer. – Corinne (talk) 00:57, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It's fine. I make its/it's mistakes all the time and I havent a clue why added an apostrophe to hundreds. I do the same for XXs years as well even though thats not correct either; e.g. 1920's instead of the correct 1920s. I pay more attention when writing articles though than when writing comments on talk pages. As for Byzantium the z was intentional. That's the spelling used on the pedia. Ah, I see what happened there, you misspelled Byzantium yourself just above. Lastly the HRE is a little beyond my area work on Wikipedia but I do know a little bit about it. If you've ever heard of the youtube show "crash course" they make short 10-15 minute informative episodes on just about everything. To summarize the HRE; "It wasn't holy, it wasn't Roman and it wasn't an Empire"*. There is reason for the name though. The HRE was founded by Charlemagne in the later stage of his life, he became the first Holy Roman Emperor in 800 when he took the title of emperor after being consecrated by the Pope. It's important to note that while the Byzantine empire came directly from Rome, the HRE did not and was more of an attempt at re-establishing the Roman Empire than a continuation of it. This is why it was called holy Hmm, when I got home I actually did a short read up on this, and, actually "holy" was added to the title after the fact and became more frequently used after 1254 (Citation; Pg. 19 of Heart of Europe: A History of the Holy Roman Empire by Peter Wilson). The reason for the term holy is rather to unite all Christians under a single ruler, which makes sense when considering the importance of Christianity in Europe at the time. Roman comes from Rome (where the papacy was located) rather than the Romans, though the intent was to capture the glory of the Roman Empire. This was happening in the middle of the dark ages and life in the Roman era had been of a far higher quality than it was in the middle ages. While most people couldnt read, they could see, and the structures such as aqueducts and temples the Romans had built were scattered all throughout Europe. It would have left even the uneducated wondering who had built these, by comparison to their villages, magnificent structures. The idea of a city deteriorated in Europe when Roman rule collapsed. Everything became smaller. Cities the size of Rome weren't built in Europe for a very long time (say 13th century), in contrast in the East everything was still of far grander size. If I say dark ages you'll think of an agrarian society or poor peasants with little straw roofed huts, mixed with violent raids and attacks. That's only true for Europe, the moment you take a stroll into Turkey everything changes. It looks and feels far more Roman because it is. Chariot races were still held in Constantinople all the way up to the start of the 13th century at the Hippodrome of Contantinople; other events were held here as well. Lastly comes the term Empire. The HRE at its greastest extent encapsulated Germany, Austria, Czech Republic, Switzerland, half of Italy, and parts of a whole bunch of European countries including France and Hungary. Im not sure of the absolute extent of it but it was an empire in its early stages (say 800-1200 AD). In its hayday it was sizeable, but, while the HRE lasted for around a millenium it gained less territory than it lost quite regularly. By the end of its lifespan it had shrunk to (I think) about the size of modern Germany. I havent a clue what happened to it or how it actually ended though. The word empire was just what was used to refer to it; "the Empire" (strikes back). Mr rnddude (talk) 02:29, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Wow! Thank you, Mr rnddude, for all the information. It's very interesting. I still don't see where I misspelled "Byzantium", though. I had merely copied your sentence from the Caracalla talk page, and you just corrected the spelling there (see ). Is there someplace else where I misspelled it? I just corrected the link at the beginning of this section, above. I had put the wrong talk page. Well, feel free to ask me any question about grammar, wording, or spelling, and I'll ask you when I have another question about history. – Corinne (talk) 15:35, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It has been said that the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, roman, nor an empire. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * – Corinne (talk) 00:43, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * There's "Byantinum", which I am certain is just a typo from my mispelled Byzantinum. If you copied it across you left out the "z", which was what I first noticed and originally thought you were referring to that. I checked and the z was definitely there. It was when I came home I noticed that I'd added a random n into Byzantium and that that was what you were referring to. Mr rnddude (talk) 02:43, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh... Well, it shows I can make typos, too. – Corinne (talk) 03:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Grammar advice request
Hello Corinne. I'm sorry to pop up out of the blue like this but my friend Gerda thought that you might be able/willing to help me with a small grammar problem. I absolutely don't want to be a nuisance so if you would rather not, please say so; but if it is possible, please indicate and I will ask you my question. Thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 23:40, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

This is the third edit conflict I've gotten in the last few minutes, this time with the Today's articles for improvement article.


 *  Hello, DBaK. You will have seen by now that I posted a rather long answer at User:Gerda Arendt. I was in the process of adding this note there, too, but got an edit conflict. I'll add it here instead:


 * I was sorry to see you belittling your writing abilities. I don't know a lot about much else, but after all this time, I'm still learning. Also, there are people, myself included, who love to talk about grammar and explain it. You've just got to find the right people and places to ask your questions.


 * I would love to try to answer any question you have about grammar, vocabulary, and writing. Ask me anytime. – Corinne (talk) 00:13, 6 February 2017 (UTC)   – Corinne (talk) 15:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much, for both the positive reply and your very kind comments here and over bei Gerda. I will try to find a moment to write up my query and post it as soon as possible. With best wishes DBaK (talk) 16:35, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Follow up copyedit request
Hi Corinne, thanks for copyediting Trunajaya rebellion a while back. I added a new section to the article, Trunajaya_rebellion, would you mind copyediting that too? Not too confident of my English writing skills there. HaEr48 (talk) 09:02, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Chemistry
 You are welcome; I'm glad to help. Unfortunately, I found chemistry (in high school) to be my most difficult subject. I found it difficult to have to learn so much about something I could not see or touch – too abstract. In college, I took one more chemistry course (for non-science majors) and passed only because it wasn't much more difficult than the high school course. However, I enjoyed geology and crystallography and mineralogy courses. The basic concepts of chemistry such as atoms, electrons, molecule structure with linked atoms, bonds, etc., I can understand (and I'm fascinated by the table of elements). It's things like "mole" that I had a hard time with. In some ways I can see that chemistry is at the root of all of life, and that the reactions and changes are almost magical, amazing, and often but not always predictable. I admire anyone who understands chemistry. – Corinne (talk) 15:56, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!


Redolta is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Red olta 📱 Cont ribs 00:04, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much, Redolta! This certainly has brightened my day. All the best to you. – Corinne (talk) 00:56, 25 December 2016 (UTC)




 * X
 *   Merry Christmas & Happy New Year
 * X


 * Frohe Weinachten und
 * alles gute zur neuen Jahr!


 * Wesołych Świąt i
 * Szczęśliwego nowego roku!


 * Linksmų Kalėdų ir 
 * laimingų Naujųjų Metų!


 * X
 * Sca (talk)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Thanks, Sca! Thanks for thinking of me. It's nice to hear from you. I hope you have a very nice Christmas and a happy, healthy year in 2017. Best wishes, – Corinne (talk) 01:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and happy holidays!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Corinne: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Doug Weller  talk 15:22, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message


 * Thanks, Doug, and thank you for thinking of me. I wish you the same, and a good year in 2017. – Corinne (talk) 04:04, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Docetism
 I hope you are enjoying the holidays. I've just made a few copy-edits to Docetism, including to the footnotes. I notice that in most of the footnotes that include passages from books, the passage is in quotation marks, sometimes with a phrase or short passage within the longer passage set off with single quotation marks, as in Note13, in which the passage begins "NBrox". (I actually added the final double quotation mark since there was an initial double quotation mark at the beginning of the passage.) However, I noticed that in Note7, from Foster 2009, the passage is not enclosed in double quotation marks, and within the passage there is a title of a work enclosed in double quotation marks. Can you tell me what the usual punctuation for a footnote is? I assume there is a difference between a footnote that is taken directly from a source and a footnote that is merely a comment written by the author of the Wikipedia article. Is a footnote (or material within a footnote) that is taken directly from a source always enclosed in a pair of double quotation marks? – Corinne (talk) 17:11, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hope your holidays are good too, Corinne. WP:CS and WP:FN have lots of examples of proper punctuation in footnotes; I'm a little fuzzy on the fine points, and rely on the cite tags for formatting. Although it's nice to fix up the references if you have the time and interest (I do it too, within reason), WP:C/E and WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/How to don't mention copyediting footnotes at all; our job primarily concerns the article text (and is big enough :-)). All the best,  Mini  apolis  21:14, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Tectonics
 This week's article for improvement is Tectonics. I've made a few copy-edits. I'd like to ask your opinion about two different things.

1) One is on the wording of one sentence. See Talk:Tectonics. I've gotten the reply from Vsmith, a geologist. Now I know a comma is not needed before "lithosphere", but I'm still not sure whether we need "the" before "lithosphere". It's got to be clear that "crust" and "lithosphere" are two different things. What do you think?

2) The other is regarding  edit, in which GeoWriter changed "earth" to "Earth". I thought, when the definite article ("the") is used, "earth" does not need to be capitalized. If we follow the pattern of referring to the other planets without the definite article, such as "Mars", "Saturn", etc. – and of course they are capitalized –  then we would capitalize "earth" when we refer to our planet without the article: Earth is the third planet from the sun, etc. I certainly don't want to argue with such a knowledgeable person as GeoWriter. I think I've seen discussions regarding this somewhere, but can't remember where. I just wondered what you thought about this.  – Corinne (talk) 15:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I fear my answers won't be very helpful.
 * (1) I think this does depend on the relationship between crust and lithosphere, but I don't have the knowledge to resolve that.


 * (2) The Earth/earth question has been the subject of recent debate -- see Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Archive_187, though I doubt you'll find a clear conclusion there. My advice would be to let someone who thinks its important worry about, and you not worry about it. There are too many other actually important things that need doing.  E Eng  16:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Just thought I'd point out that you have the word "something" two times in a row in your last comment to P. I don't think you meant to have it there twice, did you? I don't want to correct anything in your own comments. – Corinne (talk) 01:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I happened to notice your edit to MOS Dates and numbers, and I read this:


 * Do not markup mention of units and the like outside the context of advice about their use.


 * You may find this to be nitpicking, but I believe "markup" is a noun, as in "The markup is highlighted in yellow", or "Don't change the markup." In words like this, usually the verb form is "mark up". So it perhaps should read:


 * Do not mark up mention of units and the like outside the context of advice about their use.


 * Some readers might find "mark up mention of" a little confusing. You might consider changing this to one of these:


 * Do not add markup to mention of units...
 * Do not add (or change) the markup to the mention of units...
 * Do not add (or change) the markup at the mention of units...
 * Do not mark up the mention of units... (verb)


 * Just a thought. – Corinne (talk) 16:48, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It wasn't my text, but I've fixed it. Thanks. You know, you don't need my permission to fix stuff like this. Especially on a MOS page, there are plenty of people watching who will keep you from messing anything up.  E Eng  22:01, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh. O.K. I'm sorry. I thought you had just added that sentence. I didn't take the time to look back a bit. Thank you. – Corinne (talk) 22:52, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Finally did it
I, uh, finally got around to it, per your comments on my talk page two months ago, my reply one and a half months ago, and finally actually did it say five minutes ago. Sorry bout the ridiculous delay for a such a simple issue. Oh, and your talk page message wasn't too long for me to be bothered with it. I just completely slipped on it. Belive me, I can't complain about length of comments. Mr rnddude (talk) 02:45, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Lake article
 I don't know whether you have Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates on your watch list (I would assume so), but if you don't, your thoughts might be helpful at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. You probably know that Jo-Jo Eumerus has written quite a few articles on volcanoes and other geographic topics regarding South America, so whatever is learned at this discussion may be pertinent to the others. – Corinne (talk) 23:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I tend to avoid FA stuff these days ... no interest in the rules wonkiness of it :) Vsmith (talk) 23:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 *  Oh. Okay. I'm not sure what you mean by "rules wonkiness". Do you mean too much attention paid to minutiae, or something else? Maybe it's the same reason I avoid the page, too. – Corinne (talk) 00:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank You
Hi Corinne:

I can’t remember now how I stumbled across the GOCE, but early in my WP career I did. I took up a GOCE request and edited the article True Detective. Within hours of doing so I was notified by a GOCE coordinator that it would be advisable that I stick to editing articles with a “Copy Edit” tag until I had more experience. Shortly after that, another GOCE coordinator got in touch and explained that while there was nothing wrong with my copy edits, they were insufficient for a GOCE request. People asking for GOCE copy edits had high expectations of the copy edit – these edits were a “big deal” – since the requesters were going for GA or FA status. I couldn’t just do a quick cursory line edit, I had to be prepared to make substantive edits if necessary and try not to miss anything. I took that advice to heart.

That’s the sort of guidance I thought GOCE coordinators might see fit to pass on in this instance after examining the copy edits in question. That was not the case. I never felt it was my place as a simple editor to mentor and was not doing so.

Instead, a drive by comment has escalated this to the absurd, with accusations of piling on a new editor, which has prompted the coordinator emeritus (who to that point was untroubled by my expression of concern) to launch what comes close to a personal attack suggesting, I guess, that because I had “issues” in the past (explained above) I should be the last one to be commenting on another editor's copy edits or acting as the GOCE “police”. (Bitey or what? :) )

All of this is a lead-in to a big thank you. You eloquently expressed what I had been attempting to do, you understood that I had not detailed all my concerns publicly (there were more), and you suggested that a coordinator should provide guidance to a new editor. I must say, over the past few days, I was sorely tempted to find a new hobby and move along from WP, but your tacit support has convinced me that I’m a big boy and my enjoyment of what I do should come before everything else.

Thank you again, and all the best for 2017. Cheers. Twofingered Typist (talk) 16:14, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

P.S. As to the suggestion that these things be handled privately by email, I have absolutely no idea how this is done on WP. As far as I know that information is private. So please feel free to delete this when you have read it.


 *  You're welcome, and thanks for the New Year's wishes. I don't really understand it. Not wanting to sow discord, I chose my words carefully. I haven't yet looked at either my watch list or that page, but I'd certainly like to understand this better. – Corinne (talk) 20:48, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Corinne!


Happy New Year! Corinne, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Ssven2  Looking at you, kid 12:19, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

POTD notification
Hi Corinne,

Just to let you know, the Featured Picture File:Henri-Edmond Cross, 1908, Les cyprès à Cagnes, oil on canvas, 81 x 100 cm, Musée d'Orsay, Paris.jpg is scheduled to be Picture of the Day on January 17, 2016. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2017-01-17. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:57, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Chris. Happy New Year to you! I made a few copy-edits to the article on Henri-Edmond Cross, then took a look at the caption. I made a few minor changes to the wording. I wonder, does the text have to be centered like it is now? If not, I think left-justified (text to the left margin) is easier to read. – Corinne (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The end result will look like this. You don't have to worry. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:43, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Sri Lankan Civil War
' What do you advise regarding ' and the one just before it by the same editor? It is unsourced – and added in the middle of an unsourced paragraph with a tag on it – contains some subjective words and phrases such as "luckily", "very healthy life", and "well-respected family", and minor punctuation errors such as a period after "Miss". Would you simply revert both edits, with an edit summary saying "Removing unsourced material; see WP:RS", or leave it there and place another "citation needed" tag and/or leave a note on the editor's talk page with some advice and a few links? I think it was a good-faith edit; it's just that the editor doesn't know the WP basics. – Corinne (talk) 23:08, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I've made an edit.  E Eng  04:46, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail!
 Mini  apolis  17:27, 12 February 2017 (UTC)