User talk:DO11.10/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up very shortly to answer your questions. Don't be afraid to ask! If you would like to experiment with Wikipedia, I invite you to do so in my own personal sandbox (just follow the simple rules!) or in the Wikipedia sandbox. When you contribute on talk pages or in other areas, it is important to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date.
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Again, welcome! &mdash; ßottesiηi  Tell me what's up 22:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Art forgery
Nice work with images and so on with the art forgery article - Skysmith 10:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Chamberlin Observatory
I changed the HTML table on the page to a Wikitable and put the image you uploaded in it. Hope you approve. I found the same image yesterday on the Denver Library site before I noticed your message on the talk page. As a pre-1923 image, it ought to qualify as PD-US. If your browser displays an annoying horizontal line running through the table, well, so does mine. I don't know how to get rid of it. I think that it's just a fact of Wiki life. By the way, this month's Sky & Telescope has a squib at page 80, col. 2 about a new history of Chamberlin called Denver's Great Telescope. -- Cuppysfriend 18:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Radiation
I have reverted your addition of Radiation to Category:Immunotoxins. This article is about all categories of radiation, many of which are harmless. Specific types of harmfull radiation have their own articles. Additionally, I don't think any types of radiation could be classified as a toxin. It would be more accurate to classify certain sources of radiation as toxins. To me, calling radiation a type of toxin is a bit like calling bacteria a disease, if you get my meaning. Dgies 09:01, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Some great points. I was just trying to populate a rather underpopulated category, as well as several other related categories, I may have gotten a bit carried away.--DO11.10 23:37, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Vitamin
The article Vitamin you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be adressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. → A z a  Toth 21:43, 15 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd suggest changing the old names/new names section into a table. TimVickers 19:59, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Immune system
It's starting to come together nicely. Keep up the good work! – ClockworkSoul 18:10, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I am just getting ready to sub out Adaptive immune system, and put a summary in it's place. Any advice?--DO11.10 18:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * So far, you seem to be doing just fine, but if I see anything I'll let you know. :) Have you considered joining us with the Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject? – ClockworkSoul 21:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I did notice one thing: you should probably try to minimize your use of lists if you can help it. Instead, try to work the information into prose. The article will read much more nicely if you do. – ClockworkSoul 21:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I realized the list thing when I went back over the article. I am planning to make a summary table describing both innate and adaptive at the beginning, that might get rid of most of the lists. Thanks again, let me know if you see anything else. How would I go about joining the WP:MCB?
 * Just add yourself to the list! At the top of that page is a few suggestions, if you're wondering where you might want to start. :) – ClockworkSoul 04:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

This month's winner is proteasome!
– ClockworkSoul 22:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Derrick Lonsdale
Why did you remove him from Category:B vitamins, please? His work may be right or wrong but he has done controversial work on 'B-1' including publishing a book so the cat seems fine to me. TerriersFan 02:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I removed him from the category because all of the rest of the articles listed (in both Vitamins and B vitamins) are about actual vitamins, not the people studying them. It was confusing. I think a proper descriptive category for him to belong to would probably be Category:Nutritionists. I was not inferring any sort of judgement of the man or his work, just tidying up a category.--DO11.10 23:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow that was odd, I have never encountered an edit conflict on my own talk page. Thanks for cleaning up the below.--DO11.10 23:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I thought that was the reason, I'll adopt your suggestion. TerriersFan 23:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Vitamin D
I fixed the Vitamin D entry which had a l33t speak hack attempt or something in it. Just reverted it to the previous version. It said something about being h4xed or something equally stupid in the intro for the Forms section. Oddly clicking the edit button for a section failed to allow me to edit it and I had to change the section id number to 1, if you are in a position to advise someone about the issue with wikipedia then that would be good.

Dear DO11.10 : You personally should undertake the editing and writing of the vitamin D entry yourself! You saw fit to delete in a heavy-handed way improvements that I made to add some reality to the article. You have discouraged me from ever trying to fix up Wikipedia. Its a waste of my professional time. My opinion of Wikipedia has gone down the sewer. ZERO credibility! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.188.64.6 (talk • contribs)

Dear Graduate student in immunology Re: your role as "vitamin D" editor: I notice you have now MORE THAN ONCE reintroduced a link to a webcast that I indeed HAVE viewed in its entirety -- the item had NOTHING!!!! to do with vit D. Please, for once, check the webcast yourself, and if you still think it is really useful for an encyclopedia keep it, but defend its inclusion in the discussion page. Your "personal rules" above are admirable, but your implementation of them verges on arrogant heavy-handedness... Again, Please do view the webcast you keep reinserting. The exercise should enlighten you to realize that other people's edits to remove it are appropriate and not malicious. (please remove this note once you've read it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.188.67.83 (talk • contribs)
 * Wow, my psychic powers must be failing me once again, if I didn't realize that your edit summary "removed brand names" really meant "removed brand names, and, oh yeah, I watched this web-cast and it is a hulking pile of rubbish that has nothing to do with vitamin D". Silly me!
 * I suggest that if you want your edits to be taken seriously you 1) Create an account--the IP addresses that you are contributing from seem to revolve and many of them have documented records of vandalism like this and this, and 2) Take a look at the Introduction or How to contribute help pages, I think that they are quite enlightening.--DO11.10 17:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

HeHe...
I'm usually afraid someone'll revert my attempts for being "vandalism"! I don't know what recent occurrence happened, but I recommend you do what you can with that articel is it's hidden away and so not likely to be dealt if left alone, especially by someone who should know a not insignificant about on the subject. 68.39.174.238 02:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

BTW
If it's this and the subsequent result you got above, don't worry. The inappropriate change in tone and insertion of attacking commentary needed reverting. And if people don't bring to wiki editing certain core requisites, there's not much anyone can do. In all honestly, people who fly off the handle and leave at the slightest provocation should probably do so early before everyone gets exhausted trying to tiptoe around them and they finally get exhausted when someone who doesn't know their background challenge them. 68.39.174.238 02:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC) (PS. I'm referring to the people who give no warning and people who wont change their tendencies)
 * True. People such as those are par for the course here on Wikipedia. You should see some of the hate mail I've gotten in my time simply because I've disagreed with somebody. To work here requires basic conflict resolution skills, in which all too many are deficient. Good luck, and don't let them get to you. You're doing an excellent job. – ClockworkSoul 04:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for your very kind words, you have certainly given me a lift. I do have to say that my experiences here have definitely increased my "conflict resolution" skills. (I [sometimes have] different words for this in my head mind you ...).--DO11.10 05:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

H5N1 and Flu
If you have the time, the H5N1 and Flu series of articles could benefit from added linking to articles you've worked on, added sourced data on interaction with the immune system, and other things. Original antigenic sin needs to be mentioned with regard to pre-pandemic H5N1 vaccines, if I can find a source. WAS 4.250 21:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, is that why you reverted my addition to Orthomyxoviridae? Original antigenic sin was an orphan article which I was attempting to introduce into other articles, but I struggled with the placement as well, my only defense is that I am not a virologist. I will do what I can, but it may be a few days or so, then perhaps you can check my additions for context, or we can collaborate somehow? --DO11.10 23:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I reverted because it lacked a source and was added prior to another source that sourced the statement that did precede the source and did not fit in that paragraph and the sentence as written really doesn't belong in that article. WAS 4.250 00:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * But Original antigenic sin is certainly interesting and relevant to the disease of flu and maybe H5N1 flu. Further, the articles you edit on the immune system should receive more attention in the flu and H5N1 articles but I know too little about he immune system to do justice to such an effort. My prefered style of collaberation is for  everyone to feel free to just edit the articles normal wiki style and don't waste time and effort with chit chat and negotiations and so forth until it seems necessary. So jump right in. Don't feel bad if I edit what you do. I won't feel bad if you edit what I do. If we end up just reverting each other, then we aren't talking enough and need to talk more and edit less. I look forward to seeing you edit some flu and/or h5n1 pages. Cheers. WAS 4.250 00:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me, let me know if you need anything? BTW, I was not mad that you reverted my edit.--DO11.10 00:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Re Antibody Image
Hey. Excellent suggestion on labelling the variable chain, I definatly missed that in my image. However, I also feel that the disulphide bonds should also be labeled. Would you like me to edit my image, or will you edit yours. I don't want to simply edit and replace your image because, though i am against the feeling that any given article or image on wikipedia belongs to anyone, I can see you've put a lot of work into the immunology pages. So while, stylistically, I prefer my image and will label the variable region, I will leave it up to you to decide which image should be put up. Warm Regards, 19:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Images for Immunology
Hey, I added one showing the Fab and Fc fragments to the antibody page. I can upload one showing pepsin digestion into F(ab')2 fragment as well, but I think I'll add some text about it because there wasn't anything there. Let me know what you think of the image. And also, I'm not totally sure how to upload to wikicommons. I'll try and figure it out. Best, 03:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Very nice diagrams! Perfect. Thanks. You will have to sign up on the commons to move them. If you would like, I can move them easily to the commons, they will remain attributed to you. Here is an example of one I have moved: Image:CD4 receptor.png
 * Cheers--DO11.10 04:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure, you can upload them if you like. Image:F_ab2_pFc.png shows digestion by pepsin rather than papain, and yeilds one 100kDa fragments and a bunch of other small fragments. It was integral in first determining the structure of antibodies. You can upload it too if you want, I'll sign up for commons later, i have class right now though so, until then, cheers -- 14:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

to DOI11:10 re: Your rejection of our peer-reviewed publications on Vitamin D and Disease
Dear Sir/madam, I notice that you are deprecating the learned work of myself and my professional colleagues. I sign my name to my work, but I have looked in vain for a name or a telephone number that I could call to contact you. I was taught that science is based on collaboration, not on suppressing the work of others. I would welcome a chat so that we can reconcile the misunderstandings which seem to have arisen.

Sincerely

Professor Trevor G Marshall, PhD, Director, Autoimmunity Research Foundation Trevmar 04:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply at Talk:Vitamin D--DO11.10 17:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

To DO11.10 from shbrown about vitamins
Thanks for your note at my page.

Tough conversation you're in at the vitamin D page. Builds character and invaluable skills. Excellent job maintaining an even tone. I need to work on that.

I understood RDA is a redirect. Am I correct that there is no link from the vitamin page to the RDA page? It took me long enough to find megavitamin therapy so I'll believe it if the link is already there.

I support the goal of NPOV. I try to be very generous in this area because when I write I read what I write and ask myself if there might be other POV's which would be better supported if I used different words. Invariably I can think of other POV's and other words.

I have found some references on RDA's to give you a head's up on where I'm going. This is a nice page. Why isn't there a page like this at webMD or the likes? Outstanding pages on the vitamin deficiency diseases did show up at a mainstream site. These articles show that the RDA's are not meant as guidance for individuals concerned that they might be vitamin deficient. Surprisingly, large numbers of Americans have a reason to be concerned that they might be vitamin deficient. My evidence for this is that large numbers of Americans exhibit symptoms of vitamin deficiency. I was surprised to learn that one in five Americans has some kind of mental illness. Malabsorption is a recognized risk for the elderly population. Few in the >60 age category would claim that their health is as good as it was when they were young. Chronic problems with some of the same symptoms as some of the deficiency diseases are common in the elderly. I'm only arguing that some mental illness and some chronic problems of the elderly might be caused by vitamin deficiency. Finally, hosptialization and/or severe illness can lead to the onset of deficiency disease. Deficiency disease itself is a "point of view". When exactly does someone cross the border from healthy to vitamin deficient (0.3 RDA, 0.28, 0.25??) Science says with certainty that steadily lowering the dose of a vitamin over time will cause the deficiency disease.

I've started searching the internet on the subject of anorexia. So far I'm having trouble finding the connection between anorexia and vitamin deficiency. Apparently over a million young women suffer from anorexia. Surely starving people should be expected to be suffering from vitamin deficiency? Wouldn't it be a good idea to recommend that all young women take a multivitamin supplement?

Sigh. My POV has gone overboard again.

Cheers. I will happily edit away when I'm ready and look forward to your continued support.

shbrown 03:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Featured Picture
Congratulations, and thanks for nominating it. Raven4x4x 07:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Tubal Pregnancy with embryo.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-03-21.  howcheng  {chat} 16:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

This month's winner is RNA interference!
– ClockworkSoul 14:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: C. Teteni copy violator
Sure, you can read requested report here. Bot have checked either Jared Wilmoth's revisions and current version of articles. I see mentioned Nature, and a certain copyright violation in Immunodiagnostics. But unfortunately, the bot recognize only simple copyright violation... Regards, --F. Cosoleto 19:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Trevor Marshall again
When looking at an article about sarcoidosis I stumbled over the name of Trevor Marshall who has now established a quasi-resume site for himself on Wikipedia. I entered it for deletion because I feel it is just another of his attempts to use Wikipedia for his policies.--Savisha 10:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree that his quasi-resume site should be cleaned up but maybe not deleted. He has published in at least two of the five most prominant medical journals in the world (CMAJ and The Lancet), and so is deserving of at least an entry. At least, thats IMHO. -- 16:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Do you remember Talk:Vitamin_D last week. It's the same guy. It's just that I have the feeling that there's something odd going on. A similar thing happened on Talk:Sarcoidosis Also the two Publications are merely brief responses not articles.--Savisha 17:41, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected. It appears I jumped into this debate midstream and was premature in my conclusions. Good work on calling this guy on his bias/OR/vanity articles, whatever they may be. Keep it up! -- 19:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd also like to make a more general comment on how appreciated such a lively community of wikipedians is. The immunology websites have been maintained, despite numerous vandalism attempts, by the efforts of a few individuals and it is appreciated (I know of at least a few fellow students studying for immunology exams that have been using it). I'm planing on doing some contributing over the Christmas holidays, so if anyone wants to collaborate on a project leave me a message on my talk page. -- 19:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Tetanolysin
Hello,

Thank you for your stub submission. You may wish to note that it is preferable to use a stub template from WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types instead of using simply, if you can.

Thanks! --Vox Causa 04:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Trev Marshall
Hey, ya I didn't add any of that stuff, all I did was make the wording less POV. So you say some of those articles aren't even his articles. Jeez. Anyway, the page needs some work, I was reading some of the discussions between you and Marshall about calling you in private? Weird. Anyway, thanks for keeping an eye on things, i'll see what Sarabrate is talking about. (I'm done exams so I'm gonna be editing over the holidays! I'm working on the bio of James Clerk Maxwell right now, hopefully get it up to FA status.) Anyway, have a great holidays. -- 18:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi there
Good luck with the FA for immune system. It's a dauntingly large area to cover. TimVickers 03:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Very true. Let us know if there's anything specific we can help with. – ClockworkSoul 03:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm unsure what the chances of this going through are. I've done as much as I can tonight, but will try to do some more editing tomorrow. The references are a particular concern, since at the moment they are concentrated on a few secondary sources. Hopefully this will be OK with people. I've asked User:Ciar if they can help out as Immunology is really not my field! TimVickers 04:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. Yep, the antibody page has been a big job...one of the first pages I ever edited. It looks a lot different now from when I first stumbled across it, hopefully for the better. The hard work you're putting in on the immune system page looks like its paying off too. Of course, like some of the other critics out there, there does seem to be a large emphasis on bacterial and viral immunity, and less on the parasite and tumor immunology and (since I do originate in the field of comparative immunology) I wonder if an introduction into the alternate "adaptive immune system" now being reported for jawless vertebrates (see articles by Zeev Pancer and Max Cooper on the VLR molecules in lamprey and hagfish for more info) would be appropriate? Maybe this is more appropriate for the Adaptive immune system article - who knows. Oh yeah, to answer your question, my name doesn't rhyme with Leaven Cooled...it's not even close, your pal must have a different non-de-plum ;-) Happy Hogmanay Ciar 04:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi again. I'm wondering if there was a particular reason why you reference both the 5th and 6th editions of Janeway's Immunobiology textbook? Would it be OK to substitute all these refs to the more recent edition? TimVickers 21:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've substituted refs to papers or reviews for all of the 5th edition Janeway references, could you add it as an external link? Thanks. TimVickers 01:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi again, could you have a look through the changes I've made? I don't have your background in this field, so I don't want to introduce any errors into your work. TimVickers 20:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words, all Wikipedia articles are a team effort and all I did was basic copy-editing and wikification. Fingers crossed for a smooth FA process! TimVickers 16:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A note of support can't hurt. It would avoid any appearance that the article was re-written without the lead author's permission. TimVickers 17:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! Immune system is now a featured article. TimVickers 20:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Ditto from me as well; you did excellent work, DO11.10! :D It will be one of our most popular FA articles, I foresee; everyone cares about their immune system. Your contributions will help people for a long time to come; thanks from all of us interested readers! :) Willow 12:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Immunology group
Heya DO11.10! It's not a mistake to have advanced immune system to FAC, but it might have made things easier if you had put it up for a peer review first. It's not required by any means, but it can sometimes help shake out the bugs, especially if you don't know the manual of style as well as some more senior editors. Also, you're right in assuming that "shared" accounts are not the preferred way of doing business, but if you like I would be very happy to help you set up an Immunology Wikiproject. I would be happy to contribute to that project in addition to the broader MCB project. Good luck! – ClockworkSoul 05:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It went to peer review in November, you might have been away then. Plus, I'm not senior, I'm only 29! TimVickers 05:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

This month's MCB Collaboration of the Month article is Peripheral membrane protein!
– ClockworkSoul 18:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks for the comment on my photography and for reporting the image! I rarely flip over to Wikipedia Commons so I never get a chance to check for copyright vios. Cheers  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 01:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Vitamins
Vitamins are nutrients required in very small amounts for essential metabolic reactions in the body, and which cannot be (endogenously) produced by the body, itself.

In general my addition is true with notable exceptions. Shouldn't it be there?

Bob

Uriel8 03:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

...Vitamins continued
Hi, Thanks for getting back. It sounds like you may have answered this one before, dear writer: I can perhaps go away happy now, but just don't happen to agree that normally, or most often, exogenous nutrient substances, required for normal operation of the body, our friends the vitamins, shouldn't be defined as such. Exceptions that you seem aware of being duly noted. That would appear to be most helpful to readers in their time.

The Mustang analogy that you provided is even OK assuming we tell the buyers that "some can be red", i.e., to provide information about the exceptions that prove the rule. Then they are aware that all come in a wide variety of colors starting from all of the primary ones, and pastels in later years :-D

It would seem to defy conventional knowledge, and many people are unaware of sapient conventions, to continue to deny them the essential nature of "essential nutrients" like vitamins, tho the trade may survive. Bob         --   Uriel8 18:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * It's my pleasure. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 04:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Seville Fair
Yes, is a Babelfish translated, look at my user ¿can you translated it?, please. The image (mape) ¿isn`t good?. Look at spanish (write me "usuario:Lobillo") version. Thanks. Another thing, ¿know "Seville Fair"?. --Saeta 10:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, my english is not very good, understand some words you say (Seville Fair), i will be "to correct my errors", ¿babelfish?, i don't know babelfish (before now) is not good (like my english)... --Saeta 23:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you DO11.10, thank you very much. --Saeta 19:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!
Thank you. --82.41.42.96 21:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography and bands
Wondering about this comment, I have seen other musician groups having a Biography WikiProject tag, see Talk:Nightwish in example. Is there any rationale about musical groups? Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 02:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I just found it curious that, in my watchlist, you removed the tag while another user rated Epica (band). I don't use ratings, and do not know about the band to measure its contents (had in my watchlist after some cleanup, I guess), so I won't install it. Just wanted to let you know there were others around who were rating groups as Biographies, and that you may have not know about that :-) Cheers! -- ReyBrujo 04:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Sami people
1.The information about sami people is true. I apologize for not referring on where the information came from. 2.I know that mosquitos dont have a disease, but I still know that some of them carry Malaria. And by the way as written on the page immunity:"Immunity is a medical term that describes a state of having sufficient biological defences to avoid infection, disease or other unwanted biological invasion" the thing I wrote about sami people does describe the medical definition of immunity. 3.I am from Finland and I know my English isn't that good, but I also know that almost anyone who read my text knew what it meant and could have re-written it more clearly, even you.

T:Skele

IHC merge
Good work on the merge of IHC staining and IHC. Dr Aaron 02:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Clearly the two articles were written by individuals with differing backgrounds (judging by the categorization), but they did merge quite nicely. The article could probably use a detailed examination of consistency and accuracy by someone with more knowledge than I have, if you want to have a look.--DO11.10 16:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Last push for the Biography Assessment Drive
We've done great work so far on the WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive, reducing the 135,345 backlog by 38,626 to 96,719 as of March 20, 2007. We have only 6,720 more to go to get below 90,000. That would be outstanding and any extra effort that you can offer in these last few days of the drive (which ends March 24, 2007) would be much appreciated. If you haven't already, you may want to load Outriggr's assessment script in your monobook.js. If you have any questions, please feel free to post them on my talk page. -- Jreferee 23:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Han van Meegeren
Nice work trimming the intro on Han van Meegeren -- it's an excellent job of capturing what's important about the subject without bogging down in details. Hats off to you! -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Typhus merge
Thanks for completing the Typhus merge. It has been on my to-do list for some time, but.............. Best wishes. WBardwin 01:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

E. E. Smith
Hi. You've assessed the E. E. Smith page, but you didn't write anything in the discussion. Do you have any specific advice for improvements to the article? Thanks. --Pariah Press 05:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)