User talk:Fayedizard/Archive 2

GA for Stephen Hawking

 * Congratulatons and well done! --Mirokado (talk) 19:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Well done indeed! BTW I really like the post you just did on Talk:Stephen Hawking, you're a really smooth operator! Roger (talk) 16:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, both of you :) Fayedizard (talk) 21:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

A token of appreciation

 * Sqeeeeee! I love it :) seriously... this is very validating, thank you :) Fayedizard (talk) 20:34, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hawking ref structure
Hi. I see you took this to FAC. I've cleaned up a bit and helped a few of the references towards best practise. I see a lot more that could happen, such as collating the references in the reference section so that the citation details don't clutter up the body of the article. Interested? Alarbus (talk) 04:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Alarbus - thank you for looking at the article, you clearly spent a lot of time on it last night - I confess that I'm not entirely sure what you mean by your suggestion :( Does "collating the references in the reference section so that the citation details don't clutter up the body of the article" mean taking away the footnotes? or is it the spliting of footnots and references as in articles like Speech generating device?  If it's not too much to ask - would you mind making the suggestion on the article talk page? The article has a large number of lurking watchers and they're really useful for getting opinions on (and they'll probably understand the suggestion much more than I. :)


 * Oh - one other thing - yourself and materialscientist spent a chunk of last night reverting each other on the article - but looking at the diffs - I really can't see what content you are disagreeing over, could you fill me in a little bit? If there is disputed content we should probably withdraw the article from FAC... Fayedizard (talk) 07:51, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. I mean WP:LDR; list-defined references. The page Speech generating device is using an old form of splitting the footnotes and refs, one that's essentially deprecated. To do that nowadays, I use the template sfn, such as I've just done on William McKinley. Anyway, I'm not suggesting such a split for Hawking as it's usually not appropriate for an article that's heavily sourced to things online; {sfn} works best for sourcing to books and journals. Hawking is a hybrid with some of all types of sources. See Statue of Liberty for an article with a mix, albeit more print sources than Hawking (so it is split into further sections). The idea here is to de-clutter the prose of citation details, keeping them segregated somehow down at the bottom and referring to them by name or author|year|page.
 * The reverts seem to have been materialscientist missing some of the fixes I was making and my having added about 600 spaces around the citation fields. Spacesarereallyhandyandhelppeopleactuallyreadthings. Presumably he's one of your lurkers. I'm not much interested in getting into any arguments over this; if you're taking the lead and like this idea, great; if there's been rancour over this page, I've no interest. Alarbus (talk) 08:13, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm one of the "lurkers" (and minor contributor to the article). AFAIK there's no substantive disagreement about this article. I think I can safely speak for all at WP:WikiProject Disability that we really appreciate what Fayedizard has done for this article (and others). I think he/she is just saying that this conversation would be better on the article talk page - or even on the review page - so that others who have an interest in the article but don't watch this page, can also see what's happening and perhaps contribute to the process. Alarbus, your contribution is also appreciated, please continue. Roger (talk) 08:35, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * ...just back online.


 * Okay, the references thing makes a lot more sense now - thank you, it's always good to get the perspective of an editor who's more experienced in the area. As I mentioned, I think that it's the sort of thing that should probably go though the talk page first (although if it's a requirement by one of the FAC reviewers I'll probably jump to it). :)  On the other hand, a project that I'd like to wave at you for general interest is the possibility of moving bipolar disorder to GA/FA. We're using  over there and it might benefit from someone who knows what they are doing looking at the reference formatting (there's some very experienced people looking at the article in general)... Cheers, Fayedizard (talk) 20:33, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Feel free to have a debate about this on the talk page. I'm not going to argue for it; it would take far more time than to actually fix the article. I expect you'll be getting comments from the FAC-types about uneven referencing. I just got another about this article on my talk page, so I've lost all interest in it. fyi, on bipolar disorder,  and  are not properly linking to anything. They seem to be seeking the content of, but the "2000a" is not helping and neither is the inappropriate mixing of the {cite} and {vcite} families of templates which will never fly at any competent review. Good luck, Alarbus (talk) 04:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Reply - Blindness
Thanks for your message. I'd hoped to be able to start work on tidying up the Blindness article by now, but haven't yet found the time! I'd still like to at some point, but please don't let me stop you doing anything in the meantime :-) Jonathan Deamer (talk) 19:33, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 06:25, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Down Syndrome
I'm really unsure how to reference things in general terms like records of life-expectancy of individuals with Downs Syndome, or babies born to people with DS, which may be subject to frequent change as new records are created, and also how to find out which individuals are dead, so I have no idea how to reference this kind of content properly. To be fair, this isnt a sports page or a freakshow either, so I'm not even sure we need detailed records, people can always Google the latest position if interested. The figures themselves arent disputed which is why I have kept if fairly general. Newspapers and Guinesss Book of Records are subject to frequent change. Do you have any ideas? Excalibur (talk) 22:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Stephen Hawking FAR
Hi,

I was following (but not participating in) the Hawking FAR. I just wanted to applaud you for doing a great job with the article and for your patience with the candidacy. I'm trying to make myself familiar with GA/FA standards - I've been on WP for a while but I don't think any of my work has been recognition-worthy, yet. I may come to you for advise later... As for the Hawking article, I could try to help. I have access to a great library, but unfortunately can't guarantee too much free time over the next few weeks.

Best,  S Pat   talk 16:32, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey - that's very very kind of you to take the time to stop by. Thank you very much for your words :)   I suspect I might not be a person to come to for advise, at least at the FA level, although I can do the odd article.  I think that Hawking is unlikely to go any further than it has, I suspect I lack the sureness of touch for FA  -  but if you're looking for things to get involved with - we could really do with someone taking a bit of a content-hammer to dyslexia or even down syndrome - I've been battering them regularly but I suspect it needs someone coming in from a different angle... thanks once again... Fayedizard (talk) 22:12, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your offer to review Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore!
I am now ready to handle a review. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:41, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah-ha - apologies for missing this - looks like it turned up when I had some meatspace issues - let me sort out a couple of little projects that cropped up and then I can see where I am… Fayedizard (talk) 20:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Update of Downs
If you are going to be doing an update please use secondary sources from the last 3-5 years per WP:MEDRS. Than hopefully we can get this article to GA status. -- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:22, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent, it's great that your keeping an eye - particularly since I've only picked around the edges of medical articles. I've updated the 2003 reference to the 2010 textbook - my main focus at the moment is just sourcing all the fluff that's arrived - I think a later phase might have to energise the source where necessary, but I'll certainly choose modern over old for now… Fayedizard (talk) 20:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

dyslexia
Stop screwing up the articles contents to fit your media hyped ideas get the research to support edits and begin to understand the nature of the disability, you so have not demonstrated that you have any idea what dyslexia is let alone able to edit an article about dyslexia. You should concentrate on developing the sub articles which came from the orignal dyslexia article, which due to my lack of copyt editing skills due to my own dyslexia, have not changed since i movced the content. So may be you should stop deleting good research and instead developing the complete series of required dyslexia articles. It is very easy to critise someone who has a communication disability, but it very difficult to help them express what they need to get across. So may be you could start working on the dyslexia project berfore making any more edits to the dyslexia articles so that consensus can be met. dolfrog (talk) 01:52, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * re: Irlen filters you seem to have some form personal of agenda regarding dyslexia and related issues, as if you may have some conflict of interest, hopefully not, but could you please clarify you specific interest regarding dyslexia. Are you dyslexic for instance, or do you have links with one of the organisations working in the dyslexia industry dolfrog (talk) 03:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * (talk page stalker) I left a warning about personal attacks, there are now related conversations at User talk:Dolfrog/Archives/2012 1 and User talk:Mirokado. --Mirokado (talk) 04:40, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Morning editors, lovely to see you both and welome to my talk page. I'm somewhat spoilt for choice as to where to respond and I think I'd like to continue the conversation over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disability because I think I want to make a point about editing while disabled, and that's a general conversation the project should have. Fayedizard (talk) 09:06, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

So now you need to prove that know something about dyslexia and improve all of those sub articles before you are qualified to edit the main article dolfrog (talk) 07:29, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * No Fayedizard does not need to prove anything to you or anyone else. You however, need to get off your hobbyhorse and realise that people here are only interested in improving the quality of Wikipedia articles, not promote their "noble causes". Roger (talk) 13:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Boken DOI cite in Disability in literature.
A DOI cite you added to WP:WikiProject Disability/Sandbox/Disability in literature seems to be invalid. Could you please check your source for a typo or other error. If you can't resolve the DOI problem please use a different citation method. Thanks for joining the drafting process. Roger (talk) 11:28, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Apologies. My bad. Fixed now :) Fayedizard (talk) 12:33, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

CVUA
Electriccatfish2 (talk) 01:46, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Replied at your talkpage. Fayedizard (talk) 18:23, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

re 1962 Commonwealth Paraplegic Games
Hi,

I did some fixing of spacing, punctuation etc. but I can't review the content or organization, or fact check. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 13:49, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied (well, about to) on your talk. Fayedizard (talk) 15:12, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Talk:1962 Commonwealth Paraplegic Games/GA1
Hi. I nominated the article on behalf of User:Aussiesportlibrarian and hopefully he will be fixing things per your suggestions. :) Just wanted to let you know in case it looks like I am not acting quickly. --LauraHale (talk) 09:49, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * :) I'm looking forward to working with you - I should have some initial comments in about 20minutes or so, then finnishing the review in the next three hours :) Good luck! Fayedizard (talk) 10:12, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * First wave of comments done - bit rushed as have an appointment - back in a little while - interested in your thoughts generally :) Fayedizard (talk) 10:33, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the constructive feedback. I have merged medals, badges etc into ceremonial, created new section participating teams (and changed the table), fixed up grammar issues and created a new wikipedia page for Events at 1962 Commonwealth Paralympic Games. Note the term wheelpast was in official documents. There is unfortunately limited online resources - this is an historical event and little digital content including newspapers.Aussiesportlibrarian talk 18:32 24 June 2012 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.42.206 (talk)
 * Fabulous - I'm aware you're on a bit of a different timezone from me - but will give this a quick half-hour of attention now, and then a more thorough look in about 12 hous or so. Fayedizard (talk) 08:43, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Strikethoughts have been put in - and a quick paragraph of general comments to look at - it would also be handy if I knew when you're best times where for editing over this week - just to make sure that you're not hanging around waiting for me :) Fayedizard (talk) 08:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

You are invited to offer a second opinion at the ongoing GA review of Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore!
Thanks for helping improve coverage of disability topics on Wikipedia! Some time ago, you offered to review my GAN, Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore, but did not. The eventual reviewer, vaibhavgupta1989, appears to have insufficient understanding of the GA criteria (for example, he suggested I remove all red links) and the nomination is now awaiting a second opinion; would you like to offer it? (Solarra is not offering one; her comments were made before the request for second opinion and she is also unfamiliar with GA reviewing.) --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:36, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm… that does look like a mess - okay I'm aware that the article has been awaiting it's GA review for a long time, and I feel bad that we missed each other last time when I had a bit of free time. But at the moment my plate is very full. Here's what I would do in the circumstances. I'd post to the talk page of the GA review process, Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations, and get a sense from them about if a second opinion would be best, if you don't get any response then I think the simplest and cleanest way of dealing with this might be to close the current review as a failure - make any changes that are reasonable - and then renominate in a little while. Please keep me up to date - I am *full* of projects right now but windows do open - also I'm starting to acquire some friendly people with a knowledge of disability who watch my talk and one might be willing to jump in for your GA.  One last thing - your contact with the review of the GA review might need a bit of care - there are places where your arguments look a lot like Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions, and I think you'd get further citing policies rather than precedent...
 * My GA nomination of Xiaxue is also on hold and I am assisting Zscout370 with the GA nomination of Coat of arms of Singapore, which is also on hold. Hence I approached you not to get a second opinion quickly, but to get a quality review from you (assuming you are familiar with GA reviewing and disability topics). Perhaps you could help me ask the "friendly people...with knowledge of disability" (and a knowledge of GA reviewing)? --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 10:20, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Chen Guangcheng GA nomination
Hello,

I have started a GA review of Chen Guangcheng. The article is in good shape, and reasonably close the GA status. However, some more work will need to be done for it to reach GA status. Please see Talk:Chen Guangcheng/GA1 for more information.

Thanks, ThaddeusB (talk) 00:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

hi
ready to discuss massow article — Preceding unsigned comment added by LisaThorne (talk • contribs) 09:59, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That's great to hear - best to post at Talk:Ivan_Massow and we can take things one at a time. :) Fayedizard (talk) 10:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

My user page
Er? Why did you undo my user page? --LauraHale (talk) 21:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Major apologies - accidentally clicked on the wrong button on my watch list and rolled you back - really, really sorry! (this is why I shouldn't watch tv and edit at the same time...)
 * No worries then. :D Accidents happen. Thanks for the assistance with those Olympic articles by the way.  You should at some point get a bunch of DYK credit for that.  If you want to go in an fill in birth dates and classification information for my Paralympians, similar credit is available.  Each article should now have the APC link where that information should easily be available. :) --LauraHale (talk) 21:17, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * So I'm a little overstreached at the moment - but I'm intrigued (I've got no knowledge at all of the DYP) - and it might be a nice thing to write a tiny bot for... which articles need Birth dates? Is there a category handy? Also - something is rattling around in my head about some AUS editors coming over for the Paralympics... Have I got that right? Fayedizard (talk) 16:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Revert-a-mongus
Hey, what was that warning template you added about? And then removed...? Just curious. Thanks -  Theopolisme TALK 20:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I was trying to revert the edits to Bhayandar at the same time you were and didn't see the diff change on igloo - I'm mortified I templated you... major apologies... should be fixed now - and there should already be an apology on your talk... Fayedizard (talk) 20:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Why - thank you :) it's always nice to know someones watching and appreciating. Thank you very much indeed - and the reverse counts as well, if you see me doing something you'd do differently, feel free to drop me a line :) Fayedizard (talk) 06:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

re your offer to review renominated article District Railway
Hi,

It's been renominated:

MathewTownsend (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up - starting the review now :) Fayedizard (talk) 16:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

SAS Institute
Hi Fayedizard. I reverted the removal of the template  here. I think the confusion may have been caused because I used a new template for proposing major re-writes. The requested edit is to replace the article at SAS Institute with this version.

A long-time SAS customer reviewed the copy (see here) and Alphaquadrant reviewed a prior draft, but has since gone on a Wiki-break. I'm talking to SAS about adding the images Charles suggested, but I would be comfortable doing that later as a non-controversial edit. Feedback has been positive, but the merge hasn't been made yet.

Hope this clears things up. Thanks for helping with the request edit queue. I've been trying to pitch in myself, but without approving edits as a COI editor myself. I just did a lot of work with Noununique names implementing an AfC-like system with decline templates and such and I'm hoping more people will use them. User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 23:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey - no problem, thanks for clearing that up :) Fayedizard (talk) 07:32, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Sons of Soul
Hi. I'm this article nominator at FAC and have addressed your spotchecks. I'm not sure if it helps, but I left a comment on how the material cited with inaccessible sources can be checked. It seems pretty inconvenient, but it's also how I looked up information on the album to begin with. Dan56 (talk) 19:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Dan - I just responded on the review page - nice article btw :) Fayedizard (talk) 20:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Ivan Massow
Hello again Fayedizard! It seems that someone isn't happy with the work I've been doing so far on the above rather contentious article. About a week ago there weren't any ratings in the 'Rate this article' box at the bottom of the article's page - now look at it! It's a shame that that feedback tool isn't engineered in a way to prevent that kind of abuse. The curious thing is that I have been so careful to try and be balanced, I'm not actually able to guess whether the party who considers the article to now be heavily biased is saying it's too negative or too positive about its subject. I wouldn't be surprised if trouble kicks off again.... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 10:00, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've been keeping an eye - and I'm pretty impressed with the work you've been doing - well done!  I think, given the nature of Massow's public life, that there are as many people who think it's too positive and there are that think it's too negative! Fayedizard (talk) 18:22, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Yes, I'm sure you're right. This is the first BLP I've edited, and I seem to have jumped in at the deep end somewhat, though I imagine all BLPs can get a bit fraught. I am enjoying it though, despite the fact that someone (I'm sure it's only one, voting several times) considers my efforts to be displeasing.... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 23:00, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Conflict of interest/Noticeboard
You participated in a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard that was halted, pending an AFD result. The AFD is now closed, if you'd like to make further comment.--GrapedApe (talk) 11:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Sophia Bekele
Hiya! Following your addition of Sophia Bekele to the original DotConnectAfrica COI (still ongoing) I have given my best attempt at giving the article 'a good going over'! I am a very new editor and clearly an SPA because of the amount of time I have had to spend on this COI.

When you have a spare minute could you have a glance at the article to make sure I haven't made any obvious mistakes in terms of policy and guidelines? Furthermore any critique on my work to date on the article you could offer would be very welcome. Many thanks! --Elekebia (talk) 17:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, most of it looks good - there are a few bits were your newness shows through (In general it's more effective to move stuff in a single edit rather than delete a bunch of stuff and then add it again later - the reason is that people might revert you halfway though for section blanking and then that gets confusing...).  You've been doing some good stuff on the DotConnect stuff, but you are right in thinking that it's worth getting a bit of work around wikipedia generally. Do you have any particular interests whose articles you'd like to  work on?  If not (picking something of the 'multiple issues' stack at random) you might find in fun to do a bit of work on Daily_Planet, which is a little lacking... Fayedizard (talk) 18:06, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference
I'm sorry to report that there were not enough accounts available for you to have one. I have you on our list though and if more become available we will notify you promptly.

We're continually working to bring resources like Credo to Wikipedia editors, and this will very hopefully not be your last opportunity to sign up for one. If you haven't already, please check out WP:HighBeam and WP:Questia, where accounts are still available. Cheers, Ocaasi 19:12, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Assistive technology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Defect (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) 11:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

LeadSongDog come howl!  18:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved!
Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
 * If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Talkback
—Tom Morris (talk) 23:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

"No good at autographs"
Hello again Fayedizard - I just happened to notice that you've forgotten to sign again at the COI noticeboard... :) PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 08:54, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Blush* thank you for noticing, and thanks for the heads-up - it's much appreciated :) Fayedizard (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 09:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I confess your most recent edit summary on the COI page made me laugh! I think you must have some sort of gremlin at work.... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: Thanks :)
No worries. :-) What a difference a tilde can make! Graham 87 11:33, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

District Railway GA
Your GA Review of District Railway seems to have been stalled for a fortnight. Are you planning to return to it?--DavidCane (talk) 18:23, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi David - good to hear from you... The article has been waiting for someone to give it a second opinion since I think about late August - I posted on the GA board at the time but might put up another one shortly... I'm starting to get a little impatient... Especially since the whole point of me re-reviewing was so that we didn't have a long time waiting... Fayedizard (talk) 21:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I've started another thread at GA talk on the subject: Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations I hope we find something for your guys soon. Fayedizard (talk) 21:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * My comment on 24 August was intended to be the second opinion you asked for.--DavidCane (talk) 21:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh - apologies, as you were one of the contributors to the article, I'd understood that was how you had arrived at the conversation. I'll pop back to the review page now. Fayedizard (talk) 09:08, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I did make some edits back in 2009 and 2010 and minor edits after it was listed at GAN the first time, but I haven't really contributed to the development of the article as it currently is.--DavidCane (talk) 12:43, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Eleaeis (Oil palm)
Hello, fortunately the previous editor found some time and agreed to add the material. Thank you again for being willing to look at the requests! --YellowOwl (talk) 15:26, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem - thanks for letting me know - feel free to pop back if you need any more help. Fayedizard (talk) 20:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
No unique  names  05:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh dear.
I just picked this up. There is no value as such to it, I just thought you may find it interesting. http://www.prlog.org/11987720-sabotage-of-our-wikipedia-sites.html Elekebia (talk) 18:53, 4 October 2012 (UTC)


 * *sigh* thanks for letting me know - I'll open up a thread on the COI board :s. It's actually my first one of these.Fayedizard (talk) 15:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Congrats

 * I suggested him for TFA on his birthday, please join the discussion and improve the blurb, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Stephen Hawking's students
I see you have removed some of the students of Stephen Hawking that I inserted a few days ago. I would like to reinstate that there are reliable sources. If you click on their wikipedia page, it will state that they are students of Hawking. Moreover, for people like Raymond Laflamme or Bernard Caar, the information is also on their homepage or some news pages like Guardian. The name of his students are especially important to the interest of physicists in the field. So please restore them if you can. If you still do not believe there are reliable sources, I can find them for you.Eltonjohn007 (talk) 10:18, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Your request for an editor review
Hello! I just wanted to let you know I have removed your request for an editor review as you've gone inactive since December 2012. Since editor reviews are about your current editing habits, it wouldn't be beneficial for this type of feedback from your edits around seven months ago. Should you return, and still wish to have an editor review, the page still exists at Editor review/Fayedizard.  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 00:17, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Million Award
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it!

Cheers and all best, -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:04, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

OE Talk
Hi, can I ask if you can look at the OE Talk page to review recent requests? I do not want to start another bun fight/edit war and therefore have not responded to allegations of lying, however I believe the truth will either come out in course or will become irrelevant. I also understand that recent direct edits on the page were wrong and I apologise.Hardlygone (talk) 18:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if you could possibly take a look at the recent posts on OE Talk page, please? --Hardlygone (talk) 11:14, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Fayedizard, please stop by soon with your voice of reason! NB: I am the only ID I've ever used on Wiki, contrary to claims last year by OE's paid editors Hardlygone and Theroadislong! RingARoses (talk) 23:59, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Stephen Hawking as TFA
A quick note to let you know - the Hawking article has been nominated to run as the front-page featured article on 8 January; discussion here. Andrew Gray (talk) 10:45, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh wow - thanks for letting me know! Much appreciated :) Fayedizard (talk) 22:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Fayedizard, I'm sorry that my small attempts at wikignoming your Stephen Hawking article and a bit of self-defense at the talk page seem to have brought the wrath of Sandy and Mat down upon you as well as me. I think I need to step out of any involvement with the article because I am too frustrated with the people involved, (the ongoing problem of people who criticize but won't do any work themselves that would likewise subject them to criticism drives me nuts) but I wanted to let you know that I think you have worked hard and done a good job.  There's always room to improve any article, but you don't deserve what you are getting thrown at you, but I think I'm not helping you by pissing off the primary complainers.  So if you want a supportive hand, or have an idea you want to run up a fairly neutral flagpole, feel free to pop by my talk and say hello.   Montanabw (talk) 20:23, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I tried again a year later, not much to lose, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 14:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Credo
Hello! You have received preliminary approval for access to Credo. Please fill out this short form so that your access can be processed. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Dyslexia
Hi this is to inform you that Dyslexia which you edited will be submitted for WikiJournal of Medicine...''The objective of this message is to invite the contributors to collaboratively submit the article for review through Wiki.J.Med, and if possible, to help in further betterment of the article in accordance to the suggestions of the reviewers. Wikipedia articles are collaboratively authored. So, it is very important to make the authors aware of such a process that the article is currently undergoing'' thanks--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:10, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Fixed your talk page archiving
Hi! I took the liberty of fixing the auto-archiving settings at the top of this page. --rchard2scout (talk) 08:23, 22 April 2021 (UTC)