User talk:Graham87/Archive 9

Featured sound
Sorry, the template rather breaks with big sets like this, but the other option is to spam you with 11 templates, or use something that looks less official. =) Anyway, thanks for setting this up - it's a fine addition to the encyclopedia. Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 19:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it's a little unbalanced looking and takes up a lot of space (though, yes, definitely better than 11 seperate templates) But yes, this is a great find, and a wonderful addition to the project. =)
 * By the way, if you want to join in on Featured sounds, please do so =) I and a few others decided it had languished long enough, so have been working to revitalise it, and we'd love more people =) Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 03:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry! I didn't realise you were blind. I suppose the visual layout probably doesn't matter then, and am very glad I didn't go down the 11 template route. Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 15:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Classical mechanics
What did you just do to the classical mechanics page? There are about eight consecutive change notices in my watch list and I can't figure out what happened. Thanks, MarcusMaximus (talk) 05:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Very well. Nothing to worry about, then :). By the way, I can't even imagine how you are able to efficiently edit Wikipedia using a voice synthesizer interface.  It must be quite a skill! MarcusMaximus (talk) 05:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

New article CUES was deleted
Hi there Graham!

How's it going down under?

I recently started the Credit Union Executive Society article, and it was speedy deleted. This is unfortunate since this organization is on par with CUNA (Credit Union National Association), which is clearly worthy of inclusion. Unfortunately, I didn't start the article with references, so this is my bad. I know of at least one other editor who is knowledgable in the credit union space who can back me up on the merits of this one. There are so many articles written on CUES in industry magazines, I almost don't know where to start with the references and citations. Here's just one: http://www.cutimes.com/article.php?article=40011

Also, you can see by my body of work that I am not a fly-by-night wiki editor, and not a newbie. I've delivered a lot of solid material to wikipedia, and credit union related articles in particular. I'm certainly not an expert either, and don't know the intricacies of wikipedia by any means.

Any guidance you can give here would be appreciated. --Mmpartee (talk) 15:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Deuterostomes and Bilateria
Hi, Graham. I watch Deuterostome and Bilateria as I'm interested in paleontology and have got involved in the Cambrian explosion task force, which about the early stages of animal evolution. Are you thinking of merging Deuterostomeand Bilateria? If so, I don't think it's a good idea at present. From what I've read there's quite a lot to say about the evolution of the bilaterian body plan from presumably Cnidarian-like ancestors, and about the mechanisms and evolutionary history behind the split between the protostomes and deuterostomes, which account for most but not all of the Bilateria - not to mention the question of whether flatworms are pre-split bilaterians or protostomes that have secondarily lost the coelom and anus, whether the Lophotrochozoan theory of protostome phylogeny is right and Chordate phylogeny. I think it's much better to leave Bilateria, Deuterostome and Protostomeas separate articles for now, and then we can look at how much overlap there is. -- Philcha (talk) 16:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, Graham. Thanks for explaining. I won't ask you found out about the parallel versions. I notice these have slightly incorrect correct titles, e.g. "Deuterostom", although the editor concerned says he was trained in biology. My guess is he was dissatisfied with the articles and wanted to experiment, but at that stage didn't know about sandboxes. -- Philcha (talk) 07:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Plant
I've been trying to figure out your recent activities on Plant, but I'm having trouble making sense of it. Could you explain, please?--Curtis Clark (talk) 14:32, 18 October 2008 (UTC)


 * My hat's off to you; I can certainly see the potential for error in that complex procedure.--Curtis Clark (talk) 15:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Tasman Bridge disaster
Graham - thanks for the copyedits you recently made on this article.GlenDillon 06:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Scooby Doo Frank Welker
Hi Graham,

Good job as usual on keeping up with all the pages you work on. I can confirm that Frank Welker did indeed succeed Don Messick as the voice of Scooby Doo. Scott Innes did the voice for a couple of direct to videos during the period listed, however he was never really considered the "new voice" it was a trial period and no series were being produced. However, it still is accurate enough to say preceeded by Scott Innes...I have no problem with that, it is just that Don Messick created the voice and did it for 30 years, and Scott did a couple of projects over two years. Frank has done the voice for the last seven years. He has been in all the Scooby projecst including three new Scooby series and several moives, video games etc.and is currently working on the newest live action Scooby. Scott has also, done some Scooby commercials. This is probably more than you wanted to know, since this is not your area of major interest. I corrected the box. If you want more info just let me know.

Greenskeeper (talk) 03:49, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Miami
Re your comments in Talk:Miami/Archive 0 -- now that the page has been move, please take a look and see if anything else needs doing. -- Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 18:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Supernanny logo under a free license?
Hi. I discovered that User:Tennisdude92 plagiarized episode synopses of the TV show Supernanny from ABC's website into the List of Supernanny episodes article. I removed it, but then thought to check through his User Contributions, and the first thing other than that plagiarism that I found was, in which he uploaded the Supernanny logo with the GNU Free license. Is this right? The various licenses are not my forte, so could you look into it as far as what should be done? Let me know if this is okay with you. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 23:14, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry about that. Your name was at the top of the Edit History of the Text of the GNU Free Documentation License page, so I just contacted you. Thanks for the advice! Nightscream (talk) 00:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Johann Gottfried Walther
Hi Graham,

how are you? I am back here after some work "outside" of wikipedia and I saw your media list with concertos and choral preludes. I find it very interesting and it is my opinion that articles about composers must have a certain amount of sound examples. I will add some more items on my sandbox and the Petrucci project is a real treasure for my. I read a lot of pieces and then decide to print and play them. My next organ session will be about 10th of november I think. Have a nice time: here the cold days are coming! next week we have perhaps the first snow. my best greetings to you from Germany Uli

--Metzner (talk) 23:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Virtually Barouqe.
The concerns were that there was no explict (C) notice or license attached to the works concerned, it may obvious to you that the works are by the site owners, but it wasn't to me. I raised this issue on IRC, and was told that I was justified in commenting such links.

In respect of deep links, feel free to re-instate those, Generally speaking though it's better to link to the html page that contains a file, rather than directly to a file, as this WILL show the copyright/attribution information as requried. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Main Page redesign
The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, P retzels Talk! 14:54, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

FS!
Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 01:37, 31 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yay! :-) Graham 87 01:39, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well done! SatuSuro 01:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Very impressive. It is an excellent performance, by the way, quite distinct from any I have heard before. Cheers from me too! cygnis insignis 02:09, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Request
You know, we don't have any Johannes Sebastian Bach (or any of the other Bachs)) as a featured sound, largely because noone's nominated one yet. Would you like to join in with one? The link is WP:FSC. Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 01:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Done at Featured sound candidates/Sonata for Flute or Recorder and Harpsichord in B minor, BWV 1030. Graham 87 02:43, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

New script for aleatory fugues
Hey Graham, I made another script, User:Proteins/followrandomlinkonpage.js, and I think it's a fun one. It opens a random link on any page in a new tab or window. It's like the 'Random article" function in the navigation portlet, but the script allows you to restrict the range of articles you're randomly jumping to. Also, you can spawn multiple random pages from a single page, so you can for instance generate a dozen random Featured Articles in the time it takes to say "In Piccadilly Circus, people pursue peccadillos."  Programming-wise, the script is relatively simple, but it suggests interesting variations...

I thought you might enjoy this new script, but it isn't accessibility-related, so I thought I'd post it here. Cheers! Proteins (talk) 23:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey Proteins, the script is neat! It's fascinating to see what is linked from a page. However it probably shouldn't follow the category links at the end of the page, especially hidden categories; it followed the link Category:Template computed age non-articles on my userpage. It should follow category or image links with a colon in front of them like Category:XYZ, but not actual category links. I'm not sure about image links. Graham 87 00:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

That's a great suggestion, Graham; I hadn't thought of those exceptions. I think I've fixed the script so that it doesn't follow Images, Categories and Special pages. It already follows only links in the main article; it doesn't follow those in the left-hand column, the article tabs such as "edit this article" or the user-associated commands at the top edge such as "my preferences". Enjoy, Proteins (talk) 01:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Need your help
The fair use of Image:Haydn_op20_Movement_3.OGG and Image:Haydn_op20_Movement_2_Second_Variation.OGG has been challenged on the grounds that a free recording of the opus 20 quartets could be found. On what basis this challenger assumes that there is a free recording I have no idea. But, since you are familiar with the problem, perhaps you can help me deal with this.

These images were the first two of a whole raft of examples I was planning to include in the article String quartets opus 20 (Haydn). But if I am going to face illogical fair use challenges all along the way, I might as well give it up. --Ravpapa (talk) 05:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Later: I have raised this issue at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content. You may want to add your two cents worth to that discussion.

Regards, --Ravpapa (talk) 18:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi
I need you to fully protect this talk page. The blocked user is abusing it. You can delete it and then create=sysop only, or whatever is best. 211.30.109.24 (talk) 04:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Its been a while...
Our rugrats vandal has returned. Special:Contributions/24.187.8.111. Same start to IP address and he still targets Rugrats and other nickelodeon related articles. The vandalism is the same trademark misinformation. I level 2 warned him, but he ignored it and continued his vandalism spree. I've now level 3 warned him, but he's already done more than enough to be blocked. If you could help me keep on top of the situation, it'd be most appreciated! Thanks :-) Sloan ranger (talk) 21:11, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah sure, i'll keep an eye on them. After all the help you've given me, it's the least I can do :-) Sloan ranger (chat) 12:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

LegalWikiPro
I left a comment on the LegalWikiPro deletion page. As you will see there, I discussed some of these issues with an editor when I first created the article. I'm a newbie, but was aware enough of some of the issues, and thought that I had worked them out to Wikipedia standards. Maybe. Maybe not.

On other issues: I feel like the external links were very relevant to the topics at hand. The legal articles on Wikipedia are, by nature, quite general. They are good, but they lack a lot of specific detail that an attorney or interested layman may need in order to fully understand an area of law. Here is a quote from the "external links" guidelines as to what SHOULD be linked to: "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons." I think the links were completely appropriate under that guideline. For example, Wikipedia may have an article on Intentional Interference with Contract. It is good as far as it goes, but it does not give the reader a lot of nuance or detail. The links to LegalWikiPro gives the reader jurisdiction specific detail, quotes from cases (public domain), and an organized outline of various defenses and evidentiary issues that simply can not be found on Wikipedia. Your readers seem to like it. LegalWikiPro has about 20 hits a day from readers linking to it from Wikipedia. And...they stay and read. Not sure why that's a bad thing. I'd ask for the links to be restored, if possible.

Thanks for your time. I know you don't make a lot off of the service you provide. :)

Briefer (talk) 16:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Muhammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī
Hi.. can you see the matter here Muhammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī i put sources from britannica encyclopedia and encarta encyclopedia put they deleted it.. i dont know what should to do... can you please advice me because i dont know alot here... many thanks --Bayrak (talk) 21:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

please i want to know is this true...
 * Encarta/Britannica are Teriatary sources. Per Wikipedia Rule: RS "Wikipedia articles should be based around reliable secondary sources." Secondary sources are exactly Professors of history of Islamic mathematics who were consulted for this article. So Teriatary sources do not have the same weight as primary and secondary sources.) --Bayrak (talk) 20:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Please don't
Just because someone "constitutes vandalism", which hasn't happened much at all, doesn't mean the whole IP should be blocked.216.114.210.66 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC).
 * Message originally added to my user page. Graham 87 14:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for copy-edits
Thank you for the copy edits of my user page. I didn't know line-breaks destroy lists and therefore accessibility. I find it somewhat amazing that you became an administrator on Wikipedia despite being blind. Keep up the great work! I've been to Austrailia, by the way, near Canberra. Great country. I'm currently in Chile. Jason Quinn (talk) 13:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Biscuits and the biscotti
Americans take too many liberties with non English languages.

It is wrong to refer to the Italian Biscotti with the American definition. It would be similar to Italians defining "biscuit" to be what we refer to as a "dog biscuit". It is true that a dog biscuit is a biscuit; but there are a lot more biscuits than dog biscuits.

Or to state it mathmatically "The set defined by the Italian term 'biscotti' is mmuch greater than the set defined by the American term 'biscotti'.

And furthermore the word is pronounced "bis coat ti" not "bis Scotty". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.203.135.180 (talk) 20:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I've Replied at User talk:72.203.135.180. Graham 87 03:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

deleting and reverting
Sorry, in 'non-Wiki' usage, I tend to use the words 'delete' and 'revert' interchangeably, I'll keep better tabs on that in the future. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, though.LeeRamsey (talk) 01:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

LegalWikiPro...
Thanks for your comment re LegalWikiPro. Since I am relying on other lawyers to help edit, I am finding it difficult to get some of these self-interested lawyers to freely contribute. But I'm getting alot of interest in the concept. "I'll be back" when this thing gets off the ground. :) Briefer (talk) 02:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Heads up
Hey Graham- Just a quick note; through my work with the account creation team I have recently made accounts for two new folks using screen readers, User:Guardian Knight and User:Nshugart- in addition to links to pages like Using JAWS I have encouraged them to get in contact with you if they have any specific questions, so they may be dropping by. Just thought I'd give ya fair warning! L'Aquatique  [  talk  ] 19:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Great! They both seem to be very nice people, more patient than myself (which is a plus)- I'm hoping to convince them to join WikiProject Accessibility. We could always use more guinea pigs... ahem, I mean experienced users...  L'Aquatique   [  talk  ] 00:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow, just checked my e-mail and there's one more new user that uses a screen reader, User:JDD. Will also be passing those links and your name on to him.  L'Aquatique   [  talk  ] 01:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Here's hoping. By the way, you may be interested in the discussion I started about audible catchpas on the WT:ACCESS page. We've gotten so many complaints in the last few days about the catchpa that we (the account creation team) are trying to figure out how we might put in place some sort of catchpa alternative.  L'Aquatique   [  talk  ] 01:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Sewer Cover Barnstar

 * I award this to you, Graham87, with humbleness and awe. You’ve done what I truly can not. Greg L (talk) 00:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Writing pKa for screen readers?
Hi Graham,

L'Aquatique and I have been adding ALT text to acid dissociation constant, which is up for FAC. We're unsure how to write pKa, which is the pH at which a given acid is half protonated and half deprotonated. Since scientists say "pee kay ay" in conversation, we might write it as "P K A" or "p_K_a"; I chose the latter. However, the reader might want to know that the "a" is a subscript; so we could also write it as "p K sub a". Maybe you have another idea? Sorry to bother you with such minutiae, but we'd be grateful for your advice. Nice barnstar above, by the way. Proteins (talk) 21:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Proteins, Probably "P K A" would be best, so screen readers don't say the "A" as if it's an indefinite article. The alt text should match what is spoken in real life as closely as possible. If people really want to know where the subscript is, they can use their screen reader to describe the font or view the HTML source.Graham 87 01:43, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

New York Times search results
I think you are the person I spoke to six or seven months ago about the syntax of NY Times search results. I have a NYTimes search in my Firefox search engine dropdown. When I search on "Byron W. Brown" it yielded 40 results this morning and 38 now. When I google New York Times, click on the link to take me to the main page and enter the same search terms in the search bar I get 445 results. Here are the URLs for the searches
 * Firefox: http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?query=%22Byron+W.+Brown%22
 * NYT Main page: http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch?query=%22Byron+W.+Brown%22&srchst=cse

What is the difference?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you use Firefox? Can you replicate the difference with other searches in a way that might demonstrate the difference?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:29, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That still doesn't make so much sense to me since I put the name inside quotations in both cases. I will check in at the help desk and see where they send me.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Humoresque
Hello Graham87. Thank you for adding the sound file to Dvořák's Humoresques. The sound and performance is very good, with only few slight slips in viola part. I agree with you: better than nothing. Btw, the version with viola has very refined and intimate sound. It reminds me art nouveau and old vanished world. Great. --Vejvančický (talk) 07:39, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The recording is absolutely O.K. and relevant, and I think, it's possible to add it also to Antonín Dvořák. His article is currently without sound files. The Chopin is a bit honky-tonky, with some strange percussion in background!:))) I have funny morning today, thanks to you. --Vejvančický (talk) 08:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've noticed now. Dvořák is not in my watchlist, I only occasionally check it... Sorry for misunderstanding. You are right, I don't like that recording of Biblical Songs, I've explained my opinion on Featured sounds talk page. I'll try to create the article for Romances, I can find the score and some other interesting and relevant facts. The Queen of the Night is fantastic!! I want the complete discography of Florence Foster Jenkins! It's charming! Oh man, I'cant stop laugh! Thanks so much. --Vejvančický (talk) 08:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Checking ALT text
Hi Graham, a bunch of us have been adding ALT text to the equations and images of acid dissociation constant, which is at FAC. Could you please check them out and offer us advice on how we're doing? Do we need to signal somehow that the text is ALT text, so that it's not confused with the text of the main article? Are our descriptions OK? Some of my ALT texts are long, which could be good (very descriptive) or bad (very boring). Also, if you had an opinion about the article's suitability for FA, particularly as regards scientific jargon, that would be helpful, too. Thanks as always, Proteins (talk) 01:35, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Romantic Pieces Op. 75 (Dvořák)
Hello Graham. I've created the article for Dvořák's Romantic Pieces, and I also added a nice recording from Dvořák article to it. I hope you don't mind. I was a bit confused, since I know whole cycle only in arrangement for two violins and viola. I've searched, and now - it's explained in the article. It's in my sandbox for the moment, feel free to check it, you can fix typos or whatever if you want. It's well sourced I think, and facts are O.K. But my English isn't perfect. Have a nice day. --Vejvančický (talk) 14:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC) Btw, is it possible to upload the whole cycle? Thanks

Cut-and-paste moves
Hi, I noticed your post on a talk page about "cut-and-paste moves", and was wondering if what I did with the article Roy Miller was correct? You see, I found out that another article was created with approx. the same content, Roy Miller (footballer), so I merged the articles together in the latter one. I was going to move Roy Miller (disambiguation) to the original article, so I temporarily blanked the page, but it ended up being reverted. Did it again with an edit summary and it worked, but I still couldn't move the disambiguation-page, so I should maybe have done something like this? What do you think? lil2mas (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding User:Bayrak
Hello,. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 67.194.202.113 (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Alt text and ASCB workshop
Hi Graham,

I'm not sure if you follow WT:MOS, but I thought I'd keep you abreast of the status of alt text. After adding it to the MoS, a few people expressed reservations about the desirability of alt text for images, which surprised me. The principal objections seemed to be: (1) it'd be a lot of work, and (2) people would use it as an excuse to start arguments on Wikipedia. Interestingly, alt text for equations never came up; that may well change once the people at the Math WikiProject take notice. Anyway, I softened the MoS wording and it seems acceptable to everyone so far. After the holidays, I'll broach the subject in a few other venues and go from there.

I'm leaving tomorrow for a workshop in San Francisco that aims to give scientists a crash course in editing Wikipedia. I've begun to write a few tutorials for newbies to Wikipedia, which are listed in the second section of my user page. They're probably not very accessible — sorry! — since I've been writing them in a hurry, but if you had any suggestions, I'd be grateful. I hesitate to ask, but would you be willing to help a little with the workshop? We're expecting a few dozen scientists to begin editing next Tuesday between 12:30-2:30pm San Francisco time. I was thinking that it'd be great if they received a hearty welcome and some occasional editing help from online Wikipedians. I'll understand if you're otherwise busy, but it might be fun for you. Thanks very much! Proteins (talk) 17:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Proteins, it's good that alt text is now getting more well-known and hopefully more well-used. The only accessibility issue I have found in the tutorials is that some of the HTML lists aren't continuous. I've made an edit to fix this at User:Proteins/New user account - feel free to tweak it if desired. I won't be able to be on Wikipedia for the workshop - it's between 5:30 and 7:30 AM on Wednesday my time, so a bit early for me. Good luck with it though. Graham 87 23:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)\
 * Creepy talk page stalker here- Proteins, I should be available during that time. Let me know if there's something I can do from online- l'aquatique  ||  talk  02:55, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Corn/Maize moves
It doesn't really matter, but I'm curious to know the purpose of your recent series of moves involving Corn, Maize, Corn (disambiguation) etc. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 12:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


David WS (contribs)  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. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy holidays! David WS (contribs)  19:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I second the above
I was about to say my Merry Christmas to you was a bit early but another editor seems to be even earlier than me! I wanted to get this done and not forgot about it, its hard to remember such things when the festive season is approaching and the last thing i will be doing is visiting the wiki :) May you have a joyous Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year with all the best for 2009. Its incredible how fast time is flying. I dont know if its the same with you. Hopefully you had a great year with the best still to come. Lets hope the summer wont be too much to handle, when it gets boiling all you want to do is stay indoors and in the cool, its impossible to sleep. We were "lucky" enough to have a mild summer last yr, i loved it. Thanks for all your efforts, trust me they are not taken for granted. Keep it up and enjoy the holidays!  Monster Under Your Bed  (talk) 07:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

IP address deletion
Sorry to intrude, but I need to ask an administrator to delete my IP address from the recent History of the Rayleigh Wave page. I inadvertently forgot to sign in and made an edit. I would rather not have such personal info. on the web. Would you please do it for me, or tell me who I can contact. I am completely new to Wiki so I messed it up this time. Sorry. Best wishes, Femtoquake (talk) 09:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Graham, Thank you very much. Impressively speedy. Best wishes, Femtoquake (talk) 10:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Image licenses
Dear Graham, I am really sorry to butt in again. There are so many difference image licenses. I meant to select one where anyone can use my images but supposedly acknowledge the source. This applies to Rayleigh Wave, Surface Acoustic Wave, and Picosecond Ultrasonics pages, that I have added rather fine images to. I meant to select the Creation Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0, as this seemed reasonabe. Can you tell me what to do because there are a fearful no. of choices. Best Femtoquake (talk) 12:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC) PS. I am not sure I am meant to be bothering you, so tell me to bother someone else if that is the case)

Images (again)
Dear Graham, Thanks once again for your explanation. I uploaded all 3 images to Wikimedia Commons, and chose the licence recommened by Wiki, i.e. the double-barrelled one including Attribution 3.0 Share Alike combined with GNU.

Is that all I need to do? The links to the images are unchanged in the Wikipedia texts (Rayleigh Wave, Surface Acoustic Wave, and Picosecond Acoustics), but I suppose Wikipedia automatically knows that I uploaded to Commons, and so I am hoping that I will stop receiving threatening messages about my images being deleted?

Or do I need to change the link in Wikipedia? I am a bit worried because now I have uploaded them twice, to Wikipedia on one licence and to Commons on another, and who knows which one overrides the other?

Please let me know if I need to do anything else to avoid some conflict occuring.

Best wishes, Femtoquake (talk) 15:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

History of Good or Featured Articles
Thanks. I knew that no one would actually know a user's expertise, but if one or two people contributed significantly to a good or featured article, this can be assumed. Or, like me, they just know how to do research, although their contributions would likely be closer to stub quality if that was true. Vchimpanzee ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 16:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I tried the tool and the top two contributors to the article suggest real expertise on their user pages in their subject area. The third does not. Vchimpanzee ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 16:23, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I didn't say they HAD to be experts. On the other hand, if they lied on the user page, they might lie in a direct conversation too. Vchimpanzee ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 21:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image problems resolved
Thank you very much for sorting out all the mess I left. I am very grateful for that. I have a nasty suspicion that I could have avoided it if I had read all the small print very carefully. Anyway, thanks! Femtoquake (talk) 11:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Left over image
Dear Graham, PicosecondUltrasonicsSchema is not required. I just did not know how to delete it. So I changed the name and hoped some Bot would one day realize it was not linked to anything and kill it. But it looks like there are no such nasty devils on Wikipedia, so again I have to ask one of the Guardian Angels to do it. Thank you very much. Femtoquake (talk) 11:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Once again Taa Very Much as we say in the UK. I had seen the indent thing, but wasn't quite sure when it was used. OK. Thanks. The instructions for image deletion look a bit formidable. Femtoquake (talk) 12:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...
A belated thanks for the edit on my user page...--NapoliRoma (talk) 17:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. Graham 87 00:56, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for everything
Hi Graham. I just want to say thanks for everything you have done in regard to the project and hope you keep up your tremendous, tiresome work for a long time to come. Things have changed in real life where i wont be making much if any edits at all in the future. It was a pleasure to meet you. You showed me the right way to do things and i appreciate meeting someone like you. You were kind, thoughtful and a whole lot of other words that i cant even think of when i first got in touch with you and i want to say thanks. Best wishes for the future to you and your family, hope everything goes well. Cheers  Monster Under Your Bed  (talk) 01:53, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Proper referencing
Dear Graham, I would like to sort out a small irritating glitch with references. Ref. 18 in Picosecond ultrasonics refuses to look beautiful no matter how I rearrange it. It is because the URL is too long or special in some way. Also Ref. 11 goes funny if I try to arrange like the others.

Am I doing the references OK. Some people in some sites like to do them in the style of the present Ref. 11. Or is all in blue OK too?Femtoquake (talk) 02:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Let me know
I saw your well thought out comments on the MfD for Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:JamesMLane/George W. Bush substance abuse controversy let me know when other articles come up for deletion that you are interested in. thanks. travb (talk) 06:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry christmas!
Hi Graham, its been a fun year fighting the relentless rugrats vandals! Thankfully, i'm not here to report any this time! I'm just here to wish you a merry christmas and a happy new year. I hope you have a fantastic 2009 :-) JS (chat) 22:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Its only 1am here, I still have a whole night of sleep before its time to open my presents :D - Have a wonderful day! JS (chat) 00:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Jaws and "same page" links
Hi, I've been working on ways to make the familytree template more accessible, as it is useful for complex diagrams if not simple family trees. I saw your input elsewhere and wondered if you had time to look at the idea I've been playing with. See the last table (Obama) in my sandbox. The problem I'm running into is that JAWS 10 does not read same page links reliably. But it must just be me, as surely I would have seen such a large issue mentioned elsewhere?? Do you see the same problem on my test page or when following TOC links yourself, or am I just using JAWS incorrectly (for example, I arrow down to a link, hit enter to follow it, then arrow down again but find I'm back at the top)? Also, any comments on this idea are welcome; I plan on running it by the other thread after more work. --GregU (talk) 22:17, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, sounds like it may be worth continuing on this idea for now then. --GregU (talk) 09:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)