User talk:GreenC/2009-2011

 Talk Page 2009-2011   2012 Talk Page <-- 

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! -- Longhair\talk 00:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

February 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \bblog(?:cu|fa|harbor|mybrain|post|savy|spot|townhall)?\.com\b (links: http://thelectern.blogspot.com/2009/02/village-of-stepanchikovo-dostoevsky.html). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Guillaume Schnaebelé
Hi! Thanks for your message. Unfortunately, the original captions seem to be unreadable, but I guess I'll have a go at making something up that isn't too much like the text on the website - which as far as I can gather is different from the original. - Mu (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Ecomigrant
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Lets drink  Tea  03:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

March 2009
In a recent edit, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For subjects exclusively related to Britain (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to other English-speaking countries, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the appropriate variety of English used there. If it is an international topic, use the same form of English the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to the other, even if you don't normally use the version the article is written in. Respect other people's versions of English. They in turn should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any queries about all this, you can ask me on my talk page or you can visit the help desk. --Dynaflow  babble  23:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I quoted you...
I quoted you. Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 00:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't see it as a quote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.131.217.210 (talk) 10:09, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 03:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Cat standardization and idioms
Put bluntly, you're wrong. Firstly, idioms probably don't belong on Wikipedia, see WP:DICT. Secondly, mentioning their use isn't important, any more than the article "the" should mention all the places that word is used.

Secondly, the popular culture articles being retitled is a simple matter of standardization. The two I moved are essentially identical in form to dozens (hundreds?) of other articles in Category:In popular culture. A standard form of title is more elegant. I can't imagine any reason why you'd undo that (especially since you didn't specify one), so I can only assume you're engaging in vengeful editing. Simply running around undoing all my edits because you had a problem with one is hardly conducive to encyclopedia building. Don't do it anymore. Mintrick (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Eating crow
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Eating crow. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Eating crow. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

George Moore
Do you have a verifiable source for this edit of your to George Moore (novelist)‎? Being a FA I think such a statement should be properly sourced. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 23:45, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

R. E. Streeter
I think you need to wind yer neck in a bit; this page is about two steps away from being deleted, and I could care less about that.

I asked a civil question about notability and got sarcasm from you.

Now, if you care about keeping this article you can work with me on it; otherwise, forget it.

I’ve left some questions on the talk page there.Swanny18 (talk) 08:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

PS: And don’t remove tags that say there’s a problem with an article if you are not prepared to do anything to fix the problem. Swanny18 (talk) 08:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "As far as I can tell you haven't tried to do anything except add a nag tag and wait for someone else to fix the problem. If you had actually done some work on the article and made a good faith effort to "work with me" on improving it rather than trolling with threats of deletion and nag tags you might get something more than sarcasm. Green Cardamom (talk) 14:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)"


 * Try reading what I actually said, and try reading the revision histories; The aggravation started at your end. Swanny18 (talk) 23:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Alec John Dawson
Hi, I've been researching this author and found your newish article on him today. It's great to see him included on Wikipaedia but I'd love to see the entry expanded and indeed corrected - his date of death's wrong at present. The right one's given on the discussion page I've started over on the article itself... I'd be happy to help out further but haven't posted on Wikipaedia before so would welcome guidance on this... Best wishes... Sun-in-splendour (talk) 16:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Green Cardamom, I've now drafted an expanded article on Dawson (link on my user page) and would really welcome any comments you might have at this stage! Two specific queries I had were

1) whether the links I've included to specific Dawson texts on Project Gutenberg/ Internet Archive should be there, or whether the general links at the bottom of the article are enough

2) How to include an illustration of Dawson. There's a somewhat hilarious photo (the only one I know of) showing him 'in Moorish guise' + a large black beard in one of his books on the Internet Archive, so presumably in the public domain...  Not sure how I'd upload it though!

Very many thanks

Sun-in-splendour (talk) 14:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Wolf Hall
Sure. Irregulargalaxies (talk) 01:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Walf Hall Copyright
Hi. I've removed his copied text again, but put in a permenant link to it in your report so it can still be viewed. I've also linked to the article's history. Hope this is ok. If he carries on it might be worth taking this to ANI for them to deal with. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 22:04, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, given the extent of the problem I think I'll take it to ANI now. I'll copy everything over from the copyvio talk page and see what happens. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 22:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Discussion now open. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 22:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Red Herring
I noticed that you removed the Mother Goose quotation from this article:
 * A man in the wilderness asked this of me How many strawberries grow in the sea? I answered him as I thought good As many red herrings as swim in the wood.

Why? It illustrates the popular view of the idea of training scent hounds by dragging a red herring through the woods, from an extremely important source on the evolution of the English language. And it is self-referential, illustrating the idiomatic use of a Red Herring. How is this unrelated trivia? Aymatth2 (talk) 01:00, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Copied and followed up on the article talk page. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Sifu Versus
Calling someone a "red-link newbie" and baselessly accusing them of sockpuppetry for vote stacking purposes, along with your other insinuations in the above conversation, is close to a "personal attack." Some might actually consider it to be one. I personally am a fan of thick skins on here, so I don't (you're not exactly flying into a psychotic rage, hehe), but I want to warn you now because the AfD is not a venue for your strange slander against another editor. It is for discussing the relative merits of the article at hand. If you have evidence that JBsupreme is doing what you say he's doing (and considering I'm the only other person who's voted thus far, if he's vote stacking he's doing an amazingly poor job of it), contact an Admin, don't fling accusations in an AfD. Additionally, as I mention at the AfD, the "red-link newbie" you are talking to has more than 10 times as many edits as you, has been a registered editor for almost a year longer than you, and is a frequent contributor to AfD. So...you know...maybe you should just quit the attack/well-poisoning stuff while you're behind. Just my two cents. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ bomb  00:54, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * If you still want to present your "proof" of these allegations to an admin, then you are welcome to send me your proof using Special:EmailUser/Phantomsteve. I am an admin (you can verify it here) and will consider your allegations and bring them to the notice at the appropriate venue. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 19:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ bomb  05:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Green Cardamon, I answered you here. Greetings, --Albrecht1 (talk) 18:01, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Rosalie Duthe
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:04, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

The Dorothy and Lillian Gish Prize
This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The Dorothy and Lillian Gish Prize, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://gishprize.com/index.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 16:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Note
You may wish to read this for future reference. Abductive (reasoning) 02:36, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cornwall Capital


A tag has been placed on Cornwall Capital requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  ttonyb (talk) 03:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet
Hi, sorry for appearing to slowly edit war, I hadn't checked that it was you who had added in in both times, and for not explaining my rationale. Basically per WP:EL, point 1, the information in the linked document should be in the article, if it was ever to get to a better state. So can we copy the information into a section on characters? It was a great book to read and your information would have helped me keep track! --Stephen 21:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it's copyright (no CC license on the page) so can't copypaste; and the list probably isn't really appropriate for Wikipedia, too many names too long, normally only focus on main characters, unless perhaps if there was a List of characters in The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet article? We should probably keep the EL, until something comparable on Wikipedia ever made it redundant. It would really be a lot of work to create that list for Wikipedia because many of the descriptions are paraphrased from the book directly and would need to be sourced with quotations to prevent it from being tagged with a copyvio. Green Cardamom (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Brent Lundy

 * Thank you so much. I am new to this, so any help would be greatly appreciated. Should I start an Ultraviolets article in my user space? or what exactly do I do for a merge? Docmusique1 (talk) 11:51, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Been on holiday, but plan to start the article this weekend! Will keep you posted! Thanks again for all of your help! Docmusique1 (talk) 13:07, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Changing referencing style
Please don't go about making stylistic drive-by changes in referencing style in accordance with your own preferences. Read Citing sources and Manual of Style (footnotes) more carefully; you will discover that there are several styles of referencing that are acceptable in Wikipedia. Using named references is merely one alternative among others. --Hegvald (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see those changes to Vivian Maier are a marked improvement. Naming refs so that they can be combined into one footnote is prefered. Abductive  (reasoning) 00:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Red links in literary award pages
I'm kind of new to Wikipedia editing, and I'm not familiar with these conventions. Pardon my ignorance, but why should the authors be redlinked? Will the red links help pages get created for these authors? Wolfehhgg (talk) 19:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)


 * It's a good idea to redlink if something is notable enough that it will probably have an article created in the future. One reason is as you said, another reason is it's a courtesy because when it's black (no wikilink) the reader has no idea if a potential live wikilink has since been created, which means they have to manually check. For example imagine this article in 2 years time, those authors currently without a wikilink have since had bio articles created, but no one has updated this article to wikilink to them. It's a common occurrence, you can never assume article's don't exist just because they are not linked. If it's not wikilinked (red or otherwise) you have to manually check, which makes redlinks a convenience for readers they can see right away the status without wondering if an article exists but just hasn't been linked. For authors who have won literary awards, it's a strong case they will eventually have a Wikipedia article. Also some of the more popular book titles that have won multiple awards, can justify redlinks. Green Cardamom (talk) 09:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for clearing that up. Wolfehhgg (talk) 20:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
 * This permission does not give you any special status or authority
 * Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
 * You may wish to display the Autopatrolled top icon and/or the User wikipedia/autopatrolled userbox on your user page
 * If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
 * If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 16:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Too many cn tags
Thank you for your message. The Bahrain and 2011 Bahraini protests pages are an edit war battleground and it therefore seemed more appropriate to point out each unsupported statement, rather than simply rely on a single overriding refimprove tag. regards Mztourist (talk) 01:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Literary awards
Please don't add entries to the list of literary awards unless they already have bluelinks. To do otherwise would be to invite spam. DS (talk) 16:32, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. But henceforth, don't add them to the list until after the links are blue. DS (talk) 17:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Clarification needed
Regarding this diff please see Talk:A Visit From the Goon Squad. Perhaps you meant to cite the APR podcasts, or some other reference? Viriditas (talk) 11:41, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Wellington R. Burt
Hello! Your submission of Wellington R. Burt at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Redtigerxyz Talk 10:05, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Culture of Schwäbisch Hall
Fixed it. It was just missing text. Kingjeff (talk) 03:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Wellington R. Burt
Materialscientist (talk) 01:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That article has a pretty odd page views distribution. hmm. jorgenev 23:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hah, you noticed. Well three events happened: 1. I created the article around the same time the story hit the wire (AP, etc) and so it got a lot of traffic from people Googling his name to learn more. 2. DYK caused the second peak on May 20th. 3. Good Morning America or some other major network show did a video piece about him and that caused the third peak. Green Cardamom (talk) 23:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Word. Well congrats on the entry into WP:DYKSTATS! jorgenev 11:30, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for this edit. Interested in helping me expand the article? I know it has been missing for a long time, so I figure there is a lot of catching up we could do with it :P Happy editing!! ¬¬¬¬

GAN of Wellington R. Burt
I've placed the article's review on hold, see the talk page for more details. (This post is essentially a talkback, don't reply here.) Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I really like the change you made on butter sculpture
Thanks for finding a good way to include all the relevant information. I'm working on yak butter now, if you are interested in taking a look.  Sharktopus  talk 14:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help on yak butter too! I am going to go put us both up for DYK on it now.   Sharktopus  talk  17:44, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Traveller (role-playing game). When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Danyang–Kunshan Grand Bridge
Thanks for sorting that out, and reverting the two places where I had changed it. I was coming back to say, we ought at least to have a stub about it, you could do it better than me, and I saw with pleasure that you had already done it. I had better apologise to the original "commies built it" author for A10-ing him. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 21:50, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Yak butter
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   08:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Once A Week (magazine)
I see that you've done most of the work on Once A Week (magazine). I'll be linking to it soon, in connection with an article I'm developing on Trollope's Vicar of Bullhampton.

Is there a typo in the John Sutherland quote in the first paragraph? I assume that there should be an apostrophe: "magazine's". However, I'm loath to change something inside quotation marks unless I've actually seen the source.

Thanks for checking up on this&mdash;

Ammodramus (talk) 03:02, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * typo, fixed, thanks. Green Cardamom (talk) 04:08, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * In connection with this, I've just looked at the article on E. S. Dallas, to which you've recently added a mention of his editing OAW briefly in 1868. According to a number of my Trollope sources, he was still editor in March 1869.  Can you check up on this?  Unfortunately, my sources don't give the dates of his tenure at OAW, so I can't edit the article myself.  --Ammodramus (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't have a source, my edit was a dab, go with your source since whoever wrote it didn't cite. Green Cardamom (talk) 04:08, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

William Hunter Campbell
please see Talk:William Hunter Campbell Roseohioresident (talk) 19:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

The Home of the Blizzard
I've been fiddling with some wording to include a mention of The Home of the Blizzard into Far Eastern Party, but as I say I don't want too much detail on it, given how long the Aftermath section is already. How about this:

"First published in 1915, Mawson's account of the expedition, The Home of the Blizzard, devotes two chapters to the Far Eastern Party; one contemporary reviewer commented that "undoubtedly to the general public the interest of the book centres in [this] moving account.""

Or, taking a slightly different and longer approach:

"First published in 1915, Mawson's account of the expedition, The Home of the Blizzard, devotes two chapters to the Far Eastern Party; one contemporary commentator noted that the chapters were "seized upon by reviewers in the press and perhaps convey to those who have not read the book the impression that the expedition, as a whole, was spent in gloom and in the shadow of death.""

Either of these would be inserted into the last paragraph of Aftermath, just before "A later analysis by J. Gordon Hayes". Apterygial talk 01:18, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I've added it in. Apterygial  talk 12:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

James Wyatt
Hey, thanks for taking the time to improve this article. :) I had just added a photo to it yesterday, so I was glad to see someone else working on it already. If you're interested, there are many other bios on people in the RPG industry that could use better sourcing and/or expansion! BOZ (talk) 12:22, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * It was a random find and lucky I could dig up an obscure source. The problem with these RPG industry articles as a group they appear to be written by inexperienced editors and poor source availability (the people are still alive and fairly young). They are challenging articles. Green Cardamom (talk) 18:05, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Peak car
Hi there. I noticed you created and you are the main author of peak car. I would like to proposed to you to change the article name to Peak car use or to Peak travel. I prefer the former, grammatically gives a better idea of what the article is about (related to automobiles not any kind of travel), the concept is used in several of the papers included in the references, and the name is available, meaning that we can move it without losing the page history. Peak travel on the other hand, is already a redirect, so a clean move is not possible. Cheers.--Mariordo (talk) 22:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Additional comment
I responded to your comment both earlier on an article page, and to your later comment on my talk page, but thought I would leave a more general comment here. Your edit summaries assumed bad faith, which is something we try to avoid. If you had looked at my 80,000 edits, you would see that they were not fact-based; I've added images to hundreds of people lists, not just this author -- and this author's image was an especially good one (we often lack images, or have poor ones). Our people lists are properly augmented with images; such additions bring it closer to featured status. I see that you started by deleting the image from an article you created and edited primarily, where the author won an award that was the subject of the article. The better course -- where the image is both appropriate and a good one, as there -- is for you to add more images, which I often do, and have done for you on that article that you created; I assume that there was not ownership issue involved in your reaction, and that you just had concern that would have been more properly had if you were dealing with single-issue editor, rather than one who spends his time improving articles (and, of course, if I were a single issue editor, I would have improved the author's article, which you can see I have not (as of yet) done). I usually, though not always, add more than one image at a time to a list article, but was tired at the time I added these; I expect that you would have been less concerned if you had seen that, and will try to be more vigilant about doing that in the future where appropriate. If you have concern as to the addition of an image as to a specific article, I think it is often a helpful approach to so indicate, rather than in an edit summary make a broad-based assertion that is not appropriate in any event if the image is appropriately placed in an article .... IMHO, of course. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 12:30 am, Today (UTC−4)

ANI thread
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Korean War by medium
Category:Korean War by medium, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 10:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Printed solar panel article - needs revamped
I re-read the last reference you posted on the discussion page. Much of my objection to this article is about the title of being a "printed" component (printed solar panel) and being as cheap as a inkjet printing to produce. Both of these are a stretch to say the least, and somehow suggests that this technology is or will be as cheap as a household printer - no way. This is the only reference with any sort of technical description of the process. It also is not a "panel" since it is not rigid and deliberately designed not to be anything like a solar panel. Sorry I am retired from the semiconductor field and do not have access to the Advanced Materials reference - nor desire to pay for a subscription. The other references are nothing more than articles written in a marketing vein and pretty much wishful thinking for the future of the technology. The online videos are not very helpful in determining the method of manufacture, and marketing oriented.

Do you mind if I take a shot at editing the main page? I may be able to salvage it, although I can only take it so-far with limited reference material. My biggest objection is the page title itself, and suggest renaming it from "printed solar panel" to something else, such as "solar cell research for low manufacturing cost" (ok, I need help with the title, and may not have the privilege to make such a change anyway.  Plus the topic alone is quite broad and vague). The "digital wallpaper" concept has been around for decades and nobody has made a decent run at making it viable. The one reference I could read described a methodology for patterning of materials akin to (but not the same as) screen printing. Printing itself is a process that applies a pressure to deposit a generally gooey material onto a surface (e.g. "ink" on paper) followed by a drying or curing step, and Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) clearly does not do that, nor can a inkjet printer be converted to do CVD. Inkjet could have been used to pattern certain conductive materials in a grid pattern, but the article just isn't clear about that. Printing the letters "MIT" on top of the already fabricated solar cell doesn't prove much of anything significant. (Do ya think that might be marketing???) I'm sure there are practical problems that still need to be resolved to make this a mature technology, although I lack sufficient information to describe them all. I have no argument about the potential uses - but that is all contingent on making it a mature technology, and this is still about basic research.--96.244.247.130 (talk) 00:51, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I made an attempt, but the title is really out of place.  I put "printed" and "panel" in quotes to indicate it probably isn't either. Comments from SME's are welcome.  Am not educated enough in WP editing to follow your instructions explicitly.--173.69.135.105 (talk) 01:34, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * So far nobody has come to visit the page to make corrections.  I made what changes I could but I am not proud of it either.   I still think it would be better to delete it altogether, but I will not spend any more time on this page either.   It's simply a piece of crap that doesn't smell so bad now.--173.69.135.105 (talk) 01:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for changing the title page. It helps considerably.   I'm satisfied enough to move on to something more important.  I did a touch-up and am moving on to other subjects needing my expertise.   I hope others can contribute to the subject.--173.69.135.105 (talk) 02:30, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Strange edit
What was the point of this edit, in which you removed a necessary definite article and restored information which entirely duplicated what was already there? If you are going to make strange edits like that you could at least leave an edit summary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.104.181.183 (talk) 16:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ralph Edwards (homesteader)
Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Blue ribbon winner
Template:Blue ribbon winner has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bulwersator (talk) 12:58, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...
...for your contribution to the article Fido (dog)! Chrisrus (talk) 04:51, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the article, who knew Fido was a historic dog from Italy. Good find. Green Cardamom (talk) 05:27, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Determining copyright status
I have appreciated what you have contributed to articles of films. However, I have tried to determine the "copyright status" in Storm in a Teacup (film) ([ history] · [ last edit]) ; it was considered OR, and an administrator has removed it. See either its talk page or User talk:George Ho/Mentorship discussions. --George Ho (talk) 10:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)