User talk:Huon/Archive9

thanks
Appreciate your answer to my question regarding my article submission. Have a lovely weekend. Adam Silverstein (talk) 15:57, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit to Burnley
Thanks for your advice. I'll try a new user name. The previous information is over 5 years old and some claims are incorrect. I could include it but other local towns don't seem to include old statistics, just updated new ones? Thanks again for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burnley College (talk • contribs) 20:25, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

The Organization Workshop
Hello, Huon, I think that the 'new look' AfC should be ready now for at least a preliminary viewing. I am still trying to get my head around how to do the internal 'wikilinks', and I hope I'll eventuall crack it - in the meantime, though, you will see that I have subjected the text to some 'harsh discipline', especially in the area of drastically slimming down the notes. I have also added one final (External Links) section at the end which you have not seen before(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 11:37, 4 June 2013 (UTC)) -- Re: supra. Re: wikilinks - still not getting the hang of it. The html5 video playback does not work on my laptop. I tried the University library, but theirs do not support either. So I have to do it manually. When I tried to enter (‘’A Future’’ 2000 p.15) by inserting:, I cant find nuffin, either in the body of text nor in References? Will keep trying. (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC)) -- Wednesday morning: making some (slow) progress in the wikilinks department now. Probably not perfect yet. Re: 1.^ A Future, Carmen&Sobrado (Eds) 2000. [1] A Future for the Excluded]. de Morais bio: chapter 2 (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 08:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC)) -


 * Unfortunately I find myself more busy this week than I expected; I'll take a look at your references (have you read WP:Referencing for beginners or Help:Footnotes?), but I may not find the time for the once-over I promised. Huon (talk) 08:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

- Understood, Huon, thanks for telling. Yes, I am being guided at the moment by WP:Referencing for beginners. In the meantime, will keep honing away at the text: I managed to slim down the references to a mere shadow of their previous (inflated) size. Will have to have a look at Help:Footnotes, too. Cheers (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 08:58, 5 June 2013 (UTC))

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Sandom and associated Talk Page". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot  operator /  talk  01:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:4RoundBracket-Byes-NoSeeds-2Legs
Thanks for the help. It looks like it is working just fine. I'll start using it in some articles. So far it looks great. Thanks again! --MicroX (talk) 04:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * You're welcome; I was happy to help. Huon (talk) 21:23, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Syria map
Important - there is an argument to the discussed change of Syria map template, which you have taken part of here|Syrian civil war detailed map talk page; and a consequent vote is ongoing at Template talk:Location map Syria. Please present your opinion there.Greyshark09 (talk) 09:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for Redirect: Plug and chug
Here's a source for the redirect request you recently declined:

http://books.google.com/books?id=hdw2CbhoFIQC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=plug+and+chug+problem&source=bl&ots=_ceiTna2Au&sig=VsrTjWuFi7CwwxwtCJIkE-1_S24&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vw21UcelIqrqiwLDtYDABg&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=plug%20and%20chug%20problem&f=false

Now what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.213.26 (talk) 23:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Now I have created the redirect. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 23:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.213.26 (talk) 23:34, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Clarification Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William A. Cohen
Thanks, Huon, for your help. In the past an editor wrote that a USAF Major General is by definition notable. Nonetheless, the references to confirm notability include the Air Force Biography (afb), book review, university awards (Claremont Graduate University and California State University, Los Angeles web pages), and the nomination of his latest book as best marketing book 2012. These in addition to the opaque Who's Who, where I found the Israeli jet info. I am revising the submission. Can I send it to you, once that is done, so that you can compare it against your suggestions/comments and tell me if I have adequately revised the piece? If so, how do I do that?Flairdrive1 (talk) 23:03, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Those university websites are not independent sources on their own alumni and thus don't help to establish notability. Similarly the Air Force is his former employer, not a third-party source. If, for argument's sake, Cohen were an incompetent bumbler who was promoted only because of his seniority, the Air Force would be unlikely to say so. I would expect better sources to exist; for an Air Force general that's indeed very likely, but we'll still have to find those sources.
 * If you want me to take another look, you can drop me a line here on my talk page. Alternatively you can simply submit the draft for another review. Huon (talk) 23:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

The Organization Workshop
Hello Huon: as per my talkpage message yesterday, I think I am now 'done' with 99% of the latest copyediting. I am at the moment still making some changes/additions to the last (Controversy) part, especially, as you will see, a new caption on 'non-political' resistance/opposition to the OW (clientelism). cheers (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 11:07, 11 June 2013 (UTC))

Hello Huon: I posted on my talkpage this morning (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 15:04, 14 June 2013 (UTC)) -- Saturday afternoon: Dear Huon: received your copyedit for which a warm vote of T H A N K S !! I was going to send you a comprehensive reaction to all the points you made, but in the meantime this must serve as an intermediary answer: since your copyedit came in at 15:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC) there have been a couple more notifications on my personal email, one of them, when I checked, with the puzzling dodger comment which was inserted AFTER you did your copy edit? re: ''Comment: Please submit this asap - it really needs to be in mainspace. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:28, 15 June 2013 (UTC)'' (??). Before being able to send you a comprehensive reply, I was still trying to chase your re: The draft cites a 2012 paper by Labra & Labra, but the link for that source instead points to a 2011 paper by Andersson, Carmen and Labra Comment: It would help if you could plz pinpoint where in the AfC exactly the problematic Labra&Labra ref appears. What I do know is that in this AfC I n e v e r (consciously!) referred to a ‘2011 Andersson, Carmen & Labra’ file. What I “think” this may be about is the 2011 ‘The Organization Workshop’ article which got me in all that terrible OTRS hot water in the first place,(remember?: the article that stood me accused as having copied from myself. . ) and which I thought had been removed from the web, but mysteriously must have crept in again?? I have not been able to verify this as there are a lot of ‘Labra&Labra’ refs and the text and you were not telling me which ‘Labra&Labra’ ref is causing the problem? On another note: on my talkpage today you are telling me that you removed the External Links altogether from the AfC, but I notice that they actually all still are there? Anyhow, this is merely a preliminary reaction and I will be answering more in extenso later. Many, many thanks again in the meantime!(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 17:24, 15 June 2013 (UTC))


 * The Labra & Labra 2012 paper is in the biliography: Labra, Isabel; Labra, Ivan (2012). The Organization Workshop Method. Seriti, S.A.: Integra Terra Network Editor. It links to this paper on capacitation. All the "Labra & Labra" references in the text link to that one bibliography entry.
 * Regarding the external links, I meant those in the article proper, not in the "external links" section - what I removed wholesale was this:
 * Other enterprises (Brazil) e.g.: the COOTEDAM andCOPROSER Cooperatives.
 * Roger (Dodger67)'s comment is a very good sign: I'm not the only one who thinks the draft's issues are resolved and that it should be moved into the main articlespace. Huon (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: yours: ''The Organization Workshop Method. Seriti, S.A.: Integra Terra Network Editor. It links to this paper on capacitation. All the "Labra & Labra" references in the text link to that one bibliography entry''

Hello there again, Huon – oops, that was a honest mistake – I would never have ferreted that one out unless I had had my nose rubbed into it. The correct url is: http://www.seriti.org.za/phocadownloadpap/OW/OW%20Method%20Laboratories.pdf and I corrected it already in the bibl in the draft. What do I do now? Should I, as dodger suggests - (bravo! – what puzzled me that he was so QUICKLY ‘au fait’ of the latest developments!) – should I, as he suggest, press the ‘submit’ or leave whatever remains to your very competent hands?

PS: care to know how I feel? I feel like a 10 ton load is slowly lifting from my shoulders. Cloud 9,ere we come (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 18:43, 15 June 2013 (UTC))


 * Yes, I think you should submit the draft. I stand ready to accept it, and apparently so does Dodger67. I'm fully aware of the massive amount of work you've invested, and for a new article this is far above average (admittedly there's more to write about OW than about the newest band with a few albums and half a tour, or about yet another dot-com company).
 * Do you happen to know of any freely licensed (or public domain) images that we could use to illustrate the article, for example of de Morais or of an OW? Those aren't necessary, but they'd be a nice touch. Another suggestion would be to nominate the article for the "Did you know" column on Wikipedia's main page that highlights the best new articles - I don't have much experience with that, but in my opinion this article should qualify. I'll gladly take care of the technical details of the nomination, but of course you'll get the credit as author. Huon (talk) 19:26, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

-- Dear Huon: my cup runneth over! If there are any medals to be handed around, I know on whose chest mine would land. I'll have to check my Picasa pictures file, but that will have to wait for tomorrow, as I am truly exchausted. . .And, ok, with a little trepidation, I'll go and press that submit button now. Feeling lighter, lighter, lighter. . (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 20:25, 15 June 2013 (UTC)) - Hello, Huon: I am almost ‘back to normal’ now: I have only one eye and the Wikipedia ‘nano’ script was an etra challenge, especially on a notebook. I  started my search for a suitable pic – with ‘suitable’ being the operative word: one ‘large group’ looks surprisingly much like the next large group of people, ie what proves that this is not eg an Assembly of God group, rather than 'An OW'  – tricky! {Rafaelcarmen (talk) 19:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)) - RE: 17 Monday -  Images for the OW article:  Hello again Huon: I have now a good selection of pictures for the wiki article to choose from. They are all sourced from either Integraterra in Chile or from seriti in South Africa. The  two sources have already delivered the pics by email(most are images in Powerpoints, some with text, eg the explanation of the 850 Matzinho participants in Mozambique is integrated in the powerpoint, which is handy: no possibility for mistaking this group for a Seventh Day’s Adventist convention!)   I have already looked into the ‘how to’ (upload images on wiki) and it is clear that I need to have the permission of the owners of the images and that the owners (or I, on their behalf??) have to obtain an OTRS number. Before proceeding any further, I would welcome any advice you could give me on this issue at this stage. Many thanks again (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 17:38, 17 June 2013 (UTC))


 * It's a little more tricky than that: Permission to use the image on Wikipedia is not enough. With some exceptions (which don't apply to this article) Wikipedia only accepts images that are released under a free license so that everybody may re-use and modify them for any purpose, including commercial purposes. The copyright holder would have to release the images under such a license (preferably the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License). Then the image can be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons (a central image repository for all Wikimedia projects including Wikipedia) via their UploadWizard, and a confirmation email should be sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org - an example release form is here.
 * I'm not sure whether the Commons accept PowerPoint files; it may be necessary to extract a JPEG or PNG image. I wouldn't be overly concerned about the risk of the images being mistaken for something else - that's what image captions are for. Rather, I'd expect that an image of one of the "large groups" will drive that point home much better than words alone. Huon (talk) 21:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Tuesday morning: thank you Huon for these as usual concise and precise instructions. In practice this means that, just as for the AfC itself, I am feeling like a novice again and starting on yet another learning curve, this time starting with 'how do I extract jpg from pp'. Being a slow learner, all of this will take me some time (sure it will!), but I'm confident I'll get there. One question, though: once I'm 'there' what is the next step, I mean, how to go about integrating the (now licensed) images into the text?: do I go into my sandbox, edit, upload and save? And, supposing I have done everything correctly, will this result into the images actually appearing in the actual article which is now online? I told you, I'm a novice! (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 08:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC))


 * I'm not really an expert on images, and much less so on PowerPoint. It might be possible to upload a PowerPoint slide or an entire sliedeshow, but I can't remember ever seeing that. My rather primitive suggestion for "extraction" would be to take a screenshot and to save it via MS Paint or the like, but I just took a quick look at the OpenOffice equivalent to PowerPoint, and it has an "export" option that allows saving slides in a wide variety of image formats - I expect PowerPoint also has such an option which would be much more comfortable than the screenshot approach.
 * Once the imageg is uploaded, adding it to the article is the easy part. I have added an example image to this section; the file is File:View from Humboldtbox - Berlin Cathedral.jpg (with the orginal at the Commons, see commons:File:View from Humboldtbox - Berlin Cathedral.jpg - files uploaded to the Commons will automatically be available on Wikipedia), and the code that displays the image here is  View from Humboldtbox - Berlin Cathedral.jpg , where the "thumb" parameter creates a thumbnail in an appropriate size. For more details on displaying images see the picture tutorial. Huon (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Tuesday 15.00hrs: believe it or not, since I posted this morning I have successfully extracted jpgs from powerpoint (using ‘Paint’ in the Accessories). So I have the jpegs-minus-pp on file now. The next thing I am planning to do is to send [the jpegs] (respectively) to Chile and S Africa and ask the ‘owners’ to fill in the Wikimedia ‘permission’/’donation’ form. I presume they then will be getting a number from Wikimedia which I then can use to upload the images onto Creative Commons. Not quite sure of the exact sequence yet. Am differently occupied at the moment but I will take the process forward tomorrow. (One step at a time !) Thanks again for the help.(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 14:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC))


 * If the owners are okay with the uploading, my suggestion would be to do it the other way around: Upload the images first, then have the owners send the mails to OTRS and have them refer to the specific uploaded images. That way it'll be much easier for the OTRS people to know what those permission mails are about, and they can add the appropriate tags to the image pages. Huon (talk) 14:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Stop with the page moves
... until this is discussed at the project page. They are potentially disruptive. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 21:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)


 * And your own moves didn't require prior discussion? See also WP:BRD. Huon (talk) 21:57, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Anne Delong is messing up again
Dear Huon:

Once again I have made a mess and I come to you for help. I found three copyright violations that had been declined for other reasons and I thought that I could resubmit them and use the script to decline and speedy them. However, this resulted in the decline messages being sent to me instead of the proper user. I asked for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation, but there is conflicting advice and I am afraid of making it worse. Can you fix this up? Please? &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 14:24, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * The articles already have been deleted; I don't think I can do anything about them any more (nor would we need to do anything about them, except possibly notify the author if that hasn't been done). Regarding the procedure, my suggestion would have been yet another one: Don't bother with the AfC submission templates at all, simply tag the drafts for speedy deletion and leave a note at the authors' talk pages.
 * If you want to submit an article on another user's behalf, therer's a way to do so: The template can accept a username as a parameter. For example I could submit a darft on your behalf by adding . Then a review would notify you, not me. Huon (talk) 18:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I didn't know about that.  Can I just pick up the notifications from my talk page and move them to the talk pages of the editors involved?  The messages don't have a user name on them.  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 19:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Sounds good, if you know the editors involved. I would have had to dig them out of Rankersbo's contributions, and I'm much too lazy for that... By the way, I don't see how this counts as "messing up". You helped us get rid of multiple copyright violations, in my book that's not "messing up" but "good work". Keep it up! Huon (talk) 20:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No, they shouldn't be in anybody's contributions but mine. I submitted the pages, so that would be my contribution, then I declined it, blanked it and speedied it, so that was me, and the only thing that went wrong was that the messages went to the wrong person (me) instead of the editors who should have received them, and they are probably wondering where their articles went.  I will move the notices if I can figure out who they are.  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 20:39, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Since the articles have been deleted, their histories is no longer available. From what I gathered, Rankersbo originally reviewed the articles and has notified the authors; those notifications would be what I'd be looking for to identify the authors. If you know the authors or have edited their talk pages, that would be much easier. Huon (talk) 20:50, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Nholz99/sandbox: APSE
On the APSE wiki page, I am not exactly sure how to go about this. Do I need to find you newspaper or magazine articles that support what I have written? No one has ever written the history of APSE until I did. I interviewed everyone who was involved in the formation and continued development of the organization. These are first person accounts, not opinions. I read the wiki article about using sources such as these and there was a section that stated this:

Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
 * 1) the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
 * 2) it does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities);
 * 3) it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
 * 4) there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
 * 5) the article is not based primarily on such sources.

I feel that the article I wrote meets these five requirements. If I am wrong in this please help me figure this out. Thank you.Nholz99 (talk) 02:55, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * If no one else has ever written about APSE before you did, that draft is original research and not appropriate for Wikipedia. There are two problems with your interview approach: Firstly, our readers have no way of verifying what those people told you because those interviews weren't published. Secondly, you should have another look at the fifth criterion you listed above: Your article is almost exclusively based on such sources, but it should primarily be based on third-party sources. If no such third-party sources exist, the organization may not be notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Huon (talk) 03:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

The Organization Workshop
Just now I managed to upload a test picture: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MeansofProduction.jpg. I will do some more and then contact the owners for the OTRS. Not quite sure about 'how' and 'where' to insert the picture file in the wiki OW article: 1. Am I 'allowed' to change my own article now and is this done in the to me familiar 'sandbox' mode (edit-->save)? 2. I will want the picture(s) to appear in a precise location in the text. How do I pinpoint that precise spot. Sorry if those questions sound a bit 'basic' to you, but I am still learning. Thanks again. (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 10:58, 19 June 2013 (UTC))


 * You can edit the article just as you edited the draft. You can determine where the upper end of the image will appear; I'd usually choose the beginning of a paragraph. Take the example image I added above: I placed the image code immediately above the "Tuesday morning". The article text will automatically flow around the image. I've also added two of your uploaded images to the article; please move them around if you think they're better-suited in other places, or change the captions - I'm not really happy with the wording of the "early days" caption. File:OWfreedomtoorganizewithinlaw.jpg has a very low image quality; I'd probably not use that one. Huon (talk) 15:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Wed 18.00hrs: I had been planning to do everything one step at a time (spent some time still perfecting pp extraction – could not get the size right), then uploading, and the next step was going to be tomorrow ie the owners emailing the relevant urls for OTRS (one of them is travelling today and out of computer/signal range until tomorrow)- but I see you have been far ahead of my hesitant 'first steps': barnstar!  I find that the introductory black&white pic (albeit a bit on the large side) lends ‘gravitas’: it is obviously a historic document  (although even in the 90s OWs had been happening for a couple of decades previously) and as such I presume 'low picture quality' is one of its. . .qualities(?). The ‘early days’ was the caption in the original (seriti) pp before I extracted. You are right, there is no mention in the article of ‘early days’ as there was no space for this, but ‘as a rule’ groups tend to hang and mill around like headless chickens for an average of three days, before they ‘get organized’ ie democratically elect a steering (management) committee (the previous self-appointed "leaders" 'trying to do everything' having failed miserably. In Africa, they will just sit and sing. If they don’t make it beyond this point, the OW flounders, but instances of this are extremely rare. Clodomir’s method is not for nothing  ‘scientific’ : it is repeatable and events  predictable. I was planning to use images sparingly, as the borderline between ‘measured’ and ‘garish’ is very thin.  Well, I will see now how to replicate the excellent demonstration you gave, Huon. Still a nagging worry: if I can editsave pictures/texts does that mean anyone else can?(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC))


 * While the article may not mention "early days" it does mention the initial phase of anomie; I've added the ""early days" image to that paragraph. For the image at the top I had deliberately increased the size; on the one hand it's a very detailled image which could well do with more than the standard "thumbnail" size, on the other hand there was the whitespace next to the table of contents which I thought we could use as well. If you think I overdid it, you can change the "400px" parameter in the image code.
 * Indeed anyone else can edit the article as well; for example Khazar2 already corrected some typos. That's nothing to worry about; Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. If someone changes the article in a way you disagree with, you can easily undo those changes, though if it's not obvious vandalism you may want to also leave a note at the article's talk page to explain why you reverted those edits. One word of warning: Reverting back-and-forth is known as an "edit war", is strongly frowned upon and may lead to blocks; there is a "three-revert rule" to prevent edit warring. Instead it's preferred that editors who disagree discuss the issue on the talk page and reach a consensus. To see whether others changed the article you may want to add it to your watchlist (if it's not on the watchlist already); I've added it to mine as well and will keep an eye on the article. Huon (talk) 18:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

--
 * 14:00 hrs - just uploaded some more pics - am contacting owners for commons permissions and will then decide which ones to use in the article (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 13:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC))


 * OK, great! Thanks so much for your effort! File:LaurelOWClosingCer..jpg seems an accidental duplicate of File:LaurelOWClosingCeremony.jpg; if you want I can tag it for deletion. Just out of personal curiosity, there's a "Welcome to the English course exhibition" banner in the background of that image - it's probably not relevant enough to add to the article, but do you know why the course exhibition was held in English? Some event for the OW's international organizational backers? Or is it the exhibition of an English course that taught language skills, as an equivalent of the carpentry and confectioner skills taught? Again, that's probably irrelevant for Wikipedia's purposes, I'm just curious.
 * Anyway, all the pictures are nice; I especially like File:ContractnegotiationSAfrica2012.jpg for the illustration of the interaction between PO and FO (I take it the person at the right is a representative of the FO while the persons in orange T-shirts belong to the PO?) and File:Laurelvocatskills2005.jpg for the vocational skills (File:LaurelOW2005VocSkills.jpg could also be used for the latter purpose, that's mostly a matter of personal preference, but, having done neither myself, the images suggest confectionery requires more of a collaborative effort than carpentry and thus would be a better representation of the OW's core principles). Huon (talk) 14:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

--
 * 17:40 I found an old email of 11 November 2005: “English” was top of the list, with 143 subscribers(on the pre-OW applic list: (more later)

ÉXITO EN LA CAPACITACIÓN MASIVA OUTCOMES OF THE LARGE GROUP CAPACITATION PROCESS: Inscripción en curso: Subscribed to the following Courses: Inglés English 143 Computación Computer137 Fieltro – peluche Felt/Plush 53 Artesanía country Country artisanal craft 35 Electricidad Electricity 25 Proyectos Projects 16 Repostería Confectionary 104 Corte y confección Fashion couture and Tailoring 46 Mecánica 49 Mechanics Belleza 91 Beauty products Mantenimiento de computadora Computer Maintenance 46 Ebanistería Cabinet making 18 Manipulación alimentos Food processing 34 Electrónica Electronics 29 Lista de espera Waiting list 100

¡NO ESPERE Y COLABORE! DONT WAIT AND JOIN!(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 16:41, 20 June 2013 (UTC))


 * Ah, the subtle ambiguities of the English language! My first reading was completely wrong. Thanks for satisfying my curiosity! Huon (talk) 18:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

---
 * 19.45: my broadband had cut out the moment I hit 'save', so I thought this (above) had failed to go thru -Preparing the OW is one of the 3 tasks of the FE framework(see wiki article!). The PE (Participants Enterprise) organizes, among others, a post-OW fiesta, where all products and services elaborated during the OW are exhibited, and that included here, apparently, the banner in impeccable postOW English. ..

I don’t know where the ‘delete’ tab is for the ‘Closing Ceremony’ duplicate, so, yes, please. Uploading will be a job for tomorrow (1 step at a time) – will try to keep pics to the minimum, though. Re: carpentry- these guys will have set up some kind of post OW cooperative enterprise, so the division of labor principle is still there. Thnx again for your comments and help {Rafaelcarmen (talk) 18:53, 20 June 2013 (UTC)}


 * I've tagged the duplicate Commons image for deletion. Regarding carpentry, I assumed as much, but I'd say an image of the lone person sanding that door doesn't illustrate the division of labor quite as well as the image of the bakers and decorators. As I said, that's a matter of personal preference and I don't insist on a specific image; those are just the ones I liked best. Huon (talk) 20:57, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

-
 * Friday 10.00 From the same retrieved 2005 email: they were 600, not 400 - re

EL DIA 18 DE OCTUBRE INICIO SE INICIO EL LABORATORIO ORGANICACIONAL DE TERRENO EN LA COMUNIDAD DE CORREDORES CON 618 PERSONAS. A DIFERENCIA DE NOSARA EN ESTE CASO LA INICIATIVA NO SURGE DEL APARATO INSTITUCIONAL SINO DEL SECTOR SOCIAL ESPCIALMENTE COOPERATIVO DE LA ZONA. EL 4 DE DICIEMBRE SERA LA CLAUSURA DESDE AHORA LE INVITAMOS On 18 October 618 people of the Community of Corredores started an Organization Workshop (OW). The difference with Nosara -- (NB, also in Guanacaste, one of the poorest districts of Costa Rica - where a series of OW's took place, and are still on-going starting in 2002) -- the Corredores OW initiative did not come from the Institutional Establishment but from the local social sector, especially the Cooperative sector of this Zone. The Closing Ceremony will take place on the 4th of December to which we invite you all. (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 09:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC))

Disambiguation link notification for June 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Religion in national symbols, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prayer shawl (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) 11:10, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Reply at Template talk:Tanzanian ministries
AfricaTanz (talk) 03:14, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks, but all I did was fix a typo. Huon (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

The Organization Workshop

 * Thanks, though you did all the hard work, and I truly appreciate it. Huon (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Handsome
Fancy a date? ;) xxxxxxxxxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.103.42 (talk) 21:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Zsolt Felcsuti
Dear Huon

Thank you giving me help at the help desk. I modified my article, giving references where weren't enough and I deleted those parts which couldn't be covered as Wikipedia standards require.

Please make your review again at my article.

Thank you in advance, Josef.smith1222 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josef.smith1222 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately I don't speak Hungarian, and I don't have access to the Financial Times, one of your best sources. Thus I'm probably not the best to review your draft. Please resubmit it via the "resubmit" button in the "submission declined" message box. However, I don't think the new source will suffice; for example, for all I can tell it doesn't mention Felcsuti's father or his "graduation as Technician". Huon (talk) 00:41, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't want to disturb you, and I am sure it's not easy to translate Hungarian to English but in the Manager Magazin source they write this about Felcsuti:

Felcsuti Zsolt (41) A műszaki érettségi megszerzése után kereskedelmi közgazdász, majd marketing-szakközgazdász képesítést szerzett.

In English: After he graduated as technician Felcsuti gained International Business Administration and Foreign Trade at first, and then Economics and Marketing.

His father is mentioned on the MPF Group's website, in the about us article. I tried to make new cites which can help confirm me.

Thanks for your time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josef.smith1222 (talk • contribs) 10:29, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you so much! It was really bothering me that his name is spelled wrong. But no one would change it. So I thank you a lot. May God bless and reward you heavily. I will also add to Maytham's page over a period of time. There is a lot about Maytham and I hope that he gets recognized around the world. Once again thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabranos (talk • contribs) 07:32, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Imran khan on 1971 genocide
I didn't mention but I also added a lot of Wikipedia links. Almost every single fishy fact is covered by the Wikipedia articles. And the video I uploaded It was live on TV and Imran khan himself was viewed there. So it is beyond any debate. The words you have mentioned is ideological form of the conversation he had on TV which is shown in the video. "Haam apne logoke sath keya kia...etc" obviously doesn't express a realization a simple mistake. Also there is to mention the wiki based references I'd request everyone to check out before making any baseless accusation .hakaluki88 17:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asheq Siddiquee (talk • contribs)


 * Wikipedia does not consider itself a reliable source. See also WP:SYN: No original synthesis please. I don't think any of the other sources out there on Wikipedia will discuss Khan's stance, so they are irrelevant here. I won't understand the video so watching it is no use, but I'm immediately prepared to believe that you reproduced the "ideological form" - also known as "propaganda". For example the number of victims is highly disputed, and you used the highest estimate out there. Does Khan discuss the number of victims at all? The wording throughout that section is anything but neutral and unsupported by the given third-party references. Also, the grammar needs work. This discussion should take place at the article's talk page, Talk:Imran Khan. Huon (talk) 17:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Taliban
I'm saying that why the Taliban has wide support from Ethni Pashtun.see it. João bonomo (talk) 15:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That alone does not make them nationalist. Nationalism is a matter of their goals, not of their base of support, and I haven't heard that they wanted to create a Pashtun nation. Why discuss this here? Huon (talk) 17:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

US civil war battles
Hi as American Civil War is a subcategory of each of 1861,2,3,4 and 5 it makes sense to add the specific year to each battle I think. Tim! (talk) 07:17, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * WP:CAT disagrees, especially as those battles already tend to be categorized not by war, but by campaign. Adding every tiny skirmish to the top-level "Conflicts in X" category will make those unmaintainably large. Huon (talk) 07:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * When cats become "unmaintainably large" the usual process to is to create subcategories but the campaigns don't work because there is no guarantee that they don't last for more than one year. Tim! (talk) 20:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Sharpe Rowland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (state) (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) 10:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Organization Workshop
The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
RadioFan (talk) 22:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

my page marked for deletion
Hi there. Seems as if you made my page for myself Mark Yaeger, marked for deletion, stating there are no notable sources. I've put everything I can find on there, but as a composer there isn't too much available publicly. There are audio interviews of myself, several official and unofficial pages, twitter, IMDb - which should be the most reliable source as it cannot be altered. I want to remove all warnings on my page, as all requested biographical info is properly cited, and if anything, I am writing as a auto-bio and can prove my identity; therefore all info is correct.Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks so much


 * None of your sources is the kind of reliable, independent source Wikipedia content should be based on. IMDb is expressly not considered a reliable source for biographical information due to their lack of editorial oversight; see External links/Perennial websites. If that's indeed the most reliable source to be found, then you unfortunately are not notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Also, writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged due to the conflict of interest. If you feel you do satisfy Wikipedia's notability criteria, you should try and add reliable sources to the article to support your claims, and you should comment at the deletion discussion: WP:Articles for deletion/Mark Yaeger. Huon (talk) 19:19, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Epiphany Eyewear
Hi Huon: I reworked Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Epiphany Eyewear incorporating your suggestions and would like your feedback again. You've been very helpful. Appreciate your Talk with me. Thank you, 301man (talk) 23:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * At a very short glance I'd say two parts should be improved: Firstly, you have a very long list of "External References". Those that are reliable sources and actually discuss Epiphany Eyewear in some detail should be turned into references proper: Summarize what they say about the glasses, and cite the source in a footnote. The others should be removed. Secondly, the "Reception" section. That's useless in its current form. Summarize what those publications have to say about Epiphany Eyewear, and cite your sources, don't just say that reviews exist. Were the reviews positive? Negative? Mixed? Why? The section doesn't say.
 * On an unrelated note, I've just tagged commons:File:EpiphanyEyewearWSJ-11Nov2013.pdf for deletion. Unless the Washington Post released the article under a free license, that's a copyright violation. Huon (talk) 01:25, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Huon: Thank you for your very helpful suggestions. They have been applied to the Article. I appreciate your input because I need to learn about using Reception properly.  I believe now I will be able to include a Reception using references. Also, The Wall Street Journal Author David Weidner has reviewed the Article, the pdf file and emailed me which I've included on the file's discussion for deletion page. We have permission to use the pdf file.  Again, thank you for your help; it's very much appreciated.  301man (talk) 19:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Tazerdadog (talk) 04:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

make this article better
Thank you for the constructive feedback and advices regarding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Radev_%28designer_&_visual_artist%29)

I have now rewritten and updated the text as well as included 11 footnotes that show the source of the claims in the text. Hope that article is now more compliant. Please remove the unresolved maintenance templates as they are solved by now. If not please offer a definite edit of those.

Best regards

RFA Nomination offer
Had I acted sooner :P. Congratulations on your RfA; looking awesome! --JustBerry (talk) 19:31, 14 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but it seems premature for congratulations just yet. Let's wait until the RfA is over one way or another. Huon (talk) 04:54, 15 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Huon, may I wish you the best of luck in your RfA. I have responded to a couple of "oppose" votes, not because I think I can make them change their minds, but because other people might be more inclined to vote "support". I've no interest in taking part in an RfA at all myself at the moment, so I can only applaud those that do, particularly if I think they deserve to pass. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   15:54, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I appreciated that, but thought it wise to keep my own comments to a minimum if I didn't have any relevant facts or links to add. Huon (talk) 17:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

RfA
Your reasonable response could perhaps answer these questions, which may clarify the point:

Would you block a non-arbitrator or non-administrator for a personal attack? Would you always just leave a note on the talk page of the non-administrator?

Thanks! Kiefer .Wolfowitz  20:10, 15 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think an isolated personal attack justifies a block. If it's a pattern that persists despite warnings, things get difficult. On the one hand I wouldn't want to lose an otherwise competent editor over an issue that's not content-related, on the other hand we cannot allow even an otherwise competent editor to drive away others. Ultimately blocks may become necessary to prevent the disruption of the project, but I'd prefer to gain some sort of community consensus, say RFC/U (though I've managed to avoid ever going that route yet) or, in extreme cases, a ban, to imposing blocks on my own. This of course also goes for admins or arbs, where blocking them on my own without prior discussion would likely lead to much drama and little long-term benefit. Huon (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2013 (UTC)


 * So, you are less willing to block an administrator than a non-administrator? AfricaTanz (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I expect firstly that admins should know the rules well enough so they don't need to be blocked, and secondly that blocking admins or arbitrators (who are among the most trusted members of the community) without prior discussion for incivility, which to some degree is always in the eye of the beholder, will likely lead to more drama. So I wouldn't be less willing to block some people than others, but making the block stick may require more effort. I'd prefer not having to block anybody for incivility - can't we all just get along? Huon (talk) 22:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC)


 * You're saying two different things. Which is correct? Treating everyone equally? Or not? AfricaTanz (talk) 05:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Ziad K Abdelnour
Hi Huon,

Even though you removed some edits from unregistered IP's regarding SEC content in this page Ziad K. Abdelnour, still the same content is getting updated on the page from others and the reference link given is also not valid. How can we stop edits from Unregistered IP's? Rajmavrick (talk) 08:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks


 * I've once again reverted to a more neutral version backed up by a secondary source. Technically we could request the page to be semi-protected so that IP editors cannot edit it any more (see WP:RFPP), but I don't think one edit every few days is enough of an issue for that. Huon (talk) 12:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Huon We have got the same edit again from Unregistered IP. This is happening since June, someone just going on posting the same content with out any explanation in the talk page. Now can we go for page protection.Rajmavrick (talk) 08:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I support!
Hey Huon, A couple days ago, I came across some of your comments on an edit dispute and thought, "wow, this guy is reasonable and seems to receive a good deal of respect". Little did I know that you were a candidate for becoming an administrator! Anyways, I hope you will stand by the same precedents with all facets of Wikipedia and am glad to support you with this endeavor! D arth B otto talk•cont 19:47, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Huon (talk) 17:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

 * Thanks! Mmmm... cookie! Yum! Huon (talk) 17:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Institute of Political Studies - Belgrade
Dear Houn, thank you for you suggestions. IPS is the only governmental institution in Serbia for researches of political issues. It is 100 % financed by Ministry of science of Serbia. In that sense it is leading, since its role is to provide analyses and advices to government on domestic and international problems and developments. Any Help from you and your colleges is welcome. Sincerely yours, Senior advisor of the Institute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IPS-u-Beogradu (talk • contribs) 23:51, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * As I said at your talk page, what we need are third-party sources that cover the institute in some detail, such as newspaper articles. Such sources need not be in English, though that's obviously easier for our readers. I don't think I can be of much help finding such sources - surely you know better where to look. If the IPS is the only research institute of its kind we should say so - to call it "leading" implies that there are others being led, and that the IPS is not the only but the best (or maybe the most prominent) such institute. Huon (talk) 02:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Your RFA
Congratulations, I've just closed your RFA as successful and provided you with the admin flag. It's worthwhile taking into account the opinions of the opposition voters as you take your early steps with the mop. Feel free to get in touch with any of your fellow admins while you find your feet. Once again, well done and good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:14, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'll certainly do so. Huon (talk) 17:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * Congratulations! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, especially for the icon. Now I really feel ready to wipe the floors. Huon (talk) 17:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't usually look at RfA, but I saw your name and thought I'd just add my congratulations! Good luck! :) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 20:36, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Congrats!!! Surprised the rest of the Admin crew isn't here to congrats you.--v/r - TP 21:16, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I really appreciate it. Huon (talk) 23:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

-- C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S! (see Pronacampo9 talk page a few mins ago) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 03:08, 20 July 2013 (UTC))
 * Having given you some grief before I finally came around and saw the light, I too want to congratulate you on a well-deserved success. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:33, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! Now you can say that you've been there, done that, and got the t-shirt. ;) — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 01:13, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks to all of you! And Tryptofish, don't worry - I can distinguish constructive criticism from grief. Huon (talk) 03:18, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Congrats! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:35, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Huon (talk) 23:16, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Allow me to jump and show my congrats as well. I must point out how much you have personally been of help to me over the past months. People like you in this community are invaluable. Cheers! &mdash; MusikAnimal talk 05:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * A belated WELL DONE from me too!  Brookie :) { - he's in the building somewhere!}  (Whisper...) 09:45, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Congrats from me to! I'm pretty sure you won't delete the main page or move the sysop noticeboard to WP:BWAHAHAHAH. Jackc143 (talk) 13:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you all very much. And Jackc143, don't give me ideas... Huon (talk) 13:46, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Quite right.  Jackc143 (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Another belated congratulations. You did a good job coming through a tough process. I hope you took a deep breath and gave yourself a pat on the back. You deserve it! -   t  u coxn \ talk 23:06, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Seeking help with the article
Dear Huon, I am new to editing, so apologies if I mess up the tags. If possible, can you please take an impartial look at the Alex Zhavoronkov page. I am the person in the article and I asked a professional writer to prepare the page for me in Wiki format drawing information from various sources. Unfortunately, the editor posted it. One of the books I published most recently is [us.macmillan.com/theagelessgeneration/ Ageless Generation]. On Amazon Ageless Generation - #1 in Biotechnology Category; another book is by a much smaller publisher was illustrated prose Dating A.I. and a recent popular article at HuffPo 13 reasons. In today's world this may not provide adequate notability; therefore, I would like to take the liberty to ask you to take a look at the article and delete or edit it. Biogerontology (talk) 04:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia measures notability not by what you have written, but by what others have written about you. Thus an independent review of your book, a newspaper article about you or a peer-reviewed paper discussing your work (written by others, not by yourself!) are the kinds of sources we're looking for. I have added some such sources. I don't think there's a risk of deletion (certainly not the "speedy" kind), though still more sources certainly couldn't hurt. I haven't looked for Russian news sources; that might be worth a try, but I don't speak Russian and wouldn't be much of a help there. Huon (talk) 12:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for your advice. I am not so worried about deletion. I would rather have it deleted rather than having a "neutrality" issue. What needs to be done to get a neutral review? I would highly appreciate your advice. There are many third party reviews of the book on the web and more are added every week (e.g. Edge Boston Biogerontology (talk) 21:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That Edge review was among the sources I already added. I don't think the article has any serious neutrality issues; the main problem is that many of the sources are less independent than I'd like - your own research papers, an interview, the websites of organizations you're affiliated with one way or another. Third-party sources would be better whenever possible, but the statements the non-independent sources are cited for aren't especially controversial or promotional, so that's not a major issue. Huon (talk) 21:49, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Side-by-side lyrics help
Thank you, this works well. RLamb (talk) 08:45, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

 * Thanks! I was happy to help, though you may want to have someone who knows his way around  tags to take a look. Huon (talk) 11:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * and tags are really annoying, I came across them in my welcome templates. Thanks for the help though!  Mat  ty  .  007  11:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
THANK YOU! It looks perfect!

Margaretwmiller (talk) 22:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC) 

Great...as long as I did everything correctly 70.113.75.75 (talk) 00:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, 70.113.75.75, but I have no idea what this refers to. Huon (talk) 02:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

HCL Technologies
Thanks for your inputs. We will work on the content and seek your support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srishti Dugar (talk • contribs) 12:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I left you a response.
I have received your message Huon and have left you a response. Please check my talk page and respond to my message. Thank you. 75.62.136.128 (talk) 19:34, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I left you a response
I have received your message Huon and I've left you a response. Please check my talk page and respond to my message. Thank you. 75.62.134.122 (talk) 02:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I left you a response
Hello Huon. I have received your message and I have left you a response. Please check my talk page and respond to my message. Thank you. 75.62.128.176 (talk) 01:57, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I've added your name to User:TheOriginalSoni/languages
Hi,

I wanted to inform you that I'm creating a list of foreign language speaking editors, so that others find it much more easier to locate editors who speak a given language. It should be particularly useful to help deal with ESL editors and to help translate sources in other languages.

I've added your name to the list, showing you as active and willing to help with translations. I hope you don't mind this addition. Please feel free to make any changes you like to this list, as well as use this list for any purposes required. :)

Cheers,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 03:55, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


 * You're aware of WP:Translators available? I had also intended to add Babel userboxes to my userpage; I should really do so. Huon (talk) 00:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you very much, Huon, for your deletion under g7 of my essay shortcut, wp:R-e-s-p-e-c-t! –  Paine Ellsworth   C LIMAX ! 04:26, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited My Robin is to the Greenwood Gone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elizabeth (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) 10:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Mr. Cookie 715 (talk) 23:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Dan Henig
Thanks for responding to my question about my user page for Dan Henig. I added some regional / national sources, but am unsure whether they satisfy the criteria for notability. If you have a second, could you take another look? Thanks so much! Allspiritseve (talk) 17:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

I left you a response.
Mr. Cookie 715 (talk) 00:50, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

User name
thank you for that tip, I've asked it to be changed. GoGoBot2 (talk) 16:34, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey sexy admin
Congrats, Huon. Can you please put your tool to use on Talk:Bramshill House/GA1? We're starting the GAN all over again; see Talk:Bramshill_House. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 23:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. If you want that page deleted, Mark Arsten pre-empted me. Huon (talk) 23:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw. Hey, how does it feel? Trust me, it wears off after a while. :) Still, well done and good luck with your new position. Drmies (talk) 23:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I like it, mostly for the little stuff: Moving pages without leaving a redirect, looking at deleted pages for the "why was my article deleted?" questions, deleting obvious copyright violations, ... It's so convenient, and I expect that feeling will stay for quite some time. Huon (talk) 00:04, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

An IRC pie for you
There are like no fruits that start with "I". Howicus (talk) 01:51, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Alan Dow
Thankyou Huon, for taking the time to respond to my query about reliable sources policy WP:RS. I think I am beginning to understand how an article must strike a balance between many competing and perhaps conflicting considerations. I found your pointers of further avenues for exploration particularly valuable. Thankyou... afd (talk) 16:10, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I left you a response.
I left you a response. Please check my talk page and respond. I'd appreciate it. Thank you. Mr. Cookie 715 (talk) 20:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Apology at User talk:Mr. Cookie 715
You can find an apology on my talk page. Mr. Cookie 715 (talk) 00:33, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
I wasn't aware that I could create my own footnote...I thought I had to use the template. I will do as you suggested and cite the papers as I would for a scholarly journal. They are dates and facts, such as which college was attended. Other information can be found in newspaper articles. Thank you for your help! Margaretwmiller (talk) 03:43, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Pronacampo
Hello Huon: just wondering whether you picked up the message I left on my talkpage on 31 Jul? (Pronacampo9 (talk) 12:28, 2 August 2013 (UTC))


 * Copied from my talkpage: Sunday 04 noon - Hello Huon: you will see that in the meantime I have 'cleaned up' the rather messy presentation of the above. I have also done a dotting-the-i's etc final 'finishing touch' - "The Reviewer" will catch me out on something, though! :-) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 11:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC))

Mr. Cookie 715 really is sorry. See his apology at his talk page.
Mr. Cookie 715 (talk) 02:02, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Middleton
No, I wasn't ready for that article to be reviewed. Some of the links go to protected URLs so I have to edit the HTML. I also need biographical information on him. Please move it back! Margaretwmiller (talk) 17:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Oops, sorry for that! I have un-submitted the draft so it won't get reviewed. At a very quick glance it looked so good that I almost would have moved it into the mainspace; again, sorry for the confusion. I hope this is okay? If you prefer I can also move it back into your sandbox, but I don't see much of an advantage to that. Huon (talk) 17:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thanks so much for your help with the Run DMT page. Have a great week! User:Riceflour —Preceding undated comment added 07:18, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Pronacampo

 * Tue 6 August: hello Huon - I have left a mssg for you on my talkpage (Pronacampo9 (talk) 08:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC))


 * Wed 7 August: another (longish) mssge awaiting you, Huon (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:56, 7 August 2013 (UTC))


 * Thu 8 August: your patience and further clarifications much appreciated! I am taking them on board while going through the text once more. Going by the 'awaiting revision' label we should be looking forward to sometime next week (for what, let's hope, will be a thumbs up). Thanks again for your time! (Pronacampo9 (talk) 08:21, 8 August 2013 (UTC))

Royal2012

 * Thanks for responding. However I am unable to do it myself as yet. Too new!

Royalty2012 (talk) 07:55, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Capacitation
Perhaps you might want to have a look: I tore up the first draft and started all anew - hopefully more within Wikipedia parameters this time (?) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 20:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC))


 * PS: The toughest – conceptual – part is still to come. I wish I could cast my ‘historic’ net more widely and further back than the relatively recent 1987 date. English language combinations (with Capacitation) do exist, most prominently Freire’s technical proficiency capacitation. There are also combinations with same in the UNESCO 1969 trilingual glossary. But none is rooted in Aktivity. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 07:35, 10 August 2013 (UTC))


 * Re: MOVING PAGE - Moving a page. Hello, Huon: I have visited several times ‘moving a page’, but it seems to be more complicated than I had expected. I want to move “Community Capacitation’ to the much more appropriate (for several reasons)Capacitation, but, as you can see, capacitation already exists and that is the reason why I was not allowed to create it in the first place. Moving a page also has a lot of provisos which I do not fully understand, among others that, in certain cases, administrators may have to intervene, of at least give their approval? I may be wrong but the operation does not seem to be straightforward? (Pronacampo9 (talk) 16:06, 11 August 2013 (UTC))


 * For the etymology that's impressive; in fact I wonder whether that won't unbalance the finished article in the end - I expect the choice of an English word isn't all that important an aspect compared to what capacitation is. Rearding Freire and the UNESCO glossary, do they happen to just use the same word with a different meaning? Then we might want to write a sentence about that so that a reader doesn't mistake Freire's capacitation with the activity-based one (and I wouldn't use much more than a sentence - the article should explain what capacitation is, not what it isn't). If Freire et al. use "capacitation" with the same meaning but describe a different path towards that same result, then we should cover that in greater detail because then his version of capacitation is an aspect of the article's topic itself.
 * Regarding the page name, capacitation is indeed taken already. The standard way to resolve such issues on Wikipedia is to add a parenthetical description, say "Capacitation (adult education)" or "Capacitation (community development)". This description should be as short as possible while still allowing the readers to see that they have found the topic they're interested in. I'll gladly move the draft to such a title - what exactly shall it be? "Capacitation (community development)"? Huon (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

--
 * As ever, wise counsel! Capacitation could also be parenthized as (Social Psychology) - the substance of the conceptual grounding will indeed mostly be about this - (as I told you, I foresee a long stretch of sweat and tears - a certain word 'babble' is seared in my subconscious. . .) but that (parenthesis) will undoubtedly get up the noses of our bros and sistas of 'Small Group' Social Psychology - remember? We could leave that for another day perhaps - So let's play it safe and let's parenthize it as "Capacitation (Community Development)", which will usefully shift the emphasis from 'Community' to 'Capacitation'.
 * PS: I am referring to the Spanish 'capacitaCION docente' as es:Capacitacion (for wiki espannol - but that little 'es' keeps popping up? As ever: muito obrigado {Pronacampo9 (talk) 20:50, 11 August 2013 (UTC))


 * I have moved the draft to WT:Articles for creation/Capacitation (community development); when it's accepted it will be renamed Capacitation (community development). (Wikipedia doesn't use title case; thus "community development should not be capitalized.) The old title currently redirects to the new one. As long as the "small group" scocial psychologists don't have a concept of "capacitation" of their own and we'd still have ambiguity, I don't see how they could object to "Capacitation (social psychology)" either.
 * For the Spanish link, use a "piped" link:  capacitacion  will look like this: capacitacion. Huon (talk) 21:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the 'piped' help & the title move (Pronacampo9 (talk) 07:35, 12 August 2013 (UTC))

Thanks
Thanks for responding to my question about lost edits. I don't understand how I could have fixed the problem without going back in my browswer. After my edits, I clicked on "submit changes" and up came a document showing, on the left, the original article, and on the right, my changes with a message at the top that some of the URLS in my submission were black listed (I had copied Google's direction to a pdf instead of the pdf's home page address). I couldn't make the changes on that page so where could I have done so??

I'd like to contribute more to Wikipedia but finding it pretty confusing (like even how to thank you).

ClearOB (talk) 22:01, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not quite sure what happened. If you chose "show changes", that doesn't save the edit yet but only shows the changes in the code you're about to make. In that case there should have been an edit window with your changes below the comparison between the old article and your changed version, and you could have made additional changes to that edit window. That shouldn't have generated a link blacklist warning, though.
 * Or you chose "save page" and ran into the spam blacklist. That also gives you the same comparison of the original and your changes, plus a "your text" window that holds your modified code. From there you have two options: You can copy "your text", edit the page again, paste the changed text, and then modify it. Or you could use your browser's "back" button to return one step - it sounds to me as if you tried that but went back two steps, not just one. There's also a "Return to [page you edited]" link at the bottom of the "your text" window, but that's a trap - it will bring you back to editing the article, but without your changes. I hope this helps. Huon (talk) 23:01, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, THanks. ClearOB (talk) 23:13, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Would you please help me remove the copyright note and improve the page please.

Wikileekpediamonitor (talk) 05:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

A request
Dear Huon,

I'd like to ask that the GregoryStump page that BabelStone has been working on simply be removed altogether. Is that something that you can do?

Thanks again for your help,

GregoryStump (talk) 12:37, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I have tagged the page for deletion, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:BabelStone/Stump. I expect no one will object, and the page will be deleted in a week. Huon (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Unanswered talkbacks from Mr. Cookie 715.
Please respond to Mr. Cookie 715 which is me. you haven't responded to my messages. Please do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.62.130.94 (talk) 02:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Capacitation

 * Update and fyi: just last night I serendipitously came upon a quotation from 'the big man' (re: Se aprende, não se capacita) which, I think, makes a perfect 'fit' as an intro to the Etymology section (of Capacitation AfC). I tried to 'center' the italized five words but the wiki template won't let me. Re; Pronacampo9 Capacitation(community development) Afc (Pronacampo9 (talk) 08:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC))
 * PS: I just noticed that "someone" edited out "Cees" Van Dam (Biblio) and changed it into "Chris"(?) Van Dam. It cannot possibly have been me as it is still "Cees" in the latest (Capacitation) AfC, not counting the fact that "Cees" is one of the more popular Dutch names and Dutch is one (of the 5) language(s) I speak. I cannot possibly have made that type of edit (unless I was asleep, perhaps?) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:33, 14 August 2013 (UTC))
 * PPSS: I have meanwhile, of course, restored "Cees" to both the Organization Workshop file and in Clodomir Morais AfReview articles. - (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC))


 * The Van Dam issue is strange: In this edit User:Chris-van-Dam2013, who hasn't made any other edits, claims to be the author of that paper and to be spelled "Chris". I saw it at that time, but since the paper itself only says "C. Van Dam" I saw no reason to doubt Chris. On a closer inspection I found the Labras spelling him "Cees", too, so either all his colleagues don't know how to spell his given name, or this was some bizarre drive-by vandalism. Since the written sources are on your side I'd go with "vandalism", though it's indeed a very strange one.
 * Regarding the quote, I have added a box that's meant for such quotes and that could be centered. I could probably get rid of the box itself and add HTML code to simply center the text itself, but that would be kind of a self-made hack. It would be nice to have some more background information on the quote: The work and/or the date. Huon (talk) 23:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

--
 * Hello, Huon: this brings to a close 20 years of mistaken identity. I indeed met I Cherrett in 1993 and he was the first who brought C (aka ‘Cees’ I was told) Van Dam to my attention. I now have checked all the sources (EXCEPT mine and those which, like Labra, derive from mine!) and indeed, on the photocopied paper-copy I have, the Spanish url and the Dutch (CESO 1983) url, it says “C.” Van Dam. The Dutch url, however, is decisive – as you can see, it says Van+Dam+Chris. So it must have been 'user Van Dam' aka Chris himself  who made the edit. There is now, however, a conflict with other published sources which say ‘Cees’. So I have re-edited Van Dam on all three sites as "Van Dam, C." (as it indeed says on all the paper and digital versions). I do owe Chris Van Dam a sincere apology!
 * http://www.worldcat.org/title/laboratorio-experimental-de-clodomir-santos-de-morais-una-pedagogia-para-la-organizacion-social/oclc/225542128
 * https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?complete-0=#bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=97cd3f936541a8f4&psj=1&q=Van+Dam+Chris+CESO+netherlands&safe=off
 * As for the Clodomir quote: it definitely is centred now, i.e. where I wanted it in the first place. Clodo’s name in red does look a bit unusual, though, as does the frame. I’ll see what I can do. (Pronacampo9 (talk) 05:44, 15 August 2013 (UTC))
 * Oops! Thanks for following up on Van Dam. Just calling him "C. Van Dam" seems a good solution, especially since that's what his paper uses, too.
 * Regarding the red link I tend to agree, but I expect the de Morais article will be accepted before this one comes up, and then the link will turn blue and point to that article. I thought adding it right now couldn't hurt. Huon (talk) 06:31, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, Huon, the Capacitation(cd) article is still far in the distance, so it definitely does not do any harm and thanks again.
 * I clicked the Chris lead, and I must say, I never stop to marvel at wikipedia's sleuthing prowess!

Re: Revision as of 14:23, 1 July 2013 (edit) (undo) (thank)

Chris-van-Dam2013(talk | contribs)

m (I am the author of one of the publications, but my name is badly written: my name is Chris and not Cees)

I am happy to learn that 'the real Chris' has stood up and let his voice to be heard loud and clear all the way from Holland. A Chris Van Dam google search, however, does not bring up anything. More surprisingly, ever since 1982/3 (and until 1 July 2013, that is), C. Van Dam, as far as I know, has not been heard of again in OW circles. A pity, as this early 1982 work is a 'first' in many ways, and definitely comprehensive & well researched. I presume it served him well as a graduation thesis. Ah well, perhaps he has retired and prefers it to remain so. Except when his name gets misquoted (!) - I, too, would be i n c e n s e d had it happened to me. (to my shame, it took me a full 1 1/2 month to actually notice the edit. What puzzles me a bit is that the edit was made not only on the 'open' Organization Workshop article, but simulataneously in the Clodo bio AfC, which, although now 'up' for Review, was not on 'open access', yet, on 1 July? or was it?).(Pronacampo9 (talk) 07:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC))


 * I didn't check all revisions of the Clodomir Santos de Morais draft, but none of those I looked at had "Chris". The capacitation draft did; I expect you copied the bibliography from the OW article and thus copied the "Chris" along. Technically drafts are just as "open access" as articles if one knows where to look for them, but they're comparatively well-hidden: Neither Google nor Wikipedia's own search should bring them up. A glance at the page histories showed that no one but you, me and a bot that deals with citations ever edited the drafts, and the bot wouldn't make such a change. Huon (talk) 17:19, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear Huon,

I am not very familiar with Wikipedia, so I am not sure this message will reach you. But if you have any doubt thay I am the author of the Santos de Morais publication, please write to my email, chris.vdam@gmail.com and I will be glad to give you all the details about why and how I wrote that manuscript. But if you want to kkep it as C. van Dam or Cees van Dam, you can do that, I will accept my new name.

You can also ask Clodomir, which I met briefly in Managua in may 1980.

By the way, I do not live in the Netherlands but in Argentina, and you can find more on me on the following web pages, www.sistematizaciondeexperiencias.com, wwwl.territorioindigenaygobernanza.com

Best Regards,

C.(hris van Dam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris-van-Dam2013 (talk • contribs)


 * Hello Chris, I'm sorry for the confusion about your name. I'd say since your publication itself only uses "C. Van Dam" and is catalogued under that name by, say, WorldCat, it's probably best to go with that name and avoid the confusion. Interestingly Google Books gets "Chris" right but leaves out "Van"; that probably wouldn't be an improvement. Again I'm sorry for the confusion. Huon (talk) 02:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

--


 * RE: I expect you copied the bibliography from the OW article and thus copied the "Chris" along.: bang on target, yet again, Huon – yes I did mechanically cut & paste the title from one article to another – it took me another month to notice the alteration! I therefore assume I never will be any good as a sleuth but cant stop being amazed by wiki’s powers of investigation.
 * As for Chris, what an unusual and, in the end, happy turn of events! I am happy I already apologized in a previous talk re: I do owe Chris Van Dam a sincere apology! -- which I hope Chris is able to access - for mistaking Van Dam’s first name, as it was indeed I who started it all.
 * Without any doubt, Chris is a most generous and forgiving man as he is prepared, if needs be, to even accept his a/pre-sumed name. But I presume we'll have to settle for “C.” as “C.” indeed is ‘not wrong’ & avoids possible future confusion and complications (it so happens that the wrong ‘Cees’ cannot be deleted from printed books and articles. . .)


 * Chris has kindly left his contact details and I see that you have already sent him a message about the (mis)naming issue. Good. Moreover, Chris is not retired -- as I had been surmising, -- but very much actively engaged in the ecological movement in Argentina (one of the few countries where, to my knowledge, the OW never had any significant presence).
 * Unless Chris expressly insists on it, I will, for the moment, desist from personal communications.
 * It is good to hear that Chris met Clodomir in Managua in 1980, which, if confirmation were needed, gives the lie to Josh Fisher’s claim that the 2010 Génesis OW was ‘the first in Nicaragua’. . .(Pronacampo9 (talk) 08:26, 16 August 2013 (UTC))


 * PS: Re: 14 August Talk (Capacitation): On properly sourcing Se aprende, não se capacita
 * Q: Re: Regarding the quote, [ . . . ] It would be nice to have some more background information on the quote: The work and/or the date.Huon.


 * A: On top of the Souza ref to de Morais' Se aprende, não se capacita (Port), I have now provided a ref to same from de Morais’ 1987 thesis Se aprende pero no se capaita(p.136)(Spanish). For more details re: Capacitation (community development) notes #3 and 4.(Pronacampo9 (talk) 18:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC))


 * PPSS: "Argumentum ex absurdo"

Going strictly by the book (in casu: the English Dictionary) the sentence Se aprende, não se capacita ought  to translate as The trainee learns but is not trained – quod erat demonstrandum?(Pronacampo9 (talk) 19:16, 16 August 2013 (UTC))


 * PPPSSS 17 Aug: dodger today made the following edit (in Organization Workshop): "Apuntes de teoría de la organización (Book, 1979)". [WorldCat.org]. Retrieved 2013-08-17. I have seen the 'retrieved' note in other wiki articles. What are the rules governing this? (Pronacampo9 (talk) 12:57, 17 August 2013 (UTC))


 * The "retrieved" date is usually meant for web sources that might change over time or become unavailable - say, an online newspaper article or an organization's website. In those cases it clarifies which version of the page linked to is the one that is meant as a source, and if that page is modified or removed altogether the access date may help to retreive it from archives such as the Wayback Machine. Here, where the source is a book and the link just to a library catalogue, I don't think it makes much sense - even if the link vanished, the book would still be the source, and it doesn't change. Huon (talk) 17:29, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The "Retrieved" date is automatically added to web cites when one uses the Reflinks tool. Changing the ref to rather use "Cite book" would make better sense, for a book reference the ISBN is more useful than a Worldcat link. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:46, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Saturday evening - Happy Tidings! (I have already sent a motion of thanks to with whom the 'wiki review' Russian roulette wheel stopped - bingo!) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 19:42, 17 August 2013 (UTC))

Thanks for the apologies, well received. Just for your info, it was in 1979 when I joined an FAO project in Honduras, a project with PROCCARA (Programa de Capacitacion Campesina para la Reforma Agraria, where Clodomir had worked in the early days of the Agrarian Reform) and I was surprised to see how strongly Clodomir's footprint was still there (I Believe he had left Honduras and PROCCARA in 1976). So, as a sociologist, I started enquiring about Clodomir and was fascinated by his Teoria de la Organizacion and what he had accomplished with the cooperatives in the North, through his Laboratorio Experimental, and the testimonies of many agrarian leaders. In 1980, I went to Nicaragua (1st year of the Sandinista Revolution) and I looked for Clodomir, he was kind enough to devote an afternoon to this 26-old guy who wanted to know more about his ideas and what he was doing in Nicaragua with the Sandinista Regime.

I haven't found the same Wiki entries in spanish... I believe might really interest latin american spanish speaking people.

Best, Chris


 * Chris, unfortunately I don't speak Spanish or Portuguese, but I believe Pronacampo9 (who is the expert on Organization Workshop issues) said he was working on getting the articles translated - I'm sure he would appreciate your help. I'm just the guy who tidied up the draft and improved the layout and the wiki-code; all the writing is due to Pronacampo9.
 * Pronacampo9, I saw that the Clodomir Santos de Morais draft was accepted with the first review; congratulations! Huon (talk) 20:44, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

---


 * Tue 20 Aug: I originally received Chris’ message (above) on the (unusual?) ‘split screen’ Huon page. I have already replied to Chris elsewhere:  I checked Chris-van-Dam2013 (talk • contribs) but found that the talkpage had only been used once (1 July). Thinking it unlikely that he would visit there again soon,  I wrote y'day directly to Chris’ gmail. Labra happened to have been (also) in Managua in 1980 but they must have missed each other – so I have already played matchmaker. Labra has indeed a Spanish version (which needed a lot of work, not least in terms of the necessary adjustments, starting with - Spanish - source materials) more or less  ready. A Portuguese version should also be in the offing at a later date. The latter are both absolutely necessary:  a Spanish speaking college told me already that he put the text through the Google translation robot and found what you expect from a robot: meaning and purpose mostly compromised or ‘lost in translation’ – the job needs to be done by a hispanofone with intimate knowledge of the subject (and the corresponding latino bibliography, for example). The robot e.g.  translates the (proper) term ‘Laboratorio’ eg as ‘Taller’ -- (re google Translate: El Taller de Organización (OW) - o "Laboratorio Organizacional" (LO) en portugués - es un tipo de evento de aprendizaje para los. . . ) -- and explaining ‘capacitation’ to Hispano/Lusofones is a bit like carrying coals to Newcastle. . . PS: The Organization Workshop and Clodomir Santos de Morais articles, in the meantime, have been furnished with a more or less complete list of ‘Categories’ – I still have to chase those ‘external links’, in the latter article, which ‘do not follow Wikipedia policies or guidelines’  a bit like needles and haystacks. .(Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC))

RE: Able2Extract Image
Awesome! Thanks a lot for reviewing and revising the image upload. I'll be sure to follow the same model, and tag more appropriate licenses in future. Really appreciate the feedback! TorBel80 (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2013 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, it was my pleasure. Huon (talk) 20:44, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Organization Workshop

 * "Identity" problem: as I told you yesterday, I thought that my colleague (in Chile) was ready to launch the Spanish version of Organization Workshop for review. What I just discovered, however, is that he has, indeed, a complete and (very) proper translation, complete with all the corresponding Spanish biblio and notes. Unfortunately, this text is not even at (Spanish) AfC-stage, yet. I checked on the Spanish Wikipedia and found that (surprisingly) Laboratorio Organizacional does not exist yet. When trying to open the Spanish AfC page I ran into a problem: the Spanish site does not accept my Pronacampo9 username and password - (re: Error de inicio de session No hay ningún usuario llamado «Pronacampo9». Asegúrate de que lo has escrito correctamente, o usa el formulario de abajo para crear una nueva cuenta de usuario). The ‘message’ seems to be that, in order to be able to create a Spanish Wikipedia AfC page, I would have to create an entirely new ‘Spanish’ identity, which, (and here is the rub) would be traced back to my existing Pronacampo9 ‘identity’ and email address – which may get me in trouble at a later stage. As they say in Spanish: ¿Que opines? (what do you opine?) taa (Pronacampo9 (talk) 04:08, 21 August 2013 (UTC))


 * I think that's an aftereffect of your name change. Newly created accounts are "global", that is, they have a single unified login on all Wikimedia Foundation projects: The English Wikipedia, the Spanish one, the Wikimedia Commons and so on. However, renaming an account is done locally, and the rename seems to have left you with a non-global English-Wikipedia-only account. The easiest way to resolve this is likely to turn it into a global account via Special:MergeAccount. Then you will have access to Pronacampo9 accounts at all projects. One issue you may want to think about is whether you want your account at the Commons renamed before you go global - that didn't change its name when you changed the English account's name. The page to request a name change on the Commons is Commons:Changing username. If you have the Commons account renamed before you create a global account you will be able to merge them easily - renaming it afterwards would be much more complicated if not impossible.
 * Regarding the email, I just checked that when you create a global account all the "local" versions inherit the email address; I haven't tested whether you could change it individually on different projects. You can, however, change the email settings locally; for example you should be able to deactivate the option for other users to email you and the email notifications: See the preferences; the Spanish Wikipedia has similar ones. Furthermore, nobody (with the possible exception of the tech guys with server access) can see your email address: Not users, not administrators, not even the highest-ranking members of the community. So I don't quite see how your email address could get you in trouble - definitely not from Wikipedia's end, and unless you reply to mails sent by others, those others cannot tell what it is.
 * If the issue with the email address is serious enough that you want to make absolutely sure that the English account's address isn't related to your Spanish Wikipedia account at all, you have an alternative: Create a separate account at the Spanish Wikipedia. There is some scheme in the works to globalize all accounts (supposed to happen in August, but it seems delayed), so in order to keep your English and Spanish accounts separate you should likely choose a different username if you want to go this route (otherwise one or the other of your accounts may find itself forcibly renamed soon). Also, if you go this route your new Spanish account will likely become a global one, so you would be able to edit the English Wikipedia with it - keeping the accounts separate may require some juggling and logging out and back in to another account when you change the project from Spanish to English. I have no experience with such an issue (I only have a global account that allows me to easily edit everything from English to Chinese), but this might be something of a hassle in the long run.
 * I'm sorry this is all rather complicated. Huon (talk) 05:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Now, for a comprehensive and prompt reply: this is a comprehensive and prompt reply - the 'golden editor' title is worth its weight in gold. . I will have to print this out & study carefully. If possible, I think I would prefer an entirely new and separate Spanish wiki account - I am thinking in terms of creating a separate new (eg yahoo) account specifically for this purpose? (Pronacampo9 (talk) 05:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC))


 * I still don't see why you would want to do so, but that's none of my business. That said, a Wikipedia account doesn't require an email address at all, and you can use whatever email address you want to use. A newly created Yahoo email address would of course also do.
 * If your English account is linked to some email address you'd rather not have it linked to, you can easily change that email address - asee the preferences.
 * Two things complicate matters: Firstly your past renaming, and secondly, having a Spanish account not associated with the English one. You are certainly entitled to do so, and creating a new account at the Spanish Wikipedia is the way to achieve it, but you will have to be careful about where you edit with what account: The new account likely will also allow you to edit the English Wikipedia under that username, too; doing so would once again link your English edits (at least those made under that username) to your Spanish ones. Huon (talk) 05:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I am happy to see I have a number of options, each of one I will first have to study & weigh carefully. As a matter of fact, what I have (vaguely) in the back of my mind in all this is the prospect of being 'collared', at a later stage, for 'glovepuppeting'(although I realize I may be getting completely the wrong end of the stick here)(Pronacampo9 (talk) 06:27, 21 August 2013 (UTC))


 * 09:10hrs: I am unfamiliar with wiki Commons – and wiki Commons seems to be unfamiliar with me. . .In practice: I am at this moment properly logged in with my Pronacampo9 username and password. However, when I go to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page (using the same computer) I find I am logged out and I am asked to log in (again?). I already before tried to log in @Commons:Changing username, but I get a red ‘no go’ when typing in my Pronacampo username. Nor do I have any more success with my ‘primary’/’root’ username (re: Rafaeletc). So I am a bit nonplussed now as to what exactly to do, starting with what is my present “account-at-the-Commons” exactly (and which needs changing) at the present moment? I.o.w., which username (if any) has 'wiki Commons' in its memory at the moment: my 'root' username, the Pronacampo9 one, or none at all? (Pronacampo9 (talk) 08:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC))


 * You should, I believe, still have access to the Commons account you used to upload the Organization Workshop images, what you call the "root" account. As I said above, renaming an account is done locally, and when you changed the username at the English Wikipedia, that Commons account was, for all I can tell, unaffected. That account's old password should still allow you to log in to that account, and failing that you should be able to recover access to that account via the "I've forgotten my password" feature - a new password will be emailed to you.
 * Regarding "sockpuppetry", I don't see how that would be a problem for you. There's a detailed policy page at WP:SOCK, but the short of it is: Don't try to pretend two different people at once, at least not for nefarious purposes. For example, using a second account to support yourself in a discussion with another editor is prohibited for obvious reasons. If you turn your current account into a global one that won't be an issue: All your contributions will be linked to that same account, even across different versions of Wikipedia. If you instead decide to create a separate account for the Spanish Wikipedia, that still won't be an issue since you would still edit each version of Wikipedia with one account only.
 * Unless there are off-wiki reasons for keeping the accounts separate, my suggestion would be to turn your Pronacampo9 account into a global one and use it for the Spanish Wikipedia as well, preferably after having your old Commons account renamed so you'll also be credited for the images you uploaded. Huon (talk) 10:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * 13:00hrs: Aha! Commons responds to my 'root' username - my mistake was I typed in with 'r' instead of capital letter 'R'. Ok, next step! - I think I'm getting there, eventually. Very wise to have reminded me of the images: I would never have been able to access these on yahoo! Thanks for having stopped me acting precipitously (Pronacampo9 (talk) 12:12, 21 August 2013 (UTC))


 * 13:30: I have now submitted a request to change my username re: --Rafaelcarmen (talk) 12:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC) I (successfully) changed my username Rafaelcarmen --> to Pronacampo9 some time ago. However, wiki Commons still uses my 'old' username (Rafaelcarmen) and I want to create a 'global' account using Special:MergeAccount. So, what I am requesting is to please, make my present Pronacampo9 username universal/global. thanks (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 12:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC))

User:Desiderata45 re:references for List of Golden Plate awardees
Dear Huon, I hope I am sending this message correctly. I really appreciate your message regarding finding an official list of Golden Plate awardees. The Academy of Achievement website has 4 pages listing their Golden Plate Awardees. Are these pages acceptable as a reference? Appreciate your help! The pages are below: 1961-1976 1977-1992 1993-2007 2008-2012 --Desiderata45 (talk) 13:43, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * For the mere list of awardees these sources should do well. Of course they cannot help establish that the award is notable in the first place (since they're primary sources), but I expect we already have other sources for that. Huon (talk) 21:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello

 * First of all I don't know Misconceptions2 that well. I was contacted by Josepaulopineda on skype and was asked by him to help make articles about Manga and Anime on wikipedia. I agreed to this as I am a huge anime enthusiast. I also told some of my friends if they would be interested in helping such as "Article contribute". I was never offered any money for this. Though it would be nice if I was. Josepaulopineda told me that Misconceptions2 and some other people are also creating anime articles, I was told if I need any help I should ask him or Misconceptions2. Josepaulopineda told me he also contacted Marie013, however I dont know this person and I am not the sock puppet of any of those accounts. Josepaulopineda can better explain this spider web, he probably has links to a lot of those accounts who have been creating anime articles. Me and Jose have only worked with people who made anime related aarticles. Those people who edited other articles and voted on articles have nothing to do with me or Jose --Johnmorales777 (talk) 14:15, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Changing Username
Sunday 25 Aug: the change of username of both the person before and after me has been done/executed. If there is a problem with my request, should I not have been told about it by now? (Still cant 'go Spanish' RE: Error de inicio de sesión: No hay ningún usuario llamado «pronacampo9». Asegúrate de que lo has escrito correctamente, o usa el formulario de abajo para crear una nueva cuenta de usuario.) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2013 (UTC))


 * Sorry, I should have checked that. I think you didn't fill out the OldUsername and NewUsername fields; the people renaming accounts may not have understood what you want. You should probably edit the section commons:Commons:Changing username/Current requests and change all instances of "OldUsername" to "Rafaelcarmen" and "NewUsername" to "Pronacampo9" (without the quotation marks in both cases). Huon (talk) 14:18, 25 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Great! & done - 'hasta la vista' (Pronacampo9 (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2013 (UTC))


 * Monday 19:00hrs: I got a notification of re: below (josepaulo) on my personal email & don't know what to make of it, starting with whether 'it' (re: Invitation Teahouse) is addressed to you or to me?? PS: from the 'Username change' page: no change (Pronacampo9 (talk) 18:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC))
 * Josepaulopineda's message is not related to you; I think the notification is a kind of bug that happens when a new section is added immediately after your latest comment - that's falsely interpreted as someone replying to you and you get notified. Regarding the Commons, I'm not really an expert over there; I can try to find a Commons bureaucrat to speed things up, but I doubt I'll be successful - I currently don't even know who the Commons bureaucrats are. Huon (talk) 04:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Tuesday 27: Thanks, Huon – yes, that’s what I thought but ‘Invitation to Teahouse’ and the ‘strange’ content of the title prompted  me to make sure.


 * As for http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Changing_username: there are a lot of “In Progress” requests on that page (including mine), some dating back a month (and longer). Some of those ‘in progress’ received a curt reply from the one or another change administrator, but most seem to have been ‘left hanging’ (indefinitely?) – (remember the ‘hanging chads’ of the 1st George Bush election?)  I have been toying with the idea of putting in a new request, just for the sake of flagging up my name and telling em ‘hey I’m here’ but I don’t know whethere this is a good idea. I have done quite a bit of work on the Spanish ‘courier’ text, but a bit annoying as I cannot ‘test’ whether it all ‘works’ – the equivalents of  the English (harvnb), for example, is {harvnp}) (nota al pie de la pagina), and all the refs such as ‘cite book’ (cita libro) and ‘first’ (apellido) and ‘last’ (nombre) have to be rewritten in Spanish, and much more – but not being able to ‘test them out’ is a bother, to say the least. Ah well, patience. . . PS: I just got a short note from Chris (Van Dam) – just back from Peru, he says. And no, Dutch is not his forte: he was born in Chile and only lived for 1 year in Holland.(Pronacampo9 (talk) 07:44, 27 August 2013 (UTC))


 * PS I just noticed that only one Commons administrator seems to be 'active' on the Change Username page (Re: Russavia http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Russavia). Which is a bit surprising (as I would have expected this to be a 'shared' job?)(Pronacampo9 (talk) 11:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC))


 * Renaming users takes more than the regular administrator toolset; I don't know how many of the bureaucrats with the necessary rights the Commons have. Russavia may well be the only one working on that task. Huon (talk) 17:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Re: Hello Dschwen: thanks for your instruction. I checked Step 5 as requested and both "Rafaelcarmen" and "Pronacampo9" are definitely mine. My request was first made on 21 August. Grateful if you could tell me if there is anything else you want me to do? (92.25.187.97 18:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 18:33, 27 August 2013 (UTC))
 * :: Tue 17.25hrs: there has just been some activity on Change Username. When contacting “Dschwen” my Username came up as a number?

Copy: Did you provide the diff link to an edit that confirms this? --Dschwen (talk) 19:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)Hello again: I have now completed phase 2 of the Step 5 process. I have pasted the url string in the "Change Username" main page as my own name does not come up in 'Edit'. Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3APronacampo9&diff=570433522&oldid=569079245 (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2013 (UTC))
 * Latest (fyi: I feel I have to keep you in the loop now!)

PS: Commons did not recognize Pronacampo9, hence the numbers in the Username tildes to Dschwen (Pronacampo9 (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2013 (UTC))

Rafaelcarmen → Pronacampo9[edit]
 * 21.55hrs: "DONE"!

Status:    Done (Pronacampo9 (talk) 20:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC))

--
 * 22.05hrs: errrr: Dschwen just approved my Status change. However when I try to log in @ wiki espanol, 'Pronacampo9' still is not recognized. Q: Am I missing something? (Pronacampo9 (talk) 21:08, 27 August 2013 (UTC))


 * The next step is linking your renamed Commons account to your English Wikipedia account and in the process creating a global account that will also allow you to edit the Spanish Wikipedia. The place to do so is Special:MergeAccount: That special page should allow you to create a global account and to also link the Commons account to that global account (you may have to enter the Commons account's password). With the global account you should then be able to log into the Spanish Wikipedia (and all others you may want to edit).
 * Renaming the Commons account was a necessary precondition because otherwise you would possibly have ended up with both the global account and the old commons account without a possibility to later merge them. Huon (talk) 22:22, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

--
 * At last! It looks like I am now 'accepted/able' in both English and Spanish 'homes' (a few more hurdles to make the 'red' Username and talk (discusiones) go 'black' in Spanish. Grateful you steered me thru all of this - awesome! (Pronacampo9 (talk) 06:09, 28 August 2013 (UTC))

Marie013 has deceived you
See this video evidence: http://www.sendspace.com/file/p7cqyc. I could not find you in IRC--Josepaulopineda (talk) 16:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * This video is utterly useless as evidence of anything. According to the timestamp it postdates Marie013's comments at the SPI, and that seems consistent with the content. Where else would Marie013 have said things Misconceptions2 would want removed? A desire to see someone banned is entirely understandable if you just scammed her out of $250. Huon (talk) 04:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It does prove something. It proves that Marie013 was lying about misconceptions2, she said the person she was talking to on skype was misconceptions2 and he was the one who told her to do these edits. But this proves she knew she wasn't talking to misconceptions2 on skype and is just trying to get the user banned because she has beef with Josepaulopienda. She was also asked if she did or not not say "il see to it he gets banned", and she deceptively avoided the question. Marie013 should be banned from wikipedia for lying and trying to get an innocent user banned for no reason what so ever other than having beef with the users friend.--Sinjanthu (talk) 17:53, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Sinjanthu, how exactly are you involved in this mess? How can you tell from the video that the person participating in that Skype conversation is User:Marie013? How can you tell the entire video isn't made up in whole cloth? Assuming the video is genuine and "Madel I" is indeed User:Marie013, how can you tell who the other participant in that conversation is? And even assuming all that is true, according to Misconceptions2 himself, the person Marie013 spoke to via IRC claimed to have made edits made by Misconceptions2 - thus assuming that that person indeed was Misconceptions2 and not someone else seems at worst a good-faith mistake, not a lie. Huon (talk) 19:21, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

hey
I have just been helping make anime topic articles --Raihaneng (talk) 20:45, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * No, you have been helping make a linkfarm. You haven't made a single edit to an article, and that linkfarm will not be turned into an article either. Huon (talk) 04:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

POV pushing and Poor sourcing
Recently, you undid a revert that I made. I suggest you review the Wikipedia articles on POV pushing and poor sourcing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greengrounds (talk • contribs) 11:21, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Also I have checked out some of your previous edits and have noticed a pattern where you remove easily verifiable information because it is unsourced. If you want to help with Wikipedia please try to be a little more constructive. Again, I've done the homework for you on Abdelnour. I undid your refert and provided sourcing for you. You're welcome. Greengrounds (talk) 11:56, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * If you so graciously correct me, you should take a little more care with what you actually do. Describing someone as a "con artist" without a reliable source to back it up is a BLP violation, and the source you found is a primary source, something we explicitly should not use per WP:BLPPRIMARY: "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person." This particular paragraph is even copy-pasted from the primary source. We already cover that same incident based on secondary sources, so there's no need to use primary sources anyway. I'll thus re-remove that content, which is clearly not appropriate for Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 14:24, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me
Hi Huon, thank you for helping me with the article List of highest-grossing Indian films worldwide, it's most appreciated. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

"Killed in the bud"
Taichi http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario_Discusi%C3%B3n:Taichi blocked my “Laboratorio Organizacional” Spanish title even though the Spanish starting page had told me I was free to create it. I suspect the reason is the existing English article. I already wrote to Taishi for clarifications, but, this being a new contact, I don’t know whether or when I will get a reply. The reason I am telling you is because you may have more insight in these matters than me. Apart from an existing English article, I may unwittingly have transgressed other wiki rules, especially regarding other language-“clones”? Here’s what I just sent to Taichi: Hola Taichi: Soy el creador del artículo Inglés "Organzation Workshop". Quiero publicar una versión en español, pero mi título "Laboratorio Organizacional" ha sido bloqueado Espero que usted puede darme algunas aclaraciones? NB: VEASE TAMBIEN Mi pagina usuario ingles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pronacampo9/sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Pronacampo9 (Pronacampo9 (discusión) 10:11 28 (Pronacampo9 (talk) 10:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC))


 * I don't think I can help you much with that - I don't speak Spanish and don't know if and how the Spanish Wikipedia's rules differ from the English ones. That said, the deletion reason had nothing to do with the English article; the given reason was "G3: Páginas promocionales" - Taichi apparently felt that the article was more of a promotional piece than a neutral source of information. I can't see the deleted article's content, but if it was similar to the sandbox draft you wrote here, it may have lacked context - that draft could almost describe some sort of team-building exercise as held by corporate motivational speakers, of the "send your employees to my seminar and I'll teach them to be much better workers!" kind. I wouldn't be surprised if some motivational speakers created spam articles to advocate their personal brand of such team-building exercises for personal gain, and Taichi might have mistaken your article for something like that. Of course this is mere speculation based on Taichi's deletion rationale and the sandbox draft. I expect Taichi himself will reply shortly; he seems to be active at least once a day. Huon (talk) 11:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

PS: thanks to Dschwen and you, at least the Spanish User "works"! (Pronacampo9 (talk) 13:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC))
 * Thanks for this (again!) Huon! While awaiting Taichi’s response, your guess does indeed sound quite plausible. My most pressing concern, starting a new process, is to be faced, at the end of that process, with a “closely paraphrased” rejection. I am reassured that this does not apply when publishing a foreign language ‘fac simile’ (or clone as I called it). I indeed only wrote the Laboratorio’s ‘opening’ sentence. Being faced with a ‘paraphrase’ rejection at the end of a long process would have been much harder to take! So thanks for reassuring me and, indeed, we will have to wait for Taichi’s reply.


 * Creating a translation of a Wikipedia article in another language is not a problem; Wikipedia's license allows such re-use. Paraphrasing copyrighted sources too closely may well be an issue (of copyright violation); paraphrasing Wikipedia content only requires attribution. So you'd have to leave a note where the translation came from, either in the edit summary or on the translated article's talk page.
 * I don't know whether the Spanish Wikipedia has an equivalent of the Articles for creation system, but if you want to work on your article before putting it "live" you can create a sub-page of your userpage and create a draft there, say es:Usuario:Pronacampo9/Laboratorio Organizacional. Then you won't have to worry about a half-finished article getting deleted. Huon (talk) 15:02, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

But, as you can as you can see on my Spanish 'Contributions' page, they still suspect me of trying to promote my $10,000-a head fee Corporate Bankers’ Workshop. If only! (ojala in Spanish – from the arabic “Insh-Allah!”) RE: 15:38 28 ago 2013 (dif · hist). . (+1207)‎ . . N Usuario:Pronacampo9/Laboratorio Organizacional ‎ (Página creada con «Laboratorio Organizacional EL Laboratorio Organizacional (LO) en Español y Portugués, - llamado Organization Workshop (OW) en Inglès -, es un evento de capaci...») (edición actual) (Etiqueta: posible promocional) (Pronacampo9 (talk) 15:52, 28 August 2013 (UTC))
 * This is pure genius Huon - I felt very handicapped not being able to 'test out' my Spanosh etc.

Thanks and Question
Thank you for helping me with my resizing photo question yesterday. From my sandbox, I submitted the article for creation. It said it had a duplicate name. I added the biography name to the title and it said to move the article under article creation, which I did.

Could you tell me if my article is correct and in the list to be considered, or if there is a problem that I need to fix? I hate to wait around three weeks to find out I've done something wrong. CAChristiansen (talk) 14:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I have moved the draft to the preferred title, WT:Articles for creation/Cindy A. Christiansen. The draft's main problem is not the title (which could easily be fixed by the reviewer) but the lack of reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as newspaper articles about Christiansen (not interviews; those aren't independent) or published reviews of her books. We need significant coverage in such sources, both to allow our readers to verify the article's content and to establish that Christiansen is notable enough for an encyclopedia article in the first place. Thus the draft will not be accepted in its current state. If you are Christiansen, as your username suggests, you should also have a look at Wikipedia's guideline on conflicts of interest - writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged. Huon (talk) 15:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help in moving article! I have added a journal reference from a local newspaper. Hope that works. Have a great day.CAChristiansen (talk) 17:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Left you a response
I left you the response to your question on my talkpage. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 07:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Dave Okumu
Hi, this is just a message to let you know that I have restored Dave Okumu, because he passes WP:MUSICBIO criterion #6b. If you still want him deleted, use AfD. Thank you.-- Laun  chba  ller  13:08, 30 August 2013 (UTC)