User talk:Icowrich

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 02:14, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note. I am trying to fix those instances, now. --Icowrich (talk) 02:18, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Your disavowal of this edit
If you did not make this edit, someone else using your account did. Please review the record of your contributions to determine if this is the only one. You may need to take other measures if your account has been compromised.LeadSongDog come howl  06:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Jack McDevitt reversion
I reverted your edit since your cited source is incorrect. It listed Cauldron as being up for the 2009 Nebula, for instance, which is wrong. Cauldron is up for the 2008 Nebula, which is presented in 2009, the same error runs throughout the source you cite. See, for instance, the official Nebula site for correct dates of his Nebula Award and nominations. I would suggest going back through your edits to make sure you cite correct sources rather than unreliable ones and correct anything you inadvertently changed to reflect incorrect information. Shsilver (talk) 01:31, 15 April 2009 e(UTC)


 * I now see that there is a bit of inconsistency with regards to Nebula dating. The book to which you refer, Cauldron, was actually published in 2007, but the award will be given in 2009.  Although the Nebula web site sometimes refers to it as a 2008 award and at other times refers to it as an award "presented in 2009" see example here:, Locus categorizes it as a 2009 award  for two reasons:


 * 1) to keep it consistent with other SF awards, so that a 2008 Hugo winner is also a 2008 Nebula winner, and so on, and


 * 2) because both sites (Worlds Without End and Locus) use the presentation year as their point of reference for categorization.


 * Would it be more valid, in your opinion, if the referenced sites said "awards presented in 2009" instead of "2009 awards"? --Icowrich (talk) 02:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No. With regards to the Nebulas, the awards presented in 2009 are the 2008 Nebula Awards. I would not consider Worlds without end to be an accurate site and you should follow the listing on the Nebula site at the page I pointed you to and that should be the source for the Nebula Awards. I'm currently looking at a Nebula that was presented in 2005 in Chicago and it clearly states on the award "Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America Nebula Award 2004." Shsilver (talk) 03:25, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I tried to get the same data using the Nebula site, but I can't find lists of nominees...only winners. Locus does have the nominees, but they organize by date of presentation just like the other site did.  Can you find a list of nominees on the Nebula site?


 * Despite the note on the front page that there is a link for them, they aren't currently up. I exchanged e-mails earlier today with Mark Kelly, who maintains the Locus site about it and his comment essentially that they know the date isn't the official one, but their policy is to list the year in which the presentation is made.  The correct years can be found on Award web (and for what its worth, earlier this year, I had to correct the actual Nebula Award site when they entered the wrong year, as you can see if you scroll down to the comments on this page). Now I have to get back to work helping to plan this year's award presentation. Shsilver (talk) 17:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for looking into that. I have modified past edits as you suggested and will no longer use the Locus method for categorizing award dates, as Wikipedia seems to favor the official dating nomenclature to Locus' method.  I also shot an email to Worlds Without End so that they are aware of the discrepancy.


 * UPDATE: Worlds Without End responded by saying they will no longer use the Locus method of dating awards...as a result of this thread!

Science Fiction: 100 Best Novels
Please take a look at this code in Science Fiction: The 100 Best Novels (as I have revised it):  I doubt the now-HIDDEN words are simply stray and I guess you mean to do something with the named reference. See also reference 3.

I think I have improved the External links entries.

Do you know whether WWEnd-Lists gives similar coverage of Pringle's Modern Fantasy: The 100 Best Novels? I didn't find it in a quick search. --P64 (talk) 02:00, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * http://www.worldswithoutend.com/lists.asp
 * This page is the natural target for reference 2 as it currently reads, and for name=WWEnd-Lists. Evidently WWEnd does not yet cover Pringle's 'sequel' Modern Fantasy or Xanadu's 'sequel' Horror: The 100 Best Books. --P64 (talk) 13:57, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Your changes do seem more descriptive than what I originally put there. WWEnd doesn't have the fantasy list, but they've been adding lists at a pretty fast clip.  If and when I notice it posting, I'll let you know.

License tagging for File:Logo pyr.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Logo pyr.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
Hi. When you recently edited BSFA Award, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Christopher Priest and The Islanders (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.


 * Thanks for pointing it out. I corrected both errors, although there is no article for The Islanders, so I just delinked that altogether. --Icowrich (talk) 23:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

EIA data
Hi there! I saw your recent edits to Ivanpah Solar Power Facility that added https://eia.gov data. I've been thinking about the EIA data for awhile, so I started a discussion at WikiProject Energy and was hoping that you might participate. Cxbrx (talk) 17:48, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)