User talk:Julia W/Archive 4

Oops!
Sorry, turns out we revert-conflicted and I reverted your reversion... -- Dylan 620  (contribs, logs) 21:56, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That's okay, I figured it was something like that! Thanks for taking care of the vandalism on my user page, :)   Mae din \talk 21:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Scottaneil's unique 'honesty' reminded me of Meta: Friends of gays should not be allowed to edit articles :) Chienlit (talk) 11:54, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm so pleased that my user page was host to his insecurity. Presumably the more they "get it out of their system", the faster the maturing takes place!  Suits my logic, anyway, :)   Mae din \talk 13:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Successful featured picture nomination
Indeed, I completely forgot I even had a Wikipedia account until a friend of mine wanted to correct the grammar on a locked article.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PerryTachett (talk • contribs) 22:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Ursus C-451

 * Thank you!  Mae din \talk 08:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Signposts, flying dragons, Mae din  voyages, and Chienlit chivalry
Thanks for your feedback regarding the origin of the and  templates. I now know that the adopted term is List-defined references. Doesn't have quite the same ring as the names we came up with. 'Tis surely somewhat surreal sensing a semblance of enlightenment and anticlimax in the one moment. A touch of mild cognitive dissonance perhaps. I have amended my user page to reflect this new knowledge, along with some examples of articles using the style either exclusively or in combination with other styles. Regards Wotnow (talk) 02:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Chivalrous editors on mae din  voyages must necessarily use signposts or they and their flying dragons might get lost. And I agree, list-defined references lacks the je ne sais quoi of your (and Chienlit's) far more adventurous nomenclature, but the innovation itself is still quintessentially attractive.  Reading through the straw poll for the new reference formatting, I was surprised how many opposed it; here I thought it would be universally accepted as A Good Thing.  Thanks for your message, and sorry for the Signpost disappointment, :-)   Mae din \talk 08:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Cheers. The opposition numbers didn't seem that high to me. For option the option that was implemented (option #1), 12 at time of the result (02:14 26 July 2009), with number 13 being posted after the result posting. This compared to 41 in favour. Just more extensive discussion within the opponent commentary. Option #2 had more opponents (14) than proponents (6), probably because it seemed to add a layer of complexity that could create new problems. Conversely, the option chosen does a very similar thing to the templates, but is somewhat simpler to implement, as GyroMagician and I found in our Malvern excursion, as we frenetically foraged through the forest of fixes before finding Signposts. Not that the exercise was a bad thing. Our attempts, and my attempt at making sense of it all, is as far as I can tell, the first time anyone has tried to pull it all together in one place for other poor sods to make sense of or explore in more depth as they choose, including unambiguously dealing with straw-man arguments based on genuine misapprehensions. Wotnow (talk) 10:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the welcome, my English is not very good so do not cooperate much in wording. Thanks again.--Beat 768 (talk) 20:00, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * If you need help translating from Spanish, I can help.--Beat 768 (talk) 20:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

self harm
ON the subject of the image that could be fake please look here. link cheers--Guerillero (talk) 21:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!
I responded the message you left at my Commons talk page at Commons. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Mila, that's sweet of you, :-) And you're welcome, though I don't think I was enough help, only a little bit of help, maybe.  Just doing what felt like the right thing to me.  Be well!   Mae din \talk 07:54, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Let's Adopt recommendations 2
Maedin, yes yes, I noticed it sorry. I am such an old woman sometimes. I did leave a message to her, thank you and sorry if I caused you any confusion :)

Retinue (talk) 09:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

templates for list-defined references
Hi  Mae din . Some technical issues have arisen relating to the use of the ((r)) template to achieve list-defined references, that we weren't aware of in our earlier discussions, nor in our good-faith implementation of the template. That goes for all of us implementing it. However, it turns out that the ((r)) template poses some technical problems for bots and scripts, causing some of them to not work properly.

It has been pointed out that list-defined references can also be achieved using templates, which don't cause any difficulties for bots and scripts. I think this is both a fair point, and the easiest solution.

I don't know about you, but I didn't envisage technical problems caused by the use of the ((r)) template. My own purpose was simply to declutter article text and make it easier to edit the text and the references. This is the same for GyroMagician. We explored a couple of ways of doing this, before settling on what we now know are list-defined references, courtesy of your kind feedback.

Because my introduction to list-defined references was via the ((r)) template, and the current technical issues had not yet surfaced, I naturally assumed that the ((r)) template was the way one achieved list-defined references. Per my user page, I did come to realise that the Harvard templates could also serve the purpose of decluttering articles and grouping the references at the bottom. But the Harvard templates, while useful in some contexts, can impose a degree of cumbersomeness over and above that of the list-defined reference method, meaning the latter is a more streamlined method. No problems with that.

Given my newly acquired awareness that ((r)) templates pose technical difficulties, whereas the pre-existing templates do the job just as easily, but don't cause technical difficulties, I have no difficulty acknowledging that and amending the ((r)) templates to templates. My reason of course is that I was not in the business of promoting any particular template, but using a suitable Wikitext to achieve the goal of creating list-defined references in some articles, insofar as list-defined references are a benefit to those articles and seen as a benefit.

The irony in all this is that it was our naive use of the ((r)) template which brought to the fore some technical issues which hitherto weren't salient. I have now updated a number of articles with the templates, and if you like, I would be quite happy to do the same with articles which you've worked on. I think it far more prudent to do that, than to cause unnecessary headaches for others. Regards Wotnow (talk) 03:37, 5 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Wotnow, thank you for your message. I was also unaware that the use of r would have any technical drawbacks.  I primarily only used the template because it decluttered the main body of the article and seemed neat and tidy.  I'm sorry to have led you and Chienlit astray; if I'd had any idea of its negatives, I'd have advised against its use.  I appreciate your offer to alter the articles where I've used r, but I'll do that myself now.  Thank you!   Mae din \talk 12:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Cheers  Mae din . No need for an apology. You acted entirely in good faith, as did Chienlit, myself, GyroMagician and others. None of us foresaw this. As I say, the irony is that it was the increasing usage of ((r)) courtesy of those of us using it in good faith, that brought the issues to light. That in itself is not a bad thing. And I daresay those raising the issues were themselves acting in good faith. Also, I see that GyroMagician is developing a referencing page for the Worcestershire project. GyroMagician is in the unique position of having worked through the pros and cons of referencing styles when we worked on the Malvern, Worcestershire article (note that at the time of the pros & cons discussion, the Malvern article was using the reference layout per Shakespeare article, hence some discussion about getting notes links to work).


 * If we look at the history behind the good work that GyroMagician is doing right now, it goes something like this;
 * Maedin puts Chienlit onto the concept of list-defined references. Wotnow encounters an application of this by Chienlit (Vincenz Priessnitz), and tries it with good results. GyroMagician encounters this from Wotnow's application in Malvern Water. After some experimentation and related discussion in Malvern, Worcestershire it is adopted for that article. Wotnow develops a user page to brings together some relevant information in one place. Applications continue. Along the way, someone points out issues pertaining to the use of the ((r)) template for list-defined references, and points out that templates can do the same job without any problems. GyroMagician becomes aware of this, and having also first-hand awareness of the process of working through the pros and cons of using list-defined references, creates a page for the Worcestershire project, that will help others who may contemplate using it. Now GyroMagician is in a unique position here. He knows the background, having worked through the various issues in a very healthy, skeptical fashion (used in a healthy way, skepticism is always constructive, not destructive). Lots of people stand to benefit from that. So what you started was with good intention, and good will come of it. Now that's pretty neat. Kind regards Wotnow (talk) 01:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Russian language (team-work)
Hi, Maedin! Today I saw your reply written in August :). See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spoken_Wikipedia.

Yes, I am fan and user of Audacity :). And I like to make compilations of suitable music (of course with open license :) with the voice. E.g. You can listen my last work with music background: File:Ru-Russians.ogg.

Now I am recording the huge article Россия (Russia). It requires some time (month?)... but I hope that the next article we can make together. We can start to think - which articles are best in English-Russian part of English Wikipedia :) -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 08:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Giraffe feeding, Tanzania.jpg
Hey, Any thoughts about the edit? --Muhammad (talk) 15:33, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Muhammad, I've updated my vote to include the edit; I suppose if the original had been presented as the edited version, I'd have supported, so there seems no fair reason to withhold support now.  Mae din \talk 16:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) --Muhammad (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Counter-Vandalism
Thanks --Muhammad (talk) 00:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, :)  Mae din \talk 09:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages
I reverted your edit to Honeycomb (disambiguation) because it does not contain a navigable link. Disambiguation pages exist to help navigate Wikipedia, not provide definitions. The fact you added would be welcome if it were linked to an appropriate article—or a section within a ``concrete`` article. See the disambiguation guideline. Thanks. —EncMstr (talk) 18:01, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'm aware. I was sure I could find an article for it, but alas, there are none.  I left it because I intended to create one, but you're right to undo it for now.   Mae din \talk 18:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

TUSC token 6a0a884c8165dd2288f06ac0d811e38e
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Final discussion for Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
 * 1) Proposal to Close This RfC
 * 2) Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip  03:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Erlebnispark Tripsdrill
Hello! Your submission of Erlebnispark Tripsdrill at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 16:32, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, John, I've responded there.  Mae din \talk 17:14, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Meat seller in Kabul.jpg
Why did it get promoted? Even counting the weak oppose as half vote I count 4.5 supports. Wasn't the minimum 5?  franklin  21:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Franklin, :) Thanks for asking; in this case I'm pretty sure it's a pass.  You're referring to quorum, which means the minimum number of supports necessary is 5.  But that's different from the ratio of supports to opposes that determine a promotion.  It's not taking 7 supports and subtracting the 2.5 opposes, it's done on a 2/3 supermajority (more or less).  7 supports requires over 3 opposes before it approaches a non-pass.  Even if it had only 5 supports and one full oppose, it would still pass because the failing would call for >2 opposes.  Make sense?  Sorry if I haven't explained it very well! :)   Mae din \talk 21:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No, crystal clear. It is a quotient not a difference. I wasn't clear on that. Thanks.  franklin   21:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, :)  Mae din \talk 22:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Greetings and salutations
Hello Maedin, I came across your page seeking for an answer, as I was seeking for another answer. Both unanswered so far. I was expecting an answer from Okip, so I went to his page. There I saw a posting from Coffee, which surprised me as being associated with coffee as I am. Thus I went to his page and was very impressed with his curriculum and graphics. I asked him a question, but did not get an answer. Looking for his answer, I found the name and page of Jujutacular, which are equally impressive. And from there, reviewing his/her talk page, I found your name and page. You also have very impressive curriculum vitae and accomplished editing record. Wow! You have a lovely page. I am a novice editor, just started back in December, and already got in trouble once. But I am trying to learn. Just wanted to say “hola”, as I saw you speak Spanish (so do I). I speak a little English and have been trying to learn French and Italian all my life; maybe someday I’ll learn them. With kindest regards, --Grancafé (talk) 18:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Buenos días, Grancafé, thanks for dropping by to say hi! Thank you also for saying nice things, . I don't really speak Spanish; I know some vocabulary and can read simple Spanish okay, but I can only just about tell you me llamo es Julie, :)  I'm also trying to learn French, but am not finding much time for it, unfortunately.


 * Sorry to hear of your earlier "trouble", but mistakes happen and I'm sure you've learned from it. For a new editor, you're doing well, :).  If you ever have any questions or feel in need of guidance, consider me someone you can ping anytime.


 * P.S. You're being too modest; your English is very good, :)  Mae din \talk 20:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello Maedin. May I call you Julie? I rather talk to real people than to masks. I understand the reasoning behind it, but still, I rather have a more personal relationship. Thank you very much for your prompt and kind response. You seem to be a nice person. Most editors around here are either too stiff or too busy. I have found a couple of nice mentors, but they are involved in major projects. Thus, it is nice to find someone nice like you. Sometimes I feel like in a labyrinth, with gremlins and goblins, like in “The Lord of the Ring”. To be quite honest with you, you are more like a friend, my first friend in Wiki land or Wiki world. I did read a little bit about you, and I will study your pages some more. About languages, because I am Spanish speaking, I can understand about 70% of Italian and 50% of French, but I can’t write or read either one. Hopefully one day. Going back to wiki, and like I said before, you have a lovely page and an impressive curriculum vitae. I love all the graphic designs and I am impressed with all your awards and barnstars. I do have one, by the way; an act of kindness from my mentor. If you go to my user page (perhaps you already did), you will find a lot about me, mainly regarding Colombian coffee. I will keep it short for today, as I don’t want to take much of your time. You are also a very busy girl, working, studying and editing. I love to chat with friends and make new acquaintances. Once again, thanks for your friendly and warm welcome. Till next time, best regards, --Grancafé (talk) 23:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Maedin, I visited your user page again and explored your sub pages. Your page is lovely, most interesting and fun. Amazing curriculum and great graphics. You are a very accomplished girl. Congratulations! I also sent you an e-mail. Have a great day. Best, --> Grancafé  ( parley ) 12:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Grancafé, I prefer Julie, but of course I’m fine with either. Sorry for the delay in replying, your message was left past my bedtime in this part of the world, and after that comes work!  Now I’m on my lunch break and can answer.


 * Please don’t be so impressed with me or with my pages, I know that I don’t deserve it! My user page took guess work and a lot of previewing; I had to ask questions, and my adopter from when I was a new user, SoWhy, helped me with the coding, too.  I got some ideas from the user page design centre and selected some icons from there.  I’m glad you like it, though!  Some very generous and kind people gave me those barnstars, I’m still not sure I deserved them, but very pleased to have them, anyway, :)


 * As for others being too busy to be kind, I know just want you mean. I dislike officious and discourteous, it’s never any fun, so I try to be more relaxed.  Wikipedia as a labyrinth is a good metaphor and is certainly how I’ve viewed it on occasion.  There are still some areas which I rarely visit and which still feel that way for me, WP:RfC and WP:AN/I being two of them, and dispute resolutions are thankfully still foreign to me.  I’ll happily admit to being blithely ignorant of 99% of wikidrama at any given time and quite determined for it to stay that way.  Too much going on in my life to bicker and pick petty arguments with others, :)


 * I received your email, thank you. Hopefully I will be able to reply tonight!   Mae din \talk 13:35, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello again! Mil gracias por tu amable y pronta respuesta. I truly appreciate your kindness and sweet manners. Like I said before, I think I found a friend in you! You have made a positive impact and have changed my perspective as to the ways of the wikiworld. For the last two months I used to panic every time I Log in, as one does not know where the booby traps are or the arrows coming from (I have to tell you something funny). But now, I look forward to see if you have left me a message. You have earned another barnstar, for your kindness and gentle spirit. Hasta pronto, -- Grancafé  ( parley ) 14:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi sweet Julie, this is just to tell you that Jujutacular helped me fix my new signature. I am very appreciative by Juju's help and advice. Hope you are having a great day, -- Grancafé  * parley 16:00, 4 March 2010 (UTC)


 * “The heart has reasons of which reason knows not” Blaise Pascal. I thought you might like these songs from Lhasa, I’m going in, J’ arrive en ville , and Who by fire Yours truly, -- Grancafé  * parley 00:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello Julie, I noticed that you have improved and upgraded your "wisdom quotes" box in your User talk page. All the quotes are amazing and insightful and, the whole context looks awesome. I enjoy visiting your pages in search for wisdom and inspiration. You have done a wonderful job! Congratulations!  Grancafé  * parley 17:00, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Kindness Barnstar Award

 * Oh, it's lovely!! Thank you!  Haha, you're too nice, :)   Mae din \talk 16:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Bangalore
Hey, I finally went to Vidhana Soudha and the Karnataka High Court, (they are opposite to each other). So while it was golden hour for the high court, the Soudha building was facing away from the sun. In the end I managed to get some good pics for both though. Here's File:Vidhana Soudha sunset.jpg. After working for more than half an hour stitching and editing the high court pic, PS crashed and I hadn't saved so I will put that up later. Bangalore palace, hopefully next week. --Muhammad (talk) 18:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Ooh, thanks, great work on Vidhana Soudha! The sunset and birds are a nice touch.  Sorry to hear about PS crashing on you (it always happens when you've spent 30 minutes, not ten!), but I see that Karnataka turned out well, too, :)   Mae din \talk 22:19, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Desargues theorem.svg

 * Did I get the credit right here? I wasn't sure if the creator of the original upon which the alt was based deserved anything. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:41, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * My response at Makeemlighter's talk

Featured picture candidates/Golden Gate Bridge and San Francisco skyline
Hi, This looks like a promote to me even when considering the new users' supports as half. --Muhammad (talk) 14:45, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Muhammad, could you please explain why you think it should be a promote? By my calculation, 9 full supports and 5 full opposes is 64.3%, which is shy of the 66.7% required.  If you do count two of the votes as halves, it looks even less like a promote.  If I'm missing something, do let me know.   Mae din \talk 21:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry, my bad. I missed one oppose. BTW, thanks for creating the flower article --Muhammad (talk) 03:43, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It's okay, I figured it was something like that, ;-)  Mae din \talk 08:52, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Wow, that is an interesting fact. Thanks for doing most of the hard work :) --Muhammad (talk) 14:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ulrich Zwingli from Wildhaus, Switzerland
Hello Julie, I have seen and heard all the amazing projects and wonderful works that you do. You seem to be very gifted, talented and appreciative of beauty, art and music. I also like Ludovico Einaudi. Furthermore, I also understand that you are a very busy person and involved in many activities. Thus, whenever you have some free time, I am going to ask you to please help me design my new User page. Many thanks, --Zwinglio (talk) 04:30, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Zwinglio, thanks for your message. Unfortunately, I am not good at designing user pages.  I do not know enough of the code required.  It took me far too long to make mine.  Why don't you take a look at the user page design centre, or you can ask someone to design a user page for you at trading spaces.  Also, don't forget that this is Wikipedia, almost everything is free!  If you see a user page design that you like, you are welcome to copy it.  The minimum that you would need to do is change the text and leave a small note letting others know who you copied the design from.  You might find lots of user pages you like at the user page hall of fame.  Hope that helps, and welcome.   Mae din \talk 10:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Julie, thank you very much for your help, guidance and sound advise. My user page is looking very nice. You have been most kind and helpful. Thanks,  Zwin glio \pray 18:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Julie, I sent you a confidential and urgent e-mail. Kindly please review and advise. Thanks,  Zwin glio \pray 19:50, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of ACC templates
Hello! A few ACC templates have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the templates' entry on the Templates for discussion page. This notice is because you are an ACC admin. Thanks! Avic enna sis @ 04:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Closure of Featured picture candidates/Gunnar Sønsteby
Sorry about that, I wasn't aware of the process, since it's my first nomination. But as you said, it was pretty uncontroversial. Lampman (talk) 07:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Yellow-crowned Night Heron
Please respond, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terry Foote (talk • contribs) 23:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Picture peer review/Anna Chakvetadze
Hi. I was wondering if you planned to nominate one of these images at FPC. I'm not sure if you saw jjron's or my comments. I think the action shot in particular has a decent enough chance of passing, regardless of whether you clone out the chin spot. If you want to clone out the spot, go for it, but you should nominate it in any case! Makeemlighter (talk) 07:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello! Yes, I had seen your comments and jjron's, and I looked into contacting the author of the images but then I . . . forgot, :)  I'm sorry I never replied, I appreciated the very helpful suggestions and should have.  I do think the action shot has a decent chance, but I'll try to get a larger size first.  Thank you for nudging me!   Mae din \talk 11:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/George V of Hanover and family
Thanks for nominating my File:Family George V of Hanover.jpg. Good luck for your working in the wikipedia! --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: fpc thought on nominations viewer
Both done. Gary King ( talk ) 19:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

When to appear?
Maedin, is there some way to know when the NURBS animation seen here on my talk page will appear on the Main Page? Greg L (talk) 01:20, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Greg, yes, you'll get a notification on your talk page, one or two days before the image is due on the main page. Most PsOTD appear roughly in order of promotion, and at the moment we're working through early- to mid-2009 FPs.  So you could be waiting awhile! :)   Mae din \talk 05:57, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Adam Dread
Hello Julie, My name is Adam Dread. I do appreciate the work you do with Wikipedia. I am writing you today in reference to your comments about my article, specifically questioning my "notablility" and my book. I would respectfully request that you take another look. If you "exact search" Google me you will find anywhere between 15,000 and 42,000 links, depending on the time of day. My exact search Bings are well over 5 million. In the past 6 months alone I have been on or been dpscussed on many national news shows, as well as countless major online media entertainment outlets. My books are not available on Amazon intentionally, as the are "niche" market books, and sold specifically in the intended markets. Thank tou for your time. Sincerely,

Adam Dread, Esq. adam@durhamanddread.com

Arnaud Lescure PROD
Hi there; this player meets WP:ATHLETE by having "competed at the fully professional level of a sport", as confirmed by this link. Hope this clears it up! Regards, GiantSnowman 07:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure where you are getting the "Monaco is amateur" idea from - they play in Ligue 1, the top league in France and one that has been fully-professional for many years. If you still wish to take it to AfD then please feel free, but personally I feel it would be a waste of time as the article will be kept. Regards, GiantSnowman 18:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha, no worries, glad we could clear this up quickly! Thanks, GiantSnowman 18:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for fixing the typo at User:Graham87/Import; it was there for over four months! Graham 87 12:14, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! I hesitated before editing in your user space and hoped you wouldn't mind, :)   Mae din \talk 12:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I need your help and advise
Hello Maedin, I sent you a confidential email a few days ago. Kindly please review and advise. Thanks. Best wishes,  Zwin glio \pray 16:00, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
 Lourie Pieterse  17:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/California Trail at Humboldt River
Can you clarify your participation at this nomination? Do you support/oppose either version? Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 07:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

FPC "Not promoted" instructions
As a contributor to featured picture candidates, I was wondering if you could comment on a potential change to the "Not promoted" instructions for closing nominations. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. I'm asking people to help gain consensus there. Feel free to ask anyone else to comment. Thanks!  Jujutacular  T · C 05:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Help!!
Hi. I was closing a nomination at FPC and ran into some trouble. I'd link you to the nom, but that's the trouble! The page name has the ' in it a few times, so gets italicized. Because of this, my links here and here are broken. I thought I knew how to fix this, but I've failed miserably. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hiya, I've had that problem before and had to ask for help, too! Thankfully Muhammad knew how to fix it, so I just copied what he did.  It needed funky code either side of the species name to replace the '' .  (It won't let me show you here, even with nowiki and code tags.)  Sorry for taking so long to reply, but I'm rather a lot of miles away and the sun goes down here first, :)   Mae din\ talk 08:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! Makeemlighter (talk) 22:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

FPC review: notifying participants of results
Hello Maedin, I wonder if you'd be willing to lend a hand with FPC review part 2. We're now at the results stage, and I was wondering if you'd be willing to take the time to notify at least the contributors to stage 1 of the review. You may already be aware that I'm having difficulty finding time for WP, otherwise I'd do this myself. Do let me know if you can help; otherwise I may simply have to extend the deadline or find another volunteer, so no worries if it doesn't fit into your schedule. If you do take this on, you may find it easiest to just use the same standard message for everybody - it's what I did. Thanks also for noticing my crop among the poppy set a little while ago! Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 09:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, yes, I'm happy to help. Least I can do considering the hard work and time that you've put into the review, so thanks for asking me, :)  I'll be able to start notifying them all in seven hours or so, assuming it can wait that long.  Re the poppy, you're welcome!   Mae din\ talk 11:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Finished. Hope you're okay with the wording, though I mostly nicked it from your notifications for the first stage.  I deliberately skipped Alvesgaspar, Raeky, Diliff, Makeemlighter, and Nauticashades, because they have already commented on and/or edited the results page.  Let me know if you need anything else doing.   Mae din\ talk 18:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Saint Paulin Church
Courcelles (talk) 12:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Reviewer Rights
Thanks! I appreciate it. Nautica Shad es  18:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer rights
Hi Maedin,

Saw this discussion on FPC:Talk. Not sure I fully understand the implications as it's the first I've heard about it. But have had a bit of a look through the linked pages and it appears it may gradually restrict my editing 'rights' if I don't ask for these reviewer rights. OTOH I don't really intend to sit around 'reviewing' other people's edits on contentious articles - sure I fix vandalism or whatever if I see it, but I don't have time to go hunting it down - so should I have these rights, or am I even eligible for it if I have no real intention of 'reviewing' as such? Perhaps you can advise? Thanks, --jjron (talk) 13:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hiya, there won't be much in the way of editing restrictions, at least not to begin with. As you are autoconfirmed, your edits to "pending changes" pages will still be automatically accepted and you can still undo or rollback vandalism as usual (even if it's "pending").


 * I'm not fully certain myself how it will work; there are several pages for testing, but I won't use them because I'd have to reveal my IP address.


 * The only potential conflict that I can imagine would be making edits to pages that have edits waiting to be accepted or rejected. Technically, the preceding edits should be reviewed first, and before saving your edits I think you'll be forced by the software to accept or reject the previous changes (read the last section).


 * I also won't be looking or watching for pending changes, I don't have time for that. I may never even use it during the trial.  I assume it's the same for most.  My feeling on this is that it's beneficial for as many as possible to have the rights, and once you have it, it will be ready for any future, wider implementation (which I think is very likely).  My view is don't let Wikipedia introduce editing restrictions or complications that may in some way negatively impact on you as an editor, however rare that occasion may be, without doing what you can to prevent it, protect yourself, or work with it.  So yes, by all means, have it—there's no obligation to use it.


 * I can enable rollback at the same time. You'd probably find it useful now and then.  Hope that helps, :)   Mae din\ talk 16:14, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. What you say here is pretty much in line with what I had thought after my brief reading up on it last night.


 * Yeah, I had seen that bit about reviewing pending changes. That shouldn't be that arduous; I'm not editing pages under that sort of protection that often, and then there has to have been unreviewed changes before you make you edit, so it shouldn't be an issue that often. I must say over the last year or so I've got into a bit of a habit of checking the history and reviewing preceding changes before I edit an article, especially if it's by an anon IP - it's amazing how often that picks up some vandalism that may have been sitting there for weeks or months. So this would just be a similar thing.


 * What you say about WP introducing editing restrictions that may potentially negatively impact on you at some stage was what I was thinking too, otherwise I pretty much wouldn't bother about this. In some ways I agree with it, like if it actually does help with vandalism and nonsense edits, but on the other hand I'm a bit against it cutting down on the freedom of established editors. It's kind of like having to reapply for your job; you'd think when you've made over 10,000 edits, had no blocks, disputes, whatever, there wouldn't be a lot of reason to reduce your editing rights, couldn't that be automated or something.


 * Anyway, I may as well have that. Also rollback I suppose, I have heard about that many times, but don't really know much about it, have never bothered to look it up as I can do an 'undo' anyway and have just used that, so haven't seen much need for it. Just looking at the article now, I suppose it is just like an automated undo for blatant vandalism.


 * OK, so thanks for this help. Cheers, --jjron (talk) 13:59, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi. I noticed this discussion on my watchlist. I feel pretty much like jjron does - not sure that I'd actually need the reviewer rights. I felt compelled to add my 2 cents, though, because I just encountered a situation where they would come in handy. I reverted some vandalism on a page with the pending changes thing in effect. So, as I see it, my reversion was essentially meaningless, since someone needs to approve my change anyway. I guess that means you might as well sign me up for reviewers rights, if you don't mind. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 20:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hiya M, I'm surprised that your edit to Wales had to be reviewed, :-/ I hadn't quite understood that pending changes protection goes up to a level 2, with only admin and reviewers able to edit without needing to be reviewed.  (There is a table here,, but I hadn't bothered before to expand it!)  Hopefully that protection level is used only sparingly.


 * I assume that you also wouldn't mind having rollback. I see no reason for you not to have it, you're obviously a trusted user and it makes vandalism reverting just that little bit easier.  I'll go ahead and add it, but you can always ask me (or anyone else) to remove it.   Mae din\ talk 06:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks :D Makeemlighter (talk) 15:38, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, :)  Mae din\ talk 22:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for enabling these Maedin (and I never even knew you were an Admin before; guess I'll have to be nicer to you in future ;-) ). --jjron (talk) 12:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, too. And it's okay, I don't think most know.  In fact, I keep forgetting that I am.  Power does not enthral me, ;-)   Mae din\ talk 16:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Careful: You accidentally deleted Kaldari's vote as well as your own. I've restored it. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:26, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh god, I'm so sorry!! What an idiot I am!  Thanks for fixing it, Adam.   Mae din\ talk 14:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid my fix broke something else. Heh. Physician, heal thyself. Heh. At least noone can accuse us of malice: You accidentally removed half an oppose, and I removed half a support. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha, we're both numpties, ;-) Not sure what your excuse is, but in the summer I can blame it on my hair colour. ^^  And yes, trust us to be neutral, even when we're screwing up!   Mae din\ talk 08:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Gallery order
Sorry, I didn't know, not having been here for about, what, 3/4ths of a year? If you're willing to fix it, it'd help, as I was about to take a nap. =/ Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

changes
The article states, "Due to the damaging effects that mutations can have on cells, organisms have evolved mechanisms such as DNA repair to remove mutations."

This is an untenable statement which require accepting speculation as fact. Put simply, we have no evidence in science that an error correction process has evolved - there are no known precursor proceeses which can are verifiable as ancestral to DNA Repair. If you want to leave this statement in the article, I will ask that you provide me with the evidence that DNA repair mechanisms have evolved by providing evidence of precursor examples. The article is about a subject of science, not one of speculations. In science, we need physical evidence. Speculations are not acceptable as positive assertions of fact. I will make no changes to the article which cannot be supported by observable, testable, and repeatable evidence, and I will expect you to adhere to these same standards of science. If you would like to respond to me via email, I encourage you to email me at.

I will await your response before providing further problems with the article.

Matthew —Preceding unsigned comment added by Standinguptoit (talk • contribs) 06:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Favor
Hey there, I was wondering if you could do me a favor. I just promoted File:PaperAutofluorescence.jpg to FP, but the file was just moved from enwiki to Commons. Could you delete the enwiki file page, then recreate it with   ?  Jujutacular  T · C 13:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hallo, all done! :)   Mae din\ talk 14:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks!  Jujutacular  T · C 18:14, 29 June 2010 (UTC)