User talk:KrakatoaKatie/Archive 5

WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request
This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 22:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Rename
As requested, I have renamed you as User:KrakatoaKatie (note that this is the version without the space). You should now move your userpages to the new name, and might like to consider recreating an account with this name and requesting that an admin block it, to prevent impersonation. Warofdreams talk 18:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi KrakatoaKatie! I like the new name!  So sorry to hear about the MVA... hope things improve soon.  I was a BNL fan in the early days (Gordon (album) was one of the first CDs I bought), but, clearly, I haven't followed their progress!  I'm happy to delete and block the old accounts.  Take care -- Samir धर्म  22:14, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Bow tie
Hi,

You may have an interest, since I saw your name in the history list of the List of bow tie wearers article: an admin is suggesting deleting it. When I looked into the Bow tie page, I found there's already a list there. I don't have an opinion on which list should remain, but one really should go. I'd appreciate your advice on the Talk:Bow tie page, if you're interested and have the time.Noroton 01:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Nursing Portal & wikiproject
Hi, You may or may not be aware that User:THB has crated a Nursing Portal and Nursing Wikiproject aiming to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nursing. It would be great if all Wikipedian nurses got involved. &mdash; Rod talk 19:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Impersonation
Hi Katie, the IP edits to restore the user talk page were very odd indeed. I've protected all relevant pages, and hope that this stops here. Let me know if it doesn't and we can proceed from there. Take care -- Samir धर्म 23:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

AfC
Thanks for squaring away old submissions! --Geniac 00:46, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: favor
KrakatoaKatie wrote:


 * Hello - I admire the look and feel of your user page, and I'd like to use it as a starting point for my own. Would that be okay with you? If not, just let me know and I'll do something else. Thanks much - Krakatoa  Katie  20:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

That's absolutely fine, feel free to use whatever you want – Gurch 04:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Gaétan J. Paquette, Canadian Publisher, Writer & Educator
Hi,

I think that this article should be part of Wikipedia. Would you be willing to help me make the changes that you think are necessary, please! Thank you!


 * Hello - thanks for the message. As a registered user, you can start a new article yourself. (You have to leave off the "publisher writer educator" thing, though.)


 * Familiarize yourself with Help:Starting a new page, the Manual of Style, and the verifiability and notability guidelines before you start, because articles on non-notable people soon find their way to articles for deletion. I personally don't think the subject merits inclusion in the encyclopedia based on the notability guidelines for people, but others may disagree. Regardless, please read and consider the policies on autobiographies and conflicts of interest, which can interfere with keeping a neutral point-of-view, before you begin.


 * As a precaution for your privacy I've removed your email address from my talk page, and I strongly urge you to not publish your email address on any page of any Wikimedia project. Instead, sign your name to talk page posts - not article edits, just talk pages - with four tildes (~), which will sign your user name and the date/time.


 * Good luck, and welcome! - Krakatoa  Katie  02:46, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Katie--

The "Protection" section on the CEC talk page was one I created and the discussions there are superfulous; that's why I deleted the section. Kenneth Tanner 02:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Charismatic Episcopal Church Talk Page Edits
KennethTanner, who also uses the IP address: 68.60.50.128, has done some very needed cleaning up on our rather lengthy talk pages on the Charismatic Episcopal Church article. He explained his rationale in the talk page itself, rather than in the edit summary box. I don't think that anyone would have objections to his deletions. The information deleted was about very detailed, dated material that would be of no use to anyone as an archive. Thanks for watching out for us, though.

Cecfan 04:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Smile


has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing! For reverting my talk page from the troll. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 04:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * A smile from me as well for the same thing; thanks! :-) Antandrus  (talk) 04:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Status switcher script
If you're still having problems with it, it was written by Misza13 who has created an instruction page at User:Misza13/Scripts/Status switcher, which might help – Gurch 07:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Closing AfDs
Hi Katie. When closing AfDs, the at template and your closing summary needs to go above the section header, not below it. Apart from separating out the closing from the discussion, the bot that updates WP:AFD/Old doesn't mark AfDs as closed the way you were doing it. I've corrected the two AfDs you did this on.

Please keep up the good work, given the backlog on AfD we need more editors like you. --Sam Blanning(talk) 14:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for letting me know, and I'll do better! Krakatoa  Katie  21:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VIII - October 2006
The October 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

DYK
Thanks. A late expansion got it over the line.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my RfA
Thank you for supporting my RfA that I have passed with 73/2/1.--Jusjih 09:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for removing spam
Many thanks for removing all the links to VITA sciences. It lighted up my watchlist, but by the time that I had a look you had already taken care of it. Great work! -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 04:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Userpage
I like it! Always nice to see my design adapted by others. I see you've added a bio section... I should do that myself at some point – Gurch 05:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam
Hi, Katie. I reverted this edit of yours to Annie Get Your Gun (musical). The link you removed appears to be legitimate, and it contains information that would be excessive if placed in the article but still of interest to readers. If you have some other reason this might be an inappropriate link, please let me know. Thanks! Powers T 14:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello Katie
Im assuming that you are the reincarnatiion of BaseballBaby who has had to change her name for some reason. Anyway do you remember the mediation you were doing for me and User:Cedars on Electrical engineering? Im just wondering if you are prepared to continue it or must we look for another since you have changed your name?--Light current 10:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam
Hi Katie,

While I do admire your desire to clean up Wikipedia pages, I think you are deleting a lot of perfectly useful external links. If an external link is relevant to the topic, at least somewhat well-designed and provides information that either differs from the content on the Wikipedia page and/or is in a more user friendly format, it is NOT spam. Simply deleting links because you don't like them goes against the spirit of the Wikipedia. By all means, please delete real spam but please let relevant links stay. Thanks! Stageagent 05:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello - thanks for the message. I did not delete the ELs because I "don't like" them. It's not a question of "like" or "don't like" or "love" or "hate." The External links and Spam policies are pretty clear to me. A few ELs, perhaps at musical theatre and play and opera, would probably be okay. 35 such links, at every article about every musical? Not so much.


 * More importantly, there's an official guideline about linking to your own site, and it's there because if every registered Wikipedia user started adding ELs pointing to their own site, or even just to his or her favorite site, the credibility of the encyclopedia would vanish.


 * Try this hypothetical: The New York Times decides to do yet another article on Wikipedia's veracity, and this time their gaze falls on our coverage of theatre. The reporter digs through the articles and the edit history of Oklahoma! and Annie and others, sees the ELs to stageagent.com, and finds that User:Stageagent put them in. What do you think the headline of the story would be? I promise it won't be "Wikipedia thoroughly covers theatre". Instead, it's going to be something like "Wikipedians drive Internet traffic to pet sites", it's going to prominently mention this little episode somewhere above the fold, and once again the encyclopedia will be subjected to stories about the supposedly foul intentions of Wikignomes and admins alike, registered or anonymous.


 * That's why I deleted the ELs to stageagent.com. I'm not one of those editors who get into editing conflicts and revert wars, so rest assured you won't find me deleting them again. My objection is on the record, and if others disagree with me, I'm perfectly fine with it. I think your site is useful, but I _don't_ think that 30+ links to it from Wikipedia is appropriate. It's not personal at all, and I hope you understand that. Thanks again for the message. Krakatoa  Katie  05:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * (cross-posted to User talk:Stageagent and User talk:KrakatoaKatie)

The contributed article
Mam I was awarded Ph.D. degree by Agra University ,Agra(INDIA) in 1994 on my work on"Major Themes in the Novels of W.Somerset Maugham. My present article is based on the research i've made under the guidence of Dr.V.K.Singhal,Head-K.R.College, Mathura. Kindly give it a place here.

Mamtash 05:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)MamtashMamtash 05:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you...
...for your support of my RfA. If I can ever be of serivce with my shiney new buttons or just to look at an article, please do not hesitate to ask. BTW, I do apologize, as many of the spelling mistakes that you have corrected were likely mine :)  young  american  (ahoy hoy) 17:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
 Thank you for participating in my RfA discussion! I appreciate you contributing your voice to the debate and its outcome. I hope how I wield the mop makes you proud. Thanks! &mdash; Saxifrage

editor review
Hello KrakatoaKatie

Many thanks for taking the time to comment on my editing. Curtius 03:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * re: Many edits
 * Many edits are associated with the creation of a family tree (see servilius). I did this work in a user page sandbox section before releasing the page. This is preposterously painstaking as it is done by hand. I have previewed numerous times before saving, but feel the need to save after relatively few steps just so I don't risk losing my work. Am I maybe missing some tool to make this easier?
 * More edits are associated with the set of tables added to the moneyer page. Here I did most of the work off-line, the wiki-formatting in my sandbox, then a page creation. Again, any tricks I may have missed?
 * Many edits are also just me making links to pages I have found useful for one thing or another (style, etc) I have had a fair bit of trouble following the Style documentation; a lot of stuff is said in similar ways on multiple pages, etc.
 * I believe I have fixed the tables.
 * Reference Style: I chose the following scheme:
 * a references section for citing a book or multi-volume reference work or article in a journal.
 * A particular footnote then links a statement in my text with a page or pages or section within the reference.
 * footnotes to Harvard Referencing rather than Harvard referencing directly because I have rather a lot of citations and the flow was really getting interrupted.
 * Reference Style: This was one of the main reasons I asked for a review. I really wasn't sure what I should be doing and the documentation was not helping me. I was hoping to get more specific input on this so I could improve it before going on.
 * I notice that few articles in WP (even featured ones) contain citations down to the page number (a surprisingly large fraction don't link to printed works at all?)
 * What level should I cite to? I provided references for things I considered possibly surprising (or contradictory to the original article)
 * What level of detail should a citation contain? ie. are page numbers required? excessive? ??
 * How should multi-volume works be handled in Harvard referencing?
 * How should individual articles in a collection (Festschriften are common in numismatics) be referred to in Harvard referencing?
 * Is there any expert I can go to for specific detailed advice on citations in wikipedia?

Thanks
Hi Katie, thanks a lot for your support and very flattering words to my RFA... Even though we have not interacted in the past, I have seen you around quite a lot. You have contributed a lot in a very little time!! Do let me know if I can be of any assistance at all -- Lost (talk) 12:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Hi KrakatoaKatie, I am very thankful to you for supporting and comments on my succesful RfA. Shyam ( T / C ) 06:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Dalbury's RfA
My RfA passed with a tally of 71/1/0. Thank you very much for your support. I hope that my performance as an admin will not disappoint you. Please let me know if you see me doing anything inappropriate. -- Donald Albury 02:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Juan Giambruno restored
This article has been restored after its deletion was contested at. As you nominated the article to be deleted via WP:PROD, you may wish to nominate the article for a full deletion discussion at Articles for deletion. --Sam Blanning(talk) 17:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006
The November 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Jackbenny.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jackbenny.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs 14:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)