User talk:LeadSongDog/Archives/2009/October

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)
The September 2009 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 has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Discussion about bibliography articles
Hi Lead Song Dog,

I know you were involved in a previous discussion on this topic and thought you might be interested in participating here.

Happy editing,

Neelix (talk) 15:02, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

User:druid Raul
This user is beginning to become troublesome. There seem to be major civility issues, bordering on attacking people by virtue of race or creed. I feel that I possibly may be "involved" in respect of admin action as I've had previous interaction with this editor. How best to approach this one? Mjroots (talk) 17:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * IANAnAdmin, but my chief concern has been the persistent copyvios, upon which Copyvio gives a clear mandate to "any administrator". Given that you have a prior involvement, it would be prudent to seek an uninvolved admin from ANB. DR's activities seem mostly to be on aviation articles, so an admin who doesn't work on those would likely be in the clear.LeadSongDog come howl  18:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your advice. I'll raise the issue at WP:ANI. Mjroots (talk) 18:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you provide evidence of copyright violations at WP:AN/I where uninvolved admins are looking into the matter? Mjroots (talk) 19:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Citation style
I just reverted you on hadron. WP:MOS states "when either of two styles is acceptable, it is inappropriate for an editor to change an article from one to the other without substantial reason." (The language is too strong for the situation at hand IMO, but the spirit of it is when two styles are valid, keep the first.)

There are many ways to cite works, and in particle physics, the most common one is the first author + et al. + the collaboration in parenthesis. See for example Top quark. I hope this clarifies. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 17:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, I was trying to solve the rendering issue that r40 didn't solve. For future ref, is there a MOS subpage, project guideline, or such showing that style of citing? LeadSongDog come howl  17:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No MOS subpage that I'm aware of. Citations style is pretty much left to whoever writes the article. This usually means that particles physics article follow particle physics convention, medicine articles follow medicine convention and so on. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 18:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Found it. WP:Wikiproject Physics uses WP:Scientific citation guidelines. The last example in the Notes section there is as you had. It probably merits explicit discussion though.LeadSongDog come howl  19:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Oil Sands
Hi I am wondering what you did not like about my edit to the Oil Sands page in the Transportation and Refining section. You said that I needed to fix my source, what is wrong? What did you not like about the information I added? This is what I added:

With high generation costs of about $60 per barrel some do not see the point yet, Thomas d'Aquino, chief executive and president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, as well as many others, believe that oil sands can still become as large a resource as oil.

Source: Eisberg, Neil. "Sustainable energy in a changing world: oil has been the lifeblood of global development for over a century, although its days are numbered. So what will follow it? Neil Eisberg reports from the 2009 SCI Global Summit in Syracusa, Sicily.(News feature)(Co." Chemistry andIndustry 10 Aug. 2009: 14-16. Web. 1 Oct. 2009. .

This is for a project so I would really appreciate your input. Thank you!

-Lp620 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lp620 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My edit summary was intended to indicate that: 1) the first statement was on a subject that had no place being in the Transportation and Refining section; and 2) I had cleaned up ("fix"ed) the format of the second citation to conform with the style used in the article, as is normal practice. While I didn't reiterate another editor's earlier comments on "forward looking statements", or as we call them here WP:NOTCRYSTAL, please find the time to read up on the basics of how we do things on wikipedia. LeadSongDog come howl  19:50, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

RE: Cabal
How come I was never told of this cabal ? *sniff* Master of Puppets  - Call me MoP! :D  22:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no cabal. The Pluspotent Imperial Grand Tutnum says so, (or so I hear). LeadSongDog come howl  23:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

WWI
I think the best way to address this article, is as you have suggested. Get three or four editors to take ownership on the various sub-sections and you or Skinny (or whoever) coordinates and does QA to ensure no duplication of facts or references. See my post on Skinny87's page - recommending exactly what you are proposing! How to progress? Farawayman (talk) 12:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for your willingness to chip in. I have no real preference on how the effort procedes, I just saw a need to get things moving again. How about we continue this on the article talk instead?LeadSongDog come howl  14:13, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that seems like the best way to do this. Skinny87 (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)