User talk:LeadSongDog/Archives/2011/January

Proposed deletion of Anticancer Research


The article Anticancer Research has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable journal that is not covered by reliable sources to establish notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  ArcAngel    (talk) ) 10:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Still at Yale?
Hi there! Sorry, I graduated back in '09. However, their website (http://www.library.yale.edu/beinecke/) does have a link to ordering reproductions of things in their catalog&#151;you might drop them a line about it. Happy researching! &#151;The Realms of Gold (talk) 10:05, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S. What are you looking to get ahold of this for? It sounds really neat. Early music is one of my main focuses (I direct an early music choir at UT-Austin) and I owe most of my experience and knowledge to Yale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Realms of Gold (talk • contribs) 10:07, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


 * At Talk:Wild Mountain Thyme, about the "traditional" song of that title, there is a discussion about an earlier song to a very similar lyric, The Braes of Balquidder by Robert Tannahill (1774-1810), included in his Poems and songs, chiefly in the Scottish dialect published posthumously in 1815. Neil Gow's ca. 1799 publication A complete repository of original Scots slow Strathspeys and dances [microform] (the dances arranged as medleys) for the harp, pianoforte, violin and violoncello &c. is said to include The Three Carles o' Buchanan (English: The Three Old Men Of Buchanan), the traditional air to which that earlier song was set according to Tannahill. Given that the modern WMT version claims originality, a discussion should examine the similarities and differences from that older version. Having many times enjoyed woodshedding harmonies to WMT in my younger and wiser days, I now feel a certain debt to the authors that might be repaid if I help rescue them from oblivion, (notwithstanding that Tannahill destroyed much of his work immediately before his suicide). Curiously, my renewed interest in the song came about by having come across an even more recent version which further butchered (or perhaps bowdlerized) the lyric so that it now reads "I will build my love a tower" where Tannahill had "I will twine thee a bow'r". The butcher leaves the listener to puzzle, Why on earth would I pile flowers upon a tower?. Argh!! Anyhow, thank you for your interest and for the link. I'm not sure if they will do reproductions for the great unwashed, but it's worth a try. Cheers, LeadSongDog come howl!  16:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

citegnome
How are you fixing citations when you write "citegnome"? Please let me know when you have time. Thanks LSdog.Jatlas (talk) 18:14, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Usually just filling in the blanks in citations, or converting them to the predominant format in the article (e.g. changing stray free-form cites to match the uses in Medicinal mushrooms LeadSongDog  come howl!  05:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey! The idea was to keep it SHORT!
You filled in some blanks in my request at WPRX, but I did not leave those details out because I did not know them! I left them out because They do not make it any easier for potential helpers to help me! They just make the request longer (i.e. more text to read through)! Yes, you only added a few words but your addition expanded the ammount of text by 50% ! (and some peple like it simple! (read:SHORT!)). Strictly, all that is needed is the DOI alone! I added the DOI as a URL, because the DOI-resolver messes things up for me, but when YOU added the superflous article title, then you made the URL invisible and I do not want that! The reason for my adding author, year, journal name, volume and page numbers, is just in case the helper would want to make certain that (s)he did get me the right article! In this case, the rest of the referece detail ammounts to nothing more than clutter! (I guess I safely could have left out the ISSN but I included it because of some seemingly conflicting, not identical, titles that are used about the same journal). Please refrain from reverting or adding anything more at my RX request, when I now trim it down a bit. (I will look here at your talk page again later).PS. As you may guess from my comment above, I have a tendency to use a lot of words, therefore I kind of prided myself on making the RX request neat and short. ;-) --Seren-dipper (talk) 13:04, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * (just one quick comment) Sometimes the URL of the article is different from the URL given automatically by the DOI parameter. In those cases I add both the URL and the doi. But that's just my personal preference, to add more options for people who want to find the source. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Enric. I suppose S-d meant this edit. I'm happy to not further assist on that request if that is what xhe wishes. I am, however, somewhat surprised by the apparent ANGER! evinced in the above comment. I don't believe I deserved that, as I acted in a good faith attempt to assist searchers for the source that xhe requested. It is unfortunate that xhe is having problems with the DOI resolver, perhaps xhe might wish to address those problems at wp:VPT. It is usually possible to find someone who can get one past these things. I note that Elsevier resolves that particular to the very similarly numbered PII based url, http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0889852905700839 for whatever that information is worth. LeadSongDog  come howl!  18:43, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I had a similar problem with the DOI a Nature article. It sent to a "Not Found" page in the Nature website. I just sent an email to their technical service, and a few days again I checked again and the problem had been solved. I can't recall if I got any email from them. @Seren-dipper, I suggest that you send an email to the webmaster of the publisher, maybe they have a mistake somewhere and they haven't noticed. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:43, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * @LeadSongDog: Sorry for coming across as angry or irritated! I am and was neither! On the contrary I am greatful for your extra effort! I realize now that I, of course, should have told you so explicitly in my comment above. (I guess I was taken over again by my wanton desire to get better at expressing myself more concisely, and therefore left out this explanation). The thing is that I find the above mentioned desire of mine, to be (almost) kind of a laughing matter and something for me to be a little embarrased about. Therefore I felt that I had to provide "an excuse" and explanation about my trimming the RX-request back down after you had helped fill in the blanks. Thus when writing the comment (OP) above, anger was not on my mind at all and I therefore totally failed to realize that the whole comment might verry well be perceived as nothing more than an unpleasant outburst of resentment. Again: Sorry for that! Well, I hope that I hereby have cleared up my errors (the unintended "insult") and that you now will pardon me and happily can make yourself laugh compassionately at me instead! :-) --Seren-dipper (talk) 15:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * If no anger was intended by the bold allcaps, then I take no insult. Thank you for clearing that up. Cheers. LeadSongDog come howl!  18:51, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * :-) --Seren-dipper (talk) 19:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)