User talk:Michael Devore/Archive 4

This is an archive of User talk:Michael Devore for 2010 through August 2014.

Happy New Year!
I finally got around to making use of your wiksort.js script, after all these years. (FYI, I am using Firefox 3.5.2 on a Macintosh, with Mac OS X 10.4.10. I will add that I glanced through the code as well, and, though I don't know Javascript, it is similar enough to "C", which I do have a working knowledge of, that I have a general idea of the kinds of things you are doing, and I'm impressed at how much you have to deal with to get this to work properly.) It has proved extremely useful in helping me find unwanted spellings, including out-and-out typos, and so on, in an article I'm working on. So thank you once again, and have a Happy New Year! Regards, Alan W (talk) 03:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Congratulations on joining the elite club of approximately twelve users of the user script, counting me, although the Greasemonkey version has around 140 downloads so perhaps the club isn't quite as elite as it could be.


 * The only major caveat I have with using the script is actually an issue in Firefox, not the script itself. On big articles with a large number of unique words, the Firefox spell checker eventually gives up and stops. If that occurs, you need to delete text up to last valid spell checked point, select the remaining text, and cut and paste it back in to the text area to force spell check on what is left. With one huge article I had to do that twice. Fortunately it has only been an issue with articles containing over two thousand unique words, or thereabouts.


 * Happy New Year. -- Michael Devore (talk) 07:19, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the tip-off about the limitation in the Firefox spelling checker. I am not too concerned, though. First of all, I've always been a good speller, so just going through the list of unique words gets me to pay attention to each word separately, and then misspellings usually jump out at me. But in this case, the article is on a British book, so I want to conform to British spelling conventions, and seeing the words isolated is a way of reminding me of changes I want to make. What happened yesterday in fact is that I found instances of both the American and British spelling of the same word, which your script isolated as adjacent unique words in several places (e.g., "honor" and "honour"). Then of course I knew immediately what had been overlooked, and I was able to make the changes. In other cases, with only the American spelling, if that is correct then the Firefox spelling checker wouldn't flag the words anyway. Again, your script's isolating the unique words in a list is the feature that has proved most useful to me. It eliminates the "background noise" of the context. If the Firefox spelling checker kicks in in some cases and helps, so much the better. But even without it, wiksort has been quite helpful. Regards, Alan W (talk) 17:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Belated Happy New Year! I could swear I left you a Christmas and New Year message on Dec 24th, but I do not see it in the article history or archive - sorry for the omission and all the best for 2010! Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, happy New Year. Hope your Featured Article streak continues through 2010. -- Michael Devore (talk) 12:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Rollback
Hi Michael, I just saw you reverting that vandalism on Catholic Church. Would it help you to have Rollback? If so have a read of when wp:Rollback may or may not be used, tell me when you would and wouldn't use it and I'll set it on your account.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  15:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, I just usually undo on a single vandal edit, or go back in the history for stacked vandal edits the pre-rollback way. A lot of my vandal reverts are on old stuff I dig up that often has later valid edits. I'm not convinced rollback would help my editing style much, seems more like it's designed as an RCP tool, so I never requested it. Thanks, though. -- Michael Devore (talk) 15:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes it doesn't help when its old vandalism, and it only saves about 5 key depressions over undo on single edit vandalism; But even with broadband it does speed things up if your watchlist has big articles like the Catholic Church. I don't use it that much myself, but when you do need it it is nice to have.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  15:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Jay Pritzker Pavilion FAC notice
Thanks for your involvement in the development of Jay Pritzker Pavilion article. You may want to comment at Featured article candidates/Jay Pritzker Pavilion/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

As always, I appreciate your copy editing efforts: --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Waterfall thanks
Thanks so much for turning your careful eye to Waterfalls in Ricketts Glen State Park, your efforts are much appreciated, as always. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Tchaikovsky and the Belyayev circle
Thanks for alerting me to the discrepency in the Rimsky-Korsakov quote in this article. I have checked the source and amended the quote acccordingly. Jonyungk (talk) 17:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Iravan
Hi. I am planning a FAC for this article about a regional Hindu village god - shortly. As such, I request you to please give constructive criticism on article as you gave before my prev. FAC Vithoba. To point any issues on article talk in consideration of FA criteria. Actually if you don't mind, please please fix them too, I am very bad in terms of following dashes and commas etc. MOS. Thanks. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 13:32, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I'll try to take a look tomorrow or by the weekend anyway. -- Michael Devore (talk) 06:49, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Follow-up: Things have been busy here the last several days and I've only had time for a few copyedits. I'll try to go into more detail this coming week, but my schedule is full until Wednesday or later. -- Michael Devore (talk) 04:57, 22 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Please check again, have answered your comments. As said before, I request you again to choose a convention and fix the dashes. Thanks. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 08:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, I observed you made some edits to the article. Thanks for the cleanup. Can you please scan the whole article and point out any issues with prose, punctuation, spellings, unclear meaning on the Featured article candidates/Iravan/archive1 page or the article talk? Thanks. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Catholic Church RfC
Input is welcome at Requests for comment/Catholic Church. SlimVirgin talk  contribs 00:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No thanks, I wouldn't get in the middle of that one for money. -- Michael Devore (talk) 03:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Quehanna thanks

 * I am not sure how I missed your edits to now, but wanted to let you know that they are very appreciated. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Jerkcity edit war
I went ahead and protected the article for a week (three times as it turns out - must have been clicking too much). I suspect some sockpuppetry as well, but have not had time to look into things much yet. Thanks for the heads up. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:03, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have also attempted to engage the other editors of the article on its talk page. I think it is probably notable, but the reliable sources are few and far between so far. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I am trying to point out that the article has more serious issues than adding objectionable phrases. The real test will come when the protection expires. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 11:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * They did not contact me that I am aware of (not even via the "email this user" link here). I can live without the FAX, thanks. Outing and off-wiki harrassment are taken pretty seriously at WP:AN/I - do you want me to raise it there or let sleeping dogs lie? Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:54, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As you wish (though if it were me I might keep the FAX, assuming the phone number that it was sent from is shown on it). I still have not been contacted in any way that I can see, though I am relatively anonymous here. I have the article on my watchlist, will keep an eye on it. Sigh. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Deceptive Appearances
Hi Michael, I wonder if you've experienced this: when I logged in today, I noticed that I was switched into the new default Wikipedia appearance--and that "Sort Words", your useful Javascript wiksort.js, had disappeared from the menus in the sidebar. At first I thought that it was lost forever or incompatible with the new skin, or some such thing. But a little searching through my Preferences led to the discovery that these scripts are tied to specific skins. So I just entered the importScript function into the proper place, linked to the new Vector skin, and now it is back, and I suppose that I can transfer it to any skin I might want to use. (For now, I figure I'll give the new Vector skin a chance for a while.) Probably none of this is a surprise to you, but I wonder if anyone else, like me, thought that the script had gone missing altogether. Regards, Alan W (talk) 02:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Caught me during a heavy crunch time, I'll try to look it over soon and have an actually useful reply then. -- Michael Devore (talk) 08:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem. It's not so much for myself that I wrote the above, since I figured out what happened, or for you personally, since I'm sure you understand it better than any of us; it's just that I thought that some of the other wiksort.js users (all ten of them? :-) might have been puzzled. Maybe just this posting in itself will be of help if they check your talk page. Regards, Alan W (talk) 09:48, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, I checked and it still works for the wiksort Greasemonkey script which, judging by the download count on my site and userscripts, comprises the vast majority of Sort Words Wikipedians. I'll update the install instructions when I have the spare time and inclination, for those dozen or fewer people who use the native script with Wikipedia's default skin. I use a nondefault skin, so wasn't affected by the recent change even though I usually use the native script. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:12, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm, maybe it doesn't always work with the Greasemonkey script. Well, that'll give me something else to look at this week. -- Michael Devore (talk) 08:29, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm glad that my comments led you to check your script's behavior, even if wiksort works fine for me where I use it. Hopefully any problems will be easily fixed. --Alan W (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Request
Dincher and I have gotten another state park about ready for a run at FAC. Ricketts Glen State Park is at PR now - if you have the time and interest, we would very much appreciate your checking it for typos and any other comments you might have. Thanks and hope is all well, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * All is still busier than usual, and this week is especially bad, but I was able to do a quick scan. I'll try to take a longer look for more detailed read before or during the weekend, but with the obvious stuff gone I may not have additional edits anyway. Good luck with FAC, as always. -- Michael Devore (talk) 03:09, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much - I really appreciate it (and can't imagine how we missed some of those typos - eek). There is one sic ref title (Millenium - one n) I know of. Thanks again for your help, especially when so busy, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello
I have created an article called Kataragama temple, if you have time can you take a look at it please. Many thanks in advance. Kanatonian (talk) 22:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Time discussion
A discussion has begun (on the talk page) concerning the lede in the article Time. I invite you to join here: Introduction, take 2 Steve Quinn (talk) 00:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Have a look at Occam's razor?
Could you please come over and glance at this thing? I have no objection to a clean, simple article even if lengthy, but some of the abuses going on over there are nothing more than a migraine awaiting all who read it. Please help me create an incentive to split the thing into new articles. Really, someone is having a laugh at the expense of a potentially good article.

I have edited a great deal over there ovedr the last hour or so. I also ask that you help me in guarding against automatic reversions. I have left adequate edit summaries for each action I took. You can see them in the history. Please help!!76.195.82.230 (talk) 05:34, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The article certainly is a colossal mess but there are several big problems that come with your changes.


 * First, although edits by an IP-only account are theoretically as valid as any other, they tend to be discounted more often by more editors on Wikipedia due to their historically high ratio of poor edits. The oft-cited advice about registering an account may be tiresome to hear by IP-only editors, but there are several good reasons for doing it.


 * Second, you unilaterally made a huge number of changes at once, which tends to a) attract other editors' attention and b) get reverted wholesale. An event which I see just happened.


 * Third, there are one or two people who might be a bit too involved in owning their edits in that article than is healthy for it. This is a common problem with high profile articles, and the net effect is often a horribly messy article with many back and forth edits, of which this article is another example.


 * Finally, you took a pretty aggressive approach on the talk page about the edits. That is often not the optimal approach because it practically dares more established editors to take opposing action. Which someone did.


 * If you want my immediate advice, I will offer this much: slow down. The article is a target-rich environment of unsupported statements, multiple off-topic digressions, weasel words, essay-like writing, and original research. Pick one egregious example of poor content and change it to properly-cited and appropriately written content, or delete the content with a well-documented reason that refers to the appropriate section of the Wikipedia Manual of Style or other Wikipedia guidelines. Then wait a while and see what happens. If challenged, explain your reasoning on the article's talk page. If you are correct in your reasoning and you get reverted, then I will support your edits through the dispute process, as far as it needs to go.


 * Continue making discrete changes over a longer period of time. I grant you it is a much slower process than your original approach, and that it can be disturbing to see how much mess remains, but it is the best way I have seen to improve a contentious article short of bringing in an established expert on the topic or a team of well-respected editors to do a full makeover. It took a while for the article to get that seriously screwed up, it will probably take a while to turn it into a good article. Maybe even a Good Article. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:56, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


 * As an semi-amusing side note, I see that an IP editor in an edit summary has now declared the entire article to be well-written. If only it were so easy, and if only it were accurate. -- Michael Devore (talk) 06:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the copy edit
Thanks for the copy edit you did on Kataragama temple, it passed GA a few days ago. I couldn’t have done it without your help. Kanatonian (talk) 13:48, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Michael Richards Lead
Why did you undo my edit? it is well established that he is a racist and he is more prominantly known for his racism than his acting94.168.210.8 (talk) 05:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I suggest reading WP:NPOV about neutral point of view; WP:OR about original research, paying particular attention to WP:SYNTHESIS; and WP:LEAD for good measure since your edit was to the lead sentence of the article. -- Michael Devore (talk) 05:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

it is neutral, it isnt pov and it is no OR i will add it again with citations then94.168.210.8 (talk) 07:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, that is not an accurate description of the edit. I see that another editor has already reverted the edit. I suggest that you read the relevant policies and if you have questions about them as relates to the edit you wish to make, post to the article talk page or the appropriate Noticeboard with questions. -- Michael Devore (talk) 14:48, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

John C. Colt
Thanks for fixing my typos...I sometimes edit with a shitty laptop that drops keys! I know, I suck as a human being! Thanks again! :)--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 03:46, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Tamil Brahmi
Hello Micheal, when you have time can you look into the above article. It will be much appreciated.Kanatonian (talk) 13:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll try to look at it this weekend, at least for a basic copyedit for mistakes. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Did a couple quick passes, but ran out of free time. I'll try to get back to finish it later. I think the overall content needs cleaning up as far as wording and sentence structure, so you might consider working in those areas, since I typically don't do a whole lot of that sort of thing. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, will do. Kanatonian (talk) 00:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Fatty Finn
Thanks - appreciate you finding all my typing and spelling errors. Dan arndt (talk) 04:53, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Peter Percival
I was not going to bother you with it because you had already done a lot of help on Tamil Brahmi, but people are Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Peter_Percival asking for it. I was wondering whether you could look over it ? Thanks Kanatonian (talk) 00:21, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I'll try to get to it, been kind of busy here again, but I think a lull is coming in the next couple of days. -- Michael Devore (talk) 23:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Piano music of Gabriel Fauré
Warmest thanks for your sharp-eyed edits to correct my typos. How maddeningly difficult it is to proof-read one's own prose accurately! One sees what one thinks one has written. The work of editors like you is greatly appreciated. Tim riley (talk) 09:35, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Like a Prayer
Thanks for these corrections. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 02:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the help with ACLU. It's a pretty daunting job getting it to GA status. --Noleander (talk) 04:05, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks...
...for the help with Henry II - the copy editing was much appreciated! Hchc2009 (talk) 08:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

FA status in Piano music of Gabriel Fauré
Please see this comment. Best wishes, Gidip (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks much
Thank you for your helpful edits to the article Fucking Machines, much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 13:32, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Fuck help thanks
Thanks for your help at Fuck (film), much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 10:07, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 16 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 02:21, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * On the Michael Tippett page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=581882912 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20Michael Tippett Ask for help])
 * Thanks bot, but no, I fixed a typo. Near as I can tell, the reference was incorrect. (No, I'm not so foolish as to believe you actually read this.) -- Michael Devore (talk) 02:31, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks
Copyediting is often a thankless job. I have noticed your name pop up on my watchlist small emendations to several of the articles on which I've worked and just wanted to thank you.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:15, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

William Burges
Super copyediting. And amazingly sharp-eyed. My only excuse is that I've been looking at this article for 6 years! Many thanks. KJP1 (talk) 21:02, 2 December 2013 (UTC)