User talk:Mindmatrix/2010

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Mindmatrix! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Trento Longaretti -

2010 Toronto Blue Jays season
Can you make a proper table then... if I do it, you may remove it. Plus, the table is an easier way to see what happened in the trade instead of reading a paragraph, which many people prefer. B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 20:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Can you please post what parts of the 2010 Jays season need cleanup (on my talk page), and I will clean it up, but still keep info. I hate deleting stuff fyi.B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 18:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up. I would rather keep empty slots (draft) because It shows what overalll picks the Jays have. Hitter boxes are removeable, so thats ok. I'll trim the Spring Traing summary. Can you fix the intro, as I dont know how you want it. but leave the countdown as its only up there for 1 more month. As for placements of articles (timeline) I think it should stay put. I won't put callups/send downs in the timeline, so no worries about that. as for the size of the article, I don't think that is an issue until it hits 175 kb in june, you know. Ill leave it up to you to fix, but please do your best not to delete that much. Thanks for the help.B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 23:28, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Im not making my own rules lol, funny you would think that. The article looks good the way it is, but ofcourse youre a hardcore wikipedian, so you like things your way, and you want others to do it your way. but since I don't know what way you want it, I dont wanna do it or else you bring up a whole new set of WP:PROBLEMS,WP:WORNGWAY on my talk page. so to avoid problems maybe you should do the work you requested because there is no boss on this site (by boss i mean telling others to do work you bring up on them)... anyways nice chattin, keep in touch buddy.B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 00:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Im sorry, but you said very clearly on this edit you would do the work.B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 19:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I see you prefer juvenile internet memes over intelligent discussion. (Aside: I use Firefox on FreeBSD without a Flash player; I used a command-line utility I wrote to fetch the YouTube page title "RickRoll'D", and didn't bother fetching the associated video.)
 * See ya, you're clearly not interested on improving the article, or your own writing for that matter. Mind  matrix  21:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

some nitwit's silly redirects
Thank you for this. Could you please keep an eye on this list? I wouldn't be surprised to see additional stupidity there. (I'd attend to it myself, but the real world calls.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Diefenbaker
The quote from Newman checks out, the exact quote is on Dief's talk page. Sorry, it wasn't you who asked about this! Best,--Wehwalt (talk) 04:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I was also wondering if you had more comments, or were prepared to make a declaration on the FAC page. Time is starting to get short there.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:13, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll be getting to it soon. I have no more quibbles about phrasing, though. Mind  matrix  16:12, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Your concerns are addressed, see article talk page. Many thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:14, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Wiki has a problem privacy concern
The problem you reported a while ago was fixed. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 00:00, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the update - I've been checking it periodically, good to see the change was made. Mind  matrix  00:44, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Nantyr Shores
As a student of Nantyr Shores Secondary School, as well as fixing up the wikipedia page for my school as a class project, i'd like to ask kindly if you leave the content up there, even the stuff regarding Juan Velasquez, he had won a contest at the school as part of a fund raising project for the Gaia Project, on which i manage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Borgo100 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I've responded on your talk page. Mind  matrix  03:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Interested?
You are invited to join the discussion at. andyzweb (talk) 03:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC) (Using )


 * I'll provide some input. Mind  matrix  03:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Solar thermal energy, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jojalozzo (talk) 20:01, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * What exactly about my edit was vandalism? All I did was remove inline spamlinking. (Aside: don't mask your username - it's irritating.) Mind  matrix  20:08, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I meant to click the spammer's talk page link. Jojalozzo (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It's OK - I figured it was something like that. Mind  matrix  13:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Your revert of my edit
Hi Mindmatrix. Was your your revert of my edit intentional? (I'm thinking it was probably an edit conflict) If so can we discuss this? Regards, Paul August &#9742; 16:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)


 * No, I was updating the anon IP edit (see diff between IP and my edit. Yes, it was an edit conflict, but I never received an edit conflict notice from Mediawiki, which saved my changes without nary a complaint. I noticed your change afterward and left it because I preferred your changes to mine. Mind  matrix  17:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, that's what I thought, but I just wanted to check. Paul August &#9742; 19:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Response
Sorry, for sending him this request I have read the previous comments and learned this is not the proper way to try to resolve the problem. I also assume as an administrator he would be knowledgeable and would have no problem assistance. - Zxcvxxcxcx (talk) 04:22, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about the image!
Dear Mindmatrix, you said I shouldn't have request an administrator to address the cropping issue, but don't worry about it because I have gotten another person to address the issue and upload the need cropped version. So you don't need to do anything with the previously discussed photo and you don't need to crop it.

Thanks, for you help uploading anyway -Zxcvxxcxcx (talk) 06:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Discussions about WP:Logical quotation
Hello, Mindmatrix. I am stopping by your talk page to let you know that you may want to weigh in on the Needed help regarding WP:Logical quotation discussion, since this edit by you led to recent debates about the WP:Logical quotation guideline. Flyer22 (talk) 00:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll drop by that discussion in the next day or so. Mind  matrix  13:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I had intended on adding comments there, but the discussion is quite active and rather long; I don't want to spend the necessary time reading the background info to participate in the discussion. However, I will say that I should not have made the second of the five modifications I made in the edit to which you've linked, since the punctuation was clearly part of a broader quotation (I think I simply missed the first half of the quotation when making the edit). The other four modifications were justified. Mind  matrix  00:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Your removal of the link to the operations of the Internet Archive
I have reinstated it, because I agree with its inclusion, and I found insufficient rationale for its removal. (C. A. Russell's 2010, February 9, 02:34 edit to the "Internet Archive" article.) -- C. A. Russell ( talk ) 02:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Lawrence Solomon
Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed is on article probation. -- TS 01:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Questions about one of your articles
Hello Mindmatrix, i was just wondering, why did you write this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newport%2C_Quebec. I was just wondering why you wrote this. It surprised me to even see a page mention this place. Ive lived their and still go there and can provide information about the place if you are interested. I just really surprised someone actually gives a S*** about this place, lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.200.213.250 (talk) 02:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, I didn't create that article; I was the last person to edit it. It was created by User:Fcsk on 4 July 2006. Mind  matrix  15:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

RE:Canada-Pakistan map
Sorry it took me so long but i have switched the colors to match the article. Cheers  Kyle  1278  19:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem - thanks for updating it. Mind  matrix  00:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Your have undo my edit
Hi, can my link (http://mg8.org/processing/bt.html) be putted in another place of this encyclopedic entry?: BitTorrent_(protocol) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.144.199.151 (talk) 18:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The visualisation is interesting, but it doesn't really elaborate on the concept, so I don't think it merits inclusion in the article. Mind  matrix  15:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Daily Mail
Why is it not a reputable sauce? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.160.56 (talk) 18:26, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:RS. Wikipedia should use citations sourced to reliable news organizations. Checking the website, I see nothing inherently wrong with it; I may have been thinking about Daily Mirror instead. Mind  matrix  15:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The Bay
You took issue with a move similar to this one, reverting it back in 2009. Any thoughts? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, there are only two entries on the disambiguation page that are specifically called "The Bay"; the others are all simply "Bay", or have other terms in their name (eg - The Bay School of San Francisco). The second entry named "The Bay" redirects to a radio station article WZBA, leaving the department store as the only article on Wikipedia with this name. (The bay in San Francisco is generally known as The Bay Area outside of the city itself, and "The Bay" only within it.) I'm going to revert it again. Mind  matrix  15:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. That was what I was thinking, but I wanted to check with you before starting a discussion on the talk page. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:50, 1 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Aside: I missed The Bay (radio station) when reviewing the disambiguation page, but it shouldn't change matters, as it has a reach of a few hundred thousand people, whereas the department store is a well-known national chain. Mind  matrix  16:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

GO Transit infoboxes
I participated in the discussion when you were developing the Template:Infobox GO Transit rail. The intricate functions that you originally included have since been removed and lines would be better served by the regular infobox, and it seems to me that there is no great advantage in using the custom infobox for stations and bus terminals either. I have worked up a couple of basic examples of a station and a line using standard infoboxes at User:Secondarywaltz/GO Transit and included a bus terminal for comparison as well. Note that the two incompatible colours of green are what GO Transit strangely uses on their website. Currently I don't have the time to change every station, and would not start until I could complete the conversions, but I think the lines would immediately benefit from the additional parameters. You may have noticed that I recently converted all TTC stations from a custom infobox (that I had developed) to the regular one, using the style parameter to create a header that resembles TTC signage. I value your opinion, and would appreciate your comments before I go stomping all over these articles. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I certainly like the layout of those infoboxes (although I don't like the use of 'statistics' in the section header). It'd be nice to included the opening date for the station, as it won't necessarily match the line opening (eg - Lisgar GO Station). I also don't like the use of symbols instead of simple yes/no, as is done with accessibility, but I won't really care what's done in that respect. I find that the services section would suffer from loss of information, as the current version has a clear and simple list of stations on the line, instead of only next and previous stations, as well as peak service info. (I know, these aren't really necessary, as they aren't specifically about the station.) Conversely, the current version could certainly do away with extraneous info about line ridership and opening for the station articles. There is also duplicate info, as the line is linked twice, once in the 'station statistics', and once in the services section.
 * Summary: I like your version better, except the services section. You're more than welcome to make the change. Mind  matrix  19:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Well it's not actually "my" version but just the standard station infobox. It is protected and can only be changed by an admin, since thousands of station articles use the template. I agree with you that there should be some way to indicate accessibility as yes/no, but currently any entry under "ADA" (Legislation only in the USA!!!) will trigger the symbol. Perhaps it needs another universal parameter of "accessible" which would display text, like most other entries in the infobox, and show a symbol only if ADA. All stations and lines are covered by the GO navbox already at the bottom of each article. Good observation on the "line" parameter which I think is meant to be included only when there are no succession boxes available, but many people seem to insist on both. Union Station (Toronto) is a mess! I don't think an infobox should be overloaded like that. Summary: Before I get around to any station conversions I will request a universal entry for accessiblity (outlined above) and I will not enter line info for GO Stations when there is duplicate information in a succession box. Thanks. Secondarywaltz (talk)

Canadian Federal Budget
Thank you for your help. I will endeavor to improve my wiking.l santry (talk) 14:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

2010 Toronto Blue Jays season
FYI...I noticed that the countdown clock had quickly reappeared at 2010 Toronto Blue Jays season after you removed it, so I reverted the edit and left a note at User talk:BlueJaysFan32. TDL (talk) 01:43, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Ecclesiastical province
My mistake, but seeing the editors recent disruptive edits I can be excused. By the way you shouldn't be encouraging such edits. Also perhaps you could help, I need to devise a way to politely advise the editor which we are referring to, that their spelling spelling/grammar is not up to standards. Almost everything they write needs to be rewritten. Po&#39; buster (talk) 19:39, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Whining
Please stop whining and personally attacking me. It's very irritating and counter productive. If you have a relevant question about edits than ask me, don't whine and jump into conversations half way through with irrelevant remarks. It makes you look foolish.

3 editors including myself wanted Province of Toronto moved due to the confusion with the title. Participate in talk pages. Po&#39; buster (talk) 15:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you should read those talk pages before making accusations, as I've clearly added comments there regarding my concerns. As far as the tags you've added to the article, I'm not the only one wondering what the issues are. There's a reason that, when rendered, the tags have a link that says "More details may be available on the talk page". I've looked, and no details are on that talk page. It is the responsibility of the editor that places such tags to explain the reason they were added. In this case, that's you. And stating "If you have a relevant question about edits than ask me" - that's what article talk pages are for, and that's where the discussions should occur.


 * Moreover, please demonstrate one edit of mine in which I've personally attacked you. All I've done is ask for information. Mind  matrix  16:08, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Canadian federal election, 1957
As one of the people who commented on the Diefenbaker FAC, would you mind taking a look at this FAC here? It's getting long in the tooth at FAC and has gotten little comment. Many thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Pedicure
don't know how to send a message w/o signing up and actually this means i won't be able to get a response back. but if you haven't heard a lot of people say never to trust wikipedia as a good source but i was under the impression that the website was heavily watched. nice to know you're the wiki nazi and your reply comments towards idiots was funny to read but even you can't control it enough. take a look at the page on pedicures and see if you can still see my complaint. maybe you can contact whomever is in charge and see if more work can be done although this website is run by volunteers. just don't let edits go up w/o being read. but unfortunately i guess i can't use this site for any help w/ studying. i will always be thinking what if some idiot w/ an excess amount of free time is playing around. ciao******* — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.195.88 (talk • contribs)

lol B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 21:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Norsk-Canadiere artikulen
Eller Kanadisk nordmennene ("or Canadian Norwegians", in what the Sons of Norway uses...). Thanks for tidying/checking that, I didn't really notice the parallel table, I guess I thought it was another aspect like language....I really don't know what User:Oro2 was up to there, I still haven't gotten a response from him....I just wanted to note, and have wondered how to put it in various ethnicity tables, and where the passage on the Stas Can cite is, which explains that ethnic stats are only derived from a 10% sample, and are only projected/estimated figures. My cousin, who was in charge of the PEI census in 2006, told me this when we were discussing, er, ethnic politics in Canada (we're related on the Norwegian side of our families...). So on all such tables, shouldn't we have a "rider" about the figures given? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skookum1 (talk • contribs)


 * Note that for each Canada census, there are two forms, the short form and the long form. The long form is much more detailed, and contains ethnicity questions, whereas the short form does not. The long form is sent to 1/5 of households, or 20%, and are the basis for many of the tables related to ethnicity, religion and other information not requested on the short form. It is a statistically valid sampling method (if done randomly), and should have a low margin of error (probably less than 1%) in its confidence interval (likely 95% or higher). See this document for more info (specifically this and this), or some of the other reference documents. So yes, all that info is based on the answers of only 20% of the population, but it should be "close enough" given the sample is large (about 6 million people). Mind  matrix  20:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, I'd remembered the conversation as 1 out of 10 got the long form...the gist of our conversation had to do with the distribution of those forms, and how it's a pity that accurate numbers aren't available for communities with known ethnic strata, e.g. Kitimat for Portuguese, Trail and Revelstoke for Italians, Little Denmark in NB etc. Might work in those circumstances, unless, say, in Trail where "the Gulch" is a known Italian concentration but might be part of a larger, less-Italian census subdivision...and for unincorporated smaller communities that are part of much larger census subdivisions, e.g. Hagensborg/Bella Coola, the 1-in-5 rule probably doesn't reflect accurately the local numbers; in that case Stuie, at the upper end of the Bella Coola Valley, is in a totally different riding; not sure about RD/census subdivision in that case; as it happens both the Cariboo South and Central Cariboo subdivisions are also heavily Norwegian in composition - but those folks are a couple of hundred miles away, and over a mountain range and more.  Of course, immigration settlement patterns have since been widely dispersed...the various canneries and fishery towns along the BC coast are now depopulated but, as far as their white/European component went, were heavily Norwegian in their day....similarly small communities in the Prairies that were notably Norwegian in origin/composition have also depopulated, or the offspring have moved on to the cities anyway; and it's a truism taht of those saying "Canadian" for their background, and nothing else, lots of those would be Norwegians and other Scandinavians (by disposition of "the way we were" about hte new country, in most cases); some areas I know of which were heavily Scandinavian even in my time no longer are, either through suburbanization of the breakup of company towns (e.g. Ocean Falls, Bralorne, Ruskin, Whonnock, Squamish - Pemberton was Norwegian-founded [as Akerton]).  The early censuses, which were handwritten and head-by-head, would seem to necessarily be more accurate about such figures; but without them I can't add the "Norwegian Canadian settlements" category, which I know should apply in many cases.  I dunno, maybe the Sons of Norway may have more accurate figures from its own surveys/data....they're not geared that way, not that I could see last time I visited the Burnaby office; they're more concerned with just getting us "younger" ones to join up....it was this sort of conversation which had Peter (my cousin) bring up the long form vs. short form thing; it's all a question of how wide the net is cast; statistically across the whole country those numbers may be very accurate; but at the smaller scale, and in less-populated but hugely vast regions, there would be no reflection of local concentrations, not an adequate one any way.  Would you know if the 5:1 ratio is applied within subdivisions, at least? e.g. within each Electoral Area, in BC's case?  On a separate note, shouldn't there be a footnote on North American Indian and other aboriginal data that many (even most) reserves/bands forbid access to census takers, and that natives as a whole look at the head-count with suspicion and so numbers reflected cannot be taken as statistically valid, or even accurate?Skookum1 (talk) 23:13, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The figures are valid for a weighting area (WA), which is a unit smaller than a census subdivision (CSD) but larger than a dissemination area (DA). There were 54,626 DAs and 6,607 WAs for the 2006 census (but only 6,602 were sampled), with the average DA having a population of 580. (See this for more.) In essence, the sampling variance is greater for smaller censal units (see this), but some adjustments are made based on the sampling ratio. This reflects the stratified sampling conducted, which according to the documents was constant throughout Canada. So, the smaller the unit considered, the larger the variance of the estimated data. StatsCan publishes the NASE (non-adjusted standard errors) for all the factors they measure, including ethnic origin. These adjustment factors should be used to multiply with the appropriate values here to give an estimate of the standard error. (An example of how to do this is given at the sampling variance page for immigration (search for the paragraphs starting at "The following example illustrates"; it also gives an example of how it breaks down for small areas). You're right with the statement "at the smaller scale, and in less-populated but hugely vast regions, there would be no reflection of local concentrations"; it's impossible to get an accurate representation of small communities with only sample data - the variance is simply too large.


 * Regarding non-report by First Nations, the census documentation seems to indicate that all reserves have canvasser-based enumeration, using an entirely different form. (Short form was called '2A', long form '2B', reserve form was '2D'; prisons, hospitals, shelters had form '3A'; other collective dwellings had form '3B'). I'm sure there's some resistance in reserves, but I think that overall reporting is good.


 * Finally, regarding younger generations not identifying as having the ethnicity of their ancestors, as you note, at some point that'll happen. They'll have no connection to the cultural aspects, and be several generations removed from the 'mother land'. I'm not sure about the validity of local censuses conducted without statistical rigour.  Mind  matrix  00:11, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Whining 2
Why do you whine so much? it gets really annoying, and it is counter productive. 1 sentence is useful, and it doesnt hurt anyone. but you use your "I have been here since 2005, and have made 25,000 edits... (along with a wide vocabulary from a thesaurus.)" excuse to get it your way. Theres other users on here.B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 20:21, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You've done nothing but refer to me as a whiner simply because I've been trying to get the article cleaned up. This edit (in particular the hidden comment) demonstrates your complete lack of ability to discuss things, simply attacking me instead. I removed from the article a piece of trivia which was completely unrelated to it, but you persist in including it and other trivia. As for my vocabulary, my apologies for being well-educated. Further, I'm not trying "to get it my way", I'm trying to get the article to include reasonable and relevant information, while removing useless crap from it. You're using it as a dumping ground for every bit of trivia you can find (and also attaching references which at times do not support the claims you make, such as the Halladay trade rumour with the Cubs - no, "I heard Beeston say this" isn't a valid ref).
 * You also ignore the warning being delivered to you by the software itself, which tells you that the article is too bloody long. (It took my browser 17 seconds to load the page just now, even though I have a fast connection and some of the images were cached. This is mostly caused by lag and latency, but you likely won't care about this anyway.)
 * Frankly, it appears as if you think you own the article, as every time I remove a bit of tangential trivia from the article, you complain and re-insert it. Mind  matrix  21:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * no I dont own the article, and you are just convincing yourself that I own the article, so you can use that as evidence against me, so you can go point that out on project baseball. making hundreds of edits to one article is not owning it, its contributing to it. get your facts straight. and what education do you have? do thesauruses come with a grade 7 yearbook now?B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 00:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Baseball is used to discuss baseball-related topics on Wikipedia, and I'd direct a conversation there if it'd be relevant to the whole project instead of a specific article. Despite your odd inferences, there's no conspiracy by me (or anyone else) against you here. Moreover, there's a difference between contributing to an article, and dumping random trivia into it. That's the purpose of editing. As for your other comments, WTF are you going on about? Grade 7 yearbook? Please try using less infantile arguments. Mind  matrix  01:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * you are whining like a little kid, but you use such selective vocabulary... its just fuuny yet odd to read.B LUE J AYS F AN 32 (T ALK 02:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Stating that somebody is a whiner because that person presents issues to debate demonstrates that you have no interest in improving the article. It also demonstrates you have no valid counter-argument to present. Mind  matrix  13:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Ontario Graduate Scholarship
I'm disappointed in you. You undeleted this article instead of using WP:DRV. You're an admin, you should be setting an example for the rest of us. Now I've gone to AFD with the article. --Me-123567-Me (talk) 13:56, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Brown's Corners, York Regional Municipality, Ontario
An article that you have been involved in editing, Brown's Corners, York Regional Municipality, Ontario, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Whenaxis (talk) 11:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Riverside South
The article Riverside South should be have a disambiguation page with links to Riverside South (Ottawa), Riverside South (New York City), and Riverside South (Canary Wharf). Why does there need to be a discussion on such a uncontroversial move ? Po&#39; buster (talk) 19:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that I d Riverside South (Ottawa) to facilitate this move. -M.Nelson (talk) 20:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the CWNB is usually used to link to active discussions that need additional input. Those who make nominations on that page should have already started a discussion on the talk page of the article in question. In this case, I removed it for this, and because there wasn't much to do with the page. (I don't have objections to the subsequent page move, though.) If it's non-controversial, you should just be bold and make the move; otherwise, start a discussion then link to it from the CWNB. Mind  matrix  23:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Metropolitan Toronto
An explanation for my revert of your change: the 5 boroughs were not the original components of Metro, and some of them were no longer boroughs at the dissolution of Metro, therefore your description applies to some point in the middle of Metro's history. I found it misleading to put it in the lede when components before and after are not mentioned. And of course it would be too complicated to put all the various changes in the lede. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 22:32, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I've updated it so simply mention the boundaries, instead of specific jurisdictions. It should be fairly clear now, without referring to any particular point in time. Mind  matrix  00:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

cvvv
vcvvvv —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.66.11 (talk) 00:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * wrwwww. Mind  matrix  12:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Province of TO
"Your" article is terrible and you seem to delete everything that even remotely describes the ridiculous idea in negative light. You have regurgitated the same info over and over and manage to put together a terribly written POV article from a couple of scraps, and quotes the media picked up. I question your motives, and your ability to contribute positively to wikipedia in general. Po&#39; buster (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not my article; but I do remove unsubstantiated claims. I did so with the original article, and I do so now. Second, stating that Murdoch has been expelled, suspended, etc. is simply to poison the well by trying to tie the idea to the man's character. The article is about the proposal, not about the man - the fact that he was suspended from anything is irrelevant to that article. And those "couple of scraps" are 38 separate references; certainly, some duplicate information, but they are all reliable sources.
 * You complain about POV in the article, then add statements with peacock terms which are unsupported while claiming that their removal is POV. The onus is on the editor who adds material to provide supporting citations and references for that material. I'm not your lackey, and won't do that work for you. Uncited contentious statements will be removed, as they are from other articles, and as they were from previous revisions of that article.
 * Also, quit it with the personal attacks. You've consistently demonstrated that you're uninterested in discussing issues, only presenting your POV and stating that anything else is crap. Any message I post on your talk page is deleted promptly, and you don't respond to messages on article pages. Instead of making generic claims about me, why not state outright what the problem is: what about my motives do you question? (Let alone that you're ascribing to me motives you perceive, as opposed to those I may have, which is itself POV. But I digress...) Stating that you question my "ability to contribute positively to wikipedia in general" shows that you can't even be bothered to review my contribution history, which is available for all to peruse, to even support your claims. It now seems that you're making accusations against me simply because you don't like the subject of that article. Mind  matrix  20:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * If you could back up and look at the subject from a non POV stance you would see how indisputably one sided your edits are. The article is almost written as a promotion of the idea. If an editor adds referenced info or obviously correct info such as "with very low popularity", just because you seem to support the idea and these facts may portray the idea negatively doesn't mean you can dictate what goes on and what doesn't. Your obtrusive style of editing has become worrisome. Po&#39; buster (talk) 20:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Who the fuck said I support the concept? It's your own POV that taints your perception of my editing. You ascribe to me certain beliefs, then use them to attack me or the contributions I make. Instead of doing that, why not use your time productively to find sources that repudiate the idea. For example, find criticism for anything in the "causes" section of the article, which could use some balance.
 * Further, show me where I've removed referenced info that was added. I rephrased one statement to clarify the situation and add context (which you later removed, by the way), as well as formatting the ref which you couldn't be bothered to do (all in this edit).
 * If you believe the article is promotional, then please demonstrate on the article's talk page which statements need amendments to remove the promotional tone. Leaving messages about it on my talkpage indicates that you want me to do the work (I have no interest in taking directives from you or anyone else), whereas leaving it on the article talkpage will give the issue greater exposure to editors who have an interest in the subject.
 * Finally, my style of editing is not obtrusive. I expect editors to supply references for the claims they add; why should you be held to a different standard than that to which you hold others? (By the way, I certainly agree that the proposal has little support, but who cares? "I know it" isn't sufficient proof for anything on Wikipedia.) Mind  matrix  01:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * zzzzz, broken record. bye Po&#39; buster (talk) 12:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Note - I dropped Po'Buster a message on his talk page about AGF and Civility in this matter. Canterbury Tail  talk  13:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Glacial lakes caveat
I just noticed you refined this category on Quesnel Lake. I'm not sure it should exist at all; i.e. just "glacial lake" all by itself; Great Bear and Athabasca and others ultimately qualify, as do about 90% of the major lakes (or more) in BC; Seton, Harrison, Chilko, even Kamloops and Okanagan Lakes are glacial in origin or creation somehow; Owikeno, the Bowrons, Taseko, Tatlayoko, Babine, Teslin, Atlin...Alta and Green Lakes at Whistler, etc etc etc....such a category name is incredibly general. Almost like "Category:Salt water oceans". Myself I'd venture that a CfD is required, not propagation....Skookum1 (talk) 00:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

The Rainbow Cadenza
Just a quick heads-up: I am attempting to educate the author of the book The Rainbow Cadenza not to do things like what caused him to be reverted by you 18 seconds after his last revert. If you are interested, the discussion is on Talk:The_Rainbow_Cadenza. If not, sorry to bother you. Guy Macon 07:59, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Buck Martinez
Why did you remove my information about Buck Martinez's broadcast career?

He doesn't work for the Jays, but he does broadcast for them, so I don't see why such information would be inappropriate. 24.235.243.8 (talk) 03:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Template dmoz
Hello, take a look at Template talk:Dmoz when you have a chance. EAE (Holla!) 06:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox GO Transit rail
Template:Infobox GO Transit rail has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 01:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Untitled comment
Please don't leave messages on my talk page. You cannot block me because you are not an administrator, even though you spend 18 hours a day on wikipedia without getting paid you bespectacled coffeehouse bohemian living in his parents' basement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.189.137.13 (talk) 14:23, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, I am an admin. None of your other claims about me are true either. Mind  matrix  14:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * That's nice. Stop stalking me and go away. I'm sure you will go run and tattle like a 4 year old to some admin who is an even bigger loser than you, (not sure if it's possible). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.189.137.13 (talk) 14:31, 16 June 2010 (UTC)


 * It's clearly possible for someone to be a bigger loser than me. For example, you spend your free time trying to engage me, a supposed uber-loser, in discussion. Mind  matrix  22:31, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Guelph Transit`s Active Fleet
I don't know how to treat this new article. It is a direct copy from http://www.cptdb.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Guelph_Transit_Commission#Current_roster, including the red links. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Usually, I'd delete such articles outright as copyright violations, but in this case the site makes no copyright claim (though in Canada copyright is automatically granted to an author for simply creating a work, with some exceptions). Moreover, it claims to use content from Wikipedia for some of its articles (likely not this one). Try taking it to WikiProject Copyright Cleanup. I suspect it'll be deleted simply "to err on the side of caution", as the adage says. Mind  matrix  00:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

revert in dns hijacking page
you reverted my edit to that page saying "revert - your phrasing is unclear, but I don't think you're talking about DNS hijacking; that's simply a search URL redirection"

I'm gonna add it back in after re-phrasing it but to clarify to you personally that tool in firefox expects a nxdomain replay, not getting one interrupts it.

edit is here

188.165.199.212 (talk) 20:17, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Public services in Canada
I have nominated Public services in Canada, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Public services in Canada. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Aurora, Ontario
Hi Mindmatrix, I didn't notice your edit summary in the Aurora, Ontario article until after I had cleaned up quite a bit. If I jumped the gun on this one, sorry but that article was nothing but a mess, and in fact probably still is, even after the cleanup. Not only was the "External links" section full of links that were not really needed, there were two other sections in the text, that were being used for external links but hidden under a different title. Most in one of the sections were repeated links from the bottom. The lists included everything from a site seeking volunteers to a vollyball club. I edited the links under the assumption that wikipedia isn't a directory for listing every website that can be found about the subject, but before anyone accuses me of vandalism for removing a large number of links, can you look at the article and see if any of the removed links should still be included? Any advice would be appreciated, thanks. Cmr08 (talk) 05:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I was going to similarly prune the article, so I have no issue with it. One nitpick is that you removed a link to the Aurora Public Library, which certainly merits inclusion on that page, and Aurora Tigers, which should also be included there. Mind  matrix  15:35, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I've restored those links, and tweaked a few more things. It still requires attention though. Mind  matrix  16:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

The removal of the library was just a mixup. There was already an external link for the library in the "External links" section, so when I saw it in the text, I thought I was removing a repeated external link, and not the mention of the library itself. Sorry. Cmr08 (talk) 04:20, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Jose Bautista
I see that you are an administrator on wikipedia, and from the Toronto area, and I see in your discussion that you have edits based upon the Toronto Blue Jays. I was wondering if you could perhaps edit the blue jays hitter Jose Bautista article. The main article title reads Jose Bautista (Utility Player). No where could I find a way to edit the title of this article so I am assuming that only administrators have access to this article. Anyways, you as well as I know that Bautista is an established major league baseball player and the term "Utility Player" is an unnecessary part of the title. Could you please edit it out? Thank you for your time. Objective44 (talk) 04:44, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


 * There are other people with this name who have articles on WP, so I will not move it to the plain name José Bautista. For now, I'll move it to the more appropriate José Bautista (fielder), though I'd prefer a better title. Mind  matrix  20:25, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


 * "Fielder" is not an acceptable disambiguator. Everyone who plays baseball (with the exception of the DH) is technically a fielder, so it does not actually distinguish him from the other Jose Bautista, who was a pitcher. "Utility player" itself, while accurate, was a compromise title, because Bautista has played several positions extensively. There are baseball naming conventions that cover cases like this. The next best disambiguator would probably be "Jose Bautista (baseball, born 1980), which is pretty clunky. I'd prefer it not be moved again, but would appreciate your input if you feel it must be.
 * That said, Objective44 threatened to report me for vandalism for moving this page back to where it was (the proper thing to do per WP:BRD). I see that this is a new account, but he's awfully combative, and if his talk page is any indication he's already been banned at least once. -Dewelar (talk) 15:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed moves
Because of your involvement in the moves of Weyburn, Fort Saskatchewan, and Wetaskiwin, please participate in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alberta. 117Avenue (talk) 00:59, 31 August 2010 (UTC) ~

New template
Hey Mindmatrix, I just saw that you made the original Template:Wikiversity. I was wondering whether you could make the a template for Google Warehouse as proposed at Requested_templates. Thanks in advance, KVDP (talk) 07:48, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Metrication in Canada
Hello Mindmatrix,

My father is an engineer who uses imperial units only in his line of work. This also goes hand in hand with what another engineer (see discussion page) said about imperial usage in their line of work in Canada -- the imperial system is almost always used. The word "mainly" does not denote "exclusively" so I therefore feel mainly is both an accurate and acceptable term. My grandparents and all of their friends use imperial units to describe temperature and distance. I think you can even attest to the preposterous notion that an 90 year old would use metric units -- it simply does not happen in this country. In terms of using a "mirror Wiki" site as a source, I see no issue with it granted the mirror site is properly cited. One of the mirror websites I have used to demonstrate public opposition to complete metrication in Canada lists among its sources Canadian government portals. I therefore feel this is an accurate source. In terms of body temperature, hospitals "exclusively" use the Celsius scale, but most Canadians DO give their body temperatures in Fahrenheit. That is not anecdotal (what is anecdotal is the fact that my family measures the water temperature of our swimming pool in degrees Fahrenheit. Please note that because of this, I did not bother to include that such example in my revisions). I think by very virtue of this minor dispute, it would be safe to assume that vast swaths of the Canadian population still use imperial units extensively. I'm going to do some research (because this stuff fascinates me) and make any and all revisions necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.193.74 (talk • contribs)


 * I've responded to some of your points at Talk:Metrication in Canada. However, note that there is a clear age divide in the use of Imperial units in Canada. Most young Canadians (by a wide margin) use metric/SI for temperature and distance. The lone Imperial remnants in Canada with strong usage are height and weight. Needless to say, both my interpretation and yours need reliable sources for verification. Anecdotes and beliefs are insufficient to support claims. Mind  matrix  14:43, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I am shocked that apparently the CBC site is not a valid reference now? Unacceptable. I am not talking about young Canadians' use of SI for temperature and distance. Note my choice of "most OLDER Canadians use..." to describe imperial usage for temperature and distance -- read carefully please. However, in terms of cooking temperature imperial usage is almost unanimous across all age groups! I am reverting the opening paragraph back to my wording using the CBC reference. How anyone can say that isn't a definitive source is simply beyond me. Please read the source carefully -- it says full metrication in Canada is to this very day, incomplete. It then goes on to say, this is largely due to public opposition. Again, I don't make this stuff up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.193.74 (talk) 18:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * An inline citation must be to a reference that clearly supports the claim. Linking to a landing page for a group of articles is not the same thing as providing a reference. The CBC is a valid reference, but the link you provided contains no text or other info supporting the claim to which it was attached. (I'm not sure that a summary or abstract for the collection of articles qualifies as a reference; surely, there are articles in that set that may be used instead.) Mind  matrix  19:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, I understand what you mean. I will make the revisions. I just feel that public opposition should be mentioned as one of the reasons Canada has not fully completed its transition to the metric system. I personally support the metric system (it is much easier to use, and makes much more sense), but there are still millions of Canadians -- young and old -- who continue to use imperial units daily. Compare this to a formally imperial nation, like Australia, where metrication is complete and virtually 100% of the population uses metric measurements. Only today, I was making a sandwich and the packaging of the BC Hot House (made in Canada for Canadian consumption) tomatoes I used read "2 lbs" very prominently. The metric equivalent was in brackets underneath. This sort of thing would NEVER happen in a nation like Australia or New Zealand. Another thing I realized is that Canadians lift 'pounds' at the gym, NOT kilograms. These things are noteworthy, and there is no point excluding why this occurs in Canada (due to public opposition) simply because some favour the metric system completely. It is what it is, and I feel it therefore should be included in the article. It gives a more accurate description of daily life in Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.193.74 (talk) 21:32, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, I certainly agree with you that opposition to metrication needs mention; my only concern was the sources. The examples you provide are all relevant. It'd be useful to also contrast with the support it received from some sectors (eg - scientific community, among others). Mind  matrix  15:17, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

"We are not a directory"
Got your point. So I've tried to explain the apps without really listing them down directory style. Is this okay?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minification_%28programming%29#Types

Tom Jenkins (reply) 05:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I've briefly reviewed it. It still needs work, as there are external links in the text; these should all be removed. Mind  matrix  15:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Is it okay now? -- Tom Jenkins (reply) 12:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Mississauga Transit
Admin help is needed with this. Everything has been screwed up with copying to Miway rather than moving to MiWay. Secondarywaltz (talk)


 * I've fixed the copy/paste move. I'll leave content updates, link fixes etc. for others to complete. Mind  matrix  14:41, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I just noticed - should it be MiWay or Miway? That is, is the 'w' capitalised? If so, I'll fix that up too. Mind  matrix  17:31, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It probably should be MiWay, per the website, but everything you helped to fix has been undone! Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I've re-fixified everything. Mind  matrix  21:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Nanaimo v. Victoria
Saw your edit; I think the intent of the previous condition of the Nanaimo article is that the city proper is larger than Victoria proper. Granted, Greater Victoria is considerably larger than Greater Nanaimo, even when peripheral towns like Parksville and Ladysmith are includeed in the latter, but in terms of strict definition the City of Nanaimo is 72,000+ while Victoria is 68,000+. Don't know what appropriate wording would be, but the comparison should certainly be in the article somehow.Skookum1 (talk) 17:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Heh - it appears to be even closer than that - according to their articles, it's 78,692 vs 78,057, so they're practically the same. When I revered the change, I accidentally based it on the metro areas (I had intended to look at the municipal pops). I've changed it to say "...is a city on..." for now - update it as you see fit. Mind  matrix  21:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Toronto Life - Food Guide 2004 cover.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Toronto Life - Food Guide 2004 cover.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Reverted Edit
Hi Mindmatrix,

I note you revereted my edit (posted under IP possibly as I was on a public machine) in which I added a link to an external web site. The article concerned is: The_Incredible_Machine_(game)

I was hoping I could discuss this with you, as I previously discussed inclusion of this link on the talk page for the article, see "An external link". The consensus seemed to be that once the site had more content, inclusion would be appropriate as it is the only resource of its kind for The Incredible Machine. At some point, the link was then added (as it happens, not by me). It remained on the article for a year, I'd say, before disappearing again. I thought I was doing a favour to Wikipedia by putting it back but evidently it has not been well received by you!

Therefore I was just curious as to whether you mistook my edit for vandalism/unconstructive/unverified and removed it for that reason, or if you were aware of the history and disagreed with inclusion in some fundamental way. It would be great to settle this through some kind of debate, in fact if you have a strong view one way or the other maybe you could pop it on the relevant section of the Talk Page for the article.

FWIW, I run the website but I'm not 'advertising' it in whatever sense of the word that implies, as I don't display ads on it or earn any money from it - in fact it costs a substantial amount to run. Linking to it on Wikipedia seemed a logical way of allowing those who might be interested to find their way to the site. Do let me know what you think anyway.

Respectfully yours,  --Christopher (talk) 04:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Tom Underwood
Hello Mindmatrix. I'm new here and I don't know how to do this properly, but Tom Underwood did die from pancreatic cancer, Monday night in West Palm Beach. The only verifiable source I know is his obituary in the Kokomo Tribune, which will disappear in a week or so. http://kokomotribune.com/sports/x862968221/Tom-Underwood-dies-at-56 Bz60zd (talk) 16:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. I've updated it for you. Thanks for finding a third-party reference about this. Mind  matrix  16:35, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Globe and Mail
Please do not add left-wing bias on pages, as you did to the Globe and Mail. Your edits appear to constitute non-neutral point of view and have been reverted. Thank you. 74.13.203.47 (talk) 07:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * So says the anonymous user who refers to a columnist at that newspaper as a Nazi activist, and describes the newspaper as an "opinion paper and propaganda tool". Apparently, you don't understand what the term bias means, unless of course you deem as bias anything with which you disagree, which is a wholesale corruption of the definition. Mind  matrix  15:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Hospitals
I noticed that you have contributed to a few hospital articles. If you are interested in contributing more to articles about hospitals you may want to join WikiProject Hospitals (signup here). Ng.j (talk) 15:53, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:North American Waterfowl Management Plan
Category:North American Waterfowl Management Plan, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 04:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Mindmatrix's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day... Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 05:01, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The above is given on behalf of User:Maclean25. -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 05:02, 23 December 2010 (UTC)