User talk:Msrasnw/2011

Thomas Howes (actor)
You asked if I "would mind" if you recreated a page for this actor. Please understand that you'd be running into a unhappy set of problems were you to recreate it in mainspace and I would strongly advise that you not, as the page has been several times deleted already, and you will likley find the article quickly deleted without any discussion under Criteria for speedy deletion G4. " Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion."

However... what you might do instead, is create your article at User:Msrasnw/workspace/Thomas Howes (actor) so that you can build the page and add proper sourcing to show notability as described at WP:ENT. And ONLY after you feel you have made the page as complete and well-sourced as possible, then you should ask this question of User:Cirt, the deleting admin, who will then compare the earlier deleted version(s) to see if your newer version has been improved to the point of addressing the issues brought up at the deletion discussion. Best of luck.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 18:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ukaid logo sml.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Ukaid logo sml.gif. 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hugahoody (talk) 21:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * My understanding is you have just replaced this gif version with a png file of the same thing. I think it might help if the tone/text of your message might be changed to reflect this. This gif might clearly just be deleted. Best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 21:18, 16 January 2011 (UTC))(21:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC))
 * Yes, sorry this is just the standard courtesy message sent out when an image is replaced in use by another. The tags placed on your original image reflect this change more than this message. Hugahoody (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kaido Reivelt


A tag has been placed on Kaido Reivelt requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Sander Säde 13:24, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * As reviewing administrator, I declined the nomination--he's president of the Estonian Physical society and clearly notable!. I've left an appropriate comment with the ed. placing the speedy tag.    DGG ( talk ) 17:42, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Thomas Howes (actor)


A tag has been placed on Thomas Howes (actor), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Wuh Wuz  Dat  14:16, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * as the article had passed DRV, the speedy deletion was not appropriate and was removed by another admin  DGG ( talk ) 17:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Thomas Howes (actor) for deletion
The article Thomas Howes (actor) is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Thomas Howes (actor) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Wuh Wuz  Dat  19:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Gro Steinsland
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   00:03, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
 * This permission does not give you any special status or authority
 * Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
 * You may wish to display the Autopatrolled top icon and/or the User wikipedia/autopatrolled userbox on your user page
 * If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
 * If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 21:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

On the Tausch entry, a suggestion (Moved from my user to my talk page)
Let me please deposit here also my recent comment, made on the talk page about the possible deletion of the article:


 * Comment (from User Franz weber) I would not like to vote in this debate here, but let me come up with a practical suggestion: I think that user Msrasnw would be Wikipedia experienced enough to come up with an article really conforming in style to Wiki standards and in the sense of the suggestions he has made here on these pages [User Franz weber]].

You seem to be a well-experienced writer of Wikipedia. User Weber is personally in favour of keeping the article, but does not vote; being a man of compromise, he is strongly in favour of keeping articles on mice and neuroligsts, just as people researching the World Values Survey. With a monthly access statistics of about 700-800 (all languages) the markets have already decided to keep the article, however I concede it has to be wiki-style indeed. user weber. The final article should especially highlight the basic underlying message of the Tausch work: no return of the Bourbons, no return of the evil spiral of xenophobia and violence of the late 1920s and 1930s, and in favour of a European social policy of inclusion and tolerance, including our Muslim minorities. The worldcat identity entry might help you weed out the most important Tausch works:

Data from Worldcat identities http://www.worldcat.org/identities/

Overview

Works: 52 works in 104 publications in 4 languages and 1,703 library holdings

Most widely held works by Arno Tausch

Towards a socio-liberal theory of world development by Arno Tausch( Book ) 12 editions published between 1991 and 1993 in English and Undetermined and held by 318 libraries worldwide Towards a Socio-Liberal Theory of World Development is a systematic, quantitative study on the determinants of world development from the 1960s onwards, using advanced statistical techniques and data from up to 171 countries and territories.

Globalization and European integration by Arno Tausch( Book ) 3 editions published in 2001 in English and held by 112 libraries worldwide

Global Keynesianism: unequal exchange and global exploitation by Gernot Kohler( Book ) 4 editions published between 2001 and 2002 in English and held by 102 libraries worldwide

Global capitalism, liberation theology, and the social sciences: an analysis of the contradictions of modernity at the turn of the millennium( Book ) 2 editions published in 2000 in English and held by 98 libraries worldwide

The West, Europe and the Muslim world( Book ) 3 editions published in 2006 in English and held by 79 libraries worldwide The Muslim world is rapidly exploding beyond the traditional lands of the Middle East to Europe and America. They are altering voter considerations, demographics, and some say shielding terrorist cells. This book explores what Europe and America can or will do about this situation.

Against Islamophobia: quantitative analyses of global terrorism, world political cycles and center periphery structures by Arno Tausch( Book ) 2 editions published in 2007 in English and held by 79 libraries worldwide

Against Islamophobia: Muslim communities, social-exclusion and the Lisbon process in Europe( Book ) 1 edition published in 2007 in English and held by 71 libraries worldwide

What 1.3 billion Muslims really think: an answer to a recent Gallup study, based on the World Values Survey by Arno Tausch( Book ) 2 editions published in 2009 in English and held by 67 libraries worldwide

Towards a wider Europe( Book ) 1 edition published in 2006 in English and held by 64 libraries worldwide

Roadmap to Bangalore?: globalization, the EU's Lisbon process and the structures of global inequality( Book ) 4 editions published in 2007 in English and held by 62 libraries worldwide

Dar al Islam--the Mediterranean, the world system, and the wider Europe: the "cultural enlargement" of the EU and Europe's identity( Book ) 5 editions published in 2005 in English and held by 60 libraries worldwide

From the "Washington" towards a "Vienna consensus"?: a quantitative analysis on globalization, development and global governance( Book ) 4 editions published in 2007 in English and held by 57 libraries worldwide

Dar al Islam--the Mediterranean, the world system and the wider Europe: the chain of peripheries and the new wider Europe( Book ) 1 edition published in 2005 in English and held by 46 libraries worldwide

Multicultural Europe: effects of the global Lisbon process: Muslim population shares and global development patterns 1990-2003 in 134 countries by Arno Tausch( Book ) 1 edition published in 2008 in English and held by 45 libraries worldwide

Jenseits der Weltgesellschaftstheorien: Sozialtransformationen und der Paradigmenwechsel in der Entwicklungsforschung by Arno Tausch( Book ) 2 editions published in 1987 in German and held by 40 libraries worldwide

Jenseits der Weltgesellschaftstheorien by Arno Tausch( Book ) 3 editions published in 1991 in German and Undetermined and held by 38 libraries worldwide

Armut und Abhängigkeit: Politik u. Ökonomie im peripheren Kapitalismus by Arno Tausch( Book ) 1 edition published in 1979 in German and held by 38 libraries worldwide

Russlands Tretmühle: kapitalistisches Weltsystem, lange Zyklen und die neue Instabilität im Osten by Arno Tausch( Book ) 2 editions published in 1991 in German and Undetermined and held by 28 libraries worldwide

The three pillars of wisdom?: a reader on globalization, World Bank pension models, and welfare society( Book ) 2 editions published in 2003 in English and held by 26 libraries worldwide

user Weber


 * Comment Dr. Tausch always makes it clear to the students in his classrooms that he has given up being a pure scientist long ago, and that, although he speaks in the classroom and in his publications as an academic, he is and remains a member of the higher echelons of the Austrian bureaucracy (true enough, his superiors want a clear distinction between these activities and his role as a writer and teacher). For that reason, publications and speaking engagements with important think tanks, as the IMEMO Institute in Moscow, are far more important to him than mere quotation figures. Perhaps it would be better to move a short and re-written article on him into the ‘public figures’ category, away from what he in his Vienna classrooms anyway calls the ‘boring Ivory Tower’. Highlights of such activities were his participation and publishing for the Luxembourg Ministry of the Economy and Foreign Trade conference on the "The Political Economy of the Lisbon Agenda" on Tuesday, 12 April 2005 in Luxembourg-Kirchberg (his paper was published as (2007), ‘The City on a Hill? The Latin Americanization of Europe and the Lost Competition with the U.S.A.’ Amsterdam: Rozenberg (for info: http://www.rozenbergps.com/). In this context, one could also mention his paper for the Luxembourg Institute for International and European Studies Conference ‘Reforming European Pension Systems’, 24 and 25 September 2004, Castle of Schengen, Luxembourg, in memory of Nobel laureate Franco Modigliani. The book in memory of Franco Modiglani was published as Arun Muralidhar & Serge Allegrezza (eds.) Reforming European Pension Systems, Luxembourg Institute for European and International Studies, with the contributions of seemingly utterly irrelevant people in it, like Robert Solow and Paul Samuelson. Without irony: Wikipedia strategists should begin to think about designing criteria, which do justice to the notability of such events, and not only to the n-th quotation of articles like the 2002 piece by Dr. Wim E. Crusio on ‘’’’Knockout mice’’’: simple solutions to the problems of genetic background and flanking genes’ Trends in Neuroscience 25: 7. 336-340 July. Wikipedia rightfully devotes a page to this Dutch scholar, user Crusio, while someone, who recently created a real furore in the German quality press by his study (with colleagues) on the efficiency and effectiveness of social spending, should not have an entry? Google News and Google News Archive should be additional categories in judging on the merits of an entry Signed User Franz weber — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franz weber (talk • contribs) 12:27, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * :: Dear Franz Weber, I have a similar feeling about the need for a possible refocusing away from straight academic more towards public policy - but it was the conference/festchrift stuff for Modigliani that perhaps was the thing that swayed me to make a contribution to the debate. However referencing and sourcing is the key. I think the level of acrimony is also a problem - I think the style of argument and possible conflicts of interest of some of those invovled with arguing for keeps just serves to further egg on the deleters. We will see after the Afd has run its course. PS: I don't think it is either nice or wise to be attacking others work on more esoteric topics. Wikipedia has space for many things and writing, as someone who recently had a mouse, or mice, visiting my house the more information on mice responses to "unpredictable chronic mild stress (UCMS)" and their likely subsequent major depressive disorders is a matter of some concern to me. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 12:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC))PPS: you are writing on my user rather than talk page!

Patrick_Lynch_(economist)
Hi, I noticed that you have just restored the George O'Brien link in the above article. This is a long shot as you could just be wikignoming, but are you interested in this subject and, if so, do you know of anything that can be used as a citation for the final section, specifically the notion of a school thought called "Hibernian economics"? I'm sure such a thing could well have existed but so far have found nothing to substantiate it. The whole article was filled with junk and seemingly random references/copyvios etc and it has taken me a while to unpick it all, but this Hibernian thing is really frustrating me. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:03, 20 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Dear Sitush, yes I am a bit interested in the subject (and I made the little O'Brian stubb!) but do not know of a school of thought called Hibernian economics. My informed but inexpert view is that the article seems to claim, not that Lynch was in this school (and the school existed but is now defunct) - but that it is an emerging school which Lynch somehow inspired. I am not sure (I doubt) whether such a school is actually emerging. I think it is possible that it might have been going to emerge (if that makes any sense) but recent events make this most unlikely. :) PS: Good work on the clean up job. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 14:32, 20 February 2011 (UTC))


 * Ah, that sort of makes sense. The bulk of the original article was mostly a complex and unreferenced copy-and-paste job of paragraphs from various obituaries etc, interspersed with commentary by the editor. The editor in question claimed to have been a colleague of Lynch at UCD (which doesn't perhaps say much for academic standards with regard to plagiarism etc!) and that s/he wanted to write an "appreciation". Some of the quotes in it seemed to me to be quotes from that editor's memory of conversations with Lynch: they have no basis in any writings that I've been able to find. My suspicion is that the Hibernian economics thing has evolved out of that desire to eulogise/over-egg the pudding etc, and your comments above would fit in with that. I'll remove the statement for now - it can always be reinserted if something turns up later. Thanks for your time, - Sitush (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

date of Gaddafi Jr's degree
Dear Underlabourer and Msrasnw, apologies for accusation of Wikiwarfare. I shouldn't have said that. It was just that you changed things without providing a rationale. A Msrasnw points out, dating a PhD is difficult, with many different dates involved, but the LSE page mentioning 2009 is unambiguous (and it fits with what Held says when introducing him). For now, though, couldn't we simply agree, as I've tried to indicate in the latest version of the page, that the issue remains unresolved? Meanwhile, lets remember why this is important -- if the LSE received the huge donation before Gaddafi Jr received his degree, it would constitute and outright bribe.Erik 04:33, 17 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erikringmar (talk • contribs)

Discussion at WP:EAR about an article you've commented on
Hello Msrasnw. It is possible you'd be interested in this discussion about an institute whose name is so long I won't spell it out, but is anyway controversial. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Livens Large Gallery Flame Projector
Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ruth Glass


A tag has been placed on Ruth Glass requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. TransporterMan ( TALK ) 19:47, 19 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I have removed the CSD tag & very slightly rephrased the article. The tag was overkill, I feel. - Sitush (talk) 19:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Many thanks - I had thought I had escaped this problem - but .... (Msrasnw (talk) 19:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC))


 * You have escaped it. All it needed was some minor tweaking, not a CSD. And now it has gone to full-blown copyvio/OTRS examination when, with my minor tweaks, the duplication detector reports 0 similar phrases. Ridiculous. - Sitush (talk) 20:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Ruth Glass
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Ruth Glass, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.geos.ed.ac.uk/homes/tslater/ruthglass.pdf, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Ruth Glass and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Ruth Glass, in your email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Ruth Glass with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Ruth Glass. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:Ruth Glass saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! TransporterMan ( TALK ) 20:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Dear TransporterMan, I don't think my little article was a copyright violation but am not sure what the above means I should do. The three bullet points don't seem to include this information which your note sees to imply they should. Should I just wait for some investigation? Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 20:38, 19 May 2011 (UTC))


 * I doubt that any of the three bullet points apply to your situation. They're either for the situation where you claim you own or have permission to use the copyright or where you claim that the copied material releases the copyright in a way that it can be used here. Neither would appear to apply to this case, but you know better than I on that point. The best thing to do here would be to rewrite the article — not just reword, rewrite from scratch, see WP:PARAPHRASE for examples — on a subpage in the manner described above and on the template posted on the page. Regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 20:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Reply

The little article at deletion had only 6 sentences.


 * 1. "Ruth Glass (born Ruth Adele Lazarus with a married name Durant) (1912-1990) was a German born British sociologist. "

I don't think this is a problem is it?
 * 2. "Among her works were Watling, a study of a new cottage estate constructed in Hendon, near London, but it is perhaps for her Urban Sociology in Great Britain (1955) that she is most known. "

The line in the thing you mention - which is "Watling, a study of a new London County Council cottage estate in Hendon, on the outskirts of London, published in 1939, established her reputation as a social scientist."

This is clearly different!


 * 3 "Glass believed that sociological research should have an influence on policy and assist in causing progressive social change."

This is perhaps the most problematic line this is based on this line " Ruth Glass opposed the idea of research for its own sake, believing that the purpose of sociological research was to influence government policy and bring about social change, and to this end she involved herself in political debate."


 * 4 "Her work was a contribution in this direction."

This I made up based on my knowledge if her work


 * 5 "Other later publications included her edited London, Aspects of Change (1964), London's Housing Needs (1965) and Housing in Camden (1969)."

I don't think this is a problem.

" 6 "A lasting legacy is the term gentrification a term she invented to describe the processes by poor were squeezed out of parts London and creating upper-class ghettos."

This is based on this "She invented the term gentrification, giving warnings about the squeezing of the poor out of London and the creation of upper-class ghettos."

I don't think this is a problem. "squeezing out" and upper class ghettos are from Glass not the ODNB author Anne Pimlott Baker

The cited sources were: Your thing at Tom Slater's site is an edited version of ODNB which I can access here: http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/39973?docPos=7 but this requires a log in.
 * Oxford Dictionary of National Biography: Ruth Adele
 * Ruth Glass Obituary in The Times 9th March 1990.
 * http://www.optimism-modernity.org.uk/documents/contact1946.html

Anyway can you check on the above and let me know which lines are problematic. Also will someone check on your deletion and the copyright issue and can I just wait for them or can you do something.

Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 21:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC))


 * Let's let a sysop take a look at it and then decide. Regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 21:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Particularly my apologetic PS there. Best regards, TransporterMan  ( TALK ) 15:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Ruth Glass
This whole issue, and how it has been dealt with, has made me unhappy! (Msrasnw (talk) 15:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC))

Max Lock
Hi there. Congratulations on all your work on Max Lock. If you are interested in this topic I hope you'll probably want to note that Middlesbrough is not Middlesborough. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 06:01, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks amd sorry for my spelling. (Msrasnw (talk) 08:45, 28 May 2011 (UTC))

NCH
Please don't let SlimVirgin drive you away from that page. There's a WP:OWN problem there, and the departure of editors wouldn't help. cheers, Nomoskedasticity (talk) 15:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Nomoskedasticity, thanks for your suggestion. I think the article is still a bit problematic but I think I have helped a bit. (Why still a photo of No 44 Bloomsbury square?) It seems far too long and detailed for what is still a proposal (few staff - no office/buildings - no students) but let us see how it pans out. In the media there seem to be doubts raised about whether it will work or work in the way advertised or intended - with many of those claimed to be involved the same ones who don't do much by way of student contact at their existing or previous universities. Perhaps they have a changed committment to teaching. My guess is all the teaching on the degree and student contact is going to be bought in cheaply with staff based at other institutions and the big guys will do guest appearances for big salaries on the diploma which doesn't really count. I guess you can get a first in the degree (which is set and marked by UL and for which students are external candidates) and fail the diploma. It is funny the amount of support and hostility it has recieved. Anyway I think the media stuff and indeed our article may help the institution a bit but let us see! I might pop back but guess I am trying to avoid any bad feeling, Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 09:54, 10 June 2011 (UTC))

Talkback
SlimVirgin TALK |  CONTRIBS 01:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Nice work on International Political Economy page and others
Great work you've been doing on this. Would you agree with me that International Political Economy should be capitalised?Cibwins2885 (talk) 08:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Cibwins2885, thanks for your kind words -  I remember having a lot of trouble with the Matthew Watson article and failing to save it from deletion by those who thought he wasn't notable. After much trouble I got it back.  As far a capitalisation I am rarely sure. As a first stab I might say yes I think the article which is about the IPE discipline, and subsequent discussion might be capitalised - but when talking about the international political economy itself (ie the real world) I might be inclined to have lower cases. I think titles of articles are often lower case (excpet for the first word) and lots of editors have strong views on the this. And there is some guidance here: Naming conventions (capitalization) and here Manual of Style (capital letters). I think the Oxford Guide to Style says capitalize the names of academic subjects only in the context of courses and examinations. But I am never really sure though about what is best. But lots others are sure! Anyway best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 09:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC))
 * Thanks again. If you look/google the term, you find everything is almost capitalised---from the title of academics, to journal entries, book chapters/books. Oh well. The limits to Wikipedia.Cibwins2885 (talk) 10:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Add-on: I still think capitalisation is the norm. Anyway, the IPE article and the IPE journal articles aren't reflective of what is really IPE.Cibwins2885 (talk) 08:52, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no strong views on this - I think with regards to views of what IPE is - I think I would go for the idea that there are different views of what it is - and they should all be expressed with debates about weights etc being established via consensus. Best wishes with any planned contributions. (Msrasnw (talk) 09:19, 24 June 2011 (UTC))

British International Political Economy
Hi Msrasnw, I noticed the above in your contribs. I'd prefer not to edit it, because I know it can be irritating when editors start following a person's contribs, but I wonder if I could ask you to make the tone more disinterested. Language such as "caused a considerable stir" and ending a sentence with an exclamation mark isn't really appropriate. Also, it would help in the lead to say who uses the term other than Cohen, and what British International Political Economy is, for readers who don't already know. SlimVirgin TALK |  CONTRIBS 15:04, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think a good place to start might be the Special Issue of the The New Political Economy (journal), Volume 14 Issue 3 (2009), Special Issue: The 'British School' of International Political Economy - as I recall Cox's article was quite interesting!  Cohen is noted I think for clearly laying out or originating the categorisation of these rival (USvsBritish) approaches but others use it. There are many contributions in the NPE article. Also, confusingly I think some UK based academics like the US approach and vice versa!). Anyway feel free to edit the article and remove or tidy my awful language. I might have a look at it soon but I have no ownership rights and our battle on one page, which I came to out interest and not in anyway following you, need not be replicated on others! I have no interest in the other matter which you are involved with (but it might have been incidental to my apologising to you as from your talk page - just above my addition - I had noticed you seemed to be feeling stressed).  Anyway best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC))


 * I'd prefer not to edit it, as I said, but it does need to be fixed so that it sticks closely to the sources. It currently reads like a personal essay, and the exclamation mark really ought to go. SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 16:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've had a tidy already! :) (Msrasnw (talk) 16:54, 23 June 2011 (UTC))
 * And now removed both of the offending !s. (Msrasnw (talk) 16:55, 23 June 2011 (UTC))
 * It can be vastly improved. I suggest added the journal articles in RIPE about the British-American IPE debate. Not jsut Cohen but Watson's reply etc.Cibwins2885 (talk) 20:45, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that is good idea! Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 20:47, 23 June 2011 (UTC))

New College of the Humanities
Thank you for your recent message. I was going to try again and tidy the refs without introducing "cite news" type templates as that was the claimed reason for the revert. Probably will, subject to any more talk entries in the next few hours. I don't think the UOL library image being there is too much of a problem if it is explained that access will be the same as for any external student. Once we are free to edit without the threat of mass revert I would suggest a clear bit of text saying that the university has clarified the position etc. Sussexonian (talk) 11:30, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK
Hello! Your submission of George Binney at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Sasata (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for George Binney
EncycloPetey (talk) 15:13, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Neo-Marxism
I see you have been working on the article and I just want to thank you. many people vote "keep" at an AfD, because they believe the article can be improved &mdash; and then they do nothing to improve the article. Editors like you show that the system can actually work. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 19:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks and best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 19:53, 1 August 2011 (UTC))

Falling In Reverse
No problem at all; things change, and develop, and become notable. Good luck to them. The article apears to already havr been restored. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:35, 7 August 2011 (UTC)-- Anthony Bradbury


 * Thanks User:NawlinWiki did the business! Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 21:44, 7 August 2011 (UTC))

Rauscher
Slim Virgin asked me also to revert the close and restore the article, so I did so. See what you and she can do with it.  DGG ( talk ) 04:46, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Mrasnw, I have the Kaiser book, but haven't read it yet, so the stub (this version) is probably as much as I can say about her at the moment. Still, it seems enough to establish notability. SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 05:26, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * This is good - and best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 06:23, 18 August 2011 (UTC))

Mark Patton (archaeologist)
Thanks for improving the referencing. I thought the article should be kept, but was having trouble finding sources myself. Hopefully this should sway the AfD in favour of a keep. joe&bull;roet&bull;c 13:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for you thanks :).(Msrasnw (talk) 20:06, 3 September 2011 (UTC))

Joan Robinson Growth Model Article
Hi. Thank you so much. I'll be sure to post there. PJote (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Lol. Alright. Sorry about the confusion, I'm still new to this, I just joined yesterday. =P But thanks a ton for your help!! PJote (talk) 21:17, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries and best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 21:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC))
 * Hey, I've done the needful. Just check if it's okay! :) PJote (talk) 21:25, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

RfC
Hi, I didn't mean to short-circuit the RFC you voted in by jumping ahead and making this change. After some research, my borderline conclusion was this - although I still have my doubts - there are probably more criteria for earning that title! If you disagree with my change, I'm more than happy to revert it and continue on with the RFC. Let me know if you have any other thoughts on the subject, and please continue to contribute there! Also, I'm good with 'researcher in parapsychology', which you mentioned...so feel free to change if you think it's better. Dreadstar ☥  23:14, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Dreadstar, thanks for your note. My researcher in 'researcher in parapsychology' was only an attempt at compromise - I think your simpler, 'parapsychologist' is probably better. (I think we could add a parapsychologist category too). To my mind there are still problems with the article - with the lead eg Richard L. Amoroso being there but not in the main body and with the general lack of psi stuff for which she seems to me most notable. Anyway best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 00:22, 23 September 2011 (UTC))

When You and I Were Young, Maggie
Thanks for the note, I fixed the typo. I recently became acquainted with the song and am fascinated by its history and endurance. I am also thinking of moving the Tennessee-origin reference in the opening down to a separate section, I added some links on the talk page for later perusal--that side-story is quite amusing. I also created a bio stub on the composer James Austin Butterfield, fyi.--Milowent • talkblp-r 15:45, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Filip Mentel


The article Filip Mentel has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.


 * I don’t like Proding articles, however seeing as I’m one of the main contributors to the Scottish Taskforce under which Filip Mentel falls under I think it only right I enforce the notability guidelines . You may not agree with them & they may not be perfect but the guidelines ensure that we don’t have lots of articles on footballers unworthy of notability.  I suggest you recreate Filip Mentel as a userspace draft & add it to the mainspace when he makes his senior debut for Dundee United. If you wish you can remove the PROD but I will more than likely AFD the article.  Regards (&#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733;) 21:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC))
 * I'll discuss it with other taskforce members tomorrow & if they feel he meets WP:GNG I'll remove the PROD I can't be any fairer then that. (&#9733;&#9734; DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733;) 22:39, 30 September 2011 (UTC))

October 2011
Your addition to UNESCO has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. You copied from this source, which is unacceptable. Nev1 (talk) 23:04, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry have restored text in the footnote with more appropriate quotation marks. (Msrasnw (talk) 23:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC))

A little answer
I hang out over at Special:NewPages a lot - I see a lot of articles as they're being created. And I'm a pretty quick draw, so...

Keep up the good work, and happy editing! -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I had thought of that but thought since I seem to be an Autopatrolled user I had thought this mean't my things would not appear there and be in danger! I think I now see clearly. They appear there but are not yellow. Anyway thanks and best wishes, (Msrasnw (talk) 20:43, 3 November 2011 (UTC))

Annales
Hi, nice new addition! I have added the LCCN and OCLC numbers. From those records (and from the way the title is spelled, with a period after "Annales") and from the journal's homepage, I get the impression that the title simply is "Annales", with the rest being a subtitle. If that is correct, the article should perhaps be moved to another title. I'm not sure, though, so perhaps you can have another look. --Crusio (talk) 19:31, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi again - thanks for the numbers and the tidying (sorry I didn't have time and perhaps the ability). I was surprised to find we didn't have an article on this journal which I think is a really famous one among historians. As for title - I was unsure but plumped for this after some thought. But I am not too worried. I have raised the name on the article page. Feel free to change if you would like but my library has it under the article's current title. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 21:46, 4 November 2011 (UTC))

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Donegal tweed, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Tweed (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks - this was very useful. I have amended the link and sorry for my error. (Msrasnw (talk) 15:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC))