User talk:Music Sorter/Archive 1

Welcome
Hello Music Sorter, and welcome to Wikipedia. I hope that you have enjoyed contributing and want to stick around. Here are some tips to help you get started: If you need any more information, plenty of help is available - check out Questions; ask your question here and attract help with the code ; or leave me a message on my talk page explaining your problem and I will help as best as I can. Again, welcome! strdst_grl (call me Stardust)  15:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Learn the basics by reading the introduction and taking the tutorial.
 * Remember to sign messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ) to automatically insert your username and the date.
 * Enjoy editing to improve articles, but try to leave an edit summary to explain what you are doing.
 * Create your first article using the Article Wizard to help avoid common mistakes, which may lead to article deletion.
 * Although you don't need to be familiar with all of Wikipedia's policies, try to keep to the core principles and basic guidelines.
 * When dealing with fellow Wikipedians, please remain polite, solve problems calmly, and remember that no-one is out to get you.
 * Get involved with the community by joining a WikiProject.
 * Make any test edits in the sandbox or click here and create a sandbox of your own.
 * If you are having difficulty, consider finding a mentor to give you more personal advice.
 * If in doubt, be bold. If you make a mistake, it can easily be reverted.
 * Strdst_grl - Thanks so much for this great input. From my short time here I have indeed found each one of your bullets to be great and consistent advice from many Wikipedians. Thanks for taking the time to welcome me. Now I need to figure out how to make a cool signature. :-)   &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 06:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Data as singular or plural
You might want to join the discussion at Hard disk drives: Data as singular or plural Tom94022 (talk) 17:19, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Trademarkia
Hi, I have removed the Trademarkia references you just now improved on (sorry!) in Kleenex as WP:REFSPAM. Trademarkia has spammed many articles here and I clean them up as I run across them. Cheers, CliffC (talk) 18:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your input on the peer review of USAir Flight 405, I've quickly read through your comments and will implement them later today. Regards,  Wacky Wace  you talkin' to me? 10:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Jessica Dubroff GAR
Hi MS, thank you very much for your thorough review. I appreciate all your constructive comments and suggestions, many of which I accepted. I have made some changes in the article, and replied to all your points, so please let me know what you think. Thanks again, Crum375 (talk) 22:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Crum375, you are very welcome. It was a pleasure to review Jessica Dubroff with you. Now that it has passed the GAR, I believe I have made the necessary updates to the article and related pages to show the article as GA. If you find that I missed anything, please don't hesitate to let me know so I can correct it. I look forward to future articles that you take through the GAR process. &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 04:11, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * MS, thank you for your review and promotion. It was a pleasure for me too, and I appreciate very much your thoughtful and thorough review, as well as your kind remarks. Regarding the comma issue, like you, I want the best possible punctuation, and I obviously don't consider myself to be the ultimate authority, so I'll wait to get more inputs before making a final decision: it's easy enough to add a comma if I find myself in a tiny minority. I do accept that in situations where "city" alone requires a comma, one would also be required after "state". So the issue is only whether adding "state" (where there isn't an original comma) always requires the extra comma after it. Anyway, thanks again for everything, Crum375 (talk) 11:01, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * MS, one small question. Can you explain this edit? Is there a reason to add these templates to every historical thread on the talk page? Crum375 (talk) 23:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Crum375, I have been reviewing a number of different pages and I found a few that have used the "done" or "resolved" marks to show when items of discussion have been acted upon and completed. It certainly helped me better determine when a particular issue in question was still open and looking to be completed, or closed and needed no further assistance. I started putting them on pages I was reviewing to be sure there were no open items. I figured since it was a talk page it did not detract from the public view of the article. It also saves time for future reviewers to know the can skip an item unless they wanted to read the history as to how the decision was made. I thought they would only have a positive effect. Do you see a negative side I missed, or was your question only curiosity? &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 01:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with using the template to check off recent issues, related to the GAR. My question is about old historical threads in the talk page, where adding the template seems odd. Crum375 (talk) 13:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Understood. When reviewing an article for GAR I ensure that any of the past discussions have been addressed as well. When looking at any other article in which an editor is interested in making a contribution, it is useful to know if that thread has been addressed or still open. It increases the efficiency of reviewing old threads. Some threads never get resolved and should be considered by new editors. Others that have been addressed can easily be skipped or reviewed; it would be up to the editor. When I first saw this practice in other articles I realized how helpful it was to know if any of the issues were still open and pending. &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 15:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

What would you do when some of the threads are archived, would you then go into all the archive pages and check them off? Is there a time limit? In this particular case, there are some threads from 5-6 years ago. Crum375 (talk) 16:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Good question. I believe the biggest issue is for discussion items still on the main talk page. Items on the archive pages are archived typically because they have not been active. Anything on the current talk page is either active or not archived. If a page does not do any archiving then the "done" indicators help people skip items that still appear on the active page, but no action is necessary. &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 06:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * In my experience, and this article is case in point, many low-traffic articles have old unarchived threads, some from many years ago, simply because there aren't enough of them to justify archiving. The point is that anyone could decide at any moment to archive the older threads, even if there are very few of them, so the marking as "done" of only unarchived ones is rather arbitrary. Anyway, I guess if you continue doing this you may run into other people commenting on this practice, so I'll leave it to them. I do want to thank you again for your thorough review and promotion. Crum375 (talk) 12:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

GAN
I've requested a second opinion on the article on Air Greenland's first GAN, if you want to go and check it out. Regards,  Wacky Wace  you talkin' to me? 16:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive Wrap-up
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Utahraptor at 22:18, 3 August 2010 (UTC).

November 2010 backlog elimination drive update
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Utahraptor (talk) at 16:26, 14 November 2010 (UTC).

New improvements
Thanks for your kind review and suggestions on security service (telecommunication): I tried to follow your points. Would you mind assessing the differences? Thanks a lot

--Pastore Italy (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Viking Modular SATADIMM.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Viking Modular SATADIMM.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors via SMasters using AWB on 01:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 23:50, 2 December 2010 (UTC).

Replaceable fair use File:Viking Modular SATADIMM.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Viking Modular SATADIMM.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 06:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:SATA Mini PCI-e-(hztl).gif
Thanks for uploading File:SATA Mini PCI-e-(hztl).gif. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Hammersoft (talk) 14:11, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE Year-end Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:35, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Solid-state drives
I de-prodded List of solid-state drives and moved it to List of solid-state drive manufacturers. I agree the list is unwieldy and unmaintainable, but think it may be valuable if it's refocused. Are you interested in the topic? I'd be happy to collaborate on cleaning it up. --Pnm (talk) 19:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE drive news
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 20:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC).

GOCE January Backlog elimination drive conclusion
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 15:31, 5 February 2011 (UTC).

== RFC on the inclusion of a table comparing SI units and Binary prefixes ==

Notice: An RFC is being conducted here at Talk:Hard diskdrive#RFC on the use of the IEC prefixes. The debate concerns this table which includes columns comparing SI and Binary prefixes to describe storage capacity. We welcome your input

You are receiving this message because you are a member of WikiProject Computing --RaptorHunter (talk) 18:50, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:52, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE elections
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 08:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:10, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive invitation
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 09:17, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Your query on Ohconfucius's talk page
Hello Music Sorter. I've seen your enquiry on Ohconfucius's talk page and, as it seems he hasn't had the time to give you an answer yet, I thought I'd give you a preliminary response. Please keep in mind that most answers I give will probably be better explained by Ohconfucius himself. Anyhow, I will try to address your concerns point by point: Hope this has allayed some of your concerns. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 10:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * While I'm sure the links were all correct, they were in violation of WP:OVERLINK. Looking at the diff, I think 100 might be a bit of an exaggeration.
 * The dates in the refs were changed because they were inconsistent (in fact, looking at the article at the moment, the dates alternate between YYYY-MM-DD, dmy and mdy) and MOS:NUM permits (indeed encourages) using one consistent date format. If for some reason, you felt the article would be better served using all YYYY-MM-DD in the refs section, then I'm sure Ohconfucius would be able to accommodate that.
 * As far as I'm aware, Rich Farmbrough was only admonished because some of his edits were only making capitalisation changes. As long as other productive changes are made in the same edit, cosmetic changes are acceptable. Please correct me if this is incorrect.
 * If the parameters were unused, I can't see why removing them would be a problem. For example, removing "|language=" for a clearly English-language source seems a positive edit.
 * Personally, not sure about the London vs UK change. Will let Ohconfucius explain that.
 * Changing "|publisher=" to "|work=" or "|agency=" is a productive edit. For example, The New York Times should always be in italics, yet if it is the publisher parameter it would not be (hence the change to work, which italicises automatically). Similar story with, for example, Associated Press or Reuters, which should be in the agency parameter as they are news agencies.
 * You did not mention any policies in your post and I (and I assume Ohconfucius) disagree that it is in violation of the MoS. You may be interested in having a read of Policies and guidelines.
 * Please note that Ohconfucius is not using a bot; all edits are manually checked before hitting the save page button.
 * Jenks24, thanks for this very thoughtful reply. As I am sure both you and Ohconfucius has run into situations where what appears to be one thing may indeed be something else. Since first seeing the numerous postings from Ohconfucious and my original post to his page I have thought even more about what changes he is making. I also did what I could to review his scripts to determine what specifically was being modified. In response to your comments I have the following:
 * On the overlinking I fully understand the intent of the reduction. I was not trying to over exaggerate the number and there were so many edits I tried to estimate the quantity. The actual count appears to be about 60. My greater fear was this change came from a bot. With the number of changes I was concerned needed or helpful links were being removed. Looking at each one they appear to match the ones in the script. There may be debate among editors if the links in the company info box to CEO, president and others should be wholesale removed from every article he reviews. I would have expected some discussion somewhere that shows concensus for such a change. Did that happen and I did not see it? If it did I am happy to support it in all the edits I do as well. Otherwise I am concerns this is an opinion based change being made on a grand scale.
 * On the dates changes I now see the other perspective you have described. The issue I was concerned about was MOS:DATERET (which I did state). I now see the position that Ohconfucious is taking is if any part of the article is using the Month-DD-YY format and YYYY-MM-DD is mixed into the footnotes, then even the footnotes should take that format to comply with MOS:DATEUNIFY since I think we all agree the policy is clear to not use that format in the prose. With that I guess I should rethink all my edits in the footnotes to focus first on MOS:DATEUNIFY and then use MOS:DATERET to find the predominant and permitted format.
 * You may be correct on the issues with Rich F.
 * The parameter removal is less of an issue if the changes are not from a bot. I presume the user would not remove entries that appear to be typically added and the editor is working on getting them. In the end they can certainly add them back, so no true harm.
 * The London to UK change is discussed on his script page. I do have a concern that he says this edit is based on his opinion to list the country of location and not the city for the publication.
 * the publisher= changes is good information. I was not aware the different parameters created a different appearance. I should review that data to follow the ability of the template better. Thanks.
 * I thought I did mention a few policies I felt were being violated on the date changes in particular. As mentioned above I see there is reason to believe these changes were not in face violations. I do appreciate the link to the WP policy page. I try to follow them as much as possible. I think my past edits have supported them as much as I understand them. I am certainly open to increased learning and will never say I have them all fully interpreted.
 * As I mentioned above, I appreciate knowing that this is not a bot making these changes.
 * In summary your reply has done a great job increasing my understanding of what is happening with these numerous edits that would otherwise appear to be a bot. In fact I am interested in better understanding the script and how I might be able to take advantage of it checking these basic elements when I edit and create articles to enhance my abilities. I will also make a note of this discussion on Ohconfusius' page where I placed my original message as a follow-up. I will also review the "undo" changes I made now that I can feel better they do not in fact violate any policies. Thanks &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 17:15, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your considered reply and your kind note on my talk page, I do appreciate it. I can entirely understand how you came to your initial conclusions; the MoS is very complicated and I think there would be very few people who could say that they know the whole thing (and I'm definitely not one of them) and you seem to understand them very well for your short time on Wikipedia. I see that you and Ohconfucius have had some further conversation on his talk page and the issues seem to have been resolved. As a result, I apologise for my short reply to your detailed response, but if there is anything left that you still have concerns with or are unsure about, please feel free to ask me and I will do my best to answer your questions. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 08:28, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

International Space Station
Thank you Music Sorter ! My deepest heartfelt thanks for your taking an interest in the new drive to push the ISS article to where I was simply unable to push it alone, I know to you it's a small thing that you've done, but you haven't any idea how difficult progress on this article has been. You've picked out one of the many simple mistakes which any editor could have spot if they were looking, but so very many have simply overlooked. I was waiting to see who actually took the effort to look at this article. You got the one that didn't even need reading glasses, but everyone else missed. I am also new here, but you will get my very first awarded barnstar for your efforts as soon as I work out how. My sincerest thanks Penyulap   talk 03:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are very welcome my friend. I must say that initially your post in the Computing Project group initially had my "slightly put off" (something I no longer feel) the way you posted the question to the group if the space station was using computers. You almost sounded like a salesman pushing a POV. Then when I read your message further I understood your desire to further improve the article. So I went to the article and found an incredible wealth of information with more sources than I think I have seen in any other article. I was truly impressed and I further appreciated your desire to continue to improve the article and take on the burden of putting yourself as a focal point on the article. With my initial quick read I did see a couple of things that caught my eye so I tossed them in. I am currently pretty deep in a number of computing and storage articles (my area of expertise), but I do periodically take a break from that to do something different (over the weekend I worked on a number of WP:DAB articles. So if there is something you think needs some particular attention from someone outside your group let me know and I will put it on my schedule. &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 04:14, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thats ok, I know what it is like to be busy. I am glad you understood. You do what you need to do, and by all means come back when you do have time to spare. You'll always be welcome. Penyulap   talk 05:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Floppy article invitation
Hi, you're invited in taking active part in editing/patrolling/reviewing Floppy disk hardware emulator. Hoping you'll enjoy it as you enjoed Floppy disk. Blackvisionit (talk) 05:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:48, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Updating Integrated Device Technology
Hey &sect; Music Sorter &sect; !

I was thinking about making edits to the Integrated Device Technology article but I don't want to fall into the mistake of making it promotional again. So I've been working on the userfied page User:Crisscutfries/Integrated Device Technology as a draft page. I've posted on the the conflict of interest noticeboard in order to get some sort of feedback regarding my post on my userfied page. And since you were willing to help before, I wanted to ask if you'd like to help now.

Cheers Crisscutfries (talk) 17:03, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Crisscutfries
 * I will take a look this weekend. Thanks for letting me know. &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 15:13, 16 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Great! Thanks &sect; Music Sorter &sect; !Crisscutfries (talk) 16:03, 16 September 2011 (UTC)Crisscutfries


 * Hey &sect; Music Sorter &sect; , I just wanted to know if you had a chance to take a look at the page. Crisscutfries (talk) 15:55, 21 September 2011 (UTC)Crisscutfries


 * Yes I did. I decided to make the changes directly on your page rather than try to describe what I was recommending. You can certainly undo anything you like, but I think the changes and comments I left in the editor notes on the page itself should help you get it live again. &sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 07:02, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. I've taken a look at the notes and changes, and it looks good. The only downside I've looked into this company and how it got started, and I've had no luck finding enough information about the company's origins.Crisscutfries (talk) 16:24, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sometimes companies pay analysts to write up something in their early development stages. If it was before 1995 you generally only find it in printed form before the web got going. Public companies sometimes have some interesting data buried in the annual reports to shareholders. Otherwise I guess you will just have to do without.&sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 16:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 01:48, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Dispute over USB article naming
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "USB". Thank you. --Crispmuncher (talk) 20:47, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 11:05, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 16
Hi. When you recently edited Take Me to Your Leader (phrase), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Trillian (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. Read the FAQ* Join us 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, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

&sect; Music Sorter &sect;  (talk) 15:50, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Musicsquare.net
Hello, I noticed that 'Musicsquare.net' has ceased to exist. Somebody should clean up the links all over wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=musicsquare.net&title=Special%3ASearch

Please pick it up, or put it in front somebody with a bot that can do this. I'm not going to edit dozens of pages that are of minor interest to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:1241:1:F0C5:6580:148C:4F3D (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

What was the RAMAC price and capacity?
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Hard_disk_drive. Please help end the duologue on capacity and price of the IBM RAMAC Model 350 disk file. Thanks. Tom94022 (talk) 21:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

December 2014 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

GOCE holiday 2014 newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

GOCE 2014 report
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Violin Memory


The article Violin Memory has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Unambiguous advertising

While all constructive 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. CorporateM (Talk) 04:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

GOCE March newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

April 2015 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

GOCE June 2015 newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:20, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

GOCE August 2015 newsletter

 * sent by via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)