User talk:Ryan Vesey/Archive 18

Help!!!
Hi, its me again, apparently I am having a nightmare, but this editor just edited my Nebria species, by using AWB and putted orphan tag on, even though he saw it as a huge genus (I guess he saw). Can you please come [here], and discuss it with him and me, plus he was warned several times about wikify tags, and even got a final warning for 3-revert-rule violation! Can you please revert any changes that this editor have made to any of my insect related stub articles. Here is an example: Nebria dahlii, and I think there will be more next day!--Mishae (talk) 02:05, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Mishae! On the topic of the orphan tags, I found the better way for you to deorphan the articles.  Rather than creating navboxes, you should make sure the articles are listed in the genus article.  In this case, Nebria has a listing for Nebria dahilii.  I assume that is a spelling error.  If you change the spelling, the article won't be an orphan any more.  In other cases, species might need to be added to the genus article or a genus article might need to be created. Ryan Vesey 02:45, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

This is not a newsletter
This is just a tribute.

Anyway. You're getting this note because you've participated in discussion and/or asked for updates to either the Article Feedback Tool or Page Curation. This isn't about either of those things, I'm afraid ;p. We've recently started working on yet another project: Echo, a notifications system to augment the watchlist. There's not much information at the moment, because we're still working out the scope and the concepts, but if you're interested in further updates you can sign up here.

In addition, we'll be holding an office hours session at 21:00 UTC on Wednesday, 14 November in #wikimedia-office - hope to see you all there :). I appreciate it's an annoying time for non-Europeans: if you're interested in chatting about the project but can't make it, give me a shout and I can set up another session if there's enough interest in one particular timezone or a skype call if there isn't. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:19, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Need your opinion
O.K, so you know how much I am obsessed with navboxes? Well today I discovered that I can add Lepidoptera template to any of my butterfly related articles, and Coleoptera to all beetle related ones! So is Anura for frogs. I hope consensus wont be too concerned about it? That way, no matter how big the navbox is, it will still be concise, in a way that moving back wont bring back the opened navbox! Your thoughts? Just to let you know, the same thing is going on on Vietnamese and Ukrainian Wikis, I think its time for us to do it too! Otherwise, I don't understand the reason why users would create such navboxes, and don't use them?! Check this one out, see what you think: Elachista atricomella--Mishae (talk) 04:54, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, those should be some great templates to use, congrats on finding them. Ryan Vesey 15:55, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I hope no one minds if I will add them to my previous articles, which I have like 2000 in my watchlist, by writing in edit summary navbox added, or if it will be possible, after the finals you can do it for me?--Mishae (talk) 16:18, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, that seems like a great way to do it. Just as a note, it would probably be best if you didn't make other changes (to spacing and the like) while you were adding the navbox. As for me doing it, that would be more difficult because I don't know which of your articles are which types of things. Ryan Vesey 16:22, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * O.K, I will try it...--Mishae (talk) 17:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Myotis vivesi
I have found a large template in this article above, Myotis nav, which I changed to Myotis in all other articles, I also removed taxonomic rank from it, but left it in the Chiroptera, which I found as of today.--Mishae (talk) 05:50, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know if there is an exceptional reason to have the second template without the taxonomic rank. It is probably best if there's only one template and a redirect leading from one to the other. That being said, this might be one of those templates that have too many species to be of much use. Ryan Vesey 14:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The reason for it would be that Chiroptera template covers the Myotis, that way the large number of species are invisible, and are visible only when you click on button "show". On Vietnamese Wikipedia they do it with species, they are the ones that thought me which navboxes to use...--Mishae (talk) 20:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That makes sense then. Ryan Vesey 21:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Gomantong Myotis and Lesser Mouse-eared Bat
Another question, on the article above, I added some sections and putted IUCN as the main source of info. I also updated the source from 2006 to 2008 (or 2012), question is: Should I now remove the source, since its the same as I am referencing to?--Mishae (talk) 02:00, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * With Lesser Mouse-eared Bat, can you check the same thing and also for copyvio, I am just afraid that I might have done it!--Mishae (talk) 03:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Table considerations
Ryan, one technical point. I am far from an expert on tables, but I am not a big fan of using the percentage mode in width. I think I understand why it is used, and a real expert might point out that fixed with can be a problem on small screens, or maybe on mobile devices. Maybe someone needs to create a hybird, but I want to show you why I am not a fan:

Many people have 15 inch monitors. On that size monitor, the table looks great:

15 inch monitor view

How, I also have a 20 inch monitor (and some people have much wider monitors.) Look what happens on a 20 inch:

20 inch monitor view

The table is very stretched out, and hard to read. -- SPhilbrick (Talk)  14:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I have a 60" monitor (Yes, I use the TV in the living room and a wireless keyboard. Great for gaming, btw) and get the same result as the 20", assuming because both are 1920x1080 resolution. I changed the table width from 90% to 1200px and put a hidden comment in the section to that affect. You could tweak it or revert it, no offense taken. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 14:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * My laptop screen is set to 1280x800, and the table shoots way off to the right of the screen now, forcing me to scroll to see the final column. Percentages is the only sane way to go, as we need to be able to accommodate a wide range of display form factors, not just PC monitors. Malleus Fatuorum 15:08, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * (almost ec)Now it isn't ideal in a mobile browser, but I think it is a net positive. The ideal situation would be for some techy to design a spec so that it can be fixed size for large screen, but shrink down for small.
 * Had to leave for a minute, but I had already noticed that wikicode completely ignores and borks "max-width" settings. Ideally, you would set it to 90% width and a max width of 1000 or 1200 pixels, so it will auto size for mobiles, but it doesn't seem to accept those CSS attributes :/ Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 15:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That sounds ideal. I have a question in to the village pump.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  15:42, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Max-width works just fine. Problem solved? Malleus Fatuorum 15:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I was gonna say, max-width is working in my tests... Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. Now looks fine in 15 inch (Chrome) 20 inch (Firefox) and iPhone.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  16:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that fix, and thank you to Sphilbrick for the suggestion and everyone else who took part. Tables are the one think on Wikipedia that I'd like a virtual editor for. Ryan Vesey 20:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "max-width" is being ignored on my system, Chrome on Win 7, 1920x1080 resolution. I just goes out to full 90%. I just opened up IE8 and it works fine. Odd. Not sure if it is my system or all Chrome installs that is failing to render that CSS command. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 22:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems to be a problem with Chrome. I've got Chromium running on a Ubuntu system, and it too ignores the "max-width:", but it works just fine with Firefox. Malleus Fatuorum 14:52, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting conversation goes on here, but alas, I came late... Either way, are we talking about Excel? As far as IE7 or 8, my brother had 7 and it became useless when Chrome came out. I don't know about IE8 (I think I use it), but I clearly don't see a difference between IE7 or IE8, and as far as tables go shouldn't be a problem. It all depends, I guess, on the size of the table and your specs.--Mishae (talk) 06:11, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It's referring to the table in User:Ryan Vesey/Temp. Once the table is finished, it should be easier to decide how to fix it.  Really, it needs someone with 18 different screens and browsers running at the same time because it's impossible to know how an excellent change on one browser in one resolution will affect all of the others. Ryan Vesey 14:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Doesn't really matter though does it? The majority of those with modern browsers will see the advantage on wide monitors, and those whose browsers don't render "max-width:" correctly are no worse off than they were before. Nothing will work for every browser/display combination. Malleus Fatuorum 14:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I said it was OK, in chrome, but I had the Chrome on the 15 inch monitor, When I move it to the 20 inch, it stretches. However, as MF points out, it isn't worse than before.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  14:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Apparently Chrome doesn't like to use max-width for non-block displays. Should be fixed now. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like we found it about the same time. If I had added ;display:block instead of :display:block, I would have done better.-- SPhilbrick  (Talk)  15:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help guys. Here's a question, is it absolutely necessary for the table to be indented from the text on both sides or is there a way for the table's margins to be the same as the margins for the text? Ryan Vesey 15:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it can be left-aligned by making it an inline-block rather than a block. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:20, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That just doubled the right margin, is there a way to fix that or is that a result of one of the max widths? Ryan Vesey 15:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Just remove the margins, which I added to centre the table. Malleus Fatuorum 15:29, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I don't see that that made any visual difference (on my admittedly wide screen). I think it is just the max-width. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:34, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I removed the margin settings only a minute or so ago; the table should now be left-aligned with "display:block:". Malleus Fatuorum 15:39, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, yeah, I see it now. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool, collaboration at work.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  17:04, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I restored the centering margins, I feel like it was presented better that way. Ryan Vesey 17:34, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 15:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Automatic Strikeout  17:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Break
I thought you were trying to take a wiki-break... Go  Phightins  !  21:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I am, trying and succeeding in a wiki-break are fairly different things Ryan Vesey 14:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I can imagine. If you'd succeeded at your RfA, you could block yourself until your finals are over. Good luck. Go   Phightins  !  20:32, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I considered using some javascript in my js page that would block me from logging in, but that would have meant Wikipedia would have 5 fewer articles and I wouldn't be midway through User:Ryan Vesey/Temp. Ryan Vesey 20:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I can tell you that Wikipedia doesn't benefit from you being MIA, however I'm guessing that neither do your grades. Go   Phightins  !  20:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I finished my midterms on Monday so I've got nothing big left until Early December except for a 4 page draft I hope to have done by this weekend. That being said, I'm continuing to keep a very limited watchlist.  Having things like ANI on your watchlist ensure that you waste a lot of time on Wikipedia while making minimal edits or improvements. Ryan Vesey 20:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That's good. In the end, we're all supposed to be here as content contributors to build an encyclopedia. Go   Phightins  !  21:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Ohio politics
I'm asking you to create the last four pages here.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.231.13.104 (talk • contribs)


 * Just in case you weren't aware the above comment was made by a sockpuppet of banned User:OSUHEY. Hut 8.5 22:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I knew right away, I created some of the articles before but am not incredibly interested now. It's unfortunate that there's not an Ohioan editor (other than OSUHEY) willing to get some of these written. Ryan Vesey 22:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Question
I realized there is 2 different templates for Spiders that all mean the same thing, what I mean by it is this: Should I nominate bottom one for deletion? The top one takes less space.:)--Mishae (talk) 05:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * WPSpiders
 * WikiProject Spiders
 * No, the top one is a redirect to the bottom one. Ryan Vesey 13:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Another question: How come I see the (+) and (-) on the bottom of every page next to categories? Example: Nebria campbelli. By the way, also check my other question above in "Need your opinion" section. Another question, whats wrong with conversion in those artcles?: Trimeresurus malabaricus and Trimeresurus trigonocephalus--Mishae (talk) 21:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay here. The (-) allows you to remove a category with HotCat the (+) allows you to quickly add a category. There's also a (±) which allows you to modify a category. The conversions were fixed by other editors and the problem was that the template doesn't support commas so 2,000 should be written as 2000. You would be correct in removing a source after you use it in-text for Lesser mouse-eared bat and Gomantong Myotis. I'll check the bat article for copyvio, one thing you can do in the future is use the duplication detector to compare your article with all of the sources. Ryan Vesey 14:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I already used it in both articles, and wrote it to fullfilment, I even think that Lesser mouse-eared bat article can be moved from Low Stub to Low Start! Your thought on it? As far as duplication detector goes, I kind of don't trust it. There is a chance that the program might mistaken not copyvio texts with copyvio ones, or the other way around. So, it will be better if you, or any other user would check it for copyvio... I, for one, will provide the source, and I will have a feeling that I violate any texts, I will give it to a user with a question such as the one that I asked you.--Mishae (talk) 04:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!
Have a great Thanksgiving and best wishes for a good semester! Automatic Strikeout  01:18, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Response
I will. Sorry for the sloppiness. Guinsberg (talk) 21:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Macio Snipes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (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) 11:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse
Hi, Ryan -- thanks for your invite to the Teahouse (delivered by HostBot). If I don't appear for a while, it means I'm too busy learning how to do this Wikipedia thing. But I'll certainly drop by if (when?) I get too confused, etc. Best wishes, CsDix (talk) 18:46, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Major professional sports teams of the United States and Canada
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Major professional sports teams of the United States and Canada. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation needs YOUR help!
Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation at 22:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC). If you do not wish to receive anymore messages from this WikiProject, please remove your username from this page.

WikiProject Wikify: November Newsletter and December Drive

 * Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Wikify, 22:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Italics in Titles
Me and user Stemonitis are in conflict again! Last week I wrote 30+ articles about isopods but I decided not to add Italic title and "name" in a taxobox, reason for not adding "name" was due to the fact that:
 * 1) Majority of species wont have common names and will always have a scientific name
 * 2) Removing it (or not using it at all), saves extra line that can be used for something else. If by any chance the species will have a common name, then, and only then I wont object using it! At its current state I am objectiong it, and I would like all those reverts (if they will happen), and reedits just to put the template and "name" in, to stop now! Because there is no point to it and it angers me!

As far as italics go, the title is wikified from the start, therefore its unnecessary addition that I even want to discuss on a forum, and if consensus will agree I will remove it. Infact, I was writing majority of my articles like that, and no one, NO ONE secretly add it, or issue a concern about it! 2 Days ago he was concerned of me using a Global Species Database or Globalspecies.org that from his point of view was missinformative. I discussed it with him, and even asked for second opinion, in both of which I was proven to be wrong. So I came to understand that its time for me to remove the missinformation which I did today, after he gave a link where I didn't found anything and came to the conclusion "if that species can't be found there, then he need to give me another link, or explain it to me a bit further". So today I decided to remove it my way out of fear that he will delete them (and he did threaten to do it). Then I realized that he decided to go and do it himself, while I was about to write to him about my missunderstanding and continue the conversation. I never expected that user Semonitis will be a self righteous individual, and will cause this sort of problem in our relationship, which was already strained, but his impatience doesn't improve it, and as I mentioned above, angers me!

So, my problem here is that he added this template and "name =" in almost every article! I was glad that I removed it, since I don't see a point for it. Now though, I am worried that he might threaten to block me or enter into an edit war with me! Can you please come to his talkpage and didcuss it further between me and him?--Mishae (talk) 02:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't know why this is being discussed here of all places, but the above is a gross misrepresentation of events. The addition of italic title and the use of the  parameter were very much of secondary importance in my edits. (The fact that Mishae "doesn't see a point for it" is also irrelevant; there are reasons, even if Mishae cannot see them.) The real purpose of the edits was to remove a series of significant errors introduced by Mishae – applying the wrong names for families, claiming occurrences of European narrow endemics over wide swathes of Asia, linking to non-existent external web pages, etc. No-one is edit warring (unless you count Mishae's subsequent pointless edits). Mishae seems to have utterly misunderstood the purpose of my edits, which is unfortunate, because they have all been clearing up the mess Mishae left behind. --Stemonitis (talk) 18:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Stemonitis if you see those reasons then specify them here so that Ryan can understand your point of view as well. I maybe missunderstood you, but don't think that the stuff that I am saying is a "lie" or in any way attack against you. All I want from Ryan is to help me understand you, thats all. Now, as far as "linking to non-existent external web pages", well, user Entomologist2 gave me that idea, go talk to him. Whgy should I be blamed for all of this, while you will expect a pat on the head. As far as edit war goes, maybe I overreacted and I am sorry about it, but fact is a fact. Since I know some rules of the current project, I do worry about missunderstanding that can result into my block, and both of you know that.--Mishae (talk) 02:37, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * No, Entomologist2 (a, shall we say, "close associate" of Stho002) only adds links to pages that exist, generally because Stho002 has recently created the Wikispecies page. He does not add links to non-existent pages, as you have been.
 * Since you ask, using italic title and  ensures that the title is italicised even:
 * If there is a misspelling in the taxobox,
 * If the taxon is a monotypic genus, where the article is at the genus title but the taxobox is effectively about the species,
 * During page moves, where the contents of the article are changed before or after the page move,
 * For fossil taxa, where an obelisk is included in the taxon name,
 * In cases where a reference is added to the focal taxon in the taxobox,
 * And probably in some other cases that slip my mind for the moment.
 * I have seen every one of these things happen, so they are real effects. Note that the method I use causes no harm, but is demonstrably useful on many occasions. I do not require other people to follow the way I do things. I do, however, ask that they don't destroy it for no benefit; it does no harm and some good, and should therefore be retained. It follows that undoing it cannot be regarded as "cleanup", contrary to your recent edit summaries, and could even be regarded as disruptive.
 * (Incidentally, if Ryan Vesey would rather we take this elsewhere, I would be happy to do so. It seems like a bit of an invasion, since this issue has nothing to do with him.) --Stemonitis (talk) 07:25, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Since my "ears are burning" (all 4 of them!), I shall make some comment. Mishae seems to me to be well meaning, but is a little bit out of their depth with taxonomic stuff, while Stemonitis acts like some sort of middle-aged gardening tool stuck in the ground so hard that nobody can budge him one inch! At any rate, the one thing that we really should all stop doing is creating species page stubs for mere species names, i.e. names that may or may not correspond to valid species, and which next to nothing is known about. Creating such stubs is just not useful. Taxonomic catalogues list all names for a specific purpose, but this is not a WP purpose. There is no point creating a stub for every species name in some big genus. We need to prioritize the more notable species... Entomologist2 (talk) 07:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Stemonitis, if a:
 * Species is misspelled, there is no need to ilalicize it, just fix a mistake!
 * Species is monotipic genus, apply it! But keep in mind that not every species is monotipic. Not to mention that they might not be like that forever, and new species are found daily.
 * Fossil taxa. Well, I should say that you need to apply it then just for fossil taxa! Keep in mind though, not all species are considered to be fossils.


 * Now as for my "disruptive" edits, I personally don't understand. First I was theatened that I will be blocked if I wont use edit summary, now I use it and people still not happy. Can someone explain to me how should I write an edit summary in this case? Or wait, I got it, I will do it like Stemonitis does "because he is always right", and if I don't he will beg the admins to block me to teach me a lesson or two, meantime reverting everything to the place that he likes it. If so, that wont be fair toward me. As for asking Ryan to move it somewhere else... Well, you don't win friends that way! I don't think Ryan will say "hey I agree with him, lets block Mishae and we will celebrate it afterwards!" As I mentioned above, I asked Ryan to solve a disspute between two of us (now 3), that all. What you are saying is going on the lines of "Hey Ryan, I am your friend, right? Well if I am can you defend me against this disruptive editor named Mishae!"


 * Now, let Ryan decide who is right and who is wrong. There is a possibility that might be both wrong or both right, you never know...


 * Since Entomologist2 came lets discuss his view as well: What he is saying is that I am not suppose to create articles of every species... You have a point, and I don't. As far as they have distribution that is supported by Fauna Europaea, I shall continue. Majority of millipedes don't have distribution in Europe, so I don't write stubs about them. As I mentioned above, all I want is to help a project, and writing articles is my strengh here. If people calling my edits or articles pointless, how about you extend on them! I did that with moths, and user Ruigeroeland was very happy with it!--Mishae (talk) 22:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, you found alternative solutions to some of the items on my list. That list, however, included more items than that and my point is that it can be helpful to be consistent between articles, so that monotypic genera, fossil taxa and others are all treated the same. I didn't argue that there weren't alternative solutions; I merely argued that including italic title and the  parameter is one solution that works, and that removing that markup is pointless. In fact, you have yet to provide a good reason for doing so, whereas I have endeavoured to show you the reasons for keeping them. And please note that I always said it was a minor issue, and is not enough to warrant an edit on my part. (By the same logic, undoing it does not of itself warrant an edit.) The rest of your comment I simply cannot follow; you seem to see us as much more hostile than is actually the case. I don't think anyone is actually threatening to block you, and if they were, it would be for violations of policy, not because of some vendetta. In fact, the whole issue seems to be a storm in a teacup; you are angry, but there's really no cause for it. --Stemonitis (talk) 22:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I have all the reason to worry about it. I wasn't aware that I will be blocked on Russian Wikipedia for simply saying something that wasn't O.K. to say, turns out people were not patient enough:) But my block there lasted a year, so that should tell plenty why I can be angry and be worried. As far as policy goes, well thats a double standard. On one hand, a lot of Russian Wikipedians told me that a block is ment to be "preventive, not punishable". I agree. But on the other hand, if a block is not specified and in Russian Wikipedia is more then common. Simple words like "shit" can get in a block for a day if not more! So, yes, because I had an experience with it, I have a whole right to be panicky. Now, as for my edits, well, I have a reason for removing it:


 * 1) By removing, I have an extra line to write the article on. On the other hand I do agree that maybe thats minor since Wikipedia have unlimited amount of space for articles. But thats leads to another point:
 * 2) It might be easer for editors. Instead of fixing,  , then  , and then title of the article, that will be minus one thing to worry about. As far as italic title goes, I don't know if I said it earlier or not, but the current template is pointless, and here is why (to add to the previous list):
 * 3) It doesn't italicizes the title! Here is how: We have title present in the article that have 5 of those ('), then we have species that have the same amount, following by  which have 2 of those. As a result   already have 2 of them, so it transforms it onto a title, therefore, the title is italicized already because of the italicized  . Get the picture?--Mishae (talk) 23:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey guys, I'm getting busier and busier since it's the last week of school (and then finals after that). I haven't even had a chance to read this whole dispute. I know that  deals with dispute resolution all the time.  I'm going to ask him if he can come by and offer an opinion. This is also good because he should be completely neutral. It's fine if you discuss on my talk page, although depending on the severity of this (again I haven't had a chance to read it), Guy might suggest a different forum. If he's busy, I'll ask if he can send over another person who deals with DR. Hopefully this can be resolved easily. Ryan Vesey 23:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolving the dispute
Hi! I am Guy Macon, and I am a dispute resolution volunteer at WP:DRN. At Ryan Vesey's request, I am stepping in here to see if I can help.

When I deal with a dispute, I usually ask a few peripheral questions before addressing the dispute itself. Right now I have four questions.

[1] Does everyone involved want my help? I can help even if one party does not want to be involved, but it requires a completely different approach from a dispute where both parties want to work with me.

[2] Is this primarily a dispute about article content or user conduct? My experience has been that talking about both at the same time doesn't work very well, so I deal with one first and then see if I need to deal with the other.

[3] Are there any other users or any other Wikipedia pages that are involved in this dispute?

I should mention that this is also a bit of a test to see if one or more of the parties in the dispute does something like not answering, answering a question I didn't ask and ignoring the one I did ask, using the answer as an opportunity to engage in a personal attack, posing a long, rambling reply instead of just answering the question, etc. I can deal with any of these, but everything goes more smoothly when I get answers that are concise and to the point. --Guy Macon (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, my name is Misha (Mishae is my user name, but if its easer call me by my real name, I live in Minnesota and our time zones might be different. I have a small biogreaphy that you can read on my userpage, so I wont rambl about anything. The disspute started a while back, and you can read about my previous missunderstanding in the Arbitrage, link to which might be provided on my talkpage. That one was resolved with a warning toward me that if I will call anybody a name, then I will be blocked. Apperently, that decision didn't satisfied Stemonitis, and he was waiting for me to do something that he didn't liked. As you know, reading someones mind is impossible, but provoking a conflict is a piece of cake. To the point: I realized that Stemonitis had some unwritten articles on isopods. Now as a side note, I work on various projects, that includes biographies of scientists, plants, video games, Russian films, and various insects (ranging from beetles to bugs, and from moths to butterflies). On another side note: My native language is Russian, so my English is a Second Language, and might be not as good.


 * I will answer your questions now (the thing above was my introduction. If its long, I apologize):


 * Yes and Yes! Your help will be appreciated here since Ryan is not available.
 * It depends how the other party will reply on it. You see, it was about an article content which then turned into a user content. My main argument was about Italic title and its (in my opinion) useless usage. Stemonitis brought me some valid reasons and so did I. But we didn't do it until today. So, the conflict is almost resolved, but one problem: User Stemonitis edits my articles and adds Italic title and, which in my opinion were pointless. He insists that he does it in addition with another edit while I don't. If I see that he does it, since I dson't have a revert tool, I add an edit by removing his Italic title and  . On that, user Stemonitis accuses me of poitless edits, and sometimes reverts it by igniting what I see as an edit war. He denies it, but I have a feeling that that what he is doing.
 * As I mentioned above, I wrote 30+ stubs if not 50+, so yeah, more then one article is under attack. As far as other users go, well, I brought Entomologist2 to the table, and he even probably escalate it a bit by saying that "the point of Wikipedia is not to create stubs", and since majority of my pages are stubs, he said he might consider them for deletion. I for one, don't agree that Wikipedia is no place for stubs. Stubs exist in English, Russian, Ukranian, Vietnamese, Norwegian, Catalonian, Spanish, and other language groups of the same site. There shouldn't be a problem about stubs, is there? --Mishae (talk) 05:27, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I am going to wait until the other party responds to my questions before commenting. --Guy Macon (talk) 08:08, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Mishae continues to miss the point (as does whoever changed the section heading, as it happens). In all my edits, adding italic title and  was always secondary to the main purpose, which was to remove misinformation, or to amend categories. I, for one, have not made edits simply to alter the mechanism of italicising the title. I do think there are good reasons for changing it, but only as part of a more substantive edit. Thus, my actions cannot realistically be construed as "igniting … an edit war". Given that, I cannot understand where Mishae's feelings of persecution come from. Mishae seems to think that I am out to block him; that is simply not the case. I don't understand what Mishae means by "which then turned into a user content"; as far as I'm concerned, we're still talking about the content. I don't believe that Entomologist2 "said he might consider [the articles Mishae created] for deletion"; he was merely suggesting a better use of everyone's time. There is of course no policy against mass-producing taxonomic substubs, but experience suggests that they are unusually error-prone and laborious to maintain. I would second Entomologist2's advice (and it is just advice) that more in-depth articles on the more important taxa would be better than minimally informative articles on a larger number of taxa. I have had a look through a number of article histories, and I cannot find a single example of an edit which would give Mishae cause for complaint. The only direct reversions have been when Mishae added links to non-existent external web-pages (e.g. Porcellio siculoccidentalis). There is no edit war, and Mishae's concerns that I might "threaten to block [Mishae] or enter into an edit war with [Mishae]" are entirely unfounded. --Stemonitis (talk) 09:38, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * First, a word to Mishae. I advise not responding until the issues I will be talking about in the next few paragraphs are resolved one way or the other. Please be patient; I am still working on the preliminaries, but I will get to the actual dispute soon.


 * Stemonitis, before I respond to your comments above, I would like to note that I asked three quite reasonable questions that were designed to be a starting point towards resolving this dispute -- questions that Mishae answered -- and you choose to ignore them. I am going to give you another chance to decide to work with me and try to resolve this dispute by answering the three questions.


 * Please note that you are not required to answer my questions and that you are completely free to ignore me or to answer any way that you choose. The only consequence to not cooperating with me will be that I will stop responding to you and that I will work with Mishae alone rather than working with both of you.


 * So, for the second and last time, I ask you:


 * [1] Do you want my help?


 * [2] Is this primarily a dispute about user conduct or article content?


 * [3] Are there any other users or any other Wikipedia pages that are involved in this dispute?


 * Please note that any non-answer will be considered to be a "no" answer to the first question. --Guy Macon (talk) 11:37, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I thought that was all implicit in my response, but I'm happy to spell things out. I don't think there actually is much of a dispute, certainly not to the extent that Mishae feels. If your input can help to placate Mishae, then that can only be helpful. To that extent, I welcome your input. I have already stated that this is a question of article content from my point of view, not of user conduct. I am not aware of any other persons involved. --Stemonitis (talk) 11:53, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know if I should comment now or later... O.K, maybe I overreacted to the whole situation. But I need to make a point here. First off we already removed the missinformation and I also removed the external links as of yesterday. So, thats resolved. What is not resolved is that when user Stemonitis edits he adds the things I mention above, claiming it to be a part of an edit as a "secondary". O.K. While me when I edit the same articles and remove external links that don't lead anywhere, I would tend to ignore the things I mentioned above, which, as I can tell he can't. If italic title and  are removed by me, no big deal! If I put missinformation somewhere remove it without adding them, is it that hard?! I think I should lieve the isopod project just because of all this mess that is going on between me and Stemonitis.--Mishae (talk) 15:48, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Mishae is now overcompensating by attempting to create articles with more substance/content, like this one: Cyrtodesmus humerosus. However, it is full of errors of spelling and grammar (First sentence: "The species are ..." [plural!]), and as someone with some taxonomic expertise, I find this to be pretty meaningless when taken out of context like this, and the obvious errors in spelling/grammar warn of the possibility of less obvious but more serious errors of content. It seems to me that Mishae is showing clear signs of paranoia, possibly linked to his self-proclaimed autism. This is being magnified by Stemonitis, who is a bit of a control freak, and has a history of getting into spats with other editors. These are not personal attacks, just observations. Any attempt at dispute resolution in this case ought to take such facts into account ... Entomologist2 (talk) 00:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC) Likewise, this article (Amplinus bituberculosus) is a mess... Entomologist2 (talk) 01:08, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Dear Entomologist2, thank you for pointing out a mistake in Amplinus bituberculosus, I fixed it. Another thing to mention to Entomologist2: You told me not to create stubs in multiple amounts? And now you don't like mine Start articles... Whats next? As time will go by, I will try to improve... As of now, I have fixed Cyrtodesmus humerosus and Colobodesmus crucis. Let me know if you will spot more mistakes.--Mishae (talk) 05:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * So, what do you, Entomologist2, think of Sphaeriodesmus filamentosus?--Mishae (talk) 22:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Another dispute
Hi everyone, as all of you know, I get in a lot of hot water on this site, which is probably my fault, but here is the thing: Just recently I edited this article and the whole hell went loose! Imediately (a second after my edit) I receive a warning, that accuses me of unconstructive edits, following by my reply, which I think was a bit harsh. Could someone resolve this issue for me as well? I just have a feeling I might get blocked for my missunderstanding.--Mishae (talk) 02:16, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I just got back from a customer site in another state -- I was able to access my VPN and do a few edits in between meetings and such, but not to give this my full attention. It's 3AM here, but after I get some serious snoozing in I will get back to this. I just wanted you to know that I have not forgotten you. --Guy Macon (talk) 10:47, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The second dispute got resolved a bit...--Mishae (talk) 00:28, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No need to worry about the second one, we are cool now. At least for a time being. I feel a bit surprised that I took it a bit civilly this time around...--Mishae (talk) 00:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:12, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Need Some Assistance
Hey Ryan, working on a radio station article and a previous owner is listed as "John and Marcia Arrington, Jr.". Obviously, they mean John is the Jr. not Marcia (this is a 1942 text). I am unsure how to write this correctly. I am leaning toward writing it as "John Jr. and Marcia Arrington", but that looks wrong. What do you think? -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 06:51, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * What about "John Arrington Jr. and his wife Marcia". Ryan Vesey 06:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That was my other option, but I am worried about running into problems since the reference says "John and Marcia Arrington, Jr.". -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 06:56, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Merge Chili burger to Chili con carne
I am letting you know that I have proposed a merge of Chili burger to Chili con carne. Being that you participated in the AfD, I'd be interested in your thoughts. The discussion is at Talk:Chili con carne. &tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 15:20, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

It was suggested that Hamburger might be a better target, and I was implored to allow that as a possibility. Therefore, I've moved the discussion to Talk:Chili burger to allow for this. Please accept my apologies if it seemed that I was advocating for one solution over another. &tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 16:17, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Jeremy Boreing
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Winter Wonderland

 * Happy Holidays. ```Buster Seven   Talk  15:43, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Buster7! Merry Christmas! Ryan Vesey 16:41, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK
Not sure how to correct it for DYK, but we ended up moving the article title again, to 1950s American automobile culture, removing the apostrophe, per the talk page discussion there. If you could clean it up at the DYK, that would be helpful. Glad to see it promoted, btw. Here soon, I will need to review one or two I suppose. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;  Join WER 02:16, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll go fix that. How many DYK's have you had before? Ryan Vesey 02:18, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This will be my fourth for me, the 2nd or third I've nominated. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  Join WER 02:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, QPQ isn't required yet. Ryan Vesey 03:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I need your help with a template
I added a quote to Anastasia Myskina. Question is, how come the quote template is not working as it should? I tried everything and unfortunately made a ton of edits. Can you help me, please?--Mishae (talk) 02:08, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Misha, you used tl. You use tl in front of a template if you want to create a link to that template.  To fix it, I just had to remove the tl. Ryan Vesey 02:18, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I didn't knew that.-Mishae (talk) 20:38, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

N. R. Narayana Murthy
I haven't paid much attention, but I see issues brewing including perhaps the reintroduction of material that was found to be problematic. Thought you might take a look. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;  Join WER 18:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Death toll
If you read you might notice that it does not fail verification of the shooter father's school. Now that CNN is saying 30, what do you propose is best to do with the source? 2010 SO16 (talk) 20:21, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Ignore it, stick to better sources from the CNN, Fox, and NYT. Ryan Vesey 20:22, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Pull
Your actions were clearly not supported considering the statements at In the news/Candidates. Is it about time to reinstate the blurb? Ryan Vesey 20:26, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I've seen the comments there, and I am not submitting to thinly-veiled comments insisting we put up a breaking news story immediately regardless of the article's state. The minimum threshold I mentioned has already been pointed out to you all by someone else. It did not and does not meet it. Period. Until it meets it, leave me alone. --  tariq abjotu  20:36, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This minimum threshhold is arbitrary, and there is no objective standard that Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting has failed to meet. Since further restorations from another admin would be construed as wheel warring, you are responsible for restoring the information. Ryan Vesey 20:38, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for removing the insult, just beat me to it. Automatic Strikeout ( T  •  C) 02:27, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I removed it again. Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  13:00, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I was talking about this. Automatic Strikeout  ( T  •  C) 20:30, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you Kiefer, I didn't want to edit war with him over it, but it's ridiculous to let his personal attack stay. (And then he says me calling him out for a lie is a personal attack and continues to accuse me of more personal attacks further down the page.)  For AS' benefit, we're talking about this, not the edit on your talk page. Ryan Vesey 15:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, could you take a look here please? Automatic Strikeout  ( T  •  C) 02:36, 15 December 2012 (UTC)