User talk:Shirt58/Archive 3

Edit summary abbreviations
Hi all,

Demmed if I can find the guidelines for edit summary ("dab", "rv" and so on) abbreviations. As always, your help and guidance is sincerely appreciated!

--Shirt58 (talk) 11:41, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:Edit summary legend and Edit summary legend/Quick reference. JohnCD (talk) 12:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shri_Gaudapadacharya_Mutt
Just wondering how 'mutt' became 'Muth' in above article.. even in history of the page I could not make out? Anyways you appropriately changed it to 'Mutt', Thnaks for that. --Ashok Prabhu (talk) 16:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * And thanl you for your response! Good question. My guess is it's probably something to do with the distinction between aspirated and unaspirated "t"s being inconsistently reflected in the English transliteration of the word.  Anyway, keep up the great work, and please don't limit yourself to just this and related articles! --Shirt58 (talk) 09:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

".... bore an uncanny resemblance to Elmo"
I laughed out loud when I read that.... but that's gonna need a source to stay there :) Sasata (talk) 09:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Skidmore, Owings and Merrill
I added a citation where you had requested one on this page, and removed the tag accordingly. Kmsom (talk) 22:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I must admit I'm leery of editing anything to do with big firms. As for the Center for Architecture, Science and Ecology, it is, quite frankly, not my cup of tea... but I simply just hate redlinks that point to notable subjects but have no article.  As Voltaire said...Shirt58 (talk) 10:43, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Re:The Monster in the Box pic: help needed; may not be the only image with this problem
So far as I'm aware, there's no line in the sand for book covers- I know the number for album covers is that they should be less than 300x300px. Basically, reduce them to as small as you feel you can get away with. The default size in the article would seem to be a sensible size for the image; perhaps a little larger. As for your other images, tagging them for reduction until you or someone else can get around to resizing them would seem to be sensible. J Milburn (talk) 11:15, 15 March 2010 (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 ForteTuba, 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) 16:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Kretzoi
Hi! I'm answering instead of Dami. I want to make an article about Kretzoi in a couple of days, so you can use it. I have to note that you are linking wrong about the Geological Institute. The Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum is the Hungarian National Museum. The Geological Institute of Hungary is the following: hu:Magyar Állami Földtani Intézet. Cassandro (talk) 16:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Cassandro, and thank you!


 * "I want to make an article about Kretzoi" - in the Hungarian language Wikipedia? I'm not a scientist, but I'd be more than pleased to help out in any way I can.
 * Oops. Thank you for clearing up my mistake.  I saw "Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum" in Kretzoi context... I recognised the word from Latin, and, of course, "Magyar" (only word of Hungarian I know) and assumed it was the Geological Institute of Hungary.  Thank you again!
 * --Shirt58 (talk) 10:42, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you: köszönöm, Oops: upsz. ;-) I'm not a paleontologist but I try to do my best and yes, I want to write it on huwiki. Cassandro (talk) 12:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The article is going to be expanded, so no problem. ;-) Cassandro (talk) 10:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

RL Laws flag/icons
Hmm. I'm not sure. I think it could be two different things: the Country data World template's existence and the use of icons. Gnevin removed the template from the article and has nominated that template for deletion but does that make any different to the continued use of File:World_Map_Icon.svg? I don't think it does - there are plenty of things that are used in WP without a template summoning them. Template_substitution mentions that subst might be used for templates that could be deleted or changed in the future.

But - could the nomination/deletion be used as an excuse to remove the icons? The nomination says: "No longer used in the mainspace as per Template_talk:Country_data_World and no need for it outside the main space any usages left should be subst". Obviously, I challenge the comment that the template is no longer used in the mainspace - we were using it! The link in the nomination is merely to an assertion by John that "Per the discussion here in December, this template should not be used in the mainspace (ie on articles)". In that discussion between a handful of people, I see no particular aim/conclusion in the discussion to remove every instance of use - instead, the intention of the discussion was to look for appropriate uses. John seems (from looking at his contributions on the dates leading up to 2010-01-28) to have gone through every article using it and then the moment he had finished he states there are none left and marks the template as deprecated. He made his last removal just three minutes (00:44) before making the two edits above (00:47 and 00:48) - not exactly allowing time for opposing views.  LunarLander  //  talk  // 15:02, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, LL
 * Ah, now it all makes a lot more sense. It would appear that, in summary, the deletion of flag icons in the article was the tail end of something much larger.  Best to just wait it out for a while and see what happens, perhaps?  --Shirt58 (talk) 11:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Re:E. vigintioctopunctata or H. vigintioctopunctata?
Nice to see you agian. It would seem that the Twenty Eight Spot Ladybird's correct scientific name is Henosepilachna vigintioctopunctata, and use to be Epilachna vigintioctopunctata. Yet technically both are "correct," the latter seems junior synonym, and most scientific journals use Henosepilachna instead. I would also like to point out just in case you would like to add this to the article, that Epilachna vigintioctopunctata is a species complex, and you could read more about this here. Maybe it is just a coincidence, but I noticed, when referred to as a "complex," I see Epilachna used instead. I hoped that helped :)   Bugboy52.4 ¦  =-=  15:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Your rollback request
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 12:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * And just a minor notes on minor edits; if possible, it might be helpful to other editors if not all of your edits were marked minor (for example, edits where you created an article). Just a thought, take good care!    A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 12:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Referencing of Genesis Suite Article
These comments are in response to a note at the beginning of the 18 April, 2010 edit of the Genesis Suite article asking about the addition of further references. I am the author of the recent edits and I believe have referenced all statements I made, either with verifiable secondary sources or with copies I placed in the commons of documents that I quoted. If something more needs to be docoumented, please indicate specifically what must be referenced.

These comments are directed, foremost, to the 18 April 2010 edit Shirt58, and, accordingly, I am placing a copy them in this editor's talk page.

I thank you in advance for an explanation of what you are looking to have done.Niel Shell (talk) 22:56, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Melbourne Storm salary cap scandal
I have nominated Melbourne Storm salary cap scandal, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Melbourne Storm salary cap scandal. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Shirt58 (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD for John Gallagher (barrister)
Hey, thanks for the ref fest. Great job!--Work permit (talk) 02:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

No harm
No harm, no foul. I apologize if I came across as sarcastic towards you. It was more at the nominator. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:23, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the helpful info you gave me on my talkpage. It was really helpful. I know I shouldn't let a dispute with another user get to me. I would like to stay, time will tell. Again, thanks for the helpful info! Have a fantastic day, SwisterTwister (talk) 19:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Tags for Brad McNamara article
That's fine, on looking at it, I realise I made a mistake. The page had come up on an unreferenced BLP page due to your original tag. I hadn't noticed that another user had updated the tag to a BLPsources one. Thanks for dropping me the note though.  Harrias  talk 13:55, 7 June 2010 (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) 01:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

About Derek Murawski
I helped write this page and believe the sources are solid; 2 newspaper articles, an interview with the subject on an established music site, and links to official postings with hundreds of thousands (sometimes millions) of views. The tone should be neutral, I have nothing to gain. I have edited it a little to make it seem less fan-y. I am asking if you can either delete your tags or maybe help make it the way you desired it to be by adding in more neutrality. Thanks 66.41.49.195 (talk) 10:41, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Also, can you explain the additional sources needed tag? All of the information included in the article is taken from the included sources. 66.41.49.195 (talk) 10:58, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Derek Murawski: 2nd nomination
The 2nd nomination deletion log "Graeme Bartlett deleted "Derek Murawski" (G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion)" was visible on Wikipedia until you erroneously recreated the Derek Murawski article. Memphisto (talk) 16:13, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

It's all sorted now. This is Derek Murawski's third go at getting a vanity article on Wikipedia! I see his suspected sock puppet was talking to you above. Memphisto (talk) 17:07, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi!
thanks for the advice, I am just learnign here. I made some changes but i sAw you reverted them. Was it wrong? or did i violate some kind of rules? thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob Beckert (talk • contribs) 14:28, 2 July 2010 (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) 13:18, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Bach cantata
Thanks for adding BWV 79! (I noticed that only now.) I just added BWV 136. If you follow the pattern there of references and external links you can easily create more articles which are more than a stub and referenced from the beginning. Please also write a redirect BWV # for each one. My personal goal: one a week, this was #8. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Tagging of The Rugby Forum
I see you've tagged The Rugby Forum for proposed deletion but have given a speedy deletion criterion as the concern for which you are proposing deletion. Did you mean to tag the article for speedy deletion instead with the db-a7 tag directly? If not, could you expand on your reason for proposing the article for deletion, so it's clearer what your concern is? —C.Fred (talk) 15:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The article has since been de-prodded. If you think it still warrants deletion, I would suggest bringing the matter to WP:AFD. Myself, I think there are enough claims of importance in the article that I wouldn't speedy delete it, and I'm not sure how it would fare at AfD. —C.Fred (talk) 22:15, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Shots On-Line
Hello Shirt58. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Shots On-Line, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to software. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:17, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Apsyeoxic
I notice you tagged Apsyeoxic as a hoax a couple days ago. I have now listed it at AfD. --Falcon Darkstar Momot (talk) 08:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Randy Altschuler
Please help me improve the article by showing me for what parts would secondary sources be appropriate. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Playsmarts (talk • contribs) 16:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)