User talk:Spellcast/Archive 5

__NOINDEX__

Categories
The category links for Extractable was appearing on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Web_design_companies and other places. I removed them so that links to your talk page won't show up anymore -- RyanEditz (talk) 09:30, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

User talk:138.88.226.42
Isn't two weeks a bit much? You may have collateral damage. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Spellcast (talk) 08:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

196.21.64.112
I have unblocked 196.21.64.112 as an Nmap scan shows no open ports at this time. It is a school, however, Vaal University of Technology. and the message I am working with on unblock-en-l says they are "using a proxy server", but that is not necessarily an open proxy, just a funneling of all traffic through one server. Fred Talk 14:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It should be fine now. Spellcast (talk) 14:56, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

220.181.53.237
..seems to be the same POV-pusher you recently blocked as a proxy. Since I don't know how to detect a proxy, you might want to review my block. I've also semi'd the article for a week to deter further activity. Rodhull andemu  15:19, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I spotted it on WP:OPD. If googling the IP returns results of spam or proxy info, then it's almost certainly one. Spellcast (talk) 15:22, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Done that, it looks like one, so I'll up my block. Thanks for the tip. Rodhull  andemu  15:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Revert
I reverted your edit in Hong Kong, as inaccurate. The 1842 colonialization included not only Hong Kong Island but also the Kowloon Peninsula. DOR (HK) (talk) 06:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've restored my edit. While other areas were colonised, only Hong Kong Island was formally ceded that year. Spellcast (talk) 08:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

RFA spam

 * &mdash;Kww(talk) 19:00, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

174.132.56.156
Hi Spellcast. FYI. I've unblocked, which is not currently an open proxy by most standards. See also and Lokeshjoshi. -- zzuuzz (talk) 11:20, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

File:1934 Protocols Patriotic Pub.jpg
Hi. The above item was deleted by you when I was away more than seven (7) days. Can you help me get it back? Of course, I'll provide the Fait use rational. Thanks. --Ludvikus (talk) 23:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

212.117.165.197 or steinsel.perfect-privacy.com
Hi Spellcast. It looks like you blocked the above host for being an open proxy when in fact it is not. It is a closed VPN host. I - along with many others - rely on this service as I often only have internet access via some untrustworthy open wifi. I would be glad if you could reconsider the block or turn it into a softblock so I can at least participate when I'm logged in. Thanks in advance! Sbstn (talk) 15:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

161.200.255.162
I cannot confirm any open ports on at this time using NMAP. I have unblocked it, but will monitor it. Fred Talk 22:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Countries by area
First of all, if Denmark's outlying territories shouldn't be included in Denmark's total area, why should other countries' outlying territories do so? Examples are outlying territories of Brazil, all its islands are included, so why shouldn't the islands of Denmark be? Some of Australia's islands are included. All of Mexico's islands are included. Some separate entries of France are included, for example French Guiana and Guadeloupe. Can't see why some outlying territories are included, while others aren't.

Second of all, right now, Greenland is listed under the column "Country", and also called "a country within the Kingdom of Denmark" in the column 'notes', which is completely imbecilic!! Because of the fact that Greenland is NOT a country but a Danish island. (Also, some interesting notes I wrote about Greenland has been disabled!).

So the Greenland note shouldn't call it a country, but state following: "an island within the Kingdom of Denmark, and an autonomous province of Denmark since 1979. Greenland is, by area, the world's largest island that is not a continent, as well as the least densely populated dependency in the world." ... and now we're at it, the Faroe Islands shouldn't be called a "self-governing territory of Denmark". Notes to Faroe Island should say: "an island group within the Kingdom of Denmark, and an autonomous province of Denmark since 1948".

As long as these idiots call it a country, and only separate SOME outlying territories from "its" countries, and not doing that to ALL - I'm gonna change it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.199.177.197 (talk) 03:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/PIO
Just to let you know, before you mark a case as closed, make sure you appropriately tag the userpages of the blocked accounts. See WP:SPI/AI on full instructions, including tagged, that any administrator should follow when handling sock puppets. Thank you for helping out, MuZemike 20:37, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. Spellcast (talk) 20:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

User:212.219.203.32
Hi. Isn't it time to block this account again? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Spellcast (talk) 20:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Hip hop WikiProject Roll Call
Hello, fellow Hip Hop WikiProject members!

This message is being sent out to let all listed members of the project know to re-add your name to the members list, as all current names on the list have been erased in order to find out who is still active on the project. WikiGuy86 (talk) 19:16, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of First Battle of Chuenpee
Hello! Your submission of First Battle of Chuenpee at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Calmer  Waters  23:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

76.76.0.0/19
I have unblocked as a scan of one of the virtual servers does not show open ports at this time. I'm assuming that one, which someone wants to use to create an account from, is typical of improved configuration by the host. Fred Talk 19:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Your assistance to blocked users is appreciated, but I don't believe leaving the range unblocked is the best choice. No useful conclusions can be made from scanning the range. The vast majority of traffic from this webhost comes from open proxies. Because those times when someone legitimately edits from their personal server is exceedingly rare when compared to open proxy traffic, it's best to either grant IPBE or softblock individual IPs by allowing account creation (which would override the rangeblock) with a note to login. Unless there's anything to add, I'll be reblocking that range with an expiry time. Spellcast (talk) 10:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Aftermath.
Hello Spellcast, I was wondering if you could possibly give your input on a debate being held on the Talk:Aftermath Entertainment page? --HELLØ   ŦHERE 01:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. Spellcast (talk) 15:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Howqua
Thank you for adding photos to Howqua. I had been looking for pictures for a long time and couldn't find any that would meet the Wiki Photo Lic. req. Please come in and help to improve that entry. Thank you again. TheAsianGURU (talk) 21:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do. Spellcast (talk) 03:53, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

User:ANTE RAKELA
FYI but because of this further comment, I disabled the editor's ability to further post unblock requests. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * He had it coming, but I suspect this may not be the last of him. Spellcast (talk) 03:53, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, again.
Hello Spell, I was wondering if I could possibly get your help again. I'm sorry to have to bother you like this. There's an editor who continuously vandalizes the Soulja Boy Tell'em page and has been warned several times, in multiple ways, yet continues. I'm afraid I will end up breaking 3RR and possible get blocked myself. If you could help in some way, that'd be great. If not, thank you anyway. Have a great day and happy editing. --HELLØ   ŦHERE 19:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm late, but I see he's been blocked. Just leave me a note if there's if there's anything else I can help with. Spellcast (talk) 04:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Spelling
It is no good to alter an established historical term in English to pinyin of Putonghua / Mandarin. It gives trouble to find references to these kinds of events. For example, we say "the Fall of Constantinople", not "the Fall of Istanbul"; "the Merchant of Venice", not "the Merchant of Venezia". Here is English Wikipedia, not a pinyin Wikipedia; not every term related to China is appropriate to convert to pinyin. Chuenpee, or Chuenpei was the name used by the British at that time, thus the convention got its proper name, "The Convention of Chuenpee". The Convention of Chuenpee is widely spread in many books and historical documents, over a hundred years. In the archive of document, it is "The Convention of Chuenpee", not "The Convention of Chuanbi". Can you see the trouble? Moreover, Chuenpee is more close to local pronunciation, namely Cantonese. If there is a geographic article for 穿鼻, both Mandarin and Cantonese can be used as name, as it is about the current geography and do not give much trouble to the reader. But it is not the case for the proper name of historical event, say "The Convention of Chuenpee" in English. &mdash; HenryLi (Talk) 17:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. I wanted to keep the spelling that was closer to the dialect the British were dealing with, which I now know is "Chuenpee". I'll move that page and the two battles of that name back to the historical spelling. Spellcast (talk) 04:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Thalagyrt
You blocked this user's underlying /16 range as a proxy a couple years ago. I think this person owns the proxy. Could you care to comment over there with regard to his unblock request for the range? –MuZemike 19:25, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Spellcast (talk) 04:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That's really appreciated. –MuZemike 08:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NCBRITPEER
Sorry, you seem to have totally misread NCBRITPEER. The standard is so far as I have always seen for peers to include their title, unless as it says the person is far better known without (eg Margaret Thatcher), it is only for baronets that the title should not be included unless disambiguation is required. David Underdown (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I moved the page because that guideline says, "Baronets should generally have their article located at the simple name ... If they need to be disambiguated from another man of the same name, use the full style as the article name." Surely he was more commonly referred to his actual name rather than his hereditary title. Spellcast (talk) 14:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, you're right. I think I got barons confused with baronets. Too bad I'm no expert on hereditary titles :P Spellcast (talk) 14:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Selena Wikiproject
Hey! I see you are very active in Selena-related articles, I have proposed a Selena WikiProject and would like you to "support" this project! Here's the link Hope you join us! AJona1992 (talk) 02:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Featured list removal candidate notification
nominated 50 Cent discography for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Candy o32  04:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

8 Diagrams
Hey there. I noticed that you uploaded the cover art for 8 Diagrams, and was wondering if you could possibly upload the alternative cover art - to be placed at the bottom of the infobox (just like Only Built 4 Cuban Linx...'s alternate cover art section in its infobox). I'd do this, but I've had too much difficulty with my computer. Anyways, there's an image of this here on amazon - that could hopefully be used. Please get back to me if you can (or can't) upload this cover, thanks. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 05:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I know many album pages have alternate covers, but I don't think they meet the criteria at WP:NFCC #3 and #8. Spellcast (talk) 09:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Victoria City
Hong Kong did not become a crown colony until 1942, although it was already annexed in 1941. The book you cited was obviously wrong, since Victoria City covers an area stretching from Kennedy Town to Causeway Bay. Nobody would regard Kennedy Town or Causeway Bay as part of Central. Jerimeeah (talk) 12:25, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you mean 1841 and 1842. That isn't the only reliable source that says the city name Victoria is now largely called Central. Spellcast (talk) 19:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Block
Hi. Please consider expanding your block of the open proxy at 189.26.113.195 to 189.26.0.0/16 and 189.27.0.0/16 - see http://toolserver.org/~pathoschild/stalktoy/?target=189.26.0.0/15 for details. Thanks! —  Jeff G. ツ  16:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Although those open proxies are unfortunate, I'm reluctant to block ISP ranges because, unlike webhosts, ISPs are much more prone to collateral damage. Spellcast (talk) 08:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:History of colonial Hong Kong#Requested move
As a past participant in Talk:History of colonial Hong Kong, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new attempt to reach consensus on the matter being addressed at Talk:History of colonial Hong Kong. Please come by and share your thoughts to help form a consensus. Pædia 14:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've supported the move. Since that article only covers the period from the 1800s to the 1930s (despite what the infobox shows), I was planning to create a new page that covers the whole period at British Hong Kong in a few weeks. But if the proposal is successful, that's fine as well. Spellcast (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Would you mind if I posted your version to British Hong Kong? We could then further edit it and other History of Hong Kong articles. Cheers, Pædia 05:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Although incomplete, I've gone ahead and posted it. The under construction tag will probably be up for a week or so. Spellcast (talk) 06:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Re
Hi Speelcast. Sorry I can't find more at this point, but I agree the figures seem very high. Reading trough some excerpts on Google Books, it might seem that it was actually a few dozen casulties on the Western side at least. If you have anything more precise, it would be very welcome.  Per Honor et Gloria  ✍  22:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * K thanks, I'll update the numbers. Spellcast (talk) 22:19, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your good edits at Neil deGrasse Tyson. Best wishes Span (talk) 19:12, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. Spellcast (talk) 12:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Misinterpretation of sources
In the Svetozar Boroević article a number of the English language written references is used to 'prove' that Boroević was born in a Croatian (ethnic) family. I went through these references (online) and found that both Otberg and the IP 71.163.226.233 user are right.

See here and here

You warned Wustefuchs user here against similar attempt. Looks like he did not get your warning seriously.

I do not want enter into discussion if a user rejects any serious discussion and, therefore, do not know how to handle this issue.--96.231.71.176 (talk) 22:01, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

The Opium War
Hi, I'm the main editor of the Second Opium War on chinese wikipedia. I would say thank you for the changing of the paint's introduction that I uploaded the image. Best wishes--俠刀行 (talk) 14:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * On the one hand, I've looked for your changes in different wikipedias. So you must know the languages?
 * Are you interested in the opium wars due to a lot of articles you wrote?
 * Yeah, it's interesting to read about this collision between the industrial age of Britain (then the foremost global power) versus the largely medieval "Middle Kingdom" that saw itself as the centre of the universe. (China led the world in scientific developments until about the 16th century, and later fell behind after the Industrial Revolution). I'm familiar with the history of the first war, but not yet the second. As for the Chinese wiki, I only passed by to add images or sourced numerical values, but I can't speak the language. Spellcast (talk) 23:56, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

List of largest empires
Hi there. We're having a content dispute at the article above - the list of empires has a large 216 entries, and currently the article sees fit to repeat this list 6 times! Clearly a waste of storage and bandwidth. A better solution (saving at least 30% and making it much easier to read and use) would be a table with a column for each attribute, sortable, as used in many other articles (see the discussion). However, a silent editor keeps reverting attempts to clean up the article, without explanation. Please see the discussion (currently nobody disagrees). Your comments would be welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.18.207 (talk) 21:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It's good to see good-faith improvements, but to be honest, I don't think that article should exist. It's full of fundamental WP:OR problems, and I wouldn't be surprised if it ultimately gets deleted. If anything, it should be merged with List of empires if possible. Spellcast (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

File:GFAJ-1 (grown on arsenic).jpg
Hallo Spellcast! you deleted the local source file File:GFAJ-1 (grown on arsenic).jpg before the bot check in commons was done. How should it be properly done if you already delete the source file?! :) That's a bit unuseful. Cheers --Saibo ( Δ ) 03:10, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by bot check? I reviewed the file and everything in the local version (the file, description, upload log etc.) is preserved in Commons. Currently, the file is protected on Commons, so I can't tidy up the redundant licenses, but I will once its unprotected. Spellcast (talk) 03:20, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, I've temporarily restored the file in case anyone uses this in the news section of the front page. Spellcast (talk) 04:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Spellcast, I should have been more clearly.
 * With bot check I meant checking that all information was transferred correctly and then removing the template on top of the page. Which you would have probably done if the file wasn't protected in commons at this time. I did not know it was protected, sorry.
 * All fine now. Thanks for your response and have a nice day! --Saibo ( Δ ) 17:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Signing the Treaty of Tientsin.jpg
Hey, I found the artist of the print. Notice that the orginal print is colored. You have to find and upload another one.
 * Happy new year! (even though I hate to celebrate that)--俠刀行 (talk) 10:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * By the way, I'll upload another image about this treaty soon.--俠刀行 (talk) 10:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the source, I'll upload it to the article. Spellcast (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Spellcast, I'm confused as to why you would give this account an IP block exemption, when he was using a blocked proxy——and is a sporadically used account reactivated to vote in a contentious AfD. How did you know that was his IP address, by the way? SlimVirgin talk| contribs 19:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * See this. I thought he might've been collateral damage on a shared sever. If you suspect IPBE has been misused, feel free to remove or discuss it with the user. Spellcast (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The fact that I do not participate much in EW is due to the fact that I upload to Commons because I deal mostly with images, but that does not mean that I do not visit EW... I sure hope that a vote in a discussion is not grounds to have my IP address or account blocked. I think that my record can speak for itself, and myself. --tomascastelazo (talk) 15:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

More forgery from the same person
See my note here--166.32.193.81 (talk) 18:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Awards POV
Hey Spellcast, long time no speak. :) I was wondering if you knew exactly where in MOS the practice of keeping awards out of the lead sentence was. It's Grammy-time, and I'm now seeing "Grammy-award winning" appearing in articles again, but other than linking to NPOV or explanations such as yours (an explanation that I still find to be very handy!), I was wondering if you knew where this is listed in MOS or something, so I could point editors to it in case I'm reverted. Thanks, and hope everything's good with you! Acalamari 13:02, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Acalamari. :) The MoS doesn't explicitly say it, but I think this discussion showed that "award-winning" in the first sentence is generally verbal fluffery that doesn't comply with NPOV, WP:LEAD, or WP:PEA. Excuse me for taking this long to reply. I've just moved into a different state for university and I've had no internet for a few weeks. Hope that helps. Spellcast (talk) 11:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Spellcast, for the link to the discussion! Fortunately, there were several other editors looking out for awards POV, so at least a lot more people are willing to find it and remove it. As for the late response, don't worry about it: I had a major move last year! Anyway, thanks again for the response, and it's good to see that you're around. Best. Acalamari 12:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Chater collection (Orange)
I previously looked at the link to the reference text but found no images at all. However, you seem to have been able to extract this image of the Dent Building. Are there any other plates that you could upload to commons? -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 05:42, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded several plates from that book to Commons. I extract the PDF page into an uncompressed JPG file to avoid quality loss. You should be able to see the images by expanding the contents on the left hand menu. Drop me a note if there's still problems. Spellcast (talk) 11:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for James Bremer
Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Who's the commander in Battle of Canton (1857)?
Hey, here is my second coming to your place. I know that you have a deeper research in the Opium war. So what commander orders the offensive when the Battle of Canton has begun from December 27th 1857? What about the commander of Anglo-French troops? Or they're different commanders? Tell me something that would be nice.--俠刀行 (talk) 15:09, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, I've just completed Battle of Canton in Chinese wikipedia. You can take a look for it if it's possible to read Chinese.--俠刀行 (talk) 15:12, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Here are the official British reports of the battle: (pp. 769-772),   (pp. 1021-1028). The British naval commander was Michael Seymour. The British ground troops commander was Charles Thomas van Straubenzee. And the French commander-in-chief was Charles Rigault de Genouilly. I know Ye Mingchen was imperial commissioner, but I'm not sure who the Chinese military commander was. Spellcast (talk) 22:38, 3 July 2011 (UTC)


 * The commander of the Qing's army was only Yeh Ming chan because he owned the relational rights of trade and anything in Canton. And Emperor XianFeng gave him right to negotiate with Europeans.--俠刀行 (talk) 04:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Canton
Dear Spellcast, I'm very sorry to tell you. But your article Battle of Canton (1857) still not look better so far. Plus it looks unavailable to become longer content or would be little possible. So I'll report to the Articles for deletion when I finish a project. God bless.--俠刀行 (talk) 20:17, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Battle of Canton (1857) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle of Canton (1857) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Battle of Canton (1857) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.--俠刀行 (talk) 21:22, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair Use Boilerplate
Thanks for putting the fair use boilerplate on the images I uploaded, so they didn't get deleted by the copyright radicals. I can't imagine how Wikipedia would look without people like you. - goatasaur (talk) 15:42, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear Spellcast,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by 35.9.34.167 (talk) 21:33, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

AnchorFree proxy hardblocks
Hi Spellcast, we received an unblock request from the unblock mailinglist from someone on an AnchorFree proxy (209.73.132.0/24) you blocked. This is a harblock, and I was wondering if there is anything we can do. Are these really open open proxies, or could we maybe block them anon only? I'd like to hear your take on this. Regards, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That range belongs to AnchorFree - the company behind the Hotspot Shield which hides your real IP address. You should tell the user to disable that program. Spellcast (talk) 17:59, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks, that explains the whole thing. Thanks for looking in to it! Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks - we've had some more too. Secretlondon (talk) 09:06, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

GA Thanks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your contributions to Lupe Fiasco, which has fairly recently achieved WP:GA status. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:51, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

204.93.60.0/24
We're handling an unblock request from 204.93.60.20 at WP:OPP – I see that you've blocked this range with the comment "AnchorFree, Inc." As far as I can see, the range isn't assigned to AnchorFree; it's assigned to Giglinx, which appears to be providing a leased line for a public library. Is there something I'm missing, or can this range be unblocked? Thanks, &mdash; madman 15:40, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've responded at the project page. Spellcast (talk) 17:10, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Didn't see the book about the Taku Forts

 * Hi, Spellcast. Did you know any book about the Battle of Taku Forts in 1858? I didn't find any one. Maybe I'll try some Chinese historical books.--俠刀行 (talk) 14:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

FL Thanks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial efforts that has contributed to the recent WP:FL promotion of Kanye West discography --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:23, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Neil deGrasse Tyson
Please can you tell me why you reverted my edit? Although he labels himself an agnostic, his views are that of an atheist - he says very clearly that he is "Does not believe, but is open to the evidence". The definition of agnostic is someone who believes there can never be evidence for it; that god is unknowable. He therefore is not an agnostic but a soft atheist. He can label himself whatever he likes, but Wikipedia, as far as I am aware, is for factual information. If your problem was with the way I worded it then I'll find a better way to say it. Thanks. Treeroy (talk) 11:55, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Extractable
Hi Spellcast,

I was going to create an entry for a company called Extractable but I see you previously nominated it for speedy deletion back in 2008, they seem to have come a ways since then and appear to meet notability standards. Below is what I was planning on posting, can you let me know your thoughts on whether they're legit yet:

EXTRACTABLE is an American digital agency that specializes in data-driven marketing, website design and development, mobile and tablet design, digital strategy,branding, visual design, user experience design, content strategy and development for transactional, educational, lead generation, and entertainment purposes.

History
EXTRACTABLE was founded by three software engineers in 1999: Craig McLaughlin, Mark Ryan, and Ming Tsai. The agency business model has been to leverage analytics to optimize digital experiences. The agency is located in SOMA district of San Francisco

Clients
Recent clients include Micron, GoPro, Safeway, LeapFrog, John Muir Health, Sunset Magazine, GECU and Bill.com.

Awards
Won a total of 226 industry awards (37 in 2012) including a Davey Award, a W3 award a Web Marketing Association Web Award and others.

Merge discussion for Opium Wars
Hi. There has been a reopened discussion ongoing at Talk:First Opium War to merge the contents of Opium Wars into First Opium War and Second Opium War. A consensus seems to have been reached among all the users who contributed to the lede/Opium Wars section, and merging may be imminent. You have been identified as a major contributor of the article about to be abolished (see: User:Kiyoweap/Opium Wars) and thus are welcomed to participate in the merge, especially in the sections which you have contributed. Or, any other input under the Merge discussion thread given above would be appreciated. Thanks. --Kiyoweap (talk) 04:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2014
dear Spellcast,

I request that you respond to my communication. If you don't believe that my name is R. Michael Rich, try checking out the citations (Rich, R.M.). Let me be blunt. Much of the article is subjective and the cited sources originated (either via direct writing or interview) with Dr. Tyson. This is not an encylopedia; this is Pravda. Now, the article states that Dr. Tyson is a "collaborator" on the supernova cosmology project. That's not really true; its an exaggeration. I was there at CTIO with Dr. Tyson when those data were taken. I was his thesis supervisor. This is ridiculous. The article also leaves off his postdoctoral term at Princeton University. His autobiography also in my considered opinion, does not present events correctly- his autobiography cannot be considered a better source than the personal recollections of his thesis adviser.

I am Dr. R. Michael Rich, Ph.D., Caltech 1986; thesis advisor was Dr. Jeremy Mould. Dr. Tyson's thesis advisor was not Michael M. Rich. I have 375 refereed papers and an h-index =80. I was Dr. Tyson's Ph.D. supervisor and observed with him during his thesis observations, which I directed. Proof: Tyson, N.D., & Rich, R.M. 1991, Radial velocity distribution and line strengths of 33 carbon stars in the Galactic bulge, The Astrophysical Journal, 367, 547. Tyson's thesis was not published in a refereed journal but results were presented at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society.

The Abundance Gradient and Distribution in the Galactic Bulge  [this was the title of the doctoral thesis] Authors: Tyson, N. D.; Rich, R. M. Publication: Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, Vol. 22, p.1340

---

And here is Dr. Tyson's Ph.D. thesis as entered in the Astrophysics Data System (NASA)

Title: A study of the abundance distributions along the minor axis of the Galactic bulge Authors: Tyson, Neil Degrasse Affiliation: AA(Columbia Univ., New York, NY.) Publication: Ph.D. Thesis Columbia Univ., New York, NY. Publication Date: 00/1992 Category: Astrophysics Origin: STI NASA/STI Keywords: Carbon Stars, Galactic Bulge, Lyra Constellation, Star Formation, Charge Coupled Devices, Distribution Functions, Heavy Elements Bibliographic Code: 1992PhDT.........1T Abstract I present abundance distribution functions for fields along the minor axis of the Galactic bulge based on CCD photometric observations toward seven windows of low extinction. Abundance distribution functions are the most useful form of data to constrain models of the star formation and the chemical enrichment of the bulge. By using the recently-calibrated Washington photometric filter system, the distribution function in (Fe/H) is determined for each field, and consequently I derive the abundance gradient for the bulge. To supplement these observations I analyzed, from medium dispersion spectra, line strengths of the 33 known bulge carbon stars. The radial velocities of these carbon stars and of 39 bulge RR Lyrae variables is also presented. Within 8 degrees of the Galactic center (approximately 1 kpc) there appears to be no appreciable gradient in the distribution of (Fe/H), which is consistent with a dissipationless collapse, and/or sufficient mixing during the star-forming epoch when Fe was produced in the bulge. The mean abundance over this region is between two and five times solar. The form of these distributions is well-fitted by the simple (closed box) model of chemical evolution where the bulge is self-enriched by processing its original gas content to completion. This result carries two direct implications: (1) the inner bulge was not significantly enriched by infall (of any heavy element abundance) from the halo or the disk, and (2) the inner bulge underwent no catastrophic mass-loss from supernova-driven winds or any other mechanism. These scenarios would produce a different signature in the abundance distributions. Beyond 8 degrees from the Galactic center, the mean of the abundance distribution drops precipitously with an abundance gradient of -0.2 dex/degree in (Fe/H). This is consistent with the notion that the inner bulge is chemically distinct from the halo while the transition region is a blending of the two. It may be possible to use kinematics to disentangle the two populations via a radial velocity survey.

Note that the Wikipedia article contains a great many subjective descriptions (Dr. Tyson is an Astronomer and presenter of popular science, but he is not a cosmologist; his taking a couple of frames for a supernova survey does not qualify him as a cosmologist nor as a collaborator of Dr. Brian Schmidt). I am sure that you want Wikipedia to reach the highest possible scholarly standard. My research programs have been tangential to cosmology, but I do not call myself a cosmologist.

As Dr. Tyson's thesis supervisor I obtained NASA funding to support him for 3 years as a graduate student, and I obtained an additional $6,000 in funding from the ARCS foundation. Dr. Tyson presented results at meetings in South Africa, Chile, and Italy, and he also attended the SAAS-FEE winter school, all as a result of financial support that I secured. From a scholarly standpoint, many of the citations in the article are circular in that they are not refereed journals but rather popular news sources.

If you require additional proof, I suggest that you obtain a copy of the thesis from the University of Michigan archive and check the acknowledgements section.

Sincearly yours,

Dr. R. Michael Rich, Ph.D. Research Astronomer, UCLA Department of Physics and Astronomy

Maggieholly (talk) 06:14, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Neil de grasse Tyson
Your repeated deletions of my edits violates your neutral point of view policy. Not every fact can be independently verified. In the case of Tyson, I was his doctoral thesis advisor and he did _not_ transfer from U. Texas to UCLA, but left Texas with a terminal masters due to incompletion of his thesis. Your requirements are circular and prevent truth from appearing in your articles. It is reasonable to have a procedure by which an editor can establish credibility. You don't have one, so you rely only on citation of published material. And there is no appeal. The article on Tyson does not have a neutral point of view and it violates your policies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maggieholly (talk • contribs) 09:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)