User talk:TCO/Archive 1

__NOINDEX__

Brian Plante
Brian Plante restored, Tom Harrison Talk 23:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Just let nature take its course. Work on it if you get a chance, or someone else will, or it will get deleted sometime. Tom Harrison Talk 13:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Civility
I understand how you feel about Gadsby (book), but your comments at Talk:Gadsby_(book) and User_talk:Maclean25 are not helping matters. Please stop the name-calling and turd-dropping. It's not terribly helpful, as I'm sure you're aware. -Phoenixrod (talk) 19:15, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't care about the book. I stand behind my remarks about the type of people on wikipedia who spend too much time worrying about what someone else is doing and too little contributing. And I don't care if you disagree with that. Report me to the principal. TCO (talk) 19:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. -t BMW  c- 16:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Please be advised that you are the subject of a civility complaint at WP:WQA. Please see here for complete details -t BMW  c-  16:12, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Asimov's?
Are you the TCO from the Asimov's board?--T. Anthony (talk) 05:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I intrigue you, don't I? TCO (talk) 14:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe a little, but the truth be told I've met other people from Asimov's here. I may have even asked other people if they were "XYZ from the Asimov's board" before you came.--T. Anthony (talk) 15:04, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * "Yes" would have been artistically pithy. TCO (talk) 15:06, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay.--T. Anthony (talk) 15:08, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * :) TCO (talk) 15:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Continued violations of WP:Civil
This comment was clearly not appropriate. You have been warned several times about WP:Civil. I strongly urge you to change your approach to dealing with others on wikipedia. You will be blocked on the next offense. Toddst1 (talk) 18:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Here be dragons
Thanks for your recent comment. I am new to the concept of dragonhood myself and suppose that we are more often solitary than clubable. But I share your interest in science fiction and agree that we should work to improve and preserve such content. The Article_Rescue_Squadron provides a good focus for such activity. I also find that a daily patrol of Articles_for_deletion/Log/Yesterday is rewarding. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment
Does this comment really add anything to the discussion on the talk page? Please keep comments like that in your head or in your userspace and instead contribute constructively to the discussion. Thanks and cheers, — Ed   17  (Talk /  Contribs)  01:32, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

You should find a part of wiki to contribute content to that interests you, instead of being a rules-ninny in an area that you don't even care about, topic-wise. TCO (talk) 03:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Seriously what is you're problem? Are you trying to get yourself banned? If anyone has any further issues with this user, just report them to the above admin, Toddst1. ʄ! •¿talk?  04:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't bluster so hard. Wait for me to fuck up again. TCO (talk) 04:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Blocked
in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Stover at Yale
Hey,

You created the Stover at Yale article, and since the earliest revision it has contained the line "it was later published in over xx editions by other publishers includding blabla. Overseas publication was blabla."

I can fix includding -> including, but I wonder what the "blabla" is supposed to mean.

You are welcome to fix this yourself, or give me information about the Stover at Yale book so that I may fix it.

Bobber0001 (talk) 09:39, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

We need to find the info. The blabla is a placeholder. BTW, thank you for working on the content and not being another self-important admin...here to threaten me with banning. TCO (talk) 13:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Another block for uncivil behaviour
in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below.

to be done
link The Paragon to Amazon, not Wiki, as there is no wiki article.

How tall is mitja petkovsec?
for after unbanned

to be written don Harrold
new article

Continued incivility
in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. However further incivility will result in a long term block on the next occurance.

.

Thanks for the triple check, Max. Not contesting the previous pattern of behavior, just the recent conviction. Will take my punishment--see y'all in January. TCO (talk) 14:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

(new article, Barry Fleming)
Sandbox, placeholder

ref: http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-511

ref: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE7DC1439F935A2575AC0A96F948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

new article, Colonel Effingham's Raid (book)
placeholder

placeholder
Zorita article

copyediting texas
I have divided the Texas page into 6 parts. Hopefully with more manageable chunks, people will be more willing to copyedit the page. would you be willing to copy edit one section of the Texas page?

Talk:Texas

Oldag07 (talk) 18:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes. TCO (talk) 03:35, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Note
A section has been begun on AN/I about you. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  02:56, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Blocked
I have blocked you for three months for repeated incivility and disruption following multiple blocks for the same reasons. We don't wish to perpetuate an editing environment where it is ok for you to harass other editors. If you feel this block is incorrect, please place the template anywhere on your talk page with an appropriate reason for a reviewing administrator to reduce the block length or reverse the block. When the block expires you are welcome to return to productive editing, though a repeat of past behavior will result in a much longer block. Protonk (talk) 03:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I feel the block is proper. TCO (talk) 03:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Texas
I can't help you by copy editing, since I am being punished. Unless...I use my talk page as a sand box. Hmm...that might work. TCO (talk) 03:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm baaaaaack!
Pshew! That was a long ban punishment. TCO (talk) 17:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back. Read any good SF lately? I read Anathem myself, which was quite good and has been nominated for a Hugo, I see. Colonel Warden (talk) 18:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

No. I am hard to please. TCO (talk) 18:49, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

If I ever do anything useful...
This is a section for my case officers, admins, and sparring partners to commend me. TCO (talk) 00:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2009
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Possibly unfree File:Stover at Yale book cover image.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Stover at Yale book cover image.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --B (talk) 04:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Request unbanning
I request to be unbanned. See ANI "New start" for details.TCO (talk) 06:32, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well from what I've read you were never banned only indefinitely blocked (see Banning policy). That being the case, I suggest you read the message at the top which instructs you how to request to be unblocked (you've tried it before). Note it directs you to Guide to appealing blocks which you should read and says amongst other things, you should demonstrate an understanding of why you were blocked previously and undertake not to repeat that behaviour again. I would note that continuing to engage in sockpuppetry or otherwise editing anywhere other then your talkpage while you are blocked is not likely to be seen particularly positively. Nil Einne (talk) 19:08, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I've just blocked user:72.82.33.250 as an apparent sock of TCO.   Will Beback    talk    22:27, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Respectfully request ANI to review of my case for an unblock (someone please open for me)
Was trying to avoid ANI, since there can be a lot of drama and contention at these things. And I didn't want myself to be batted around as the subject of public debate. But I guess, I want to appeal to the community. I will abide by their call.

I just want to get unblocked and edit again and write content. It's kinda fun to write on Wiki since the interface is so cool and it gets on the web immediately. And there are some areas where I know some decent stuff, content-wise. And I'm not Tony1, but I'm an asset as a writer, here.

1. I recognize that I was uncivil (in general have not tried to deny this...I just did it anyway).

2. I promise not to do it any more. Note, I never said that before and it's a big deal (to me) to say that, since now I've made a commitment, versus before when I was just defiant.

3. My plan in future is to contribute content, avoid one article where I most clashed, and avoid editors/admins whom I clashed with previously.

4. Bwilkins is not uninvolved. We have clashed before. Nov 2008.

TCO (talk) 11:08, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * You used an IP to edit for several days before filing this request. Have you used any other IPs or socks since your block?   Will Beback    talk    11:52, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Response below. (Will you start the ANI please?)  TCO (talk) 19:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Could we hold off on the ANI for a while longer? I've looked into this a bit, and I might be willing to unblock without the hassle of an ANI thread.  I'd like to look into it a little more. If I decide I don't want to do it on my own, I'll open the ANI thread for you. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:41, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. Thanks for the time spent, regardless of outcome. TCO (talk) 21:58, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, I'm willing to unblock, based on the understanding above that you won't resume some of the behavior that lead to the previous blocks. The only remaining hoop to jump through is to see if Toddst1 has some reason that isn't readily apparent to me that unblocking would be stupid. If he's OK with it, I'll unblock. If he's not, I'll start an ANI thread. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:02, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Understood and agreed (incivility). Thanks for the time spent.TCO (talk) 22:06, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * It appears Toddst1 doesn't edit very often right now, and it could be days or a week until he logs back on. I'm going to unblock, based on the assumption that there wasn't more to this than meets the eye back then.  Contingent on your assurances above.  Please edit the sandbox as soon as possible so I'm sure I've cleared any autoblocks.  Welcome back. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:22, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Sandbox edit tested and worked. Appreciate the attention, especially given your semi-retirement. TCO (talk) 23:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

socking confession
Good question. "Yes." Here are the details (not trying to make excuses or be defiant, just describing):

1. I didn't edit at all for several months, just honored the May09 perma-ban. I usually try to honor perma-bans (or temporary ones) from forums I get kicked out of. I figure the moderators need to do their job and my bannings are justified.

2. I've never created an alternate account.

3. Then I think I IP-edited a few days, a couple months ago, with whatever IP just came off of my computer and ISP. I was associated with creation of the RVC Bodley and Gertrude Friedberg and Alexandra Raisman pages. Maybe a handful of other edits at other pages I can't recall.

4. I didn't really see it as sneaking around, but yeah...that was not honoring the ban, no argument. Kinda let slip that I was a previous editor (I'm a miserable sock, am way too candid). Was told by other editors not to post any more. Honored that...for a little while.

5. Don't come down on the people who opened new pages for me to create content. I just asked as an IP (normal process, since IPs can't make new pages). It's not like they were thick with me.

6. Started editing Shawn Johnson, a few days ago. (With the 7xx...IP you blocked.  Also one other one starting with a 9xx..  No intentional change of the IP, it just did that for some reason when I was at different spots even though computer was the same.)

7. An off-hand remark from Charles Matthews implying that one could come back from exile ("but stop socking, that is not the way to come back") kind of knocked around in the back of my head. Made me think, maybe the perma-ban was appealable. (Plus I lost the 70 pounds and got really strong in shape, and stopped drinking, so my need for Internet break I asked for from ProtonK had been satisfied.) Plus Intelati was recommending I get an account instead of IP-editing (he did not know the history, thought I was a new contributor.)

8. So I reached out to find out how to come back if possible. Intelati put in an ANI (now archived). I stopped IP editing at that time. (Prior to your blocking of the IP.) I was advised to put in an unblock request, using th template and after readin the unblock instructions (which I did). That brings us here.

9. P.s.  If my block appeal by community is not granted, then we should RTV the account. (Not being "take my ball and go home", just common sense.) And yeah, I read the policy and know RTV doesn't allow me to come back under sanction. Just if I'm forever banned, and already asked community to come back, let's clean this account up and each go our own way.

TCO (talk) 19:37, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Editing
If you want to, dive right in! You might want to start someplace like WP:GAN If you read the reviews at WP:FAC, they can get rather technical about the Manual of Style (MOS) so that might not be a good place to start. By the way, I think the newer the FA (check the promotion date in article history on the article talk page) the better the writing.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Which comment are you replying to? Was all over the place last night.  Knowing what I said, will help me put your remark in context. TCO (talk) 11:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably this one. -Atmoz (talk) 17:33, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I just wasn't sure if he was encouraging me to copyedit passed articles, or copyedit in general, or join a "group", or do some peer reviewing. I r slow. :) TCO (talk) 19:31, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I made an article, take a look!
See Amanar. Give me some feedback and upgrades (to help become a power user)!TCO (talk)

Suggestion
Why not start an archive for your talk page? People are going to get entirely the wrong idea when they come here and see all the blocks.

What are you interested in writing about?

responses
1. I don't like archives and if anything want to go in the opposite direction and pull a lot of old content out, that was wiped while I was banned. Will have to collate it with new stuff. And a couple bad remarks of mine were rightfully deleted, so have to not bring those back. I'd rather keep the bans and such, but have them in chronological order rather than as a page header. It's a bit of a project and low priority, but I agree looks pretty bad, right now!

2. Mostly interested in gymnastics right now. Could change quickly though. That project seems dead.

TCO (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikiprojects are overrated, I avoid them. Just learn to do your own thing.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:47, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
And again. The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs 01:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Painted Turtle
Thank you so much for picking up the copy-edit...I thought nobody would come! XD NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

No sweat. What did the comment about technical matters mean in the request (wikitechnical or biological). Anyhow, I will proof the whole thing and then back in your hot little hands! ;) TCO (talk) 02:57, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ha...replied there. Thanks again.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 15:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Gymnastics Notability
Hello, I think you may have misinterpreted the guidelines. Please see my response on the WP:NSPORT talk page. And I tried to get the gymnastics project involved in it as well but there was no response from that dead project. My response is basically on the lines of all the people you mentioned are notable and the guideline covers all of them as well. --MATThematical (talk) 22:41, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey. Hope I am not coming across as argumentative. Head is a little frazzled from working on Painted turtle. I'm well up for the mission of controlling BLP creep. It just seems like that list thrown up there is a little too strict. For one thing, could look at cycling or skating for comparators. Plus, I think wiki may have a blind spot for the actual notability since the kind of people who follow the sport don't tend to write stuff up on wiki (although they do use the Internet and google and would read a wiki bio). Anyhoo...back to my turtle. No hard feelings, man! TCO (talk) 05:23, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC) Another cool turtle Loggerhead sea turtle. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that is definitely a cool one. Like how it has a picture of what it eats and then what eats it. TCO (talk) 00:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

If I ask how to do wikisomething, will my talk page stalkers, come and answer (testing 1, 2, 3)
How much do people edit wikipages completely off line (like using MS Word)? It seems like it is a lot easier to scan pages and cut and paste text, at least if doing an initial composition. Would think for spellchecking and word counting could be helpful also.

That said, refs have to be done with wiki and once they are in, I guess you are stuck. But it is really a hassle always going from edit mode to view mode, rather than having a WYSIWYG interface. Also, the way all the code for refs is in the paragraph, instead of down with the references (total eyesore)!

Just want to know if there is some easier way, or tricks I'm missing.

P.s. This is also to test whether it is more useful to ask questions on my userpage or off at an appropriate page. Would figure the latter, but just testing. Managing the watchlists is also a hassle.

TCO (talk) 05:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Or is the Village Pump a good place? TCO (talk) 06:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Some editing tools to look through. If you use Firefox it has an American spellchecker built in. WikEd is aiming at WYSIWYG editing, but I find it slows the page editing loading down a lot.
 * At WP:PUMP you can learn places to get assistance. WP:HELPDESK as given by WP:PUMP is a good place to ask editing related question.
 * PS can I setup talk page archiving on this page, it could do with some. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, no archive. I'm going to straighten out the page manually, but it is a project. Hate archives.
 * Village Pump is the best place I know of for this kind of stuff. I've actually done some work in word, turned out to be worse than just using wiki to enter text.  Have to deal with two problems rather than one (but whatever works for you).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:45, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't notice this. I think there are some actual offline emulators, but I'm not 100 percent certain.  Poke around the web a bit.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 00:05, 3 December 2010 (UTC).

Regardless of what happens...
Very cool. Was trying to get enought done for one from the GoC, but I didn't get enough done by month end to earn one (see post above). So, since you gave me one, I got one anyhow. That does remind me, I'm going to call it "done" over at GoC. Will still help you out, but I just think it has gone through the process enough to check the box, if you are cool with that? TCO (talk) 14:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Consider it done my friend. Content addition is the next priority for perhaps a run at FA.  Prose and grammar are all spectacular thanks to your efforts.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

GA passed!
GA nominator passed the article! Feel free to display this userbox with pride: --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh...well I was about to add some reallio trulio cool content (for a scientist and a casual reader) to the article. But since it is done. ;)  TCO (talk) 19:00, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Just kidding. Great content and thanks for letting me join in, later!
 * You're leaving!? You don't want to try to push it through FA with me!?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:06, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll help. Let's rock!  Got a few more polishes coming, but I think it can go in the FA process, now.TCO (talk) 20:18, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Hold on sparky! Just a few more things I want to say...will do so over on the talk page.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:28, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, please give me a couple of days to review it. The fact that it's been reviewed by a FAC regular will count in your favor at FAC.  Well done by the way.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar
p.s. The article has already been nominated (without prompting) as a good article by a Dr. Blofeld and is nominated as a DYK! Thanks again for all of your help!! Remember (talk) 23:00, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks man, but I didn't do much. I am very happy for you though.  I knew everyone would love that.  Something like that is a joy to read in an encyclopedia.  Please come check out Painted turtle, place I've been hanging lately.  Again, thank you so much for the very thoughtful barnstar!!
 * Every little bit counts. The turtle article is very impressive.  I don't usually work on biology articles because I find them too intimidating and I am usually too busy with other articles.  Anyways, thanks again for the help and for your compliments on the article. Remember (talk) 13:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * We have a lot of scientific content, but (perhaps because of that), I have been working hard to call a spade a spade. Scratch that...even call it a shovel.  Biologists are really bad at just throwing out technical terms and wikilinking.  Very, very often not needed.  And very discouraging for the general reader who has to wade through a bristly thicket of vocabulary lesson.  Why say spermatogenisis versus "make sperm"?!

DYK for 1907 Tiflis bank robbery
Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

You in?
WikiProject Council/Proposals/Turtles--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:07, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe. I need to start being a little more judicious with my time, though.  Maybe help y'all where I add highest value.  I have some commercial work (or really a proposal to write) so need to stop wiki-goofing for a while.  I will get you this capture section and then turn over a list of tasks I meant to do, but never got to, today.  Then I need to stay away for a while.  will leave a note on it.  Hopefully, you can still cut me a piece of the star, though!  ;)


 * If there is a way, that I can help that is more advisory rather than getting into the details of each grammar debate, or doing heavy content research, would do that. You saw how I rewrote that page and I can advise on similar.  Obviously doing the real work is what matters though.  And what I respected of you, getting the page going with all the content.  There are a gazillion people on wiki who would rather advise on how to use the tools, than grab a hammer and start building houses!  ;)TCO (talk) 19:20, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, you did phenomenal work. If you think there even should be this project, you can sing your name and say you support.  :-)
 * You got it, baby. Will go over and say so!  I think the key thing with a project is the kind of critical mass.  Certainly the topic is important enough.  The main thing is will there be someone or preferably someones who will really work on it.  (For instance, Gymnastics is a dead project.)  If you think Wikiherp is a good project, would stay associated with it and be a subproject, so that you can keep critical mass.  You could also try to just be efficient and limit the project scope you are going to do.  Maybe just make the project around straightening out the tangle of taxonomy and just making "wikidecisions" since the taxonomy externally itself is kinda all over the map anyhow, and you end up needing to "make calls".  Or just call out some turtle specific issues wrt quality.  but otherwise, stay pretty tight with wikiherp and let them manage the article rating and all that.  Not trying to hold you back, if you are all revved up to make a huge infrastructure and rate articles.  Just a consideration.TCO (talk) 19:37, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Wild idea, but I noticed that you had some AP class experience and said the turtles were good AP class projects. you might coordinate and try to get more classes to work on turtle articles.  I remember the teacher saying how much he wished they had done terrapin instead of gravebat.  Also there are some juicy ones like snapping turtle, etc. left for classes to work on.  And certainly they are "core", high hit count articles that benefit wiki and readers.  Not just obscure (although that's fine too!)TCO (talk) 19:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I set a few things in motion, thanks for all the help!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:53, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Content creation barnstar
Thanks, man!12:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Just noticed my horrid grammar in the above, feel free to correct. Thankfully your grammar is better then mine. ;-) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:36, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * We're cool, man!


 * I was just reading a grammar book in the bathtub last night (Harcourt Brace, from back when I was in high school.) Actually pretty good book.  I remember "losing it" and paying for it on purpose at the end of 12th grade.  Read all kinds of things to check, not just with grammar, but also writing.  Wish I had learned that stuff better at the time, but maybe it is not too late.  Anyhow, fell asleep and water-logged the book.  It is now hanging up to dry.


 * And I really won't be going through the article with that book. But I will maybe try to learn from it, for work I do in real life.  TCO (talk) 13:41, 22 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, and the diamondback terrapin is found in the keys, not just the mainland of Florida. Couldn't help myself, had to check. But I am not going to add the edit.

Your contributed article, Capture of painted turtles


Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Capture of painted turtles. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Painted_turtle. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Painted_turtle - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Slayer (talk) 20:02, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * It is an intentional subpage of a longer article. Both the talk pages (and the page it came from) discuss this.  Per directions on your template, speedie is unacceptable.  If you want to read the actual pages and discuss content and how to work this feel fine.  However, this is a normal change to a too long article, to create a summary and then an article.TCO (talk) 20:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

refbegin
it basically makes the references smaller, but you need to end it by adding a refend otherwise it makes the whole of the rest of the article small Tom B (talk) 18:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Good change. Is there some way to get rid of the brackets?  I am using to seeing brackets in academic work, only when the refs are not superscripted.  Given we are superscripted (and even blue), the brackets seem like clutter.TCO (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's anyway to remove it, unless you change MediaWiki:Cite reference link, which would require enormous consensus. Part of the reason is to further differentiate refs from superscripted numbers like $2$ (squared) or $3$ (cubed), though the refs are blue. Some other languages like Spanish do it without brackets. Goodvac (talk) 18:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm extensively published in science and most technical journals seem to get by fine without the concern wrt math superscripts. There is also the blue to fall back on.  No biggie though.

In use
I wouldn't recommend the now the article is at FAC. Featured article criteria 3.(e) "its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process." Regards, SunCreator (talk) 05:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You're right. Will do.TCO (talk) 05:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Honest, I was so done, and then when they pushed me on the copyright issue, I kept doing google search after google search. And I always find stuff (even tangential as with the webbed foot), when I do that.  Anyhow, will just be responsive from now on.  I don't want to blow things for you guys.  TCO (talk) 05:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, reviewers are looking for stability. It's okay though, the Bog changed so incredibly much from the beginning to the end of the review.  We won't get grilled for including a few things.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:15, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, making changes it likely fine, but the in use template says about a major expansion is in progress. I think it could raise an eyebrow. Also some reviewers like to make adjustments to the article that they discover and having a template saying they can't is not likely to helpful to them. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 05:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I get it. And the article is really not in danger of much edit conflicts anyhow.  Template tool, back in toolbox.  :)TCO (talk) 05:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay friend. :-)  Now for reviewers...--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Dab/EL
Hey, sorry, I use a lot of jargon since I generally plow through 20 FACs at once. I check Dabs and ELs using the links in the box in the upper right corner of the specific FAC page- i.e. for you it was Featured article candidates/Painted turtle/archive1. The five links are for tools that show who edited the article when, how many edits each person did (to see if the nominator has done any work on it), what dabs there are, what the external links look like, and if there is alt text for the images. As alt text isn't a requirement at the moment and nominations by people who haven't touched the article are easily spotted, I just check dabs and ELs.

Dab is a link to a Disambiguation page- such as Flower (disambiguation). In general you shouldn't be linking to them without a reason, and should instead link to the specific article you wanted. The Dab checker also shows circular links, which is what you had. I don't check which link it was for Dabs, preferring to leave it up to the nominator to know what they meant to link to instead of guessing, and as such I don't look where in the article the dab/circular link actually was. EL is indeed external links, as you guessed- the tool linked to in that box shows the status of each link. (good, 404 not found, 403 forbidden, journal subscription required, timed out, etc.) I generally fix links that redirect as a personal quirk, so that if they ever move the page again the link doesn't end up broken, but I don't think it's a requirement. For broken links I just tell the nominator, like I did with you, as you know what it was supposed to be.

Checking your articles with those tools is a good idea before nominating- it's nothing to oppose over, really, but its a bit of cleanup that should be done for any FA, especially the broken links. I don't think most people use the tools, though, so don't worry about it. I'm just picky. -- Pres N  03:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I think we were pretty clean.  Am just an advocate of fixing everything we can think of before a review.  So will use tools next time (unless they are really techie, in which case still get someone to run them for me).  On the links, I actually went through and checked every link manually, did the hidden comments for section links, tried to go to the most desirable page (sometimes a better article might be on a slightly higher or lower level of taxonomy for a predator for instance).  Added hidden comments to explain in our article, so they don't change back, tried to fix any redirects, etc.  I was even doing piped links for uppercase and lowercase, but a bot came in and changed that all!  I agree we should link to the current article name, one less thing to break (less links in the chain).  Plus don't have that ugly little red in corner to look like we effed up.TCO (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Question
What did they have to do here to get this image to stay?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I would leave it alone unless someone challenges it. I think the usage is fair use.  Even if the people here have not justified it that way, within the project, I feel morally comfortable that they are not "stealing" from the sign designer, which is the key thing from a liability and morality perspective.  So I would just let it go, man.  If someone hassles you, put in a fair use request.  Could be a good test case.  I'm not talking about doing stuff that is on the line, but a picture of a sign to me is very clear fair use and we should be a little more aggressive about fighting for that sort of thing.  WRT our article, I just didn't think it wise to push it with the reviewers although I feel it is fair use (would pass a suit, no problem, is not stealing).TCO (talk) 05:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I wish I had brought it up before, didn't think about that picture until just now. But I'll let it go.  We'll take the high road.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:57, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I wasn't sure what you were trying to do. USe that sign to back us up?  They won't care and will just go after that other guy.  Or you were trying to make other people obey what we do? Or just trying to do the right thing regardless?  It's a grey area.  I think it's allowable, but some don't.  I would just not borrow trouble.  Read the village pump and you can see all the discussion on the sign that I've had all over the project.  I don't want to push it more here at review though.  Yeah, we lose a chip of the Hope diamond but are still a rock star.TCO (talk) 06:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't want that image removed, maybe just thought the author knew something we didn't (...than again, maybe not). Perhaps after FAC it can be brought back up; also seemed to be an asset to Conservation of painted turtles.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:09, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The loggerhead image is in South Carolina, US. I was going to say it's the difference in Freedom of panorama but on closer inspection Commons:Template:FoP-Canada and Commons:Template:FoP-US and associated US clause/Canadian clause say similar things. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Copyright has really gotten out of hand. That is my personal political stance.  I'm not saying script kiddies should be allowed to steal from musicians.  But when you can't make pretty different derivative use for commentary, that's an issue.  I actually think fair use would cover all this stuff just fine.  (The real legal fair use, not what wiki has as a policy.)  Try sueing the New York Times over them running a photo like that.TCO (talk) 20:57, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * For what it's worth I agree with you. Several times I've thought the Wikipedia fair use interpretation quite harsh. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 21:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleted some sections
I felt so bad looking at this page with its miles of unblock tags from 1.5 years ago at the top when every time I see you around the wiki you're trying super-hard to learn and follow every rule while writing important articles (and well) so I took the liberty of deleting the offending sections. (I saw that you don't like archives). If you don't like it feel free to hit the revert button, but I didn't want other editors to get the wrong impression of you. -- Pres N  08:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)




 * Shake your manly hand! :)TCO (talk) 08:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * If you keep trying to finish the encyclopedia, someone's going to block you... -Atmoz (talk) 17:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Turning in my testicles wasn't enough to keep me safe? TCO (talk) 17:59, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Man, what'd you do!?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Used hyphens instead of n-dashes. Let this be a lesson to you. :) (And try to keep plausible deniability, so if I go down again you don't get caught in the dragnet.)  Nah...I just like to tease and am pretty good at it.  But I promised not to anymore.  It's all cool.  This place is so dramatic, but let it die.TCO (talk) 19:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ha...and sorry, it's dead [*lips sealed].--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to say that I love that turtle picture, I saw you use it on Talk:Humble Indie Bundle as well. -- Pres N  21:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks man. I got it when one of my colleagues was kind of pushing on a factoid (webbed feet) that I thought was out of nowhere, and I was irked at it.  But I just decided to look and then got the RS for webbed feet AND this pic AND a better idea on how to organize thoughts on picta article (some stray factoids of interest for understanding the turtle, but not nesc. different from others). Good things happen when I fire up the Google searches.


 * And yeah...you can check the file history, I use it all over the place. If you watch me for a while, will see that I have some cute tricks, but they repeat after a while.  :) TCO (talk) 23:01, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikidog


Sea photo Talk has given you a doggy! Doggies promote Wikilove and hopefully this one has made your day much better. Spread WikiLove by placing a doggy on other user's talk pages by adding to their talk page. Happy editing!

That was a great comment at WP:Articles_for_deletion/Mossad_shark_and_Zionist_vulture. Enjoy your dog, but watch him. Closely. Sea photo Talk 22:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks man. Dogs rock!TCO (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Turtle Racing
Replied on my talk page; I can't promise Featured Article but I'd love to help! Qrsdogg (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)