User talk:WereSpielChequers/Archive 2



"Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it". So I archive my mistakes and arguments here, almost every section contains a lesson that I hope I've learned.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  16:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Ancient astronaut theories
Hi.. I noticed your edits at Ancient astronaut theories, and feel that they were a bit misguided. In Robert Temple's section you changed the wording from criticism, to 'rebut', why? That is considered a weasel word first of all and secondly it isn't neutral since Sagan's views were challenged. Also, there is no need for an extra section on Dogon Astronomy in a "refuted ideas" section since nothing about Dogon astronomy has been refuted. One of the people you cite in James Oberg even suggests that the evidence against the Dogon is mostly speculation, same conclusions were reached by Griaule's daughter. So I just wanted to inform you to please watch your edits as some of them seem a bit over zealous.Taharqa 04:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

This user has chosen to withdraw from the Dogon - Ancient Astronomy v http://skepdic.com/dogon.html debate and would appreciate no further discussion of the issue on this talk page  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  14:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Boonyay.jpg
I have removed the prod tag from Image:Boonyay.jpg, which you proposed for deletion, because the page you proposed for deletion was not an article, user page, or user talk page. If you still think the page should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to it, as proposed deletion is only for articles, user pages, and user talk pages. Instead, consider using Images for deletion for this page. In some cases, a speedy deletion criterion may apply. Thanks! -Interested2 03:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

OK Fair enough, actually I think its a great picture of a baby rabbit with a credit card for a scale, perhaps I was a little harsh and should have just changed the comment to it needed another justification for being in the public domain than being over a 100 years old. It was really the series of love letters that were posted on it that I thought not fully appropriate for an encyclopedia  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  14:21, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Ray_Toro_at_Event_2007.jpg
I have removed the prod tag from Image:Ray_Toro_at_Event_2007.jpg, which you proposed for deletion, because the page you proposed for deletion was not an article, user page, or user talk page. If you still think the page should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to it, as proposed deletion is only for articles, user pages, and user talk pages. Instead, consider using Images for deletion for this page. In some cases, a speedy deletion criterion may apply. Thanks! -Interested2 03:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I've removed the comments about the subject of the photo being Fugly and replaced with Images for deletion as you suggest.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  06:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Texian
"Legendary Texians" was correct. See http://www.amazon.com/Legendary-Texians-Davis-Joe-Tom/dp/B000UDX22K/ref=sr_1_2/105-7572984-2123641 Studerby 23:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Moai
An article doesn't become protected by someone putting a template on it. It takes an admin action to set the protection, and a non-admin can make a request for protection at WP:RFPP. However, I suggest we don't protect this article, although I acknowledge most anon edits to it are not constructive. The levels of vandalism are not particularly high (compared to the levels that the daily featured article gets, for example) and are best dealt with by encouraging a range of editors to include the article on their watchlists. See also Protection policy.- gadfium 00:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Football hooliganism
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. This is especially important when dealing with biographies of living people, but applies to all Wikipedia articles. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. ♦Tangerines♦ · Talk 17:47, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

My tidy up of football hooliganism didn't add a new point re sectarianism being a cause of football hooliganism - it was already there and still is, though I gave it more prominence. Not sure what your point is about biographies of living people as I didn't name anyone. However as you haven't restored the typos I fixed I'm unlikely to return to that article.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  19:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

HNoMS Stegg
Hi Jonathan. Thanks for your very constructive edit to HNoMS Stegg. One small issue, though: April is written "april" in Norwegian, with a minor "a". The book title that included the word "april" is a Norwegian book title and was clearly marked with to avoid being mistaken as English and having "corrections". I'll fix the book title now, but if you use a bot to make language corrections you might want to make it ignore words inside a language tag. Keep up them good work and be well. Manxruler (talk) 01:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, I stand corrected  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  23:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

The Flyboys
When you edited the article, why did you not checked the vandalism done and not reverted the vandalism. This kind of poor article patrolling is doing no help in building an encyclopedia. If you really want to do some clean up tasks in articles, do it constructively and more carefully.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I changed webiste to website, a non controversial fixing of a typo. You may not regard that as constructive or helpful but it wasn't careless, if there were other things wrong in that article they were out of my expertise and I left them unaltered.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  22:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The question of carelessnesses arises as you did not readded the categories which were deleted by the previous user and did not changed the inaccurate information in the infobox.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 22:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I think the issue here is whether an editor can make a change that improves an article without checking every detail in the rest of the article. My understanding of the way Wikipedia works is that one is allowed to improve an article even if you can't perfect it, and my changing webiste to website was an improvement. If there is a Wikipedia policy somewhere that one can't edit an article without checking every detail in it, please post me a link to that policy.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  23:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

History of Easter Island.
I made an edit to the History of Easter Island page which you appear to be concerned about. My concern is not with the reliability of the source, but rather the. The relevant sentence is as follows:

"Jean-Baptiste Dutrou-Bornier—arms dealer, gambler, bigamist, murderer, slave dealer, encourager of apostasy and alleged ship wrecker—was to have a long lasting impact on the island."

Firstly it is not appropriate present a list of a person's (alleged) misdeeds in this fashion, particularly as several are repeated later in the section. Secondly some of the things are wholly irrelevant to the history of Easter Island - it is in no way presented as relevant that Dutrou-Bornier gambled, for instance. Put it on his page, if you must. Thirdly the material is presented in absurdly loaded language - for instance, it is inappropriate to describe someone as an "encourager of apostasy" because he encouraged people to convert from one religion to another. That's an extreme violation of wikipedia's NPOV rule. Finally, of course, the sentence is written in unencyclopaedic style.

Frankly it's just an appalling sentence, in what is easily the worst-written section of a very good article. My edit was simply to cut the sentence to:

"Jean-Baptieste Dutrou-Bornier was to have a long lasting impact on the island."

which is a much more appropriate way to start the section. Other editors can find an appropriate place for the material removed, should it be relevant and presented appropriately.

However my change has been reverted. I have no intention of getting into an edit war here, so I will make no further edits to the page. I simply hope that common sense and the wikipedia policies will prevail.Salim555 (talk) 08:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I take your point about apostasy and may well rewrite that bit myself, in light of experience that paragraph may not have been my finest contribution to Wikipedia - hence my query on the talk page of the IP address you used. I suspect | your edit was reverted because you deleted some info without completing an edit summary, and as you weren't logged in at the time it appeared as an unexplained partial delete by an anonymous editor. Please don't be afraid of Edit wars, especially on Rapa Nui topics; just remember to explain your edit in the Edit summary field.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  14:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Jim Stanton
I've declined your prod request on Jim Stanton. The prod process isn't shoot-till-you-win, and this has already had a prod declined on it; feel free to take it to AfD if you want. (Although, be aware that the reason it's so short is that I've recently removed about 90% of the article). – iride  scent  20:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Shoot till you win? Oh yes there has been a previous prod - though not from me, and no offence to the editor [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jim_Stanton&diff=prev&oldid=217584037. who removed it], but he has only made two edits so may not be fully conversant with policy. More pertinently it was before this diff when the article's creator and main author admitted that he was the subject. But if you reckon AfD is the path then I may well check again to see if any refs to him have appeared on the web, and if not go there.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  19:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding The music Man
You left a note on my talk page implying I was the creator of an article, The music Man, warning me of its deletion and noting that the article exists under another name. I did not create the article. I merely tagged it for speedy deletion. User:XXreyXX is the article creator, and the one to whom your message should be addressed. gnfnrf (talk) 18:56, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Whoops Sorry. My mistake.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  19:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Vithoba
I think you meant "predominantly" not "predominately". I altered the text. Cheers. Ling.Nut (talk&mdash;WP:3IAR) 00:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes I did, thanks for picking that up.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  07:13, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Horse86
In which paragraph(s} are the attack)s}. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  13:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * In the fifth paragraph the name after the sentence "ditching rejects that she hooks up with at the clubs i.e" was the bit that tipped it over the edge IMHO. I certainly wouldn't want to be named on the web that way.  Ϣere  Spiel  Chequers  13:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll take it out. I don't think it's G!0 though. I think the user just thinks he's on MySpace. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  13:51, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Attack?
What makes you sure that This is an attack page? It does not look like one to me. Theresa Knott | token threats 19:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I've clearly been trawling through too many homophobic attacks. My miscall - I've left an apology on his talk page.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  19:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I figured as much. I've been going through your list of contributions and deleting all the others you tagged. Theresa Knott | token threats 20:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits to The Rocky Horror Picture Show
I'm not exactly sure why you keep changing the character's name in the plot section. Especialy since you claimed Rocky was the character's only name. It is not. Rocky Horror is the character's credited name. It is also the "Title" role of the film.....you know....Rocky Horror.....Picture Show. Anyway, that does not mean that it must stay that way. It means a discussion is begun and a consensus is formed. If the consensus is to simply refer to the character as "Rocky" in the plot section then that is fine. However I objected as you seemed convinced for some reason that Rocky Horror is not the characters name. So I referenced the information and ask that you discuss further reverts on the talk page to gain consensus. It is totally possible. As it stands you made an incorrect claim on your last edit summary. So I felt compelled to to revert what was clearly incorrect information.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied on Talk:The Rocky Horror Picture Show re Rocky's name. BTW Keep changing usually implies more than once, which of my two previous recent edits on that article are you uncomfortable with?  Ϣere  Spiel  Chequers  10:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Church edit
Hi,

I'm the guy who edited the opening paragraph on the RCC wiki page anonymously - I made an account to write back.

I am in fact an Eastern Orthodox Christian, which was why I disputed the Roman Catholic Church being THE oldest Christian church. Obviously I believe the lines of succession of both communions go back to the Day of Pentecost in 33AD, so I believe the Eastern Orthodox Church is just as old as the Roman Catholic Church (hence, why I edited the page to say that it was "one of the oldest Christian churches" rather than the oldest church, seeing as though the two bodies are now separate entities, as the article goes on to say later).

If I could have some more elaboration on why there was anything wrong with my edit, I'd very much appreciate it.

In Christ, Tom. Anastasis777 (talk)


 * On second thoughts your edit was correct, my apologies I've now reverted to your edit. The RCC can be a contentious article, and if others query that change then the right place to discuss it would be talk:Roman Catholic Church  Were Spiel  Chequers  13:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Heh, what did you think I was getting at? '''Anastasis777 (talk)


 * I can only put it down to a lack of caffeine on my part - I must have got the before and after on my screen the wrong way round.  Were Spiel  Chequers  14:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Haha, so you thought that I was saying that the Roman Catholic Church was the oldest church, and that I wasn't giving the Eastern Orthodox a fair hearing. An honest mistake :p

By the way, can you help me with setting up a basic user page please? '''Anastasis777 (talk)
 * Yes of course, What do you want to say on it?  Were Spiel  Chequers  14:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know, just so that there's something there. That I'm an Australian, convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, British expatriate. All that stuff. And anything basic that everybody's page needs. I'll just build from there. Anastasis777 (talk) 14:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, very minimal first draft up - you probably only want one of the Aussie boxes, more are available at Userboxes.  Were Spiel  Chequers  14:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll let you know if I need more help! Anastasis777 (talk) 14:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Oakland Raiders
Just a note that american football does not draft from high school. The youngest they can draft is those 3 years removed from high school. It is a blatant hoax. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK thanks for the info, I'm logging off and will leave that one to those who understand sport.  Were Spiel  Chequers  17:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Date formats
Please refrain from using purely numeric date formats on Wikipedia, as you did on Danny Morris. A date written as 01/02/03 means 1 February 2003 to a European, 2 January 2003 to an American or 3 February 2001 to a Japanese. Rather, use one of the date formats that is standard across Wikipedia: 18 April 2009 for articles on British/European topics, April 18, 2009 for articles on American topics, otherwise just keep it consistent throughout the article. Thank you. -- Smjg (talk) 17:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmmm not sure what 18/04/2009 could mean other than what it says.....  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  23:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Nothing, but for consistency, all dates should be written with the month named. OK, so there are one or two odd contexts where ISO 8601 dates are acceptable, but by Wikipedia policy no other numeric formats should ever be used (except when explicitly discussing such date formats).  Also, please allow time for conversations to finish before you move them from your talk page. -- Smjg (talk) 21:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Silly Boy
Hi : You say "remove lady GaGa disproved rumour", the link I listed in the PROD says that Rihanna denys having anything to do with the song - why do you remove the PROD then? Amalthea 20:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, My bad - I misread the quote.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  20:21, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry about reverting you, somehow my computer froze on me, when it unfroze I had a message that I had reverted your message. Thanks Amalthea for fixing it.--- I'm Spartacus!  NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:24, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Happenz. This morning I added a category using hotcat, and lo the page was blank! must be full moon in the forest.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  22:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

SMS
Consensus was achieved to move to SMS. In fact, it was unanimous (6-0 I believe, but of course, !vote). Please check talk pages before moving articles, especially when dealing with such high-traffic pages. I expect way more from an admin. Please move the article back immediately. Guy0307 (talk) 22:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Suggest you talk to User:Radiojon and try to seek a consensus as to what name the article should have, somehow I doubt that both your G6s are consensual.  Ϣere  Spiel  Chequers  23:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Look at Talk:SMS. If that's not consensus, I don't know what is. Guy0307 (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * On second thoughts having looked at User Talk:Radiojon, if I do any more G6s I think I'll start looking at the requesters talk page  Ϣere  Spiel  Chequers  19:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Harrier Jump Jet
Hello, looks like you moved Harrier Jump Jet family to Harrier Jump Jet earlier today. Could you move Talk:Harrier Jump Jet family to Talk:Harrier Jump Jet as well? No rush, whenever you get a chance. Thanks. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:40, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out, I should have done that with the G6, looks like someone has sorted it now though.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  21:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, it's been fixed now. -Fnlayson (talk) 23:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Evando
Hello. I happened to notice that you indefinitely blocked just three days ago, although the account hadn't edited since September and they have a number of normal edits, including talk page comments, in their history. Many of their "bad" edits could be attriubuted to lack of knowledge or simply poor wiki skills, or aren't specifically attributable to vandalism according to WP:Vandalism. Would you consider unblocking this account? &lt;&gt;Multi‑Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 19:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. :-) &lt;&gt;Multi‑Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 00:41, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for bringing it to my attention. In retrospect I was a tad harsh in that case, this is not typical of his contributions.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  00:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Louis Cullen and your 4-minute response
I added Louis Cullen the other day, had a cup of tea, added the various links around wikipedia, and found that you had already tagged the article as having one source within 4 minutes - see:Revision history of Louis Cullen. Couldn't you give us lesser mortals 24 hours? Or look him up on google and add a few more yourself? When one creates an article there are naturally other links to tidy up. I know that it is a much smaller article than Pokémon regions, and therefore probably much less important, but overly-hasty comments could drive away serious contributors.Red Hurley (talk) 10:52, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if you found my tagging over hasty, but it was in article space and IMHO a valid tag. I'm aware of arguments that certain speedy deletion tags should not be used in the first hour of an articles life, but I don't see the problem in improvement tags. BTW no I don't regard Pokemon as more important than historians.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  01:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Eleanor Abbott
I just checked and according to our own article she did invent the game Candyland. I'm not sure if she meets the notability criteria, but I don't think the entire article was vandalism.  Them From  Space  21:26, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Good spot, thanks I've restored it and apologised to the editor.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  21:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Holy spit. I'm stunned. Nice save! I've also apologised to the editor, after your fine example. MuffledThud (talk) 09:06, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Category sorting
Just a reminder that the  markup is correctly in uppercase with a colon, not lowercase with a pipe, e.g. , not. —Paul A (talk) 04:48, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for pointing out the colon business. Not sure I understand the uppercase/mixed case difference as both seem to work the same, though I take the point that Template:Defaultsort is a redirect to Template:DEFAULTSORT.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  07:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

And Template:DEFAULTSORT is itself a redirect – the real DEFAULTSORT is an inbuilt magic word, not a template, which is why it uses a colon. —Paul A (talk) 01:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Rupert Murdoch
Hey, you fully protected Murdochand added pending changes. I'm pretty sure that's not what you meant to do, so I've changed it to move prot and PC1. Is that what you were trying to do? Best, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   10:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing that, yes my bad, not sure what happened there.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  10:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Thousand Dollar Bill
The design is fake, designed by me, and realeased (sorry about the spelling) into the public domain by me. I understand your mistake, am not mad and aprreciate your intrest. OttomanJackson User:OttomanJackson 19:45, 6 September 2010 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by OttomanJackson (talk • contribs)
 * OK tis back, don't spend it all at once. File:Fake currency-1000 dollar bill.jpg  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  20:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Erdős number 2
I'm curious about the claim that anyone with an Erdős number of 2 has a pretty big claim to notability. One would expect numerous doctoral students of researchers with Erdős numbers of 1 to have Erdős numbers of 2 but to never have been notable in their own right. (This is just me being curious and not a comment on the oppose.)--RegentsPark (talk) 21:45, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point - that would explain why there are so many redlinks on that list.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  21:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Richards Hays
Not sure what you've done... but instead of correctly splitting the article into Richards Hays and Richards Hays (health sciences), I think you've duplicated them... and at the wrong name - it is Richard Hays, not Richards! Read the Bond Uni profile - it mentions working in the UK, James Cook Uni Medical School and rural health. Must be the same guy... searching, searching, found it! This newsletter proves it. Can you merge it back please, and then move it to Richard Hays, not Richards. Thanks The-Pope (talk) 11:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Good spot, now hopefully all fixed and a dab created. Ever fancied having the mop yourself?  Ϣere  Spiel  Chequers  20:42, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Request to undo page move
Hi WSC, hope you're doing well. It'll be nice to talk to you about something other than RFA!

Back in January, you performed a good-faith page move on Scusa ma ti chiamo amore based on the title capitalization in the article. This capitalization (which hit every word American-style) was incorrect, as Googling Italian media coverage of the film or a glance at the Italian version of the article will attest. I've added a link to the English article providing an authoritative source of the correct caps (first word only).

I'd like to do some work on the article, but don't want to start on it til the page resides where it properly ought. Any chance you can help me with this? You'll certainly know how to do this efficiently and cleanly better than I will. Questions, concerns? Thanks - Townlake (talk) 18:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * (talk page stalker) I'd already tried to do this, but a move in the normal way apparently cannot be effected because of the loop it would create while doing the moves. Perhaps the admin tools have a work around, such as temporarily deleting the redirect page maybe.--Kudpung (talk) 01:45, 27 November 2010 (UTC)


 * BTW:If I'd known about this redirect stuff before, I would probably have have chimed in and made a nuisance of myself. Don't hesitate to give me a heads up on anything like this, especially if it concerns Germanic and Romance languages :) --Kudpung (talk) 02:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I tried the normal way too and no dice since the correct page already exists as a redirect. Of course, the brute force solution will simply be to do a double copy-and-paste, which is certainly within my powers, but if there's a better way I'd rather let the person who made the move in the first place handle it. Townlake (talk) 04:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. I think the reason why you couldn't revert the redirect was that there had also been a bot edit, as I believe you can move things back if it is just a redirect.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  09:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, have a nice weekend. Townlake (talk) 15:12, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year (belated)
Hi WSC. Tectonic plates done a sudden shift over the holidays? Fortunately there was no tsunami here in Thailand this time ;) --Kudpung (talk) 06:34, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Kudpung, thanks for fixing that mistake of mine, obviously I didn't read enough of that article when I categorised it.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  11:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * No worries - things happen, it's like my rare near misses with CSD. Anyway I've PRODed this one now you've seen it, the school doesn't even exist yet! --Kudpung (talk) 13:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

SAS 3
Hi. I reverted your edit of SAS 3, "stared" to "started". I think you are maybe a Deutschsprecher, and might not have noticed that "stared" is the past tense of "stare" (to look intently), which is what was intended. But a lot of people who are not native English speakers might go there, and also be confused, so maybe a better word would be possible? Feel free to suggest something; you might judge better than I. Maybe just "looked". Cheers, Wwheaton (talk) 21:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry about that, I've fixed hundreds of stared/starred/started errors but on this occasion didn't twig that a machine was staring. May I suggest observing instead, it does strike me as a more machinelike thing to do.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  21:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think telescopes do stare, but observed is less likely to be misinterpreted, so that is fine. Wwheaton (talk) 23:05, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Lidman
What sort of references is this? The link leads to nothing. --LA2 (talk) 04:29, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * It was a "remember to use google translate even for references used in the Swedish Wikipedia, and don't edit too late at night" type of reference. Thanks for fixing my mistake.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  12:58, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Orlando Barone
I noticed that you included Orlando Barone in the category "University of Belgrade faculty". There's no reason for the inclusion obvious at the article. Perhaps you'd like to check whether there's been a mixup with his position at Belgrano University. Opbeith (talk) 11:38, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Good spot, my bad, only the first 19 bytes of the category were the same. But it is a totally different university. I've fixed it.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  12:21, 3 April 2011 (UTC)