User talk:Whoop whoop pull up/Archive 3



HgF4
Hi I changed one of your edits and feel compelled to open a dialogue since you seem to be a regular and diligent editor here. We're all in this together. HgF4 is a real weirdo in the inorganic world. Its existence, which is ephemeral, has captured the attention of specialists, but it is hardly a benchmark reference compound that would be invoked in conversations among chemists. I mean how many Hg(IV) species does one encounter? So I think that for reference compounds we should stick to more common entities, like PtCl42- and AuCl4-. In Wiki-lawyer-speak, citing HgF4 is probably WP:UNDUE.

I also think that terminology when discussing compounds should be simple, since we want to demystify chemical knowledge vs wrap it up in technical jargon that even confuses good chemists. That is my beef with "valence isoelectronic" and the other (IMHO) hairsplitting terms for various kinds of electronic relationships. Actually, these classifications appeal to me personally, but I have been trying to force myself to simplify my language for Wikipedia for the sake of accessibility.

But I can see that you might have other views, which would be interesting to hear. Thanks for listening and best wishes. --Smokefoot (talk) 21:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Reichskommissariats
I am perfectly aware of the German plans for Soviet territories, but the status of these territories varied and was complex. Quite simply, they were occupied territories under civil administration. I assume it is entirely possible that some authors describe some (though certainly not all) reichskommissariats as "quasi-colonies" or something along those lines, but its a stretch to just write them off as "colonies" and say "reichskommissariats were colonies". They certainly shared many aspects of colonies, but its a gross oversimplification to simply designate them as such. The best thing to do is to simply link to the main article - reichskommissariats were reichskommissariats, that's the best description. -- Director  ( talk )  05:08, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * A colony is an area of country A under civil occupation by country B in preparation for colonization of occupied area by country B. The Reichskommissariate are thus textbook examples of colonies.
 * Also, you are making a persistent spelling error; the plural of "Reichskommissariat" is "Reichskommissariate", as Reichskommissariat says in its first sentence, NOT "Reichskommissariats". Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 05:13, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm not much of a wiz at German spelling, sorry :). -- Director  ( talk )  05:27, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, but the article says right in the first sentence that the proper plural is "Reichskommissariate". Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 05:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, your point being...? -- Director  ( talk )  05:40, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * No, that's not necessarily the definition of a "colony" (were the British planning to populate India with Englishmen?). Reichskomissariats are not textbook examples of colonies, not even close. They are like colonies but cannot be simply described as "colonies". Did the Germans intend to colonize Reichskommissariat Norwegen? if you think so you'll need a source for such a claim. Their status is explained in-depth in the article, and the said article is the best way to describe them.


 * You know, your Lenin is a bit off at my resolution.. you should move the fellow a bit to the left :). -- Director  ( talk )  05:27, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, hope that fixes it...Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 05:33, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Third paragraph of Reichskommissariat:

"All of these entities were nonetheless intended for eventual integration into a Greater Germanic Reich (Grossgermanisches Reich) encompassing the general area of Europe stretching from the North Sea to the Ural mountains, for which Germany was to form the basis."

Thus implying German colonization. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 05:42, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah. Please see WP:OR. -- Director  ( talk )  05:43, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you ignore the massively obvious genocide of native populations in the Reichskommissariate and the resultant settlement with немцы (translation: Germans)?
 * No. Do you? What are we talking about here? If you're asking whether I'm aware of Nazi atrocities I think I might start to get insulted at this point (and yes I can read Cyrillic, in my language its nijemci). -- Director  ( talk )  05:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The Germans were colonizing the Reichskommissariate with Germans. It is impossible to ignore. See Википедия: Вам не нужно ссылаться на том, что небо голубое. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 05:56, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Again: I'm not ignoring anything, and I do know what you're talking about. Like I said, some Reichskommissariate (the two in the СССР) were like colonies, shared some of the aspects - but it is an oversimplification to equate Reichskommissariate with "colonies". -- Director  ( talk )  05:59, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * So these Reichskommissariate were colonies:

and these weren't: ? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 06:06, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ostland
 * Ukraine
 * Kaukasus
 * Mosowien
 * Don-Wolga
 * Turkestan
 * Norwegen
 * Niederlande
 * Belgien-Nordfrankreich


 * Do not misunderstand me. I will repeat: some Reichskommissariate shared some aspects of "colonies", but it is an oversimplification to label them as such. And I assure you WP:BLUE does not apply in this issue, not by a long shot :). Any challenged claim needs to be sourced. -- Director  ( talk )  06:09, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Должны ли мы согласиться на перемирие по этому вопросу? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 06:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Mind you, I can read Cyrillic but I don't speak Russian: the most I can do is "divine" what you're probably saying :). But what truce did you have in mind? -- Director  ( talk )  06:18, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I get your point, they aren't all really colonies. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 06:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't speak Russian either, or read Cyrillic. I used Google Translate for all that. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 06:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

RD question about guns
You are now in violation of WP:3RR due to your actions at Reference_desk/Science. 203.27.72.5 (talk) 04:49, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops, sorry... Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 04:50, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

And to add to your woes:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I've got better things to do (like sleep) than waste time on such ridiculous pantomimes. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:58, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit-warring in general is bad enough. But edit-warring on the ref desk?? Come on. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:39, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Please drop the question, find an answer somewhere else. At this point, if you continue to ask it, it turns into not just edit warring but disruptive editing, for which you can be blocked. Dougweller (talk) 05:58, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

To correct your confusion, yes, automating your weapon might be illegal. Depends of course on where you live, but no one is going to answer it. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:31, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks for clearing up my misconception about that. I actually didn't know that it might be illegal. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 06:35, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Some science to be dropped: In the U.S. automatic weapons are regulated heavily. HConverting one from semi-auto to full-auto except under very specific circumstances, IS illegal, as the National Firearms Act considers that the creation of a new machine gun subsequent to the 1986 ban. There are some exceptions, but they are either limited (certain kinds of federally licensed firearms dealers that sell to law enforcement) or extremely expensive (purchasing a pre-ban weapon, which are pretty rare and can cost into the hundreds of thousands of dollars). It is something that the ATF takes extremely seriously, so I'd highly advise dropping the issue. &rArr;  SWAT Jester    Son of the Defender  07:41, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * 69 questions this year seems a bit excessive, particularly as I've got no reason to think your own search skills aren't good enough to find the material you require. Do you really think it's right for one editor to take up so much volunteer time? Dougweller (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Semi auto to fully auto
Not that I'm a gunsmith or an engineer, but I'm fairly certain you can't do it to a semiauto-onoly without significantly modifying the firing mechanism itself. Some rifles, like an AK47, may be easier to convert, while others may be impossible due to how they're designed. It's much easier to make a fully auto semi-auto, or to swap a firearm back and forth that was designed to be either (like a Mauser C96, for example). - Burpelson AFB ✈ 17:56, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you have a reference for this?
This seems unlikely to be true and I have removed it. --John (talk) 20:07, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * See dioxygenyl hexafluoroplatinate. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 23:20, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * By "reference", I meant a reliable source outside Wikipedia itself. --John (talk) 10:47, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Heptafluorobutyric is not a heptafluoride?
In one of your otherwise rare edit summaries, you indicate that heptafluorobutyric acid is not a heptafluoride. Sure looks like one to me, but maybe you have a source that gives a definition. So please add a good reference to this source or revert.

As I have mentioned to others, creating articles with hexa-this and hepta-that is a form of WP:SYNTHESIS, at least from my perspective.

Also, please start to use edit summaries, like the rest of us do. Its a form of wiki-ettiquette.

Thanks,--Smokefoot (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2012 (UTC)


 * A heptafluoride is a molecule or molecular ion containing seven fluorine atoms arranged around a single central atom. Iodine heptafluoride meets this definition.  Heptafluorobutyric acid does not. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 20:04, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response. Like I said, I am worried that you are doing synthesis, which is creative and impressive in a way, but inappropriate for Wikipedia where we merely report.  Where is the source for your restrictive definition ("a molecule or molecular ion containing seven fluorine atoms arranged around a single central atom").  How do you propose that we resolve our disagreement?  There is a formal mechanism at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I am not experienced with initiating such litigation although I have participated in some.  Let me know. --Smokefoot (talk) 20:29, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Rude and spreading misinformation
I can handle your rudeness (no edit summaries and dismissive responses), but more problematic is the misinformation that you are pushing and the arrogance with which you push that misinformation. The nex time you disagree with an editor, send a message and recognize that you might be misinformed. We all make mistakes, but doing so with your arrogance has a poisonous effect.--Smokefoot (talk) 23:07, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Which incident are you talking about? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 23:39, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Let's discuss the hexafluorides
Hi there. Lets try to get along and discuss the hexafluoride article. There are so many ways to look at this topic and you seem to act like you own this article. What do you say? We might learn from each other! My main question begins with the official definition of a hexafluoride. Thanks--Smokefoot (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVI, July 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:57, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Third request for source of your definitions
Hi there. This is my third request for your definition of hexafluoride? And heptafluoride for that matter? I have asked above and I asked at Talk:Hexafluoride. If you dont have an good source, no sweat, we can develop someway of advancing the article without embarrassing anyone. --Smokefoot (talk) 23:10, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Misuse of WP:BLUE
No, the target-projectile reactions at Unsepttrium (and many other superheavy element articles) are not obvious. Even if they "add up" correctly, they can still fail for many other reasons, the most obvious being energy. Double sharp (talk) 04:14, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * How could anyone call that common knowledge? I can't even understand what it is saying. Ryan Vesey 13:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Double_replacement_reaction
Hi there

I'm sorry I (and many of WT:CHEM) missed your requested move discussion. I've asked the wikichemists to look at the issue closely. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

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

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:18, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 August 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 07:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVII, August 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 12:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

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

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:21, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Military history coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 10:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 06:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Meta states
They are notated as 180mTa, and not 180 m Ta. Double sharp (talk) 05:57, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Operation Linda Nchi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Technical (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey, how are you?
Hey, hows the editing going? Having fun on Wikipedia? --UnhappyandNoFriends (talk) 23:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Fine, but I notice that practically all your 30 or so edits have been greetings on other users' talk pages; why don't you go out and edit some articles yourself? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty 23:15, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 17:44, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

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

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Phosphorus heptabromide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 September 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 18:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Aluminium, sulfur, caesium
WP:ALUM only applies to chemistry-related articles. Double sharp (talk) 08:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Unsepttrium
Double sharp (talk) 08:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 22:02, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

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

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:22, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXVIII, September 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project and/or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 21:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Editting-warring
Your recent editing history at Mercury(I) hydride shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. The contested content contains few statements which are subject to debate. Plasmic Physics (talk) 23:48, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is thread name of the discussion. Thank you. —Plasmic Physics (talk) 03:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
 * See WP:AN3 for the result of this complaint. If you believe that this compound only exists as Hg2H2, rather than HgH, you should be able to locate sources to prove that. The papers in the article now, including the 2001 Chemical Reviews paper by Aldridge and Downs, don't seem to indicate that. These authors freely use the notation 'HgH'. There's a paper by Legay-Sommaire and Legay here which talks about the various mercury hydrides in more detail. It is up to the consensus of the editors working on the article as to how these hydrides should be described. I'm just pointing out that references are needed for any unusual claims. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:27, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 22:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Revert
This is just a note that I'm not sure this edit can be properly considered vandalism. The case would be completely different if a racial slur was involved, but at worst, I think this is a personal preference edit, and in such cases I would be careful about marking them as vandalism. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 23:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

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

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:15, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIX, October 2012
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Nick-D (talk) and Ian Rose (talk) 03:10, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 13:11, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 10:22, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

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

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:03, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 November 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 02:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 November 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 14:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

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

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:40, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 November 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 02:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)