User talk:Maclean25

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Geo Storm Article

Thank you for taking a look at my geo storm article. I would like to include more photographs in the "year to year changes" section. I have side front and rear photos for the 1990-1991 GSi, the 1992-1993 Base, and the 1992-1993 GSi, as well as detailed photos of the different spoilers on the two GSi variants. Which of these photos would you recommend using (I don't want to use too many) and what table format would you recommend Evenprime 06:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Hi Maclean25, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

  • RC Patrol - Keeping a lookout for vandalism.
  • Cleanup - Help make unreadable articles readable.
  • Requests - Wanted on WP, but hasn't been created.
  • Merge - Combining duplicate articles into one.
  • Wikiprojects - So many to join, so many to choose from...Take your pick!

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 11:59, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

FYI: The Wikipedia:Guide to layout suggest putting "references" after "external links".....I just thought you would like to know before you take a nap. WikiDon 06:25, 14 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Great work on B.C. riding articles!

I just want to thank you for your great contributions to the B.C. provincial electoral districts pages. They look great! Cheers, DoubleBlue (Talk) 13:58, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

I have a question for you. What is your source for the Demographics data? I have been using Election Prediction Project but the numbers, on at least one article, are slightly different. I think we should use the same source but I don't know which is more accurate. Where did you get your data and from what year is it? Thanks, DoubleBlue (Talk) 20:26, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your speedy reply! I think I like your source: Elections_BC] better and will use that from now on. Cheers! DoubleBlue (Talk) 20:42, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hey Jodi

or is it Ryan? :-) Just to let you know that you can make your life easier by signing and date stamping just by typing four tildes ~~~~ . The wiki automagically changes it to your name and time stamp. By the way, I agree with your comments on your user page that contributors should state their biases. I have been too lazy to make a user page yet but your statement may encourage me to get on with it sooner or later. :-) Cheers, DoubleBlue (Talk) 22:48, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks, I've always wondered about that.maclean25 22:54, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Image help

Sorry, I tagged your image as {{unverified}} since it did not have an image tag. But I did not carefully read your image description when I did that. Therefore, I put a {{GFDL}} instead since I am assuming you created the image specifically for Wikipedia.

Anyway, each image you upload has its own image description page where you give its description, its source, and its copyright situation. The image description page should also have a image copyright tag which quickly gives its copyright status. See Wikipedia:Image use policy for more information.

So feel free to change the image tag on Image:Bulkley Valley-Stikine 2001.png to something else. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 07:17, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Riding articles organisation

Good day. You asked:

  • headings (demographics, geography, history, election results all make sense)
    • good
  • Total votes (Total valid votes or Total votes cast? there is a 33 vote difference which would affect the 100.00% in the next column)
    • I think total votes cast since it could, occasionally, be interesting [1]. Perhaps we can add a stat to the boxes on number of "invalid votes".
  • Voter turnout (currently it is "Registered Voters Who Voted" because it is the easiest stat to get; alt is "% Eligible Voters Who Voted"
    • % of Eligible Voters would be of more interest but Registered Voters Who Voted is fine.
  • Demographics (anyway to alter table to show more detailed stats, like pop in 1991, 1996, 2001, 2005; avg. income (census or election year?), unemployment (year?), or whatever may be relevant.
    • I would like to keep the tables as clean, simple, and easy to read as possible. Perhaps the Demographics table could be expanded, however, as you suggest here, it could be interesting and informative.
  • Election table format (I like them. They are easily digestible and not really overwhelming at all).
    • Thanks. I agree. Some other tables try to do everything or be too pretty and confuse the issue. I have considered bolding or colouring the background of the winner in those tables but I don't think it's at all necessary since the tables should be in order of most to least votes anyway.
  • the images (just something I'm fiddling with, do they make sense?)
    • The images are great! Make sure you add a copyright tag as User:Zzyzx11 outlined above or they will be in danger of being deleted.

Again, great work Maclean! DoubleBlue (Talk) 14:27, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I have asked User:Earl Andrew to comment as well since he has done a lot of work in the federal ridings and may have a fresh view of our work.

The layout is very nice. I love the maps! ( I am currently working on one for Parry Sound-Muskoka, federally. It is a tedious task though, adding up all the polls in a municipality. So far, I have got all of the Parry Sound part done. -- Earl Andrew - talk 06:30, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BCCP

Mac, take a look at the British Columbia Conservative Party article. It says that the BC PC Party became the BCCP in 1991. And, of course, it was the BCCP before the 1940s. They are the same party, under different names, as far as I know. Ground Zero 17:56, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Surrey North

Hello. Your boxes are fine. I just added the chart I did because there will be a by-election coming up, and there will be a spot light on the riding. The same thing was done at Labrador (electoral district). I feel both are acceptable, as my chart shows the progression of the parties, and yours goes into more detail. Cheers! -- Earl Andrew - talk 02:53, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Hi, thanks for taking care of the Canada-related deletion list. Great job! -- Visviva 06:19, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

  • I like what you are doing with the Deletion Sorting. I am glad to help with the Canadian subjects. --maclean25 06:46, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Marsden

That's my suspicion as well. If that's the case she may be in violation of her probation, I don't think it's legal to falsely claim somone is being investigated by the police (an obvious lie since your IP address is not publicly available once you login to wikipedia and since stating the particular's of Marsden's sentence is not libel, let alone criminal harassment). Homey 06:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Peace River area

Jodi, I worked on these articles last night:

Chetwynd, British Columbia
Mackenzie, British Columbia
Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia
W. A. C. Bennett Dam
Williston Lake
  • 1) I would like to ask you to give them the twice over, double check my work?
  • 2) Do you have any nice photos you could add, or take some when you tour the area?

WikiDon 19:54, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Sure, I'll add what I can. These places (except Mackenzie) are on my todo list. Great maps, by the way. --maclean25 03:50, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chetwynd Website

Jodi, I need your help. I can't get this website to work on my computer:

I have emailed them, they say everything is fine. I re-installed a newer JAVA, Julie said it was that, but I still have the problem. I click on a topic, any topic on the left menu bar, and nothing. Nothing happens.

Maybe you can 1) check it out, and 2) if there is a problem, communicate with them to fix it. Thanks, WikiDon 04:18, 27 September 2005 (UTC)


  • The website is working fine on my computer. I'm using Mozilla 1.7. Try this link to their sitemap. At least you got a response from them. I emailed them twice for a good image of their flag and coat-of-arms, with no reply. --maclean25 04:41, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chetwynd article

Jodi, I hope your not going to leave this paragraph like this:

  • "In 1997, Chetwynd expanded its boundaries. Its northern border was moved up 210 meters over Ol’ Baldy ridge as part of the British Columbia Community Forests program. Four satellite industrial properties were, also, incorporated into the District. These Also, the industrial properties belonging to Enersul, Pine Valley Mining Corporation, Tembec, Duke Energy, outside Chetwynd were incorporated into the District as satellite properties. This was done for taxation purposes as the industries were heavily impacting Chetwynd’s infrastructure but not paying the taxes for maintenance."

I would have just fixed it, but it had items that I didn't know the answer to. WikiDon 07:06, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I fixed the grammar. I know this deserves an expanded explanation but I just cannot find any sources for it. I just know it because I handled an application to expand one of the properties. I will expand it when I get more info but this is all I know (I got a map of it at the office, too). If your concerned about the "northern border was moved up 210 meters over Ol’ Baldy ridge" phrase, I am going to keep that because I think it is a cute sentence. The "as part of the British Columbia Community Forests program" is not entirely accurate as this expansion pre-dates the program. It was done as part of the British Columbia Community Forests Association before the provincial government signed on. I will re-word this if I can find better words. Please list any concerns you have about the paragraph and article and I will do my best to address them. --maclean25 07:32, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Nightowl.....WikiDon 07:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

I nap. maclean25 07:54, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hudson's Hope, British Columbia

That would be good. I just looked at it again and noticed a contribution by Wallymaster (talk • contribs), looks like a child. I reverted the edit he made. Take a look at his other contribution, Beryl prairie, it either needs to be worked on or deleted in its present state. Hopefully the mayor will be re-elected and you can get a good article. WikiDon 07:39, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Beryl Prairie is a community within the municipal borders of Hudson's Hope. It is several miles north of HH's townsite. It will inevitably be mentioned in the HH article so I'm ok with a deletion or redirect. I saw he also listed "lynx creek, and farryl creek". Indeed, Lynx Creek is another community within the HH's municipal borders, to the east of the townsite. However, Farrel Creek is several miles outside the municipal borders (to the east). --maclean25 00:14, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spoo

Thanks for your contribution to Spoo! I've gone through dozens of different versions of the opening, and to keep up with FA standards the version I've gone with has a more prose-y flow. I'm reverting it for now while I mull over other possibilities in lieu of your change. Thanks so much! (And thanks for your support on the nomination!) --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 05:02, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

I wasn't attempting to vandalize Jackie Chan Adventures; I just don't know Chinese and my brother always says Sensei is Uncle's name! And you're right: he always throws the cup when he's done. By the way, what's it like in Canada?--HistoricalPisces 17:11, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

  • I did not revert your edit, I reverted 64.171.187.113's "Mung bean is GOOOOD for you!," edit. Does "Uncle Chan" really say that? My part of Canada is cold and dry right now but I saw the northern lights (those pictures don't do them justice) last night for the second time ever. They are absolutely amazing. --maclean25 19:36, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't think he says that (though I know he likes mung beans). In his imitations my brother uses, "Uncle does not know. Does Uncle look like psychic?", "Hi-yaaah!" and "Uncle wants tea!" He also says Uncle complains about his tea being too hot or cold or wrong kind or disgusting. By the way, should I move to Canada? I live in the US right now.--HistoricalPisces 17:12, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Extraordinary Machine/temp

I don't think it should be deleted, as the edit history will become available if it is, and you will not get credit for all the useful edits you made! Also, it could be useful in the future. That's just my opinion, though. Extraordinary Machine 20:29, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spoo!

Spoo has just been featured! Thanks for your early support! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 05:13, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Yogi tea

Hi, Any suggestions as to content for this? I think the recipe is appropriate for cookbook, but not here, and if I remove that there's not much left. It's not a product I've come across. Dlyons493 Talk 11:31, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

  • I Agree. I will put something together today. --maclean25 19:22, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
    • That's excellent thanks. Personally, I'd redirect the existing Yogi tea to Yogi Tea.

Dlyons493 Talk 21:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Northern Rockies Regional District

Howdy! I created this one last night, Northern Rockies Regional District, British Columbia, if you have anything you can/want to add. WikiDon 03:24, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Woodroffe Avenue

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Woodroffe_Avenue. Thank you. Ëvilphoenix Burn! 19:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I should have left my comments this morning when there were only two other comments - what a mess this one has turned out to be. I'll probably wait until tomorrow to leave my arguments on that page. Sigh. I get this feeling some people are going to be ticked off with me soon, since I've compiled a list of Ottawa roads that I think deserve to be nominated for deletion; I'll probably do that next week. Mindmatrix 03:22, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Federal ridings

Hello again, Maclean. I agree that a discussion to get a consensus is a good idea, and will contribute to your draft project page next week. You're right that riding names can be confused easily with other geographic names. I have been working on defunct Ontario federal ridings for the past month or so, and have usually been adding "riding" after the name if there is any chance of confusion. I have assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that something like "Sunshine Coast—Nickel Belt" would be easily understood as a riding, unlike "Burnaby", but following your comment, I think that I assume too much, and will start using "riding" after each name. I don't think that bolding the name really works because that is a code that would have to be explained. I did not catch that that meant you were talking about a riding instead of another geographical feature, and I don't think that other readers would either. I think that excessive bolding, in addition to being inconsistent with the Style Manual, creates a cluttered article.

Context can also be used: if we say that "Maskinongé—Scarborough Southwest was abolished when it redistributed into Yellowknife—Essex South and Cape Breton—Lethbridge", then I think it is clear that we're tlking about other electoral districts.

So, does "riding" work as well as "electoral district"? I think that riding is a commonly understood Canadianism that works as a short form for electoral district, but it should probably be wikilinked at the first instance in each article for the benefit of non-Canadian readers. I will start doing that. I agree that "electoral district" is cumbersome, and I think that is why it has been shortened to "riding" in general usage, even if Elections Canada doesn't use it. (The Parliamentary website uses it, though.)

I have also been deleting the dates after the riding names for the same reasons: this is an unexlpained code that adds clutter to the articles. From my work on defunct districts, I understand that those dates refer to the period of existence of the ridings in question, but this code is not explained to the reader. Also, I think that the information about the period of existence of a riding other than the one that is the subject of the article belongs in that riding's article, not here.

I am continuing my work on defunct ridings: I am about half-way through Ontario, and will move on to other provinces when I'm done, but I also want to clean up the current ridings in anticipation of a federal election early next year. Do you have a problem with any of the changes that I made yesterday to BC ridings? I'll hold off on my clean-up work until I hear from you.

Some of the other changes that I've been making:

  • replace MP with Member of Parliament as a better link;
  • replace "NDP" by "New Democratic Party" on the basis that the initialism will only be understood by readers familiar with Canadian politics;
  • break up the opening sentences that read "Abbotsford—Hudson Bay—Musquodoboit is a federal electoral district represented in the Canadian House of Commons,and located in the province of XXX" into separate sentences so that the verb phrase "is located" isn't separated by a long string of text;
  • remove the excessive capitalization in the tables -- "Total Valid Votes" is replaced by "Total valid votes" since there seems to be no reason to capitalize the non-inital words;
  • replace "Pop. Density" by "population density" -- there seemed to be no particular reason for abbreviating the first word; and
  • add in results from older elections that had been omitted in some cases.

This is a huge project, and I am happy to contribute my share. I like you vision of making Wikipeida the most complete source of info on Canadian ridings. I look forward to working wiht you. Ground Zero | t 13:19, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject

This was kind of a spontaneous thing. I thought of it earlier today, and when I was talking to Jord about naming issues, I suggested we start up a project. Now then, I will try and incorporate your stuff into the project, but I don't think being an admin will be to my advantage ;-). As for the Woodroffe Ave. thing, I didn't get into that much trouble did I? ;-) There are quite a few issues that have come up in regards to that. We have articles on pretty much all major Ottawa roads, so I feel it perposterous that one of our busiest would be deleted. But, let's not get into this again, me and my Ottawa wiki-buddies will figure something out :-D. -- Earl Andrew - talk 08:08, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Good stuff you have there and I see it has been incorporated to the project page. I don't really see there being any risk of a "bog down discussion on regional-specific issues" if we include provincial districts. In terms of a shell for districts, in my mind, would be pretty common. If anything, there might be some add-ons for some provinces for some reason I am not imagining right now but that should not effect the basic outlines for a page on an electoral district. Have you looked at the work that is being done on Alberta electoral districts by Cloveious? See Calgary Shaw for example. - Jord 13:35, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

There is a good example of where there might be an add on for provincial districts. In Alberta, you might add on the results of Senator-in-waiting elections, in Quebec you might add on Referendum results. - Jord 13:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  • The regional-specific add-ons are good. Perhaps I will change the caveat. The pages I created there are for general discussion. For a specific debate a subpage may be appropriate (it is hard to say what might emerge). Other examples incude, the infobox used in Ontario districts whose provincial/federal boundaries coincide. A sub-page may be created to answer the question 'Are these two seperate electoral districts that require two seperate pages? and what info should be cross-referenced?'. In BC, there there are couple piles more of data from BC Stats on provincial districts that I'd like to put in federal district if it were available from StatsCan. My intent was to keep debate focussed on three main areas: layout, content, and sources/references. I'd like to encourage the beginning of a new subpage or thread or dealing with a specific issues. --maclean25 17:55, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation - I've actually already had a look at it over the past two days, and have had some ideas that may be of interest. I'll present them on the project page. Aside: as far as naming conventions go, do we want to split an article like Vaughan—King—Aurora, or do we leave it as is? Mindmatrix 20:39, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't think they represent the same area - they just have the same name, and a significant overlap between the provincial and federal ridings. Elections Ontario determines riding names for the province, as far as I know; it essentially performs the provincial equivalent duties to Elections Canada. But there are differences, too: one of the current federal ridings split from Vaughan—King—Aurora is Oak Ridges—Markham, but the provincial equivalent is now Oak Ridges. I'm sure there's a method to the madness, but I'm not privy to it. Mindmatrix 21:38, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
As I typed that, Ground Zero revised the article, and answered that question - the provincial electoral districts were renamed to match the federal electoral districts. Since then, some federal districts have been redefined. Mindmatrix 21:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WPCUG Contribution

Hello, I appoligize for writing this in your talk space, but I was wondering if you could give me a status update on the WPCUG page that was marked for deletion? Is the decision standing or is there a way that we may appeal it. I've been doing searching on Wikipedia and I have found pages from other user groups.

Thank You

Michael Celotto

[edit] Notable Canadians

Personally, I'd probably either kill it or put in a few other subheadings as well; to me, it just kind of seems pointless to only sort one type of article out from the main list like that (when yeah, half the time users just add people articles under the main heading anyway). Bearcat 07:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Riding history

I posed a question to you on Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada/History. Perhaps you could take a look at it when you have a chance. Thanks. Ground Zero | t 15:34, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Mile Zero Post.jpg

...but which end is it? (*grin*) Bearcat 09:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

  • HaHa! It is supposed to be the beginning of the Alaska Highway. But the funny thing is that it isn't even on the Alaska Highway, it is in the middle of the intersection of 10 street and 102 Ave, one block away. It exists for tourist photo ops. --maclean25 09:43, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your vote, and HDI discussion underway ...

Hello! I hope you're well. I'd like to thank you for participating in the vote earlier to include the HDI in the country infobox/template.

After a lengthy gestation, a discussion piece has been prepared to help give form to the vote. If you're interested in how and where this information should appear in the infobox, I'd appreciate it if you head on over there and comment. :)

After a decision is arrived at, if at all, I'm also hopeful to prevail upon you to add the values (if you're willing and comfortable) for a handful of countries; the more people doing it, the less time it will take to implement the vote and realise the fruits of our collective labour.

As a segue, I'll also be adding my comments to the relevant Canadian riding/election project pages shortly; stay tuned! :)

Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks again for your co-operation! E Pluribus Anthony 04:03, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for your note. At your behest, I will try to participate more in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada et al.; I have some ideas about this project (previously stated, though not elaborated) and new ones (like a revised infobox). As you may recall, I'm consumed not only by the UN HDI resolution above (which is imminent) but other topics, and I've been spread pretty thin recently.
Again, I will try to contribute. Thanks again for your indulgence and work! E Pluribus Anthony 06:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RDA's

Well, we do have articles on Ottawa city wards. Look at Alta Vista Ward for an example. As for RDA's, I've been creating the bare stubs for a while now, and there are a few for other districts out there. I feel they are necessary, as they are census subdivisions recognized by StatsCan. I'm not sure how to expand them any further, as I am not a BC native, but would be open to suggestions. Just don't merge them all into one article. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:34, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

It is no coincidence, that they share borders, as StatsCan defines its CSDs to coinside with the electoral areas. As seperate articles, they work well, because we can divide up a regional district into smaller areas to divide up the information. I'm sure the list of communities alone would make things quite long. Just look at the length of some Nova Scotia county articles, and you will know what I mean. Unfortunately, how they are presently divided remains unclear. I'll have to wait until the next census. -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:20, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Demographics

First, thanks for the humorous intro to your message. :-)

Second, I will create a version of the demographics section, as I perceive it should exist, sometime soon. I won't be able to do much until Wednesday at the earliest, though. I'd prefer a slightly broader scope to the section, so I suspect my views differ from yours and Luigi's. I do agree that having examples to view would make selecting data much easier. My example will probably have several tables, and some text describing the data presented.

Third, I will contribute to Geography of British Columbia; I'm one of those people that expects that if someone votes for an article, (s)he should contribute to it. I'll probably start on it next week sometime.

I've really got to stop committing myself to so many things... Mindmatrix 17:30, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your comments on the Hugo Chavez article

Your recent comments on the Hugo Chavez article in the second peer review are deeply appreciated. I will carefully read them and immediately act upon them. However, I was forced to prematurely shut down that peer review due to the article's current candidature for "Featured Article" status. Please feel free to leave comments and objections at the FAC page, under the Hugo Chavez subheading, from now on. Regards, Saravask 09:46, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I have reviewed the Hugo Chavez article again. I note that some of the issues I raised in the peer review have been dealt with. It certainly is one of Wikipedia's better articles. My remaining concern is about the orientation of the article. Specifically, that it focuses too much on his public life and tells us little about the man. I would like to see the personal life section at the bottom given more prominece and analysis. I'm also concerned about the stability of the article. I note some of it has changed. I'm guessing some of the content has been alternating between the daughter articles and this main one however I never read the other articles so I'm not sure (don't tempt the reader with switching articles half way through - if the reader is interested he will inevitably go there - I didn't get distracted so that is good). Anyways, if the article becomes stable (so I know what I voting for) I will vote soon. --maclean25 09:52, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shoe polish FAC

Hi Maclean, thanks for your comments on the FAC for shoe polish. Please take another look as I have rejigged the article as per your excellent comments. Proto t c 11:32, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I have reviewed the article again. I note that you have taken care of some objections and improved the article. I will strike/alter my comments accordingly. I will reconsider my voting stance after a few days of stability in the article - so I don't vote for an outdated version. --maclean25 10:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Great, thanks. One objection you haven't stricken out is the one about 'why shoe polish comes in little tins' ... I really can't find a specific reason, other than 'it always has' - when it first started to be sold commercially in various forms, during the late 1800s, everything was sold in tins then, as plastic hadn't been invented. Circular tins were easier, as it made it easier to get all the polish out of the tin (no corners), as with all kinds of viscous substances. Small tins were preferred because shoe polish dries out, eventually, when exposed to the air, and it's a low-volume product that you only use a little bit of every time. I don't know whether that's actually relevant enough to put in the article. I would guess that brand recognition led to this remaining the case to this day, but it would only be a guess, and I can't find any references to back it up, so I'm a little leery of putting that in the article. Proto t c 11:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Those links are great, I will have a read through them and see what can be extracted. Thanks! Proto t c 12:48, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] A few notes

Hi. First, I'm sure you'e noticed that I've done some copyediting of Dawson Creek. I've left some comments at the peer review too. I didn't edit the whole article, mostly the demographics section - it'll still need a few tweaks. I made one change (settlers -> immigrants) which I'm not sure is accurate, so please check it.

Also, since you were one of two people who seems to have had any interest in re-working the Canadian projects, could you do a quick test to see if it works as you'd expect? It shouldn't take more than a minute or two. I don't want to implement a system that nobody has tested, because I have no way of gauging if its easy to use - I find it easy, but then, I designed it! Just visit my test page. I've made the same request of Zhatt. Thanks... Mindmatrix 20:08, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the peer review on Dawson Creek. About the Canada collaboration, please see the history page of User:Mindmatrix/xi. I had to add the template name to the template info to get it to work. Also the fourth tidle didn't do anything on the main collaboration page. On the style side, I would like to see how switching the 'article link' with the 'article, click to vote' would look. I imagine it being more intuitive to reach up to the top to browse the article, if I want to vote I will read on to see how to vote. --maclean25 05:34, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
I've taken a look at the history. Here's the issue:
{{subst:User:Mindmatrix/beta | pg=Article | reason=Reason for the nomination.| nom=~~~}}
The part before the first pipe links to the template, and shouldn't be changed. The equivalent in the real system would be {{subst:Collaboration template | ... or some such. Since I was trying to dumb it down as much as possible, I implemented automatic signing, so you didn't need to replace the tildes. That's why the fourth one did nothing, since it wasn't being appended to the three others, but rather to your username. Only Article and Reason for the nomination needed to be replaced. This is how it should've looked before saving the page:
{{subst:User:Mindmatrix/beta | pg=xi | reason=Po-tat-oe-s.| nom=~~~}}
Visit the User:Mindmatrix/xi page again, blank the text, and replace it with the line above. Things should be much smoother. I'll update the instructions to be clearer about this; maybe I'll put an example for each step. Mindmatrix 16:31, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Never mind, I found the real problem. You have a custom signature, which is parsed before the fourth tilde is appended. I'll have to re-work that bit. Mindmatrix 02:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
I've fixed it. Try doing the above now, and everything should work. Mindmatrix 02:58, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Looks great, but two things: (one) I can't get back to the main page after voting or putting up a nomination. I have to hit the back button a few times to go back. (two) I cannot see the article that I'm voting on. The top links at User:Mindmatrix/alpha are the User:Mindmatrix/xi (ie. Canada collaboration/xi) which goes to the voting page and there is nothing in the voting page that goes to the article. --maclean25 04:21, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
If you take a look at the wiki code for each nomination page, you'll see that the headers actually link to the article that was nominated; however, for the test, the nomination page and the article are the same page, so the header simply becomes a bold non-link to avoid a self-referential link. This is also the case in the main page: the header is a link to the article, not the nomination - I suppose I should have designed my test to be a little clearer. In other words, this is only a problem with the test system, and will work properly in the real system.
As far as not getting back to the main collaboration page, I'd rather not add links to it from the nomination pages, because the main page pulls in all those pages, and would thus be littered with numerous links to itself. However, if you notice in the nomination pages, right after the "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" statement at the top is a link to go back up one level. Again, this doesn't work in the test system because I flattened things out a bit, but would work just right in the real system; the only problem is, would most users notice that link? Mindmatrix 15:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
  • The statement at the top took me back to "User:Mindmatrix", not the alpha page. I noticed the format is similar to WP:RfA. Perhaps test it with a real article, see what happens. --maclean25 01:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
The reason it does that is that gamma, delta etc are not sub-pages of alpha. The nominations would have to be at User:Mindmatrix/alpha/gamma etc for that to work; that's how the real system will be set up. Anyway, I've done a test run using such a sub-page and a real article. This should make everything much clearer - I should've done it this way from the start. (Note that the User:Mindmatrix/alpha will be replaced by Wikipedia:Canada collaboration.) Mindmatrix 02:38, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mountfort and friends

I wrote the Benjamin Mountfort article so long ago that I can't remember exactly which references came from where, those reference books were returned to the library long ago. I see the chief quote: " a half-educated architect whose buildings… have given anything but satisfaction, he being evidently deficient in all knowledge of the principles of construction, though a clever draughtsman and a man of some taste." - (the newspaper article regarding his reputation is quoted) is referenced in the external links listed in the article. For you ref here: [2]. This Christchurch City Library site I think can be relied on for authenticity. I do remember an exact newspaper for that quote though and will endevour to find it (if only because it will wake me up in the middle of the night if I don't!)

The second quote (to which I assume you are referring) "...Accordingly, we see in Nature's buildings, the mountains and hills; not regularity of outline but diversity; buttresses, walls and turrets as unlike each other as possible, yet producing a graduation of effect not to be approached by any work, moulded to regularity of outline. The simple study of an oak or an elm tree would suffice to confute the regularity theory." Is from here: Letters to the Governor of New Zealand concerning the designs for the new Government House, Auckland (1856-1857), Colonial Secretary's Notebook, National Archives, Wellington IA1 60/1708. This is also listed in the external links. I suppose the present style of Wikipedia FAs would be to footnote those references, rather than list them as I did as denoted external links - however time and the whims and requirements of Wikipedia FAs change by the day, and I no longer write FAs, as I am only able to write in my own style, and have little inclination to adapt.

Regarding referring to buildings as having an Gothic, Tudor or even (heaven forbid) Brutalist design, that is something that is apparent, I believe if one has to reference the obvious then it's time to give up on the project, the blue links to Gothic, Tudor and Brutalist should confirm basic assumptions.

Please feel free to edit what you like, they may be FAs today but nothing lasts for ever. Giano 22:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

  • In this diff here [3] you assert a hypothesis (advanced by the authours of the reference book I used) regarding a dearth of architects as fact:-
  • an explanation of it could be a dearth of architects (my version)
  • and there was a dearth of available architects (your version)

I think when reporting scantily documented history unlike concrete rocket science, if there is an element of even the slightest doubt, it should be clear in the text. Giano 07:27, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Weasel words

I'm glad you liked the Palladian page I regard it as the first "proper" page I wrote here, although I can now see a lot more that needs to be added and changed. I am very into facts and information probably at the expense of prose and style.

I'm afraid a lot of very silly people coin the term weasel words and attempt to remove them when they are best retained, the only way to evaluate any work of art from a painting to building is to evaluate by comparison with other buildings, and suggest differences or reasons for such a feature. To state something is definitely one thing or another would be to assert one's own opinion. The very term Weasel words, is stupid, and intended to be disparaging as though there is never a reason for using them

Secondly if an article lists references, one has to assume a degree of trust that the author has in fact read them and used them. If every reference was footnoted the page would soon resemble a sodoku square. The references are listed so one can obtain them and check facts, or better still further one's knowledge. I do agree with you that it is better if direct quotes are footnoted, or at least referenced in the text. I see that Robert Lawson which I wrote sometime after Mountfort is quite heavily footnoted, an FA feature which became popular after Mountfort. To explain every architectural term would be boring and a little patronising to the reader, if they are interested they can always click the link, where I think a feature need to be explained as to why it shows certain influences I do explain it i.e from Lawson: "....influences: the nearest style into which it can be categorised is probably Jacobethan" note the "probably" not weasel words but merely because in architecture each architect has a variation on a theme, so rarely is anything definitely anything, even the great Palladian is not a perfect imitation of Palladio's work (as I hope I have explained on the Palladian page)

Where I think an architectural term is not sufficiently covered by Wikipedia, or is an obscure vague style then I hope I do explain why sufficiently i.e: "........the school's many turrets and towers led to the architect Nathaniel Wales describing it in 1890 as "a semi-ecclesiastical building" in the "Domestic Tudor style of medieval architecture". I expect there are terms I should have explained more clearly, but at the end of the day there is only so much one can write and if people are interested that deeply they can always attempt to educate themselves further or ask someone.

What is beginning to concern me about Wikipedia as a project though is that an article can become like a game of Chinese whispers, an eminent authority's hypothesis or view covered by a "perhaps" or "in the view of" attracts the self appointed "Weasel Words Police" (who invariably know nothing at all of the subject) who remove the doubt, resulting in a theory (however creditable or likely to be true) becomes suddenly becoming unassailable hard fact. This is why I shall be continuing to attempt when explaining architecture to allow people to form their own conclusions. For instance a certain building may well be an architects best/worst building, but its not for me to say it, however widely that view is held - so from me it will always be "possibly" or "perhaps" I hope that explains to you what I am trying to do here, and why I am writing no more FAs or anything in such detail again.

I hope you are going to start writing about architecture, there is a real "dearth" of people writing on the subject here. One author here is truly knowledgable on the subject, but apart from inspiring me with suggestions and help every now and again seems to prefer to write on many other subjects instead. I think almost every single architectural form could do with further coverage and information, all is a little superficial, but I suppose that's all an encyclopedia ever is. Giano 09:31, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

  • That's great to hear your interested in town planning. Wikipedia desperately need a comprehensive page on Baroque town planning you know the grid system, with everyone and everything in their place, church at the centre etc. sect. etc. It would be great if you could do it. You would be amazed how many pages could link to it. I did Terra del Sole to start the ball rolling and cut out some unnecessary explanation on another page. You can't imagine how a comprehensive page on the subject of Renaissance and Baroque town would help out in so many other pages. Please consider it, its a real void here. Giano | talk 22:34, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dawson Creek, British Columbia

Can you please review the images at this Dawson Creek article. I plan to put it up as a FAC soon and would like to avoid any complications. I am specifically concerned with Image:Dawson Creek 1996.jpg. It is an air photo taken 10 years ago by the province. I use them in my mapping software at work but got this copy is from an online GIS application at a provincial ministry website. At my work we bought the licensing rights to use the the photos (about 100 photos) which we manipulate with other data. We give print-outs of these images out for free but it is data we are not allowed to give out. They are georeferenced to the 1:20,000 BCGS map grid. Of course, there is no data attached to this image posted on Wikipedia (it is simply a cut&pasted image of a section of two map sheets). If you know what the appropriate tag is, if it is indeed permitted, please let me know. Also, let me know what the appropriate tag is for Image:DawsonCreek logo.png, a version of the city's logo (other versions have slogans or other wording). And the flag was emailed to me from city hall after emailing them a request to use it on Wikipedia. Thank you in advance for any help you can provide. --maclean25 04:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Also, does it matter that it is a Canadian flag and logo? --maclean25
If you're allowed to give out the images for free, are there any restrictions on giving out the images? Are there any explicit or implicit agreements with the recipients of those printouts, such as an expectation that they won't make their own copies of the printouts? Image:Dawson Creek 1996.jpg might qualify for {{CopyrightedFreeUse}}.
As for the logo, logos are almost invariably fair use in an article on whatever is identifed by the logo, as are flags. --Carnildo 22:38, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shoe polish

Hi Maclean, just a quick note to say thanks so much for your support in shoe polish becoming a featured article. It's now made it! All the best, Proto t c 09:30, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] MPs

Oh sure, election results are relevant, but MPs? No!! that makes no sense. Whatever, your article. I just wanted to add something to it like I did for Riverview (Ottawa). -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:23, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I did not mean any offense by the removal. But I have got the format just how I like it so any non-minor additions make me nervous, especially since it is in the midst of the FAC process. With the city's article I am trying to be as specific as possible and a list of MPs really upped the ante as to what can be included. I saw your edit to the template on the city polls. You have a point that it is too specific, so I added template brackets to the "locale" so that it can be amended in each article to say "city", "village", "neighbourhood", "community" or whathaveyou. --maclean25 05:41, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Links to years and dates.

Hello, good work on the Dawson Creek article, well on its way to becoming featured, judging by the comments. :-) However, you will note that I have unlinked many years, while leaving the links on the complete dates. The only reason for putting square brackets around dates is so that different people's date format preferences work. See: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Date formatting for instructions. Like you, I used to put square brackets around all years thinking it was the right way to do things until I ran across the page on date formatting. Keep up the good work. Cheers. Luigizanasi

  • Thank you for the edits. I never link the years, excessive linking always annoyed me. But in preparation for the FAC I gave in. So you unlink all the years you have to. --maclean25 05:41, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BC Constituency Pages

Hi; got your note. For the ridings I've done so far (Coast Chilcotin federal, Cariboo, Yale, Yale-Lillooet, Lillooet and Atlin, I copied tables from other constituencies to use as a model. There's user-someone named EarlAndrew who's going to try and generate some maps for me later; I've asked for Coast Chilcotin first, and at least the federal ridings have legal descriptions on-line (BC historical ridings do not; I'm trying to get someone at Elections BC to provide me backfiles). If you'll look at Cariboo (provincial electoral district) you'll see I extrapolate on political-geographic issues, such as concentrations of population; in certain MLA cases - George Matheson Murray, and actually I think more on his wife's page Margaret Lally "Ma" Murray I provide some of the political/personal context as to why the win or loss; or fluctuations in voting popluations etc. Doing the best I can; for now just working on getting the poll-data in place and relying on later editors to provide character/candidate profiles. If there's anything I'm not doing right please let me know - two big things 1) we need a historical constituencies category for BC, and for other province's provincial ridings and 2) is there a template for a preferential ballot? the 1952-53 elections in BC were preferential (W.A.C. Bennett got into power because of STV, then did away with it to keep anyone else from benefitting from it as he had)Skookum1 05:02, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Electoral Districts

Hi, First, congratulations on the Dawson Creek Featured article. On the electoral district template for Langley, looks good except for a few points.

  1. Area is sort of an interesting number. For the Canadian average, just divide Canada's area by 308. However, that average will be skewed and I am not sure it will say much. The large number of small urban ridings will be massively outweighed by the small number of extremely large ridings in the North, with (I suspect) very few ridings close to the average.
  2. Population change does not seem to be available on the 2003 rep order. I did try searching on Stats Can's web site to no avail. Theoretically, we could get the full profile for each riding from Stats Canada, but they charge $350 for set-up plus $35 for each additional profile (or something like that). Anyway, it would amount to a few thousand dollars for the whole thing. Maybe we could use the 1996 rep order pop change???
  3. I am also not sure what information the participation rate adds. Unemployment rate is clearly relevant, but the participation rate is mostly related to the number of retirees, which is already captured by the number of people over 60. (or discouraged workers, but that is correlated with a high unmeployment rate)
  4. We can't easily get the incidence (note spelling) of low income, so we probably should drop it. The average income number does give an indication of this, in any case.
  5. I still like including language, ethnicity and immigration numbers. I think they are directly related to voting patterns outside Atlantic Canada. Francophones outside Quebec tend to vote Liberal or NDP, immigrants tend to vote Liberal (hence, for example the results in the St-Léonard—Anjou east end Montreal riding), while I think visible minorities and aboriginal peoples are a factor in explaining Liberal and NDP votes across the country.

Luigizanasi 08:01, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Long overdue...

For your exceedingly helpful peer review (and the only one that even bothered to peer review) of FairTax, I award you much WikiThanks! Please accept it as a token of my gratitude.

Image:WikiThanks.pngImage:WikiThanks.pngImage:WikiThanks.pngImage:WikiThanks.png

Trevdna 15:28, 28 November 2005 (UTC)


OK, there has been much work done on the article (FairTax). However, I realize that it is still highly lacking as it stands. Would you mind going back over the article and offering any other improvements you can see?

Also, please take a look at the to-do list - is it complete, while at the same time concise enough to be useful? Did I write down your concerns (from the peer review) down well enough, or did somethings get lost in transcription? Are any things on the list already done, or unnessicary?

You can respond below, on my talk page, or on the article talk page - the response will be looked at in any of those places. (It would be most helpful if you answered in bullet form, so it can go easily to the to-do list.)

This would be a really great help to me, and to the article. I know it might seem like it is asking a lot, but you are the only one who who has shown that they can take a good objective look at this article and point out inconsistencies, who is not working on the article (and therefore is not clouded by their own biases from working on the article). Thank you very much. --Trevdna 06:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations

I noticed that Dawson Creek reached Featured Article status. Well done! Mindmatrix 16:47, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mindmatrix scam adminship

As fellow residents of this land, I feel it is my duty to employ my newly-granted priviliges to ensure that this politically unstable land may one day achieve a level of stability and functional governance that we all desire. To that end, please use the attached funds with the strictest confidence to accomplish this goal. (Yes, you're right, functional governance and Canadian politics is an oxymoron.) Thank you for your support. Mindmatrix 21:19, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] reply on my Talk page

Hi; working on a hangover but answered your comments on my Talk page.Skookum1 22:37, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] White's tree frog

Thanks for your edits to White's tree frog. Most of them I liked, however I had a problem with your edits to Conservation Status. It made it sound more general to Australian frogs, and not specifically this species. I reverted that section, and fixed it up to sound a little less ambiguous. --liquidGhoul 06:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Rightio, I hadn't realised. I will try and reword it now. Thanks --liquidGhoul 08:51, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Joan of Arc

Thank you very much for your feedback at peer review. Would you take a look at two branching articles that address several of your comments? We followed the example of the French Wikipedia last month and created Joan of Arc in art and Joan of Arc bibliography. Durova 18:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Indigenous people of the Americas

You said: "All arguments (except your racist comment) are based on Wikipedia policy concerning lists." Well, I don't know any Wikipedia policy that supports deleting perfectly encyclopedic lists based on ethnicity of people that are listed therein. But yet, some such lists are kept and other are deleted. There are many names for that phenomenon: "systemic bias", "Wikipedia is inconsistent", "POV" and so on. I prefer to call it "racism".  Grue  19:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Election Candidates

Thanks, I will take a close look at the discussion in Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Legislative candidates, because I agree that there has to be a comprehensive solution. Skeezix1000 15:11, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grant Neufeld

Blind statements of not understanding are not useful counter-arguments.

Blind, content-free accusations -- which are what you originally posted --- are not useful arguments, either. And it's really really hard to make a counter-argument when there was no argument to begin with, so be careful with your unearned snark lest you injure yourself.
I'll take a look, but so far I'm not hopeful, since as far as I'm concerned, Neufeld's industrial-strength vanity should have been bounced a long time ago, no matter what Sollog-level rationalisation he gins up to excuse promoting himself. --Calton | Talk 07:04, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
I guess I do have to use smaller words: So, in case you genuinely don't understand, and not just playing dumb is an insult, pure and simple. You gave no reason, just an assertion, and called on it, you retreated behind an insult and blamed me for your failure to be even minmally clear. I was being oblique to avoid insulting you direct, so perhaps it's my fault: so, you're a bad and dishonest writer who blames his communication failures on the reader instead of where it belongs, on yourself. Clear?

So, to recap:

  • You originally gave no clear reasons.
  • Challenged, you insulted me for not readiong your mind.
  • The reasons you eventually provided were bogus, being:
    • Circular ("Rinse, lather, repeat")
    • Irrelevant (the stamping off and the other articles-are-just-as-bad-but-he-didn't-nominate-them)

Between your bogus reasoning, insults, and disengenousness, I'd say you've earned the Bad-Faith crown. Congratulations. --Calton | Talk 08:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Wow, you just don't stop do you? First, you have low threshold for insults, you will get burned many times with this. Secondly, I did not blame you for not understanding, but rather for refusing to understand. As I said previously, "I don't expect you to suscribe to [my point-of-view] but if you are going to challenge it I expect you to try to understand it." You do not have to read my mind, just my comments. No matter how many times you call it a circular argument does not make it true. The "other articles-are-just-as-bad-but-he-didn't-nominate-them" was from this afd as stated here as outlined here, and as I agreed with you has nothing to do with this subject afd. "stamping off"?....but I'm letting you have last word! Please see Wikipedia:Don't be a dick and try to be more calm when replying to comments. --maclean25 08:58, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chetwynd, British Columbia

I would really like to use Image:Chetwynd BC Road Network.JPG in the Chetwynd article. Was it that I was using the wrong tag or is just not permitted. What about the unaltered version straight from the source:www.hellonorth.com (the pdf tourist magazine)? Is there a tag that would allow me to use that? Also, I think that BC and Canada are the same for copyrights. At my work we have a license to use the geo-referenced data on these airphotos, but we can do what we please with the images (give them away, publish them - once we publish an agenda they are public property, etc.). maclean25 16:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if Image:Chetwynd BC Road Network.JPG is different and "derived" enough that you can call it your own work? If so, you need to at least credit the source (which you did). As for the license tag, see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for detailed explanations and I recommend asking on the talk page there. I'm not sure which one applies in this case. Maybe you ought to check out Wikipedia:Copyrights#Using_copyrighted_work_from_others and ask the Northern Rockies Alaska Highway Tourism Association for permission to use (with your modifications), under Wikipedia terms (GFDL). Since their in the business of promoting tourism, I don't see why not they wouldn't agree? That would clear up any ambiguities and doubts. Personally, I tend to be a stickler, when it comes to copyright issues and if I'm ever in doubt, I won't use it. Again, I recommend getting more than my opinion.
As for the air photos, I don't know for sure. All I know is that Canadian data is still copyrighted (even if they allow it to be given away for free). It's not public domain, like US government data is. I think this is a gray area, and need further opinions from others more expert about Canadian copyrights. If you upload something that is "derived" from the data, then I think it's okay. In your case, is it considered derived? I don't know. Myself, I'd like to know, as I am considering using the DEM data from geogratis and making maps for some of the Canadian Rockies parks. In that case, I'd be deriving hillshading, combining with other data (roads, ...), and doing other cartographic design work that would make the maps for sure, a derived product and okay.
Sorry, I don't have more of a definitive answer for you. I think it would benefit us all to get more answers to these questions and maybe clarify the Wikipedia:Copyrights guidelines, to include issues relating to spatial data and Canadian copyright. ---Aude 17:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
I just copied the discussion to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chetwynd, British Columbia, to help keep it together. ---Aude 17:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board

Truthfully, I've only been pruning old AfD discussions as I find them - I rarely add new ones, since I don't hang out on AfD (now that I'm an admin, though, I do try to resolve a few dozen weekly). I'll keep doing this, and adding stubs and categories that come up for deletion. I agree that its a good draw for a number of contributors, so perhaps we should find some of these contributors that are willing to update the list. Mindmatrix 20:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Michigan State University FAC

maclean25,

Thanks so much for your help on the Michigan State University Peer review. I just put the revised article up as a featured article candidate. Please let me know what you think. Lovelac7 20:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dropping By

Hey; popped by while looking at the registry of Electoral Wiki'ers; see you're in the Peace River area which I didn't realize about you before.....if you want some entertainment on those cold subArctic nights, your local library will have The Newspapering Murrays by Georgina Keddell (the Murrays' daughter); I think you'll enjoy the chapters on the early days of Ft St John in there.....Skookum1 09:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Claridge Homes

I've protected the page against re-creation. Thanks for pointing it out. Mindmatrix 17:03, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] arial photo

Unless the photographer explicitly said that you can use it for any purpose, then it's all rights reserved by default. I don't think there's a justification for using this photo on the page that it was on, I think you should flag it for deletion. If you live near the town in question, perhaps you can find a local amateur pilots club and find someone to take a substitute free image the next time they are passing overhead. Good luck with the article, on casual inspection it looks close to feature status to me. Matt 13:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Amateur Radio Operator

please see the talk page on Talk:Amateur radio regarding identifying amateur radio users.

[edit] People's Republic of Kerala

"And why no mention of the University of Kerala?" — Maclean25 (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)

Hi. I hope you're not offended by my late response. I tried to implement your suggestions; however, I'm not sure that namedropping one university's name (Kerala University) is appropriate here, notwithstanding a more thematic discussion of education. In all the "place" articles I've seen, I've not seen one with an "Education" section. Nonetheless, thanks for your critique and pointers to sources. Saravask 04:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Rebar Jaff

No problem. Please note that most of the votes on the original AfD were blanked by an anon vandal; I just reverted that. Owen× ☎ 01:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Oh...I totally did not see that. Well, it will probably get speedied but I'll let it play out. --maclean25 01:42, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
    Oh, I'd never close an AfD as Delete with only one vote and a comment... The new article shouldn't get speedied under CSD:G4, as it is substantially different from the one I deleted. Owen× ☎ 01:48, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gerrymandering Review

" Today gerrymandering is not a major issue in Canada." Yikes. Is that ever wrong; and I'm not just thinking about Gracie's Finger (which I've been trying to find or make a map of ). Guess I'll be around for the review process if I'm wanted. Have to do some digging for further examples; but I submit boundary revisions in the Kootenays and Vancouver Island and suburban Vancouver to be constantly political in nature, despite the neutrality of the respective Elections (BC/Can) organizations.Skookum1 08:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3D Monster Maze

Thank you very much for your help! An answer awaits you at Wikipedia:Peer_review/3D_Monster_Maze. --BACbKA 12:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lindsay Lohan

You wrote:

  • Comment, please explain the reference: "born Lindsay Dee Lohan[1]". --maclean25 03:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

By any chance, would you happen to know why that reference/footnote no longer works? RadioKirk talk to me 03:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I found the odd note in the code when I was trying to figure out why it was broken which made me pose that question in the FAC. I was not able to figure out why it is not linking to the reference section. --maclean25 04:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
It appears it's been intentionally nuked by an admin. I tried removing the ref altogether, only to find the next one, bumped to the top, didn't work anymore. I don't see any other alternative. RadioKirk talk to me 04:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lindsay Lohan

I have a bunch of small concerns about the Lindsay Lohan article. Where would be the best place to list them? the FAC page, Peer Review page, article talk page, or here on your talk page? --maclean25 06:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Anywhere's good. If you'd prefer my talk page to avoid cluttering up the nom page, that's fine. :) RadioKirk talk to me 13:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello again! I believe everyone's concerns have been addressed. Please feel free to revisit. RadioKirk talk to me 18:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC) Got your list, I'll go over it, thanks. RadioKirk talk to me 22:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

  • "While still working as a successful actress..." why is the word "successful" there? it is a peacock term. Actually, I personally do not think that entire sentence is poorly crafted. Understand the purpose of the sentence is to indicate that she made a transition from film to music while she was a popular actress. Try saying that in a more matter-of-fact way, like after releasing movie x and x months of premotions she began working on a pop album in Month 200x. She released the album, Speak, in 2004 and after a period of promotions/concerts/projects she began working on her second pop album, Album x, which was released in 2005.
Simultaneous, though, not a transition—and, I felt the lead-in sentences established "successful" as fact. Fixed, nevertheless.
Deleted one, minor change to another. The only serious issue was verb use.
  • Back up (or elaborate) the statement: "...involved in charity projects such as The Carol M. Baldwin Breast Cancer Foundation, Save the Children, The United Cerebral Palsy Association, and her own charity organization, Dream Come True." - this is an important point to make but the use of the word "involved" is so ambiguous that it renders the entire sentence meaningless.
Done.
  • "financially comfortable from the start;" what does the start refer to?
"Lohan's family was financially comfortable from the start"—start of the family. Self-explanatory, I believe; no change.
  • "rollingstone.com. Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen. URL accessed on 19 August 2004." - the url does not show the article. Please re-format the reference as a proper magazine article reference, not a web reference.
Hm... I'll keep an eye on that. It worked two days ago... Edit: Fixed.
  • "Dina's attorney said she "and the children..." is a misplaced modifier (I think). It reads like the "she" is referring to the attorney, when it is actually supposed to be referring to the mother.
Done.
  • "he was sent back to prison for unlicensed driving and attempted assault" - please be more matter-of-fact, just say something along the lines of he was convicted of x and x. I believe the source says something about being intoxicated.
The intoxication was not part of the guilty plea. Nevertheless, this is prose, not a news report, so I'm leaving it intact, with respect.
  • "give up if she didn't get the job. and many..." - do not use contractions in articles.
Fixed.
  • "...taking 'shy violet' lessons..." (nytimes.com) why is there quote marks around shy violet? they do not appear in the source. If you want to add emphasis, then say "emphasis added" at the end of the quotation.
Argh, another case of the best source being slightly different than the one I found when I first wrote it [grin]. Fixed.
  • "Lohan was so well known that her friend" - more peacock terms. Do not tell the reader this, let the reader come to the conclusion that she is so well known. Just say Lohan appeared on the show, etc.
Fixed. RadioKirk talk to me 22:49, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for removing the objection! Let me answer your newest concerns:

  • "financially comfortable from the start;" this is ambiguous, please be more specific, "start" of what? start of Lindsay's life?
Objection, your honor, question asked and answered [grin]. Seriously, see above.
  • I'm still uncomfortable with the "time and money to charity projects". This really should be referenced. It is just too ambiguous and should not be emulated in other articles. money? what $100 or $10,000? time? what one afternoon or every afternoon for 3 months? I hope you can see how this can be manipulated.
One can only work with what's available. I feel the information is encyclopedic and valid, but even news stories that specify her involvement in some more recent things, like tsunami assistance, don't provide specifics. I'll keep an eye open but, for now, no can do.
  • With respect to the acting sections: there are five quotes from critics describing how good Lohan is and only one negative. There is also one neutral quote, let's go with more of the neutral ones that describe her abilities.
I tried to find good, brief quotes that represented the consensus for each project; the structure is, in fact, intentional, presenting a "she was good in that film so she got this film afterwards" narrative.
  • Reference the Vanity Fair article ("Vanity Fair released an interview in which Lohan admitted using drugs "a little"" + image of cover is used). --maclean25 00:49, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Last I checked, the actual Vanity Fair article has not been published on the Internet. The Reuters story referencing the article is the best until then (and VF provided the cover shot that was then distributed by the Associated Press).
Hope this answers everything for now. :) RadioKirk talk to me 01:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bulbasaur

Please see my response ;). Thanks! --Celestianpower háblame 11:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I re-reviewed the article here. --maclean25 03:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coquitlam, British Columbia

This is a broadcast message for users that voted to select this article as the Canadian collaboration. It has been selected for the February 2006 collaboration period. Congratulations! Mindmatrix 19:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Patriots FA

Thanks for the feedback/criticism of the Patriots article; I will get on those ASAP. Deckiller 20:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help during the FA process. I look forward to increasing the quality of the Patriots' article and hopefully see it on the front page one day. Deckiller 19:45, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bulbasaur

Thank you very much for voicing your criticism at its FAC. I have worked into the article all of your prcise suggestions but wondered if you might help me out with some of the others. This is what I've done so far.

  1. What more do you need to know about it in the real world? It notes who created it and when.
  2. As to why the anime and video games are longer: they are more popular and widely available. Plus, there is more to write about them. What more do you write about a small peice of card worth about a dime?

Regards, --Celestianpower háblame 21:07, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I note that the small concerns have been rectified, however, in my mind having this article get a re-thinking is best for it (organization-wise and content-wise). To address your questions:
1. How about a bibliography like this: Krazy Kat#Eclipse Comics editions? Is "Cultural impact" or "Merchandise" too much? It was my impression that Pokemon was a huge popular cultural phenomenon, yet according to this article, there have been asolutely no analysis of its characters and Bulbasaur has only ever been mention twice in the media. No non-promotional books with independent analysis?
2. I don’t think that justifies inclusion into the article. That sounds like writing for the sake of writing. As for the cards, I really thought the fantasy card games were a big part of Pokemon. --maclean25 03:56, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Western Front (World War I)

I have taken an interest in your FAC nomination of this article. I am doing edits and facts checks one section at a time. One problem I have is that I cannot find anything (except Wikipedia articles/mirrors) on the paragraph on the April 1915 Battle of Hulluch. Please provide a reference that proves this battle and the events described happened.

Thanks. Sorry, somebody snook that one in on me. It looks like a factual error. The 16th (Irish) Division[4][5] didn't even get to France until the end of 1915. The Battle of Hulluch page gives a date of April 27-29, 1916—a year later. I think that last sentence in the paragraph can be safely removed. — RJH 16:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay it's gone now. Thanks again. — RJH 16:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
In the 1916 section, I could not find anything on "escadrilles de chase" and a google search comes up with Wikipedia articles only. Can a reference for this phrase be found?

I believe it should be escadrons de chasse. Thanks. — RJH 22:47, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Western Front (World War I) you said that the "semi-chaotic edit/review process is a tad discouraging."

Hi again. If you look at the history for the page, there have been at least a half dozen people in there making changes. All within the span of a few days. So I was just venting a little frustration, that may also have been the indirect fault of the very flaky database behavior that day. Sorry, no offense was intended.

I agree that the one objector listed a couple of points that needed clearing up. But some of the other bullets were in the nature of personal style issues. I don't think a page can really make everybody happy at the same time, so those I tend to give less weight.

No matter. If it fails then at least the page has had a better looking over. Thanks. — RJH 15:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] &nbsp;

The correct way to write verbatim &nbsp; at the moment is to use the &amp; HTML entity to escape the initial &. I agree that the nowiki tag should have done it for you :-) If confused, look at the source (by trying to edit this section)... --BACbKA 18:07, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks, I would have never guessed that combination of letters and symbols. --maclean25 19:05, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification

Hi, I noticed that after I addressed ur objection to the excess wikilinking of dates, you had struck out ur opposition, then found you've changed ur mind again. I'm confused. I have made sure that excess linking hasn't occurred and only the most important dates/years are linked and that too not more than once. If you are talking about this edit the explanation is that the said years have already been highlighted in the first instances and years 1947, 1965, 1971, 1972 are very vital in the subcontinent history given the wars and its aftermath during these vital years. Oct 13 has also been wikilinked in the first para. I hope you can understand, for this is a minor issue. :) Idleguy 05:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

  • I saw you indicated that it was fixed but I checked and it was not. So I corrected the dates myself and struck the objection. Then I saw my corrections were reverted so I revert the strike-out. Please review this section of the Manual of Style: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Usage of links for date preferences. It is not a matter of wikifying the first instance, but rather triggering the date preferences feature. All full dates should be wikified like 20 February 2006. Individual years should not, not even the first instance (unless there is particular relevance in the context - eg. I was born in 1979not particularly relevant. The world changed in 1979relevant context.) --maclean25 06:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Ok, that has also been corrected now. I had misinterpreted that policy and so this confusion. However, please understand that the standalone years, 1947 (independence and partion of the two nations) and 1971 (major war and independence of East Pakistan and further turmoil), were turning points and historically vital years in the subcontinent's history and therefore as per MOS "they will clearly help the reader to understand the topic." Hope that is satisfactory in the current version. Please feel free to make any further changes. Tx :) Idleguy 07:06, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bangalore FAC

Jodi, thanks for the links! I have referenced them in the Bangalore article. AreJay 05:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is Punk'd "irrelevant"?

I'm in the middle of a dispute with backburner001 over the Punk'd reference at Lindsay Lohan. This user says it's irrelevant. I laid out the case for its relevance—with a rewrite for clarity—and he deleted it again. His response: "I did my part – I removed content I felt was not significant and I made suggestions for improvement when I was asked for them. If you are interested in working together to fix this problem, do your part and improve the Punk’d reference or give me a legitimate reason for keeping the reference that was in there before." (Essentially, "You think it should stay? Prove it to me and me alone," which sounds awfully close to self-appointed WikiGodhood, but I've been called dramatic already. More on point, "working together" to this editor means he deletes it, but someone else has to "fix" it.) This user's page includes as a goal, "[r]emove irrelevant/trivial content", but a quick look at his edit history is telling: on 30 January, he removed from WP:MOS a "reference to naming conventions for Mormonism"; on 19 February, he deleted "2 paragraphs" from Hiram College "to keep concise". Since then, every deletion of material has been a Punk'd reference, from Lindsay Lohan, Avril Lavigne, Jena Malone, Beyoncé Knowles, Mandy Moore, Chris Klein (actor) and Proof (rapper). After we blasted each other's antagonism (real or imagined), I threatened him with a WP:3RR war and mutual blocking, and backburner001 then agreed to stop removing the reference pending the discussion that results from my Request for Comment. No matter the outcome, your input would be very much appreciated. RadioKirk talk to me 21:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Isambard Kingdom Brunel

I've actioned your comments (for the better I must admit, thx!) - any chance of a support? --PopUpPirate 00:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: Glacier retreat

You are more than welcome to post questions to me in my talk page, but it may be best to do so in the discussion page of the article. I started the article but have been more of a researcher and editor than as anything approximating an expert, so specific questions about the content from a scientific basis may be best addressed by User:Peltoms. User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters is to credited with the creation of the Glacier mass balance article. If you want to continue to post to my usertalk I can simply address your questions there.--MONGO 03:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias

Thanks for letting me know about this project. I'll look into it when I get the chance. Regards, --Jayzel 15:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:Canada Provinces Territories 1876.png

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Canada Provinces Territories 1876.png. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam (T/C) 18:57, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Lindsay Lohan Punk'd Reference]], and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

[edit] WP:FAC

Hi, Maclean, it was nice to see your positive response to my input on FAC. An example of an article using both "Notes" and "References" sections is indeed worth a thousand words of description of the system, you're right. The trouble is I've only recently started using the new <ref> </ref> system myself, but you can see the two-section system the way a reader sees it in The Country Wife, where I use the old ref/note thing. See the advantage of keeping the references alphabetical? It means they're easy to find. In Restoration spectacular, you can see the system used with only a very few notes and the rest of the inlined references simply and briefly in parenthesis in the text (and of course fully referenced in the "References" section); that's my favorite system, really, but for The Country Wife, or for your article, the parentheses would probably be so many as to weigh down the text even more than note numbers do.

The only place I can think of where you can see it with the <ref> </ref> system is my sandbox article User:Bishonen/Andrées luftfärd. The article is an utter mess, but the footnotes and references sections are actually in good shape, so that might be a useful place to look, now I think about it. Best, Bishonen | ノート 03:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC).

You see "what's going on"? Excuse me? What is going on, according to you? I'm sorry I "annoyed" you with my oppose vote, another time I'll check the chrystal ball first to see how your library business stands. My advice above probably annoyed you some more, please feel free to remove it from your page, and thank you for assuming I have nefarious motives for spending time on your article. I have no idea what those motives are — watching you squirm? I'm supposed to hate you? I'm in some sort of alliance with Worldtraveller? What? Never mind, I won't bother you again, I can think of plenty of better ways of spending my wikitime than coping with this kind of suspiciousness. And, seriously, has it occurred to you that people who were doing some sort of plotting or coordinating of efforts (oh, wait, perhaps because they're anti-Canadian?) would doubtless use e-mail for it? Bishonen | ノート 07:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] What gets lost

In all the acrimony and curmudgeon-ism, what gets lost is what I have neglected to say. The Chetwynd article is very well done. It contains a great deal of information, and the writing is generally good. I do object to the telescoping in it to make it an FAC, but I realized that I hadn't offered the well-earned compliment on the good research and good work. Geogre 13:43, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chetwynd

Thanks for the responses; they make my inline queries sound rather ill-considered. As for the light copyediting, I'm always glad to help to those who spend their time helping others. Saravask 00:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I have a question: is "Chetwynd" pronounced as in "jet" and "wind" ("jet-wind")? Also, what is the adjective for Chetwynd residents - is it "Chetwyndians"? This will help me w/ my edits. Thanks. Saravask 00:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it's just me today, but after looking over this diff for ten minutes, I can't figure out what was done. Before I make comments, could you enlighten me as to what your plan for the "Culture" section is? It also appears as if entire swathes of text have simply disappeared. Thanks. Saravask 00:39, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Oops; thanks the explanation. I didn't mean to sound so rude. You're doing a great job so far, and plz do not hesitate to revert any of my changes, especially if you believe they are perverting your original/intended meaning (or if they're just making things worse insofar as the satiation of objections is concerned). Saravask 02:39, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFD tracking

Sorry about not linking the deleted articles. I'll try to remember to do that in future. —GrantNeufeld 21:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer Review: History of Puerto Rico

Thank you for commenting on the peer review for history of Puerto Rico. I have implemented your suggestions. Please tell me what you think now that I have made the changes. Joelito 17:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

  • I have made further comments on the peer review page. -maclean25 20:51, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Thank you again, especially for going into details and checking everything. I have corrected all errors. Do you think the article is ready for FA? Joelito 21:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
      • It is a worthy candidate. I cannot find anything that would stand out as an objection but it will be reviewed by others with very different standards and interpretations of the featured article criteria. --maclean25 22:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BC locator maps

Ref: I uploaded the template (blank map) here: Regional Districts-BC.png, and the ones with highlighted regions here: Regional Districts of BC. They are (un)licenced under Public domain, so no-one has to worry about source quoting or licence of modified maps, and they're on wiki commons, so they can be used in other language wiki's. If there's any impovement you think I could make, just let me know. Qyd (talk)22:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PR of Portuguese Communist Party

Thanks for your comments on the peer review. Sorry for only answering today. I'll shrink the history section, it really needs that. I'll start doing that when I finish my work in the List of Portuguese municipalities, which is also being reviewed. Thanks again. Afonso Silva 10:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hudson's Hope, BC map

What you posted at Wikipedia:Successful requests for permission looks fine with me. Nice job with the article too. If you wish, you can also forward the e-mail message to permissions at wikimedia dot org, in case anyone questions it. --Aude (talk | contribs) 23:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Canada's history

Hi Maclean25, the section looks much better as it flows rather than being a series of disjoint sentences. I've made a couple small changes. And I know that while the summary style discourages subsections, I think given the length of the section they aid the reader considerably; I would rather keep the subsections rather than give in to the FAC guidelines (I believe the guidelines and not necessary). Also it's great that you've added some references. I kind of felt alone in the need to get references for this page, and only E Pluribus Anthony helped out finding references, but some of the ones he signed up for are still incomplete. -- Jeff3000 14:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Retreat of glaciers since 1850

I sincerely appreciate all the time you spent identifing areas needing improvement in the Retreat of glaciers since 1850 (formerly known as Glacier retreat). You're a dedicated Wikipedian with an eye towards doing what we are supposed to be doing here...writing an enccyclopedia. I made the corrections you mentioned and appreciate you bringing them to our attention. Thanks again!--MONGO 21:29, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinates in location pages

re: coordinates (Hudson's Hope): when I added the {{coorheader}} template, it placed discrete coordinates in the upper right corner of the page (for example: German article). In the meantime, they changed the template to place the coordinates under the article title, and I think it looks awful (actualy they moved to another template name too). Now this is a widely used template in the portuguese and german wikis, but met a lot of opposition on the english one. I hope they change it back soon (as it is now it doesn't help at all, it looses the initial purpose and ellegance). Qyd(talk)18:20, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for comments

Thanks for your comments in Kolkata peer review. The things you pointed out have been taken care of. Please suggest any other changes you think appropriate for the article. Thanks a lot. Bye !--Dwaipayanc 20:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Northwest Territories capitals/temp

You could put a {{db-author}} on the page. LambiamTalk 11:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Alright, thanks. I added the speedy del tag to it. --maclean25 15:54, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Canadian collaboration changes?

Please read/comment at Wikipedia_talk:Canada_collaboration#Overhauling and re-evaluating the CC, thank You. N.B. Maybe You'd consider archiving Your long discussion page? feydey 10:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] afd

Just thought I'd let you know: someone is reopening the "minor candidates" debate.

CJCurrie 05:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Thank you for the notice. I made some comments at the afd pages. --maclean25 08:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Basho's route

I cracked open my copy of Matsuo Basho and found a route map right inside. The longest trip is the 1689 "Journey to the Deep North", which runs from Ogaki to Lake Biwa to Tsuruga, Fukui, Yamanaka, Kanazawa, Ichiburi, Kashiwazaki, Niigata, Murakami, Sakata, Kisagata, turn around and back to Sakata, Obanazawa, Hiraizumi, Ishinomaki, Matsushima, Sendai, Iizuka, Shirakawa, Nasu, Nikko, Kanuma, and finally Edo. The actual route is more complicated than this, if you'd like to send me an e-mail in the next few days I can send you a picture. Ashibaka tock 19:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FACers

Hi Jodi, we met on Talk:Blue Whale. Unfortunately I feel obliged to let you know about Wikipedia talk:Featured articles#A delisting. I'd like to see Chetwynd stay as a FA, so if there's something I can do to help.... Pcb21 Pete 18:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Yah, I noticed that. When worldtraveller elaborates I would appreciate the help. His objections at the FAC were that it was too long with too many footnotes and turgid writing. Apparently, subsequent edits were not to his liking. --maclean25 06:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFD closures

Non-admins can close AFDs that do not result in delete. Kotepho 08:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this has been true historically for some time too. --HappyCamper 08:40, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I see this now at Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-Administrators closing discussions. I totally missed that. --maclean25 08:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
No problem. Have a good night. =) Kotepho 08:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Did you have a particular problem with my closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Engineering Undergraduate Society of the University of British Columbia (2nd Nomination) other than me not being an admin? Kotepho
I reverted myself there. I guess I just went to bed too early last night. --maclean25 16:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ike Altgens

Yours was the second significant suggestion toward improving this article, and you nailed it. Received the book today, self-nom'ed for Featured article status today, and I thank you profusely today. :) RadioKirk talk to me 05:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Canada history

BTW, just wanted to tell you I copied your Canadian History suggestion into the Canada page. -- Jeff3000 04:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Relatedly, thanks for your prior note. I'm on an extended wikibreak of sorts, which should mitigate shortly; I'll make necessary edits to the version J3000 has placed. Merci! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 04:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use images

Hi there, I just noticed that User:Maclean25/sandbox contains fair use images. Wikipedia's fair use policy states that fair use images cannot be used in the user namespace. I'd appreciate if you'd remove them.

The images concerned are:

Thanks! Stifle (talk) 19:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Natasha Demkina article

Hi Jodi, I noticed your feedback on a peer review for the Natasha Demkina article. I've been working on a draft that expands the article to include more of her background history, her family, current events, and more on the debate concerining the CSICOP test. I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look at the draft and let me know what you think. Thanks!

[edit] Copyright problems with Image:Dawson Creek 1996.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:Dawson Creek 1996.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Jkelly 21:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On October 18, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Turvey, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 01:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: ArbCom Questions for Paul August

Hi Maclean. I've answered your questions. Thanks for asking. Paul August ☎ 19:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/c/User_talk%7EMaclean25_bfa0.html"