User talk:Carolfrog

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Welcome to my talk page. If you want to leave criticism or question my judgement, that's fine; communication is important. If you want to have a chat, point out good or funny articles or leave suggestions or compliments, that's even better. Please add new comment threads at the bottom of the page in a new section (click here). I'll reply on your talk page, copying what was said to keep things clear. Please sign your comments.

When replying to messages from me, I'd appreciate it if you either put the entire reply, or some sort of notification that you've replied, here on my talk page: sometimes I forget to watch, and a reply made only on your talk page might otherwise go unnoticed.
Archived talk pages: I haven't archived any talk pages yet.  :)


Welcome!

Hello, Carolfrog, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 20:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Commons Picture of the Year 2006

I, Carolfrog, assert that I have voted for: Picture 10, and that my IP address is currently 69.27.5.106. Thank you for recording my vote. Carolfrog 23:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Insulin?

Carol, I notice that you prodded the page on Actrapid. I don't see why, though - for instance, Google gives 291,000 hits for it. It certainly does exist as a brand name for insulin... what are you seeing wrong with it that I'm not? DS 01:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Ah, okay. Yes, you might as well put it up for your very first AfD, considering that it's real and apparently was very widely used in its day. DS 01:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aab-e-gum

  • Carol. Thanks for the message. Well, Aab-e-Gum is not an arabic word. Its first portion is persian and second is urdu. Does not its name interesting? And yes it is famous. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Khalid Mahmood (talk • contribs) 15:55, 25 February 2007.

[edit] Category: Aerospace expeditionary forces of the United States Air Force

Thanks for voicing your concerns over the *many* pages in the category. My rationale with making those pages was this: those wings/groups exist somewhere in the world; I find information on them in bits and pieces - when I find info, I put it in. These pages would be easier to create if they had a less convoluted existence (i.e. didn't fall under Prez Bush's *secret* war on terror). I would strongly recommend not changing them, since I am adding historical (pre-GWOT) information... but I don't control Wikipedia.TDRSS 22:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Example of completed AEF unit page

What I'm doing (albeit very slowly) is this: 455th Air Expeditionary Wing. The reason the templates are up is to have other "pitch in" bits and pieces of information, until I can get around to typing in the unit's historical information. The 455th AEW page is a perfect example.TDRSS 01:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] blind, lazy

Sorry about that "blind or lazy" bit. I didn't mean for it to be taken personally. You were not the only source of my frustration and I was just letting off a bit of steam in the edit summary. I really should behave better than that. -MrFizyx 23:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I appreciate the apology. The problem is, I really was being lazy. I saw that there was a badly formatted inline link in the text, and I was too lazy to click on it. But again, thanks for apologizing.  :) —Carolfrog 23:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • And I should behave better myself, and not be so sarcastic in deletion debates.  :) —Carolfrog 23:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Faux Pause: Sources

Hello, as you had stated in the AFD Faux Pause entry, the article would need soruces. However, there was an article, specifically this one: http://www.xanfan.com/hotpotato/fauxpause.htm, HOWEVER, IIRC, the person said it WASN'T a source...but wouldn't it be a source? Xanfan is considered a trustworthy game show writer...his website is filled with true factual information. My question is, wouldn't it be a true source, then? Thanks. FamicomJL 04:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The Xanfan source is technically a "source," but may not be considered to be a "reliable source" by most editors, according to the Wikipedia policy discussing reliable sources. If it was one source among many, it would be acceptable as a source for more information, but by itself it isn't enough to establish information. It looks like a blog website of some sort, and the attribution policy says this about that: "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published . . . visiting a stranger's personal website is often the online equivalent of reading an unattributed flyer on a lamp post. For that reason, self-published material is largely not acceptable."
You might want to check into searching the Google News Archives (which is a new function that Google recently introduced) with a search something like this: [1]. That way, you don't have to rely on archived press releases from GSN (which, incidentally, would be self-published primary sources, not secondary sources). Of course, most of the archived articles you'll turn up will be behind subscription firewalls. That doesn't stop you from citing them, as long as you're sure that they do in fact confirm the information you think they do.
If you have sources in print form (books, newspapers, magazines), you can also cite those—Wikipedia doesn't rely entirely on web-based sources. See WP:CITE for instructions on how to do that correctly.
I hope this info helps. Let me know if you have any more questions. —Carolfrog 04:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
There's a great piece in TIME magazine that says to avoid it, I guess that'd be a good source, right? :) And, by looking at http://www.xanfan.com itself, you will see that it has information on multiple shows, with screenshots and video clips as well. I believe the TIME article and the Xanfan piece are both good sources. What is the best way to put sources in an article? Thank you. FamicomJL 19:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Salt lamps

Hi, we have both worked on getting the "salt lamp advertisement" out of wikipedia. I nominated the "article" and you mentioned a source in german. I gave it a first look and it basically covers salt that is sold in "new age" or "esoteric" shops with the claim to be mined in the himalaya. The author of the pdf claims that there are no salt mines in the himalaya region. Salt is gathered on open ground, at seashores for example, or imported from india. Lamps are never mentioned. She names a few persons involved with this salt trade. If you find that those persons are linked to salt lamps, or the salt lamp manufacturers claim their salt to be "himalayan" too, the source might be interesting for you. You can ask me for translating german to english, but I will have to check if I can find the time. Happy hunting. Cisz Helion 02:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your request on small newspapers/media notability

CF, I read your question on an AfD page about if there is a place in WP where the notability of small papers/media is addressed. I believe these fall under the area of Notability (organizations and companies) (which I get to via WP:CORP). Small papers/media are either orgs./cos. themselves, or products/subsidiaries of large orgs./cos (which the guideline also addresses). To save you the reading, the guideline is the same as others: the small paper/media must itself have been the subject of multiple independent secondary sources. Typically we find them in trade publications covering the industry. Hope this helps, comments welcome! PS love the userboxes, by the way. UnitedStatesian 18:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Faux Pause: Sources pt. II

Hello, I keep trying to put in the two sources, and it won't work, for some reason. What's the best and easiest way to add sources to an article? Thanks. Still a clueless newbie...FamicomJL 02:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't around to help the other day. It looks like you got it figured out, though.  :) Let me know if you have any other questions, and I'll try to reply more promptly. ≈≈Carolfrog≈≈♦тос♦ 02:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Alright, thanks for being such a kind and big help! :) FamicomJL 13:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

I'll wear that star with pride! What was interesting in doing the web searching for that article was how often I was surprised by new information. That was a fun one. I still want to do a bit more work in it, but I really appreciate the star. Best, Noroton 16:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the rescue award

It was fun to rescue that article on chemical pond, which, of course, deserved an article; i appreciate your kind words to me. when i have time (sigh..) i would like to improve that article further. thanks for your positive efforts in fending off the ever-present negativity of some members of the community who don't have a clue about technology. best regards. Anlace 19:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs
Central Ohio Film Critics Association
Carl Franklin
Flesh for Frankenstein
Princess Albertina
James L. Snyder
Four Great Inventions of ancient China
Flesh (film)
Genital play
National Society of Film Critics
Iowa Film Critics
Enterobacter
Hugh A. Robertson
Meissner's corpuscle
Holarchy
Billy Mays
Glans
The stopperage
Amigo Supermarkets
Brendan Moran
Cleanup
Multidrug resistance
Circumcision and law
Frenectomy
Merge
Lichen sclerosus
Thin-film optics
Criticism of Wal-Mart
Add Sources
Provo Utah Temple
Sex organ
Obstetrics
Wikify
Battōjutsu
Penncrest High School
Peter M. Zawadzki
Expand
Cai Lun
Beth Grant
Bear Lake (Idaho-Utah)

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 14:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article on Black Racer deletion

Thanks for your informative and friendly response to my article. Perhaps Wikipedia is not the place for that particular article. As far as citing sources, the article was really the result of a lifetime of studying, photographing and teaching in the area of natural history. I tried to write a very basic introduction to a very common snake species—The Black Racer as found in Florida. All of the statements are really pretty close to "common knowledge" among people who study this snake. The photos were selected to illustrate the points. I suppose I could cite other sources for each statement but the facts are so basic and the real sources are my experience and observations. So as I said, maybe Wikipedia is not the place for the article as written and I would hope it would be simply deleted. I find it somewhat offensive (to my field, not me personally) that someone who obviously knew nothing about the subject was able to call its very existence into question. I went to some effort to harmlessly test the waters about Wikipedia before submitting a serious article. I was interested in seeing how difficult it would be to correct errors and misinformation. A few weeks back I encountered some very insulting things said about a very decent person (Nancy Zimpher, President of the University of Cincinnati) and I wasn't sure how long it took to remove those things or what steps could be used to bar someone from such activity. I was fairly well satisfied that there were safeguards in place but I was not prepared for an editor who has had several items published, to actually challenge the existence of a subject when it would have been so easy to check one of the sources I did list. This person didn't take ANY step to verify what s/he had to say. Thanks for your efforts...Neilnat —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Neilnat (talk • contribs) 02:15, 21 March 2007.

Thanks for your response. I appreciate your sentiment that "perhaps Wikipedia is not the place for [this] particular article." However, I feel I must again point out that whatever edits you have made to Wikipedia are licensed under the GDFL, and you cannot now withdraw the information you have added to the database. Your contributions to this particular article will make a good starting point for an encyclopedic and necessary Wikipedia article on the Black Racer. I understand that you feel that you provided a "basic introduction to a very common snake species" using "common knowledge" and your own "experience and observations." Unfortunately, on Wikipedia, we call that Original Research, and we don't allow it in the encyclopedia articles. So some reliable secondary sources will have to be found. I feel confident that they will be found. I hope that you will join in the search for sources and in the effort to improve the article. Thanks again. ≈≈Carolfrog≈≈♦тос♦ 02:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do I know you?

Hi Carolfrog,

Thanks again for that barnstar. Something just struck me. I used to know a Carol. She liked frogs. I think I still have one of her old business cards with a frog on it. Lived in -- I think it was Jersey City. Did some work for a credit card company. Beautiful woman with a vivacious personality. Had some of the same interests you have based on your suggestabox results. Hmmmmmmmm..... Noroton 04:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think I'm the same Carol. Sorry.  :) Thanks for wondering, though. ≈≈Carolfrog≈≈♦тос♦ 01:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/a/r/User_talk%7ECarolfrog_b5b5.html"