User talk:CJLL Wright/Archive XVI

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents
ARCHIVE INDEX (EDIT)
2005 2006 2007 2008

SEP '07

Glad to be back . . .

CJLL:

Thanks for your welcome back note. Although I'm pretty busy with a number of other matters, there certainly is something satisfying about making a solid addition to a Wikipedia article, (as well as cleaning up existing sentence structure, etc.) so it looks like I'll be around for some time.  : ) Madman 17:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

excellent Madman, I see that you are already up to your usual standard of well-researched additions, your new Classic Veracruz culture being a case in point! Top stuff!--cjllw ʘ TALK 10:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, CJLL!! I am glad you were keeping watch during my absence and thankful for your cheerleading (cf. your enthusiatic response to the new editor below). Stepping away for a while refreshes my perspective, and honestly I was newly amazed at the quality of some of the Mesoamerican articles. They do not speak down to our readers, but on the other hand they are not filled with techno-speak or obtuse writing. And they are almost always laced with great photos of important structures and artifacts. Lead on, MacDuff! Madman 22:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Huei tlamahuiçoltica

(in response to my posting at Cleduc's usertalk pg here)

Thanks for the heads up, that is illuminating. I'm starting to get it, but the guy's writing is so bizarre that I have the hardest time just parsing the phrases. I'm going to keep it up, though I usually get tired of repeating V-NOR-NPOV fifty times to the same person (especially when they behave so poorly) and on a subject that I find tedious at best. I'll probably put out an RFC in a few days. Cheers, Cleduc 06:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Well said. Cleduc 13:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. We can only try, but there's only so much latitude that can be given to assume AGF on User:Luisosio's behalf. We've probably gone as far as we need to, and well and truly established that his book and expertise cannot be relied upon. As and when I find the time I'll continue on with pruning out the clearly OR and unsubstantiated passages and dubious refs, but like you it's not an area that deeply interests me. I think your subsequent contribs have been well done. Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Classic Maya collapse article

Dear CJLL Wright:

Hello, my name is Galaxy413, real name John, and I have been working diligently to improve the Classic Maya Collapse article. This has been an intellectual interest of mine ever since visiting Tikal in 1974, and I have books, articles, substantial information, and research already in hand (and in my brain). How do I join the working group you referred to? And how would we remove the box at the start of the Classic Maya Collapse article which states, now incorrectly, that no citations or references have been given? Obviously, I am new to Wikipedia. Thank you very much.

Galaxy413 aka John —Preceding unsigned comment added by Galaxy413 (talk • contribs) 01:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

(for continuity, reproducing here my response added to your talkpage) Hi there John/Galaxy413. I see that you've worked out how to remove the "needs references" box in that article. I have added the code to the article which makes the inline cites display. There are only a couple of other minor formatting touches and the like, which I am sure you will soon pick up on as readily as you have the other principles of editing here.
That is an excellent job you have done with that article, most impressive! You are most welcome here at WikiProject Mesoamerica- pls look around at the project's pages (not all of which are up to date, alas) for some idea of the scope and types of things we look to do. There's no real formal enrolment in the project, but you can add your name and some info to the project participants' page so others can see who's around and working on the same sorts of articles. At any one time there's usually about half-a-dozen, give or take, folks regularly contributing to Mesoamerican topical articles, depending on external commitments and whatnot. Feel free to ask any of us questions, advice, or add your commentary or suggestions to ways we can improve things here. Your contribs at the Classic Maya collapse article are just the kind of thing one might hope for - many thanks!
I'd be happy to give you a couple of pointers, shortcuts and tips on editing and processes around here. Am just at the end of my day here so won't be adding anything right now, but over the next little while. In the meantime, if any other specific questions occur to you pls do drop me a note on my usertalk page. (By the way, not to worry about messages like that above from SineBot (an automated script that detects whether or not someone used the 'sign' function), just an automated reminder. If you want to vary your signature automatically, you can set it up on your preferences page. There's an instruction somewhere, I'll see if I can track it down. Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: Spinnaker Sound deletion

Hello, In starting (my first) submission to Wikipaedia, I was perplexed at your decision to so immediately delete it. My first contact with this fine resource was in researching another sound studio in my Metropolitan area. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Warehouse_Studio)

I had only gotten through a couple of "non-selling" and very factual statments about the location and function of Spinnaker and found it gone, while the aforementioned studio goes so far as to list their equipment etc, in hopes of raising their profile... and business..

While both studios are heritage buildings (I hadn't gotten to that part yet) I was dismayed by the immediate censoring/deletion of my ( I thought) strictly factual account of an interesting building and enterprise that exists in my small town.

Perhaps you would be so kind as to set me straight... then perhaps I can write my first article and have it be read, edited and hopefully appreciated much like my neighbour's worthy enterprise up the road.

Thank you for your time and consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricehoneywell (talk • contribs) 09:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rice, apologies your comment here caught me at the end of my day here, hence the slight delay in response.
I deleted that article as it had been tagged by someone else as likely satisfying the criteria for speedy deletion. Although Wikipedia has an extremely broad range of entries, not every entity or topic warrants inclusion here. There are Notability guidelines that an article or topic generally needs to satisfy else risk being deleted. When I reviewed the article I determined that there was nothing compelling to demonstrate a claim to notability, nor did a (non-comprehensive) search turn up any indications.
However, I have decided to temporarily restore the article, to give an opportunity for you to expand upon how it may meet the notability threshholds. Possibly, there are some 3rd-party sources or further information that could be provided that would change the present perception. In particular, I suggest that you take a look at these guidelines on notability inclusion for companies. Note that, "A primary test of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the company, corporation, product or service notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it."
You might also like to consider 'What Wikipedia is Not', as a further guide to how articles should be structured and what they should contain. Wikipedia is not a business-directory substitute or intended as a means to alert and direct readers towards products and services. Only those products and services that can show a significant notability and appearance in reliable, non-promotional third-party sources are candidates for inclusion.
This restoration does not mean that someone else won't come by later and consider the article for deletion. As it stands now I still think the article would fairly meet the criteria to be deleted. You'd be welcome to argue the point if it came to that, but in the end whether it stays or goes will depend on any overall consensus established (say, if someone were to nominate it for the formal deletion process.
I can make no guarantee that the article will not in the end be deleted, either by me upon reconsideration or someone else. It will depend on the content and demonstration that it meets various criteria for inclusion here. These criteria are not always clear-cut, and in general it is up to the contributors to make sure that the article's content and subject matter fall within our policies and guidelines. Hope this helps. Regards (also posted at your talkpg) --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: High Mowing Organic Seeds deletion

Hello, You deleted this article only about ten minutes after I created it. I see from this page that you regularly delete articles that don't meet your perhaps narrow interpretations of wikipedia guidelines. I have been slowly adding a few things to wikipedia, and I was actually planning to make a financial donation to the project. But I have lost my good feelings about this site. Please recreate the original page you deleted, and apologize. If you want to mark it for speedy deletion & send me an email, go ahead. I'll defend my page. It's no advertisement, you brown-nose "administrator". You want some sources, I'll come up with some sources. But there is a process, and as far as I can see, you've not followed it properly. If you don't put the page back up, I hope you die.

ps How about you go delete the other content I've made on wikipedia also, you fucking nazi. Think I give a shit about having knowledge available? I used to, but not any more. Fuck you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterchristopher (talk • contribs) 10:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I provided my reasons in the edit summary, which you've obviously read. You might also like to read WP:NOT, WP:AGF, and WP:CIVIL.
If you think the article should be recreated, then take it up at Deletion Review.
If you want to complain about my actions as an admin, take it to WP:ANI.
Childish invective is unlikely to help your cause.
Your demand for apology is, under the circumstances, a little rich.
This response also posted at your talkpage.--cjllw ʘ TALK 02:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks for the links. I may take it up at deletion review. I am in the mean time trying to first get DrKiernan to undelete the talk page for Tom Stearns, which was deleted along with the Tom Stearns page. How about you people do a web search for "Tom Stearns organic" or "Tom Stearns seeds" - this field isn't as full of computer-geeks as the field of another person who has a legitimate wikipedia page, Seth Schoen. Both are young graduates of NMH; both are experts in their field and have made significant contributions and have widespread name recognition and some independent biography. I look up to both of them, and I think that according to the criteria I read that they are both notable & that their notability is within the guidelines to warrant a wikipedia page. However, in addition, Mr. Stearns has succeeded as a businessman in a field much more known for being a field for losing one's fortune rather than gaining one (agriculture). Mr Schoen works for a 501c3 that is funded by someone independently wealthy; that makes Tom Stearns *more* notable in my opinion. I did read up on your page suggestions. Maybe you should also add something to the civility page about not deleting pages so quickly, especially involving newbies (see the page on not biting newbies), and this goes triple for the talk pages. Frankly, I think that your error is just as much a civility problem as mine. You may have more knowledge of the wikipedia definition of civility, but that does not make you any more an authority on civility itself. Peterchristopher 08:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Tom Stearns (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Peterchristopher 05:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the notification. It wasn't me who deleted Tom Stearns, but I guess you are considerately informing me since I deleted the related High Mowing Organic Seeds article which you also took exception to. For now I'll reserve my right to comment, and watch to see how other independent admins view those actions. Regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 06:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


You're welcome. Oddly enough, aside from your original error of deleting the file & your followup error of not recreating it, you've behaved very responsibly. I take that as an admission of your inner recognition of agreement with my analysis. The rest of the police patrol, however, are just getting caught up in their psychological problems and aren't able to see the issue. But who am I to talk, eh? Cheers. Peterchristopher 12:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'd say it's more to do with my 'inner recognition' that it's best to communicate civilly and maintain equanimity, and not to take too personally the way some things are phrased. However it is quite understandable, even to be expected, that if you couch your arguments in terms practically guaranteed to get someone's back up then you're not going to get a positive response. I don't know what you expected to gain from labelling your editing peers here as 'nazis' etc, and it seems you've now been temporarily blocked for continuing on in this vein. Maybe you were looking to make some kind of point, but if you look at it from the viewpoint that there's already an oversupply of crap and narky attitudes that we deal with then you might at least recognise why we've policies and guidelines to short-circuit unhelpful behaviour.
As for the articles themselves, I still see very little offered that demonstrates that these subjects meet inclusion criteria. Notability criteria are not always clear-cut (though for the version I deleted I'm still comfortable it met the criteria for speedy deletion ) and I'd be quite happy to respect the outcome of any consensus discussion. Unfortunately, I think your chances at reviving a consensus discussion on the topic are hindered by the unnecessary tone. FWIW, other than those admins who (not without reason) took offense at the hectoring tone, there were a couple of comments I saw about the former article contents themselves which were unconvinced that these were sufficiently noteworthy. Possibly not a sufficient showing of consensus, but (IMO) it would take some work and contrition to have it re-examined. Regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 02:40, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Chalcatzingo

In attempting to clarify a citation, I managed to butcher the Chalcatzingo page. Footnote 10 should cite Chapter 14 of the 1987 Chalcatzingo report edited by Dave Grove. The title of the chapter is "Chalcatzingo's Formative Period Figurines" it is authored by me (Mark E. Harlan) and is on pages 252-263. I will attempt to learn more about editing content before I attempt any further edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MEHarlan (talk • contribs) 17:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Gidday Mark. I had a go at tweaking the inline citation and biblio reference for your chapter in the article, pls take a look and see if that was what you intended.
Don't worry too much about not getting the formatting and style conventions right the first time around. It's no problem, comparatively few wikipedia articles are 100% compliant to our internal style guides (and there are several approaches to choose from as far as referencing and citation presentations are concerned). We can always fix it up later, getting the content improved and some references provided, however formatted, is more relevant. As you go along I'm sure you'll pick up on the (sometimes arcane) methods and conventions of editing. Pls feel free to ask about any aspect that may be puzzling and we'd be happy to help, as there are a few 'tricks of the trade' which are not necessarily self-evident in the way that they work.
Many thanks, BTW, for your helpful additions and expansions to that article. It is always a pleasure to see qualified folks such as yourself contributing here. If (as I hope) you'll be able to continue on editing here at wikipedia, then you might be interested to help out at WikiProject Mesoamerica, a collaboration of like-minded editors who have an expertise and/or general interest in Mesoamerican topics. As you may see from our project pages here, we look to improve the content, coverage and organisation of Mesoamerica-related articles, raise and discuss related issues and news, and generally try to help one another (and the wider editing community) out. At any one time there's generally around half-a-dozen or so folks regularly updating Mesoamerican topics, it tends to come and go as people move between topical interests and dependent on Real Life commitments. Participation is informal and there's no minimum quota or regularity of contributions. So if you're perchance interested then pls take a look around the project's pages (not all up to date, alas), ask a question or offer any comments/suggestions at the project's message board or to one of us directly; and if you wish to, add your name to the participant list.
You might also like to take a look at the listing of Mesoamerican citations and references which we are expanding. This contains a selection of pre-filled citation templates for a few references that might be useful in Mesoamerica-related articles, which can simply be copied and pasted into the 'References' section of the appropriate article (some minor modifications may be needed). These templates format the biblio references consistently, and so makes it easier than coding the formatting "by hand", as it were. For a full range of the generic citation/reference templates available, go to WP:CITET and you can also see how they work.
Anyways, thanks again for your contributions here, and happy editing - cheers! (also posted at your talkpage). --cjllw ʘ TALK 07:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Image licensing issues

(re imgs on Commons in the Ehécatl (airplane) article) Hey Wright, how's it going. I've sended an e-mail to permissions-commonsATwikimedia.org, with the forwarded mail that the contect at Hydra Technologies send me with the permission form. But still, no response from anyone, and the images aren't cleared yet, so I'm afraid that they will remove them tomorrow. What should I do? Cheers from Mexico...

Eldalieva 21:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)Eldalieva

(also posted at your talkpage) Hi Eldalieva. If I'm reading you correctly, you have sent on the email permissions from Hydra Technologies to the Commons OTRS folks, but as yet have not received a reply or confirmation. Not to worry, the OTRS desk may take a few more days to deal with it, as they are typically working their way through a queue of similar requests.
I have added the template {{Otrs pending}} to the image pages at Commons, which should alert any Commons administrator coming by that the formal permissions process is in progress, so hopefully they'll hold of deleting for a while yet.
If you want to follow up with someone who has OTRS access to enquire about the status of the permissions processing, you could try to contact one of the folks listed here.
If for some reason the imgs do get deleted, despite the 'in progress' notification now on the img pages, they can be restored by a Commons administrator upon receipt of the permissions OK from the OTRS desk. Regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Image licensing

Hi WRIGHT. They've erased the Ehécatl (airplane) images. I've sended the e-mail and everything. How can I get them restablished. The images' pages contained the specifications for the pictures but they still tagged and then erased them. What can I do? Thanks for the help, and cheers from Mexico.

Eldalieva 22:04, 27 September 2007 (UTC)Eldalieva

Image licensing 2

Hey WRIGHT, still in trouble here. Would be great if you help out, or connect me to other editor than knows more about it. Thanks in advance and cheers from Mexico.

Eldalieva 00:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)Eldalieva

Hi Eldalieva, apologies for the delay in getting back to you. Unfortunately, it seems the note saying OTRS confirmation was pending I left on those images' pages on Commons may have been overlooked, which I guess can easily happen as admins go through a listing of deletion candidates, in good faith. Not to worry, the images can be undeleted.
The images on Commons were processed / deleted by Commons:User:Majorly, who is also active here on en.wiki as User:Majorly. This is the extract from the Commons deletion log:
20:20, September 27, 2007 Majorly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Ehecatis45.jpg" ‎ (In category Unknown as of 10 September 2007; no permission) 
20:20, September 27, 2007 Majorly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Ehecatls44.jpg" ‎ (In category Unknown as of 10 September 2007; no permission) 
20:20, September 27, 2007 Majorly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Ehecatls43.jpg" ‎ (In category Unknown as of 10 September 2007; no permission) 
20:20, September 27, 2007 Majorly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Ehecatl1.jpg" ‎ (In category Unknown as of 10 September 2007; no permission) 
20:20, September 27, 2007 Majorly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Ehecatls42.jpg" ‎ (In category Unknown as of 10 September 2007; no permission) 
20:20, September 27, 2007 Majorly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Ehecat1.jpg" ‎ (In category Unknown as of 10 September 2007; no permission)
To have these re-examined, it would probably be best to first find out the status of the OTRS permissions requests that you filed. To do this, I suggest that you contact one of the folks who is both an Administrator on Commons, and who has access to the OTRS system. If you provide them with the details of your email request(s) to OTRS (such as the date/time and email header), they should be able to look it up for you and see if there's any hold-up, or perhaps to help out and expedite the permissions assessment.
You can find a list of some people on Commons with OTRS access who may be able to help out here. Looking through that list, one name I recognise is Commons:User:Drini, who is also active here on en.wiki as User:Drini and who I know hails from Mexico himself and a native Spanish speaker to boot. So I would suggest that you leave a note on his user talkpage (either at Commons or here on en.wiki) explaining the situation and request his assistance to look up the status of the OTRS request. If you have any exchanges with the OTRS permissions desk on record that would be helpful, you can also point him back to the info on your talkpage here which would assist in identifying the situation. If for some reason he's busy or unable to respond, you can try contacting one of the others on the list, also the commons admin Majorly (though it doesn't seem they have OTRS access). Unfortunately, I'm neither an admin on Commons nor someone with OTRS access. Hope this helps, let me know if anything else crops up. Regards, (also posted at your talk pg) --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Izamal cleanup

Hello CJLLW, Mi name is Miguel Covarrubias Reyna, archaeologist, I recently added some information about Izamal, where I've been working for several years. I'm new to Wikipedia and noticed a message about the theed to cleanup what I did, but have no idea on how to do it, can you help me with this? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Migcov (talk • contribs) 14:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Miguel, it's a great pleasure to have you editing here. Don't worry about the 'cleanup' tag, I think it was added just as a reminder to go back and amend a couple of formatting items. These were soon fixed up, and I've removed the tag. The article can (like all the others here) be polished up as we go along, the key thing will be to make the content and coverage sound, which your recent additions have gone a long way to improve. I hope that you are able to continue editing here, we have a large range (almost one thousand) Mesoamerica-related articles with still many more gaps to fill, and quite a few of the ones we do have are in need of some studious attention. You would be most welcome to take a look around at the project pages of WikiProject Mesoamerica, which is a collaboration forum for contributors with an expertise and/or interest in Mesoamerican topics. Suggestions, comments and participation from new contributors is always welcomed,. If you have any questions, either on the overall structure or on wikipedia editing in general, please feel free to post at the project's message board, or ask one of the active project participants directly on our user talkpages.
Re the Izamal article, one thing we should look to do is to add in a few relevant references and inline citations. Pages such as WP:CITE and Footnotes provide some guidelines on how to go about citing and referencing in articles. Also- if you have any images of the site (or other sites) which you would be prepared to release for use on wikipedia under a compatable license (see the image use policy, that would be great.
Anyways, many thanks for your helpful contributions to date, and hope to see you around continuing the great work. All the best- saludos, (also posted at your talkpg) --cjllw ʘ TALK 03:01, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words, I'll try to contribute a long as I can. By the way, concerning your question, all the main buildings at Izamal are still there. Hun Pic Tok can be seen by entrering to the San Miguel Hotel at the main plaza, the pyramid is in the back. The Kabul, at the west, can be seen also from the opposite side of the second plaza. Saludos —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.160.94.230 (talk) 03:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

OK Miguel, and good to hear- hope you enjoy your time editing around here. Thanks for the info. Saludos, --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Response to your note

Thanks for your comment on my Caracol update, as a student of Mesoamerican archaeology with interest in cultural heritage management, I will be doing more, and will be sure to follow proper protocols.--DuendeThumb 19:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome, DuendeThumb- glad to have you around, and I hope your editing experience here will be a fulfilling one. Any issues or questions that crop up, pls feel free to ask. Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 02:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


Attention Needed

Could you please keep an eye out for these pages, as two users are bent on removing all of the scholarly information that has been added. Pages are: Hurrians, Armenia (name), Proto-Armenian language, Armenian language, Graeco-Aryan language. Also, it wouldn't hurt to keep an eye on the Armenia, Mitanni, and Urartu articles.

The two users are User:Ghirlandajo and User:Dbachmann

Thank you.--Moosh88 22:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Moosh, I am going to decline your canvassing invitation. Firstly, at the moment I have neither the time nor inclination to research the matter more thoroughly.Secondly, users Ghirla and dab are both contributors for whom I have a great deal of respect, and I've seen no reason to doubt their judgement. I did notice this issue come up at WP:FRINGE, and I think those who are looking into it are sensible enough to work out the appropriate course of action. Regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - Category:Icons for canal descriptions

Many thanks for your work on renaming Category:Icons for canal descriptions. It is appreciated :) Oosoom Talk to me 10:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

No worries, Oosoom, and thanks. --cjllw ʘ TALK 23:57, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Template weirdness

Hi! Do you know what's causing some of the refs on List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/S to show up as: "{{Template:Citation}}" or "{{Template:Cite web}}"? When I look at the HTML source, there's a comment: "<!-- WARNING: template omitted, pre-expand include size too large -->". I've been working on this list for quite a while, and this is the first I've seen of it. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 03:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi SatyrTN. I'm afraid it looks like that page has run up against the limitation which restricts the total amount of data/bytes a single page can contain within transcluded templates. See Wikipedia:Template limits for an explanation of the limitation and why it is imposed. Basically as I understand it, as the MediaWiki software goes about 'pre-expanding' the content of data within transcluded templates as it prepares to parse and load the page's overall HTML for viewing, the parser cuts off expanding the templates once the set limit is reached (2MB). That page seems to have over a hundred citation template calls, and unfortunately it's hit the wall.
To remedy the situation, you could either manually format some of the citations to bring it back down under the limit (ie don't use the {cite X} templates to format), or if any of the sources are used more than once you could maybe rationalise the template calls by having the inline cites point to a single (templated) citation. Or, you could break up the entire contents into several (sub-)articles, so that the number of template calls per page is smaller. Hope that helps, regards --cjllw ʘ TALK 05:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, cjllw! I'm heading out on vacation, but I've asked a friend to split the page. Much appreciated - hadn't heard about that limit before! Just as a side question, the limit seems to have been hit at (or maybe before) the change to {{citation}} - is there a possibility that change expanded the pre-expanding content? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 13:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome, SatyrTN. I don't think that the minor change recently made to {{citation}} should have had any effect, as it only replaced the text (retrieved on {accessdate}) with . Retrieved on {accessdate}. ,ie a nett replacement of three chars, total #bytes should be the same. Probably just coincidental. Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 23:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia about Wikipedia

Regarding the discussion with User:Fluence I am considering whether it is appropriate for wikipedia articles to contain information about wikipedia phenomena. For example fluence has now included a key to the Nahuatl transcription used on the Nahuatl wikipedia to almost all articles concerning Classical Nahuatl. I feel that the arbitrary decision made by the Nahuatl wikipedia community does not diserve to be mentioned in articles about the language - since the Nahuatl wikipedia is by no means an authoritative source on nahuatl language use or about information about the language it self. Is there a policy on this?·Maunus· ·ƛ· 11:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Maunus. I think that at the very least this could be seen to go against the spirit of the Avoid self-reference guidelines, but also would arguably run up against the WP:NOR policy. I agree with you about the arbitrary nature of the orthography selected and promoted on nah.wiki, and that it's problematic to use it as if it were some independently referrable style. While orthographical systems that are independently published may also be arbitrary, at least they have the merit of being verifiable according to our policies. I think that we should select one of the common notable and third-party systems, and reference that. Transcriptions within a given article should follow such a system, and at the same time any commonly used variants can be noted as alternatives.
By the way- the Nahuatl article itself is now under Good Article review, and stands in peril of losing its GA status- see talk:Nahuatl. The primary complaint seems to be insufficiency of inline citations. Would you have time to take a look, and see what additional inline cites to pair up with the biblio listing that can be inserted? --cjllw ʘ TALK 00:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I have a good mind to make it an FA when I get the time - which is regrettably not now. I don't think it deserves GA status as is either.·Maunus· ·ƛ· 08:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
You are probably right, and it would take more than just inserting a few more cites. Oh well, one day... cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 08:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

'Jose Arguelles you are a friend of mine' : )

Unsurprisingly, 207.6.93.238 (talk · contribs) returned to Jose Arguelles and again deleted most of the article, also apparently doing so via the sockpuppet 'Caycedgar (talk · contribs).' Irishguy reverted back this time and warned the user, hopefully that will do the trick...but I doubt it. 69.152.169.99 04:42, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi 69.152.169.99. Thanks for the heads-up, will keep an eye out for any further misdeeds and protect the page if it gets out-of-hand. That was a rather transparent effort of sockfoolery on 207's/Caycedgar's part, which would not stand in the way of meting out a 3RR block if they persist. To venture a Caycean prophesy- our next visitation will come from User:PacalVotan, or some cognomen.... ;-) cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 05:04, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

why?

why did you delete my page DJ Ingram is known by many in virginia and his movies are great —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheechnchang (talk • contribs) 13:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I was actually the second person to delete it. Someone else has already left a note on your talk page that explains. In short, the reason was "no demonstration or assertion of notability". You are really going to need to provide external sources and evidence of the subject's notability, unfortunately your own assessment is insufficient. Pls refer to our policies, in particular WP:V, WP:CSD and the guidelines WP:NOTE and WP:BAND. Regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 13:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia as an Academic Resource

As you mentioned in your note about my interests page, it is good that there are people applying some academic standards and rigor to Wikipedia. A paralell to the excessive "geek culture" references, in terms of impediment to Wikipedia's credibility, is the profusion of for-profit tour promotion sites that often get linked to wikipedia entries on important sites; I feel it is important to try and find not-for-profit information sources whenever possible. I'll probably be working towards that goal in the coming weeks. Thanks for welcoming me! --DuendeThumb 22:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Need advice on Venus of Dolní Věstonice

There is an anon editor at Venus of Dolní Věstonice who is insisting on referring to as a " pottery statuette". I have been changing this to ceramic statuette. Could you weigh in on this question, sir?? Madman 14:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Madman. It's odd what some folks fixate upon. I've added my reversion to the pool, looks like there are one or two other eds. besides us who think the proposed usage by that anon is, well, idiosyncratic. If they really want to put a link to pottery in there, I don't see what's preventing them from coming up with a simple non-redundant sentence to add in there, rather than trying to bang that peg in the square hole. Will keep an eye out. Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 03:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


END OF TALK ARCHIVE PAGE