User talk:Michael Devore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Archives

An archive of most conversations from this page during 2007 is available at User talk:Michael Devore/Archive 1. Should I or others find the current talk page excessively boring or contentious, we can hark back to happier times by reading the archive's thank yous, or admiring the barnstars and awards, including the justly famous groundhog with a Santa hat. -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The University of Wisconsin-La Crosse article thanks you!

Thanks for your contributions on the UW-La Crosse page. Just out of curiosity, how do you decide which articles to work on? Do you just randomly pick one or is there a method to the madness, so to speak. --Crosscountrycpjon (talk) 03:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I've been asked this before by a user or two, so I'll give the excruciatingly detailed answer this time. Aren't you lucky?
As far as typo runs, my directed efforts are generally tied to incrementally improving the high quality articles and bringing low quality up to minimal standards as a form of Wikipedia triage. I choose high quality because those articles represent WP's best face to users. There is great need for improvement in final proofing of Featured Articles to meet the stated criteria of professional standards. Not that I'm more than an amateur hack myself, but one makes do. Until a few months ago at least one out of every three passed FAs and Good Articles had typographical or minor errors in their copy, based on my unofficial editing stats. Those stats have gotten significantly better recently thanks to a number of dedicated editors, including my immodest self.
So, I tend to look at FA and GA lists. Not only the main lists, but those user page mini-lists of mixed FA/GA "articles I have worked on" are high priority targets. Small lists like that can be completed in finite time and leave you feeling like you've accomplished something. Incidentally, don't let anyone tell you that all typos are the same and require minimal effort. Tracking down corrections of FA errors in references and proper noun spellings can easily eat up hours of time. So I limit the time spent on FA/GA work to keep my brain from melting due to nitpick and Google overload. But If someone asks on my talk page to look at an article, I try to look at it closer than any of the rest of my work.
As an extension to the quality filtering, I look at FA candidates and GA nominations, as well as Peer Review. Many of the best articles tend to come through those pages. I tend not to look at those as closely as passed FA and GA because other people are actively working on them, plus I'm short on allocated WP time, but I still try to scan several of each a week. That would include your current GAN University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.
In addition, I frequently abuse the random page link, and occasionally follow nested links in articles on the main page or embedded in article discussions, and find a lot of edits that way too.
I used to trail behind the edit history of people making heavy use of those typo auto-bots and fix articles in their wake. The operators would fixate on correcting The Bad Words On The Naughty List and, where there are misspellings on that list in an article, there are often others not on the list left uncorrected. I don't do that much anymore. No time.
What this all means is that my edit history will display both discernible patterns and randomness. For my other work like vandalism and cleanup runs, those choices are based on different and less complex algorithms.
And there it is, a five-pound answer when one ounce would have done.
P.S. Just to prove I don't spend as much time on GAN, I rechecked your article a bit more thoroughly and here are some fixes you might consider.
  • african american should be capped
  • Uiversity typo
  • interm typo
I probably should have caught those earlier. Michael Devore (talk) 05:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Wow. (That is about all I can think of to say at the moment....) Oh, and thanks again. --Crosscountrycpjon (talk) 14:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Western Chalukya architecture

Hi. Sorry I missed your concerns (dated Dec 17th) on the talk page. I will look into it today.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 15:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay , I will contact the user you mention. I have moved your comments to the FAC discussion and am taking care of the concerns there.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. In the section called "Architectural elements" and subsection "Mantapa" there are words suchas " bell-shaped lathe-turned pillars". Is the dash inbetween an issue? does it have to be the sort of en dashes we use for dates?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 17:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't change those. They are compound words which I've always seen and made using a regular dash. I'm not sure an en dash is even valid for a compound word. Wikipedia:MOS#En_dashes doesn't mention their use for compound words either. -- Michael Devore (talk) 17:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

If you have the time, please feel free to copy edit the whole article, make changes where you feel necessary, or suggest changes. ThanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 19:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Late this evening/AM I might have time and will give it a shot if you haven't an editor before then. Haven't done a full-blown copyedit with rewrites in a few years, but even if I don't improve the article, I believe I can keep from making it worse. Anyway, if the changes stink, you can always revert. -- Michael Devore (talk) 19:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I will be following your cpedits ; to learn from them and as you said to ensure the intended meaning of the citation does not change. Every copy editor has his/her own style.thanks for your time.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Your revert on the Latina issue was correct. latina is the simplest of the northern Indian miniature decorative superstructures, supported by a singl pilaster looking much like an acorn.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:29, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Looks good to me.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:09, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for the ongoing cpedits. The article looks much better now. When you are done, please do leave a message that you are done with the cpedits.thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I'll probably keeping making modest changes when I have the free time and inclination until the League copyeditor starts work (I think I read that Finetooth told you he/she would do it soon, which is great.) Then I'll get the heck out of their way. There is a good chance the editor will want to move around and merge paragraphs and I'm not ready to do that. -- Michael Devore (talk) 16:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Cp edits: No problem. Thanks a lot for your help.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your proof reading of the article. Sometimes after several rounds of copy edits, the meaning of a sentence can get lost, and not be noticed. Needs a new pair of eyes for that.thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. This was one of those tought ones. It has made me wiser and more hardy. Thanks for your consistant effort to improve prose, spellings etc.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Queluz National Palace

This article, to which you contributed, will be featured on the Main Page on January 5, 2008.[1] Risker (talk) 17:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Legend: legacy of the dragons

An editor has nominated Legend: legacy of the dragons, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legend: legacy of the dragons and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks as if a party or parties have recently tweaked the notification level for AfD and other action template notices to a pretty low threshold. I simply made a few minor changes to this article's content so that if the article survived, the quality would be a little better than otherwise. Here I hold no strong opinions about deletion. I do hope this doesn't portend a long string of talk page notices about any article I've ever modified which has something happening to it. That would be over 10K unique articles, now. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA issue

I've replied on my talk page. Dihydrogen Monoxide 04:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Matrikas: Thanks

Thanks for pointing the spelling issue. Your suggestions are implemented. Please point out any faults left in the article and what must be done more to improve it further to reach FA quality.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments on the article talk. The article at the moment, misses the Nepali Hindu and Buddhist prospective of the Matrikas, which i was unaware of, before. The material will be soon added. I have noticed you review FACs. So, I will leave a comment on your talk, when i am done. Please find the flaws (if any) in the article considering FA criteria, at that time. Regards. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I review FACs, but I don't review FACs. That is, I have no record of supporting or opposing an FAC. I would not support or oppose unless I knew a lot about the article's subject. Against full-time professional writers who review FACs, I have no claim to expertise.
But yes, I have read, reviewed, and edited, I don't know, two or three hundred maybe?, FA+FAC articles to correct generally minor errors of spelling, reference, or fact. I'll be happy to do that for your article when you request it. For an article of GA or better quality, though, I make non-minor editing changes only when specifically invited to do so by a primary editor. -- Michael Devore (talk) 21:17, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Félix Trinidad

Hey, I am trying to push this article to GA and I was wondering if you could help me with a grammar check, my work on the article has been concentrated on content but grammar is not really my forte and there are some sections that were not done by me, with a upcoming fight very close I think its better to have a clean and stable version to revert to while the topic is hot. Thanks for your time. - Caribbean~H.Q. 15:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I think I'll have time in the evening to take a more detailed look at it. -- Michael Devore (talk) 17:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
There are definitely some issues with that article. I'll try to work on it in stages, and will likely edit other articles between those times. If you wish, you can continue content work on it without worrying about edit conflicting with me, I tend to break up major changes between edits anyway. -- Michael Devore (talk) 01:29, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks I am definitely grateful for your help, I will let you work without conflicting for now, my next significant contribution to the article should come on January 20, following the fight. Great work so far :) - Caribbean~H.Q. 08:24, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
As time permits, I will keep making incremental improvements to the structure and grammar (well, I hope they'll be improvements) until your fight deadline, although I'll get out of the way of copyediting sessions by another editor. Unfortunately, in my opinion the article falls short of GA level right now, but continued cleanup and structure rework should get it much closer. That plus a tad more content work ought to do the trick for a GA designation. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[unindent] Update: I had a longish stretch of time to work on Félix Trinidad, and I think I'll stop now until and unless you're ready for me to do more work after the scheduled bout is over.

The article remains somewhat rough in spots, but there have been a number of corrections to grammar and spelling. I likely could do more, but we've probably reached the point of diminishing returns for now, especially since I have limited knowledge of boxing. I'll wait and see how the upcoming event draws in new editor input and content (I just noticed an advertisement for the upcoming bout on television yesterday, never would have noticed before working on this). I hope your road to a future GA article is a smooth one. (copied to your talk page) -- Michael Devore (talk) 01:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops, forgot to mention that if there were any changes I made to the article which you don't like, feel free to revert them. There were several sentences with awkward phrasing that I didn't like and replaced with phrasing that sounded better and still fit without tearing things up. These changes tended towards stylistic in spots and you may not like the style. Expunge as desired. -- Michael Devore (talk) 02:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Your work has been incredible, I realize how hard writting a boxing article in a non-repetive fashion is, and you helped me greatly when I was unable to do much (the flu has been annoying me for a week), cheers. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Troilus

Hi Michael. Thanks for correcting some typos in Troilus. I'm hoping to get it to FA level. Have you noticed anythign that should be addressed first? Thanks. --Peter cohen (talk) 11:47, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that's quite an article upgrade from the original delisted GA version. Can you legitimately archive or remove the old delisted notice from the talk page? I saw that on first glance and wondered why the article wasn't at least a GA.
I'm working on a couple articles by request and don't have much time to look over other articles in detail right now, but I'll try to give it a more thorough read-through later on, see if I can make any changes or suggestions. I see that you've had User:Awadewit involved in as an editor earlier. Awadewit is one of the premier FA editors, if you could bring her back as an involved editor, she could offer a lot more help on the FA drive than most editors (and certainly more than me). -- Michael Devore (talk) 19:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, Michael. It is GA now. Awadewit failed it at my first go at GA and passed it at the second. I'll speak to people over at the GA project about whether mention of the initial failure can be removed. This was the last version of the article before I adopted it in May [2]. I think that was somewhere near the Stub/Start borders.
I've still got a couple of points to action from Awadewit's suggestions when she passed it. (I'm suffering from an illness that leaves me fatigued. So, I'm only able to edit in fits and starts.) I'm then going to approach the Literature and Mythology projects to see whether either or both are able to assess it for A grade or peer review it as preparation for FA. Awadewit is involved in the former of these two projects. If you can aford any tiem to help I shall be grateful. I'm unlucky to make many changes this month but would hope to do more next month.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I did a full read of the article and don't really have any substantive remarks to add to the advice given, or further illumination to offer the path you are taking. Troilus is clearly a product of quality effort. Beyond GA level, I am not sufficiently trained in professional writing to offer much help except on wording tweaks and mistakes.
To parrot what you have already heard: finish up your scheduled changes, take the article to Peer Review for wider exposure (which often doesn't work, but it's worth the try for when it does), and then run it through FAC. Even a failed FAC can be invaluable for the editing advice given, and the indication of which way the wind blows on the current weighting of stylistic and other requirements to pass. Depending on the article, the FA process can become quite political, so reaching accord with the FA reviewers' expectations is critical. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to look and for your advice and nice comments.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Stain

I noticed you made minor edits to this article, nice catch and thank you.

  • If it is not too much of a bother could you help me with stylistic issues and the articles integrity as a whole?
  • I want to submit it for GA.

Could you please help me, thanks Binarymoron (talk) 06:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I should be available for detail work in the next 24-36 hours. Aside from wording concerns, a quick scan shows a big issue is layout. If I can find a similar GA/FA article to use as a model, we ought to be able to clean it up for your GA submission. It's always good to borrow from what has worked. -- Michael Devore (talk) 08:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


  • Could you explain what layout issues exist, so I can take care of them?( I'm new to this, its my first article)
  • Maybe Excel Saga can be used as a model?


Thanks, Binarymoron (talk) 11:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

The article just seems to run on a bit long for the page given the actual content size, and the sections and sub-sections look like they could be tightened up for a neater look. I could be wrong, but should know more later this night when I get a chance to look at other articles. I'll copyedit the current content before looking at other stuff, anyway. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

ok thank you very much Binarymoron (talk) 08:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

For the episodes, a table might look cleaner, such as found in the GA Smallville (season 1) or Cold Feet (series 5) episodes list, although the headers would need to be modified of course. I'm not sure how well the episode screencaps could be integrated, however, so perhaps a table wouldn't work out for your article. -- Michael Devore (talk) 17:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your updates I haven't logged into wikipedia the past few days (bad network), but I will look into the issues immediately, Binarymoron (talk) 10:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I have implemented the changes you suggested please tell me if this is alright. Thanks, Binarymoron (talk) 11:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I could provide with some more screenshots from the series. thanks, Binarymoron (talk) 15:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about my inactivity... been very busy, can the tags be removed? thank you for your help,Binarymoron (talk) 20:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page for better continuity of Mr. Stain remarks. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Can the article pass a GAN? Binarymoron (talk) 20:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I see you already submitted it. Here is the part of my original answer before your submission.
To be honest, I don't really know if it would pass GAN. I'm not a GA reviewer, but I scan through most GA articles soon after they pass and there is a great deal of inconsistency in quality. I've seen articles I personally wouldn't have passed without more work go through, and other articles I thought were in good shape get failed. It depends on the reviewer you get, and the general standards for the type of article (some article subjects seem tougher to pass than others, probably because they are popularly known or well-documented).
I think there is a chance it would pass GAN after making some additional changes likely to be suggested by the reviewer. Normally I'd say it couldn't hurt to submit it since there is a chance to pass, because even if it fails, the reviewer will point out what they think should be improved or changed to get GA. However, GAN is seriously backlogged and a review could take weeks. Ruhrfisch might have a better idea since he has reviewed articles before and is familiar with Mr. Stain.-- Michael Devore (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thomas Wilcher AFD

You may have an opinion on this one at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Wilcher.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thespis (opera) - Thanks!

Thanks for the excellent corrections. I'm curious: how did you come upon the article and notice the errors? Do you use a software that searches for typos and grammar errors? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

FAs, GAs, FACs, and GANs are fair game for Michael-poking; I have edited several hundred. At the rate I'm going and the current [FG]A[NC]? influx, I calculate I should finish up anywhere from three to five years after the extirpation of all other editors from Wikipedia. That said, as I recall, I reached Thespis (opera) while reading an article, discussion, or comment that linked there. Such are also selection filters.
All interactive editors have varying degrees of software augmentation (minimally, a browser), but I am likely more augmented than most. As I further recall, I manually scanned a sorted list of words from Thespis, noticed a dubious spelling, checked the spelling against context, and decided it to be an error, which I corrected. As for the extra word, one of various and sundry augmentations flagged that phrase as a questionable construct. I concurred after again reading with context and made the change.
Speaking of common selection filters, walking user page GA/FA lists is another common approach. For example, I'm going to try to check if the influrence spelling in a Gilbert and Sullivan quote is a typo or in the original source. -- Michael Devore (talk) 18:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

A typo from my own fingers, likely! Best regards, and thanks for all the good work! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Auckland Zoo

Thank you muchly for the edits to this page, I have high hopes for it as in my early Wikipedian stages it is my 'baby' and any and all (productive) edits and suggestions are most welcome.

Regards,

User:ZoofanNZ —Preceding comment was added at 05:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Your ongoing efforts with page are much appreciated. ZoofanNZ (talk) 07:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I try to swing by every now and then with an cleanup edit or two. The content is getting better, so you're going the right direction. -- 12:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tyrone Wheatley

I noticed your recent editorial involvement in Tyrone Wheatley. You may wish to comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tyrone Wheatley.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with Tyrone Wheatley. The article got closed prematurely, IMO. Let me know if you have any more thoughts because I would like to prepare it for renomination. Also, I attempted to make an edit that responds to your concerns about statements about him being a cancer. Please let me know if further work is necessary to resolve that specific issue.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
I have renominated it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 15:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for the catching of typos on my GA nominations. It is very much appreciated. Ealdgyth | Talk 21:16, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hi. Need help with copy edits

Hi Michael. I have been working on a new article, Kannada literature which needs copy edits. If you are free, please consider helping me with copy edits. Feel free to leave comments like [clarify] if any "Indian term" needs clarification. BTW, I remember there are two articles in which you pointed out spelling issues that need my attention. I will attend to it this weekend. ThanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 13:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I should be able to start on it by the weekend. -- Michael Devore (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Super. The last section "Modern Literature" is about 80% done. But should be 90% done by the weekend after which I will just add a rounding off paragraph. On occasson, I have not provided an offical English language equivalent for a Kannada literary work name, and dont want to wager a personal translation (though its my native language and I can come close). So I have left it at that. As and when I find the exact translation in my reference books, I will add it. On occassion, the year the book was written is not available, though the era would be correct. Again, as and when I find the date, I will add it. Thanks a lot. Dont hesitate to be aggrassive in the copy edits.Thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
It's easier for me to undertake more extensive work in bursts over several days, so you'll probably see several editing sessions in the article history. Don't let that interfere with your ongoing edits or other work. I'll let you know on your talk page when I'm done editing the current content. -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
No problem. BTW, when I write the name of a literature, should it always be "the literature name".

Meaning, is the "the" necessary everytime.?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't think so; I was thinking of removing those in the article later on, but you can make the changes if you want. Compare Kannada literature content to the treatment of printed works in the similar FA articles African American literature and Modernist poetry in English, or author-oriented FAs such as Rudyard Kipling and Mary Wollstonecraft where there is no use of "the" before printed titles in that manner. -- Michael Devore (talk) 18:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok. So I will stop adding "the".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you know. he "Modern period" section is too long right now (30K, will go to 35K by itself). There is a good reason why it is this long. Once you are done with your cpedits, I will spin off a new article called "Modern Kannada literature" which will later be expended again. On the current article you are cpediting, the "modern period" section will be chopped in half to accomodate for a more reasonable article size (65k). This way you are contributing to two articles at once.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 19:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I will look into that today. Thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the encyclopaedias/books I am refering to don't mention the full names of the English poets, Burns (perhaps Robert Burns), Elliot and Auden (perhaps W. H. Auden). If I cant find more info, I will remove that part or it may come up later. Moreover, who inspired the writers under question is perhaps a minor issue.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[unindent] I don't think you necessarily need to take out the reference with only last names. A few individuals are of such high stature in a topic that it is understood who is being talked of, e.g. if you mention Washington's and Jeffersonian politics, you probably don't need to say George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

However, poetry isn't quite as well-known to the general reading audience and, though even I know that a lone Auden comparison in poetry must refer to W.H. Auden if there is no further qualification, I don't know poetry well enough to say that Elliot (spelled with two 'l's) really means T.S. Eliot (with one 'l'). I think the names should be wikilinked since a lot of people are not well-educated with respect to poets, myself included. I'd leave the names as-is if you could verify that 'Elliot' is really 'Eliot', and wikilink them to the full article entry via piping, e.g. Auden.

(Incidentally, I've had a lot of interruptions this weekend, and haven't had the longer hour+ stretches of free time to edit the article in as much depth as I'd like to have done, but hope that will change over the next few days.) -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I will dab link the names. I have just started working on the appreciation/criticism section, which will be like rounding of the article.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Some books call 9th-18th as medieval. Others 12th-18th as medieval and 9th-12th as ancient. However, normally 9th-13th would be medieval, 14th century onwards would be late medieval, 19th onwards would be modern.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
I corrected the meaning of the sentence in "Medieval period" section. please check if it sounds okay now. I have also moved the Essay sentence pointed out by you to the correct location, above M.V. Seetharamiah.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
In your latest move of the paragraph about Gopalakrishna Adiga, I need to check my source to see if it comes under the Navodaya category, though it is dated to 1954. Some overlap between the two era is expected. So the date alone does not determine which section it belongs to. However, the date would be the first level of classification.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
A problem is that in the original he's basically introduced twice, and his 1954 work is outside that 1925-1950 time given for the section. Also, the spot he was in broke the roughly chronological order of the section. If he should stay in the original section, he probably needs to go back to the very bottom there, perhaps with a few words of explanatory text for the date. -- Michael Devore (talk) 02:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
I am trying to verify that date to make sure if it is 1954 or 1934. Not sure which book I got that date from. The very name of that poem Hattuvevu Navu is patriotic. So has to be close to 1947, the year of Indian independance. BTW, I found the info on Elliot. It is T.S. Eliot!!Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Found something. Of the three poems mentioned in that line on Adiga, Kattuvevu Navu (1948), Mohana Murali (1944). No mention of Samaja Bhairava, but I suspect they are close in dates which is why the source I have quoted calls them "his early poetry". Adiga was born in 1918. The new source I refered to is "Selected Poems" By M. Gopala Krishna Adiga, Sumatīndra Nādiga- ISBN 8126021616 Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Though you are right, in that, its better to place Adiga at the bottom of the Navodaya period.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I am continuing to work on the last section, 'Appreciation and Critisim'. I normally write on paper before typing it in. However, as I go along, I am adding interesting info, typically regarding number of poems written by a poet etc. In a few days time, a decision can be made what to trim out and what to keep in the article.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 02:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh! no. I meant that for the modern Literature section. The rest is stable where I am merely verifying citations, adding more citations and dates to classical works etc.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

And even in the modern literature section, when I said "removed", I meant "moved" to a sub-article.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

When I add # of poems to a writer, should it be in numerals or words?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:MOSNUM#Numbers is the definitive guide here and what you should follow. According to the guide, you do have some flexibility for numbers above nine, depending on what you think reads best. If you're mixing with dates, I'd probably spell them out to avoid any possible confusion, although that is not a hard rule which always applies. -- Michael Devore (talk) 03:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

In fact, I think even the "modern literature" section is ready. I dont plan to add any more details unless someone asks for it, and it is well cited too. The final "rounding off" section needs careful though to summarize the developments over 1500 years. So I am going slow there, but that section should be done in a few days.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Santipurana: The source does not say which work(s) of Kalidasa, Ponna borrowed from. So I have just changed the sentence a bit.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Citation: When a book overall is authored/edited by say author "a" but the chapter I am sourcing from is actually authored by "b", should the citation show "a" or "b". I took the conservative approach and did ("b" in "a" (1997), p xx). In one of my previous FA's (Vijayanagara Empire), a reviewer changed my citation to include only the chapter author, but included the book author (the editor) ony in the reference section at the bottom. Is there a rule for this? This could possibly help reduce the article size if I can cite with only one of them.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I remember seeing it as chapter+book authors in the full reference section and a name+year in the cite, but let me look at a couple examples from an FA by a professional writer and see what's what. -- Michael Devore (talk) 05:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
OK, Awadewit is probably one of the best of the FA writers currently active on Wikipedia. In her article Anna Laetitia Barbauld, the example of Isobel Armstrong, who wrote a chapter in a book edited by Paula R. Feldman and Theresa M. Kelley, shows a full cite in Notes (#2) for first time, then just a last name+page(s) afterwards for cites (e.g. #37 and #38). The full reference is again listed in the "Secondary sources" section (which would be "References" in Kannada literature). As she is a English lit grad student, this is likely to be a solid standard to follow. -- Michael Devore (talk) 05:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
This is a good example. It will help cut down on article size.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
No problem with discussing on talk pages because at this point the article is not in PR or anything. Yes, the author crowns Bhima after the Mahabharata war where as in the original version written by Vyasa, it is Yudhishtra, the eldest brother who is crowned. The kingdom in question is essentially one that covered large parts of India with its capital at Hastinapur, in modern day Uttar Pradesh I believe, though I am not sure if we should explain all that.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I have started the last section. I have one more paragraph to write, but you may start cpedits on this section if you have the time. Thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
It was meant to be obscure. Just a typo. Trying to get used to my new keyboard. My English spellings and typing skills are not exactly my strong point either. Perhaps I should have run this through a spell checker before you started copy editing. That would have made your job easier.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Prasne and Mouni are separately published story collections.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Your aggressive edits are welcome, so are your TBD items for me. I was thinking of first copying the modern literature section into a new sub-article. Then, I can quickly open up a discussion on that talk page of the article, asking users which of the 30 writers from the "modern period" sould be kept on the main article, because obviously, the article is super oversized. All 30 writers (or so) discussed have won the highest national honours, (20-30 more have been left out for now) but the plan is to choose 10-12 only for the main article. This way, you would already have made a significant contribution to the subarticle to be created ("Modern Kannada literature") and your aggressive edits ca be limited to a smaller "modern literature" section and in general to a smaller article. How does that sound? Once you are done with one round of aggressive copy edits, then a PR can start.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
I have created a seperate sub-article for "Modern literature" and as I had mentioned earlier, started to trim that section on the main article, without spoiling your earlier copy edits. In addition, some copyedits may be necessary to redice content in other sections as well, though that would play a minor role in bringing the article to acceptable size. I have reformated the headings of sections to reduce the TOC length, which was looking too lengthy, based on advice given by couple of other users on the articles talk page. This should not stop you from doing aggressive copy edits. thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Which is why I use "King" with the capital, unless I missed it somewhere.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, several wikilinks don't include the King. If I get a chance later tonight, I'll go through and pipe the wikilinks with a leading King to include it in the wikilink. -- Michael Devore (talk) 00:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok. Do you get the feel the Lead section is getting too bulky. I had kept the info on Halmidi inscription and the earliest poetry in the next section but Amarrg moved it up. whats your take? Typically they expect no more than 3-4 small paragraphs in the lead.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
We need to make sure that the spellings are consistantly American or British per the auto peer review. Please take a look when you have time. So will I.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I think British spellings are fine.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
In the Modern literature section, Should I provide the English equivalent of each and every Kannada writing? For most part, I have given the English equivalent from the source itself. There are a few works whose English equivalents were not given in the source, but are straight forward (my native language).Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:07, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if you need to do all that to give English titles of works; it's not the same situation as an honorific. Plus, if you translate, it might come close to original research by one way of thinking. Unless you want to do it, I'd leave the untranslated ones alone. I'm sure if the reviewer(s) for FA (GA probably won't care, the article is already better than a lot of GAs) think it should be done, they'll let you know, and you can worry about it then. -- Michael Devore (talk) 01:38, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Thank you very much for your edits to 2007 Texas Longhorn football team. Your work is greatly appreciated! Best, Johntex\talk 14:03, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Would you believe...

...that in eighth grade I used to get A's and 100%s on speling? Thanks for the lookseefixee on that little weed article! -- carol Commons 02:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ed Muransky GA

Thanks for contributing to the effort at Ed Muransky. You may want to put this on your user page:

This user helped promote the article Ed Muransky to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you - Kannada literature

For all your effort in improving this article. Feel free to dive in anytime. Your effort is also appreciated by the Wikipedia:WikiProject Karnataka work group.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A token of appreciation

The Barnstar of Diligence
You have received many stars for copy editing. But you are also a tireless contributor. Thanks for you efforts, especially on Kannada literature. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Me too

Image:CopyeditorStar7.PNG The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For excellent fixes in spelling and grammar. PeterSymonds | talk 17:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I've had the pleasure of seeing your name on my watchlist for every major article I've contributed. Thank you for diligently spotting the minor typographical errors and other general problems; it is much appreciated. :) Keep up the good work! Best, PeterSymonds | talk 17:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Dineshkannambadi and PeterSymonds, glad I was able to help a bit. -- Michael Devore (talk) 23:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request

If you are able and willing, could you please proofread List of municipalities in Sullivan County, Pennsylvania? It is in WP:FLC and a request for proofreading has been made here. I know you already found a typo or two in it (thanks), but some edits have been made since in the FLC process. Thanks in advance for your help and keen eye, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The article looks good to me, with no clear typos, but I'll try to earn my keep. Take my comments for whatever you think they're worth.
In the quibbling department, I'm not convinced that "as were Cherry (1824), Davidson, and Forks Townships (both 1833)" with a both on the end parenthesis is correct. The two townships are part of a longer list and separated by a comma, so they don't share the common sentence grouping that a both designation should have there. It might be best to use (1833) twice or otherwise rework the both.
Three of the Remarks in the Municipalities table end in a period, most do not. Use of periods in the table fields should probably be consistent.
As an observation, the article makes heavy use of parenthetical comments. Some editors may object. I am sympathetic because I frequently must restrain myself from overusing parenthetical comments, not always successfully. -- Michael Devore (talk) 08:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I am very sorry to have missed these until now - thanks for the heads up. Thanks also for looking it over and the helpful suggestions. I have changed the first sentence to Elkland Township was formed from Shrewsbury in 1804, as were Cherry (1824), Davidson (1833), and Forks Townships (1833). The other possibility is Elkland Township was formed from Shrewsbury in 1804, as were Cherry (1824), and both Davidson and Forks Townships (1833). but I do not think it works as well.
As for the Remarks punctuation, the thought was to follow the MOS on captions, where full sentences end in periods and phrases do not. I think we could make all the remarks full sentences and add periods to them.
I do overuse parentheses, thanks for the reminder. I will try to reduce their number in the next few hours as well. Thanks again for all your help, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks again. The sentence on township dates is fixed as noted above, most of the parentheses have been removed, and the Remarks all end with periods now (I did not change them to full sentences as "It is named for..." sounded goofy to me). Whoops - a parenthesis! Thanks again, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Replied on your page. (Just to keep things confusing. And to make parenthetical sentence fragments.) -- Michael Devore (talk) 11:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for checking the article changes. I checked the MOS more carefully and, of course, there is something on list entries at Wikipedia:Mos#Bulleted_and_numbered_lists: All elements in a list should use the same grammatical form and should be consistently either complete sentences or sentence fragments. When the elements are complete sentences, they are formatted using sentence case and a final period. I am going to say "Named for..." is a complete sentence with an implied "It is". Thanks again for all of your help with this, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 12:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!


Thanks for your edits and comments - List of municipalities in Sullivan County, Pennsylvania made featured list!
Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations on making it to FL. -- Michael Devore (talk) 23:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Invite

Century Tower

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Florida, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of University of Florida. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! ~~~~

 
Jccort (talk) 16:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Change of pace

I checked and it has been deleted twice before, though in somewhat different form. On Feb 21 (CSD G10) and, on Feb. 23, after it was moved to the deleted Larry Sinclair's Allegations, as a redirect to a deleted page (CSD R1). I just deleted it and the talk page. I will let User:WJBScribe know as s/he deleted it originally. Thanks for the heads up, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 23:39, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Excellent work, as usual. I supppose if the story gets any media traction it may get re-re-re-recreated and eventually wind up at AfD, or as Yet Another Ongoing Political Revert War, but if we're lucky, it'll never happen. -- Michael Devore (talk) 00:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. If it gets media traction, it will presumably become notable in the process. None of the refs cited before were reliable sources in my opinion. If WJBScribe differs in opinion, I'll let you know. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Turns out it was deletable, but under different criteria - see User_talk:WJBscribe#Heads_up. Live and learn, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 12:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, there were many valid reasons to delete that and thanks again for letting me know. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Vandalism Prevention

I have given the IP address a 31 hour block and added Gino Vannelli to my watch list. I think the long-term solution is Wikipedia:Abuse reports, but we need at least 5 blocks to go that route. I would add a {{uw-bv}} warning for each vandalism that fits the pattern. I think I will also make the IP address aware of the potential for reporting this to his or her employer around block 3 or 4 of this cycle. My guess is that they have made enough edits to be identifiable by an employer and the good folk at Conoco probably would rather their employees used their internet access for more productive work. Does this sound like a plan? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 12:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That is a well thought out plan. -- Michael Devore (talk) 13:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
My hope is that it will stop the vandalism before having to go to Conoco, but if it must go that route, then so be it. Please let me know if there is more vandalism by this account I do not catch and thanks for bringing this to my attention, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I was watching Vannelli's article but not the IP vandal's talk page (I am now). Left a {{uw-bv}} blatant vandal warning just now - thanks for the heads up (again). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Sigh - I blocked the IP a second time. Perhaps this will sink in and all this will stop, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

RE: Diff agreed, and thats the way I took your previous comment. Jeepday (talk) 14:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Good deal, we're fine; you were, of course, completely correct in your remarks about the PROD. I had thought given your reply+placement you felt I was supporting restoration of the PROD, and wanted to clarify that my comments were addressed to "closing" remarks that could be misinterpreted in the context of wholesale removal of PRODs. Unfortunately, it appears that the dispute is still on-going, but nothing new for AN/I there. -- Michael Devore (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for catching my typos in Blue Iguana! --Mike Searson (talk) 03:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dont mean to burn you out

But if you have the time and the heart, can you please copy edit a new article Kannada literature in Vijayanagara empire (an expansion of a sub-article from Kannada literature) that I have been working on. It just needs an rounding off paragraph at the end and is not anywhere as large as the earlier one you did for me. If you need time, I fully understand. thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, later tonight or tomorrow I can begin editing the new article. It's probably time to dedicate work to an article anyway. I recently made a bunch of vandal and bad content reverts and should lie low for a few days to see if any of the perpetrators are going to gripe or mess up my pages. -- Michael Devore (talk) 15:06, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I noted one of your comments to my question about how detailed the "Lead" section should be, in the Kannada literature article. Accoringly, yesterday, I have moved/merged one entire paragraph from the lead into the first paragraph in the "Medievel era" section (subsection "Overview"). How does the lead look now in that article?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Replied on my talk page.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Re:"In 1369, Bhima Kavi, forwarded the shatpadi ....

Here i mean that Bhima Kavi gave further impetus to using that metric.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] R v Collins

Hi, I wasn't familiar with the Canadian case, but I would think a disambiguation hatnote on both would suffice, given that citation conventions vary, and that readers looking for one of them might well be confused. Personally, I never use "v.", but will do the DAB if you like. Regards. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 00:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Have put hatnotes on both cases. Problem is that someone might search for "R. v Collins" or "R v. Collins", which would point to neither. Late here now, but some naming convention within Wikiproject Law might be useful. Tomorrow. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 00:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ford Windsor engine

Thanks for the discussion advisory. I've added to your cleanup comments on the article's talk page. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 18:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kannada literature in Vijayanagara empire

The capital Vijayanagara, sourrounded by natural hillocks with unusually large sized boulders everywhere was incidentally an important counter-offensive point, though I did not mean it that way. You can get rid of the mention of the capital though. I have been very busy at work as such and have not been very active in the last 3-4 days.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all your efforts. Please continue on this article whenever you are free. Feel free to jump back into Kannada literature also if you so wish.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Per the PR recommendation, I have been working on the "overview" section of late, trying to round it off. If you have time, please try to give your view of how it has turned out and cpedit it.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kannada literature

Michael, feel free to copy edit anytime. In fact, I was about to contact you. Go ahead and give it a vigourous cpedit.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:49, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The reference listed only mentions Pampa-satakam in praise of Virupaksha. The term Satakam implies "100". In sanskrit, Shataka means 100. So one author may say Sataka, another will just says 100 poems. I have removed the pov.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, Murthi is a typo. Its Murthy.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
The Lead, "Early attestations" and "Content & Genre" have been touched a lot. If you have time, you may want to focus on those sections. thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Seems fine to me.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
The deletion was my mistake. sorryDineshkannambadi (talk) 18:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Glad you saw this inconsistency. The Vaishnava faith has been popular since very early times. Even the Chalukya dynasty of Karnataka (6th century) have patronage to Vaishnava faith. So dont refer to the Vaishnava page because that page perhaps describes Vaishnava writings in Sanskrit. In the Kannada language, Vaishnava writings (poems) started in 13-14th century under Naraharitirtha, but sort of went underground untill the 15th century when other Haridasas started prolific poetry (Sripadaraya, Vyasatirtha) and reached full bloom in 16th century under Purandara Dasa and Kanaka Dasa. So the lead needs to be adjusted a bit and termed like "fully bloomed in the 15th century onwards" instead of explaining all the details I have given you here. Also the term "Vaishnava Bhakti movement" needs to be brought in because the term Bhakti is specific to the period I have described. Thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes you are right. There were a few Vaishnava "writings" in Kannada before 14th century, but the golden age is later in 15th-16th century onwards.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

yes that is correct.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merci beaucoup

Thanks for the copy edits to Master Juba. I really appreciate it! — Dulcem (talk) 00:54, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Geoffrey Boycott

Thanks for your typo fixes, I've been struggling with my typing recently. Happy editing SGGH speak! 20:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ATULKRISHNA GHOSE

Dear Michael, I would like you to explain yourself concerning the tone you consider to be "inappropriate". I find your observation and objection rather gratuitous.--BobClive (talk) 06:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not place the tag on the article, I simply removed your signature and editorial "How?" remark. Please do not sign articles, per the guidelines at Wikipedia:SIG#When_signatures_should_and_should_not_be_used. Also, please place editorial remarks on talk pages and not in article content. Whatever gratuitous nature you might seek would likely be best explored with the editor placing the tag you apparently object to: Rueben_lys. -- Michael Devore (talk) 06:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Roman Catholic Church

Thanks for helping with the typos! NancyHeise (talk) 18:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kannada literature

Has seen major copy edits, I think in the process, the English language translations of some writings may have been lost. Whenever you find time, please cpedit it. I will also pitch in. ThanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 03:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Just add "in Kannada" to the end of the sentence. its fine.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
here is what you proposed, Following a gradual decline in Jain influence and writings, the rise of the Vijayanagara empire in the 14th century saw a literary renaissance sparked by the Haridasas heralds of the Vaishnava Bhakti movement.

How about,

A gradual decline in Jain influence and writings "and OR during" the reign of the Vijayanagara empire in the 14th century saw a literary renaissance sparked by the Haridasas heralds of the Vaishnava Bhakti movement in Kannada.

The Jain influence took a dive from the 14th century onwards, with very few works of quality from 15th-16th century. The Vaishnava Bhakti movement existed in multiple languages, including in Bengali. So specifying Kannada helps.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You wrote A decline in Jain influence and writings during the reign of the Vijayanagara empire in the 14th century was followed by a literary renaissance in the 15th century, sparked by the Haridasas heralds of the Vaishnava Bhakti movement in Kannada..

Sounds fine to me.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 17:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

As such, the sentence The writings of the medieval period drew greatly from the socio-religious themes in Jainism, Veerashaivism and Vaishnavism[7][8] seems a bit redundant, now that we have already discussed about all three movements (Jain, Veerashaiva and Vaishnava).Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I hope the lead has now settled to a stable state. Please take a look at it now. I dont think your prose has been altered by myself or sarvagnya, but feel free to change it if required.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Awards---> I think you are right. How about if we put that in the lead?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, if you can fit awards summary in the lead it could work. Problem is the lead is pretty big now and it already mentions awards in the last sentence, so you don't want to add much more about the awards in the lead unless it's balanced by new content. As such, the article might be OK with just a short new awards section, possibly touching up the lead's mention of awards. I'll leave the final decision on structure up to you and the other primary authors (not sure if you are the only primary there or not). -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for joining in the copy edits.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Navenby

Just wanted to say thanks for picking up those three typos - well spotted! --seahamlass 06:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

The Barnstar of Diligence
For making me (and others) look just a little less dumb by fixing random, minor mistakes. I blame typo gremlins. I've seen you do it before, so here's a belated way of saying thanks! --Midnightdreary (talk) 18:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Homeschooling article

Nice job finding and correcting those typos on the Homeschooling article! Let me know if you're interested in joining the Homeschooling WikiProject. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

23:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Victoria Cross typo

Thank you for correcting the Michael typo. Any reason why you changed heroes to Heroes? Normal cataloguing rule is that every word is in lowercase except the first letter of the first word and proper names. Is there a different rule for Wikipedia? Anthony Staunton (talk) 09:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC) Apologies. I now realise I wrote Michale Aschcroft instead of Michael Ashcroft. Thanks for correcting the spelling of Ashcroft. Someone else corrected the spelling of Michael and changed heroes to Heroes. Anthony Staunton (talk) 12:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Image:CopyeditorStar7.PNG The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For excellent fixes in spelling and grammar. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you. I can't express in words how much I appreciate your hard work correcting the typos and etc. in the Daniel Santos (singer) and Roberto Cofresi articles. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Just a message

There are many people who come to wikipedia with the excitement of editing an article and bringing it to GA or FA. But it is very rare and wonderful to have people like you who do the work of making them flawless. I wanted to thank you for your valueable edits. Wikipedia will always cherish your work. Keep up the good work. God Bless. Indianescence (talk) 20:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


I see that in large measure due to my congenital laziness, heavily frosted with large dollops of procrastination, I have utterly failed to acknowledge four or five posts in a row here. Please consider this an all-encompassing thanks to everyone for their kind remarks. -- Michael Devore (talk) 02:58, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Just one of the many thanks for your work. In particular, you helped edit The Drapier's Letters during a very important time. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cofresi

Michael, I want to thank you. Roberto Cofresi made "GA". It won't have been possible without your copyediting and hard work. Let's celebrate with a "Cyber" beer. Tony the Marine (talk) 17:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations to you and Caribbean H.Q. for the GA. -- Michael Devore (talk) 20:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] a shiny

The Minor Barnstar
Awarded for exemplary WikiGnome-ishness. Great work!!! J.delanoygabsadds 20:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Greeks

Michael, thanks a lot for making so many usefull corrections to the Greeks article. Keep up the good work!Xenovatis (talk) 21:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Some of your work got FA'd

Bezhin Meadow, that you helped out on, is now a Featured Article! Thanks for your help on it. Lawrence § t/e 04:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your FA for the article. -- Michael Devore (talk) 04:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

The Working Man's Barnstar
You seem to show up for having cleaned up minor errors in my work every time I check on recent changes to the pages I have created. Keep up the good work.TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 06:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kannada literature in Vijayanagara empire

Hi. While the debates are on in the Kannada literature Rfc, I have been adding valuable info into the above article. The main concern user:Ruhrfish had in the PR was continuity and flow. He did not want (as far as possible) paragraphs that looked like: poet a wrote x, poet b wrote Y etc. He wanted to see a flow in the content. This is what I have been trying to achieve and have added some interesting info. This will go on for a few more weeks as I bring out context based continuity to each section. Feel free, if you have time to tweak/cpedit a I go along. The rfc on Kannada literature wont/cant go on for ever.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Michael, in this article, there are a couple of compound words like "socio-religious", "well-known" which dont have ndash, though used elsewhere in the article. Should we make it ndash in lead also?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 11:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, does every date (such as 1510) need to be preceeded by "c." to make it c. 1510? Right now we have a mixture of c. xxxx and xxxx. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Michael. As minor copy edits continue by reviewers and myself, please do keep an eye on things to ensure prose remains correct. thanks, Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Black Moshannon thanks

I have been remiss and not thanked you for your proofreading of Black Moshannon State Park, especially for your recent catches during FAC. Thanks as always for your careful work, and please let me know if I can ever do anything for you Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes thanks alot! Dincher (talk) 22:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Looks like y'all are well on your way to another FA star. Only thing I had left is trying to figure out whether to hyphenate a few compound words, but that's so often a stylistic choice that I often leave them alone. Closest one I came to adding a hyphen on is year round as it is commonly hyphenated in the context, but I found minority usage without hyphens in *.edu and Google book searches. No nits left to pick, everything looks fine to me. -- Michael Devore (talk) 06:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Since it is "year-round" a majority of the time, I put the hyphen in. Sorry about "stockadeed", that was just my inability to type. Thanks yet again, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar of Mayhem!!

Barnstar of Murder, Madness, and Mayhem
On behalf of Murder, Madness, and Mayhem, this barnstar is to thank you for your hard work and patience in motivating, mentoring, and moulding the work of student editors, and helping them to achieve excellence in research and writing. For quietly helping out copy-editing a whole range of our articles. Thank you so much!
On behalf of the entire class of UBC's SPAN312. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 01:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Black Mo thanks


Thanks for your all your careful proof reading and edits - Black Moshannon State Park made featured article!
Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Pennsylvania State Parks Groundhog Award, with Featured Article Star
This award is given with respect and admiration to Michael Devore for assistance in helping by catching many typos Black Moshannon State Park become a Featured Article from Ruhrfisch and Dincher (talk) 18:24, 27 April 2008 (UTC))
Congratulations again to Ruhrfisch and Dincher on the Featured Article status after all their hard work. -- Michael Devore (talk) 19:41, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Helena, Alabama

Thank you for fixing my horrifying typo in Helena, Alabama. That's what I get for clicking "change" in MS Word Spell Check without reading VERY carefully after drafting an article! Thanks again! Civilengtiger (talk) 13:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of PlayStation 2 games user signatures

I'm of the camp that thinks that Added By should be replaced with PS2 game serial numbers. There's already a discussion on the article's talk page, if you agree perhaps you could chime in and possibly get someone who knows more about the article than I to make the change. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 22:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

How is it that you read, read, and read again and still miss it. Many thanks from me and Talyor (!) in Ring of Pietroassa. Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 17:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eastwood

Thank you so much for correcting that "its" in the Eastwood, Nottinghamshire article.

And no, I'm not being sarcastic!

I'm working hard to try to make this GA - I dream of FA.

I see you've got a 'copy-editor' barnstar, so you're just the sort of person I'd love to read the article. I was planning on asking for help from WP:LoCE later - perhaps after I've tried to improve the 'history' section. I'm researching more facts; I'd like it to be more narrative in style, and basically more interesting. Work in progress.

I would very much appreciate any further edits, suggestions, etc that you could make.

Cheers! --  Chzz  ►  21:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to get to a more detailed look at the article later tonight. Typically I only fix typos and do other minor proofing at WP:PR, WP:GAN, etc. articles unless more is requested. -- Michael Devore (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
A quick look over it would be great, but don't waste too much of your valuable time on it. I will keep your name in mind, and after I've got it in better shape I'll let you know. --  Chzz  ►  22:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't see any obviously bad grammar and such in a quick, but full, read. The biggest problem I immediately see—and you may already have peer review remarks about it—is that there are many short paragraphs that should be combined. All those one- and two-liner paragraphs, and the choppy prose, make the article read more like a factsheet. I also noticed a few MoS issues, but nothing worth really worrying about until you're close to GAN submission, assuming the issues then remain. Good luck with the future GA. -- Michael Devore (talk) 07:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Great, thanks. I agree it's 'choppy'. I hope a few more details will help fill the gaps and make more of a story-line. I'm researching that now. --  Chzz  ►  08:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help with Pau Gasol page

Thanks for helping out, anything you canadd that is of use is much appreciated! I've been trying to get this article much expanded. I'm the one who added most of the stuff, other people have just come in and continuously improved my edits. So thanks for the help and keep up the good work! Gamloverks (talk) 14:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] When ever you have time

Please copy edit these important sub-articles if and when you have time. I had expanded the first three long back and have done some copy edits recently. The others are recently created: Chennakesava Temple, Hoysaleswara Temple, Chennakesava Temple at Somanathapura, Mahadeva Temple (Itagi), Doddabasappa Temple. I will probably add one or two more to this list soon after I create them. thanks as alwaysDineshkannambadi (talk) 00:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Adding Siddhesvara Temple to the list.thanks,Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

The TomStar81 Spelling Award
Be it known to all members of Wikipedia that Michael Devore has corrected my god-awful spelling on the page Montana class battleship, and in doing so has made an important and very significant contribution to the Wikipedia community, thereby earning this TomStar81 Spelling Award and my deepest thanks. Keep up the good work! TomStar81 (Talk) 05:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thank you for your many copy-edit improvements to History of Indiana. :) After reading an article so many times you start to stop noticing your own mistakes. Thanks for correcting many of mine! Charles Edward 02:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks as always

Thanks as always for your corrections to Worlds End State Park and Cogan House Covered Bridge. If there is ever anything you need, please let me know, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:14, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

For your efforts on Kannada literature in the Vijayanagara Empire which is a FA now.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:32, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium)

Hi,

Thanks for your fixes in the article Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium). I am currently asking for review, in order to promote it to FA or FL. If you have time, can you put your comments in Wikipedia:Peer review/Euro gold and silver commemorative coins (Belgium)/archive1. Very much appreciated.

Miguel.mateo (talk) 02:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I should be adding content to archived pages, and do not usually post full peer review comments, but I will offer a quick observation on the article for your consideration. Overall the article content is good, but the write-ups on each coin are pretty rough. If you could find a good copyeditor, I think it would really help out there. I cleaned up several typographical and grammatical errors, but more remains to be done in order to reach featured quality prose. Good luck with your future FLC. -- Michael Devore (talk) 04:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Michael for your comments and corrections, will see how can I find a copyeditor that review this article, and the rest of the series. Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!


Thanks again for your contributions - Cogan House Covered Bridge made featured article today!
Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Man, these FA writers, they never seem to tire of generating the excellence. Re-congratulations redux once more again, redundantly repeating. -- Michael Devore (talk) 04:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merci beaucoup

Thank you for your recent copy edits on the article Jacques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris (film). Your input is greatly appreciated. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Improvements

I have recently embarked on an attempt to improve some early FA's of mine. I have significantly increased the number of citations in Hoysala Empire and Western Chalukya Empire, without changing the citation format (page number designation etc). I am currently improving Chalukya dynasty, my first FA, which needed a lot of minor work and will take a week. When you have time over the coming weeks, please do read through these three articles and the inline notes and copy edit its English and grammar.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 11:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, in the case of the first two artices, there was no change to content, just citations were added with some quotes. So not much there. The last article has seen some minor changes to content.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)