User talk:Una Smith

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Request for mediation accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party has been accepted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Chaps.

For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 03:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] MedCom Case

Hi, I'm Keilana. I've just accepted the aforementioned MedCom case. I've commented on the Mediation talk page, where mediation will take place. I hope that this mediation will be productive and satisfactory to all. I have asked all participants to make a statement, more details are on the talk page. Regards, Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 03:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gastroenteritis

In Reply to: Thanks for your edit to Gastroenteritis re E. coli causing bloody stools; that led me to do a literature search and I found "enterohemorghagic" Escherichia coli and particularly Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O157 strains (PMID 18366637). Is that what you had in mind, or is there more? Nasty! --Una Smith (talk) 03:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Enterohemorghagic E. coli is one stain of E. coli that produces dysentery in gastroenteritis patients. This strain happens to be the most common strain of E. coli producing disease in developed countries. However, there is another strain known as Enteroinvasive E. coli which is rare/uncommon in developed countries that also produces bloody stools. Murray, Patrick R.; Michael A. Pfaller, Ken S. Rosenthal (2005-06-033). "Enterobacteriaceae", Medical Microbiology, 5th ed. (in English), Mosby, pp.326-367. ISBN 0323033032.

[edit] NYC etc

By reply, yes it's Spring, and finally nice and sunny. So only an hour left here. What are you refering to, wiki-med or the NNT page? I dont know what you do, but actually I am in wiki-Crohns right now, and if you know anything about it, there are big holes there.io_editor (talk) 20:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I have read cranky edits by you in several contexts in the past hour or so. My view is, Wikipedia is mostly holes around which we are all trying to make some cheese. --Una Smith (talk) 20:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Several is vague?!? I am not in the least bit cranky, although I completely agree about the "mostly holes" and am strongly re-considering my bit. If you can't be more specific, then there is this - a whole section for vague accusations directed towards one editor. Where are you anyway? A wild guess is Scotland, because you yearn for spring.io_editor (talk) 20:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the polocrosse references. I did not write the article, just supplied the photos and really needed these references as things were turning out. Cgoodwin (talk) 03:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. I think WPEQ is below par with respect to references, and too many content disputes are one result of too little research. --Una Smith (talk) 04:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] This is wiki

(From my talk page) Your comment is pretty close to a personal attack. According to policy, it is the burden of the person seeking to add information to defend it. I am sorry, but you really do have some truly unique theories of horsemanship and need to accept the consequences for adding data from various fringe theories. Montanabw(talk) 06:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] re: Competitive mounted orienteering

Hi Una,

Thanks for your note. I am VERY new in Wikipedia and although I aspire to gain some facility as a Wiki participant, I will make no promises! Actually I have little content expertise in CMO. I started the CMO stub as a way to lure the wife of a good friend of mine to share her considerable knowledge of and passion for the topic, and to get her involved in the Wiki community. Having read the Competitive trail riding page, as well as reflecting on my conversations with Amie and recalling the CMO source material that I used to create the CMMO stub, I have come to conclude that CMO and Competitive trail riding are different enough to deserve seperate entries in Wikipedia. It's possible that CMO would be a sub-category under Trail roding. I will ask Amie to review the CTR page and perhaps weigh in with her observations.

Best regards,

-b. Bwoodson (talk) 17:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Good article

Hi Una, I thought you might enjoy this article about stem-cells and horses..... interesting stuff! --AeronM (talk) 14:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Beagling

Me again... two questions: would Beagling qualify as a Project Equine article? (Traditionally it is done on foot, but here in Middleburg, we have the only (as far as I am aware) pack to be followed on horseback.....)... which brings me to question #2: would our beagles (as the only pack to hunt fox and be followed on horseback) be worthy of a separate article? I think they are noteworthy enough.... or do you think they should stay as part of Beagling? Thanks, --AeronM (talk) 18:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I would say Beagling does not qualify as a Project Equine article, because the use of horses is so incidental. Re whether an article on your beagle pack itself meets Wikipedia criteria, the most important test is notability. Can you provide several 3rd party sources, particularly books and newspaper or magazine articles? Ditto for including mention of your beagle pack in Fox hunting. --Una Smith (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I can find the resources, especially in The Chronical of the Horse, and similar.... that just reminded me of an old Gilda Radnor skit about "depleting the world's resources" in which she complains that we shouldn't just 'save the resources, there are other kinds of horses, and ponies....' (!) --AeronM (talk) 20:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I've taken a stab at it: Beagling on horseback. I am waiting on some Chronicle of the Horse articles to flesh out the history... --AeronM (talk) 00:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Controversial photo

Hi Una, I have another question..... Regarding the Fox hunting article, if a photo is controversial (added for shock value) and the editors are not in consensus regarding it's inclusion, does the photo remain in the article until the dispute is resolved, or out? Also, is this something that should be submitted to RfC? I noticed that on the Abortion page, shock photos were not allowed in the article. Thanks, --AeronM (talk) 00:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. just found this in Wikipedia:Image use policy: "Do not place shocking or explicit pictures into an article unless they have been approved by a consensus of editors for that article." Based on this I have removed the photo.... --AeronM (talk) 00:21, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citing sources

Hi Una,

Thanks for your comment on my talk page, and please continue if you think that a point has been missed or if I'm being unduly harsh or mis-representing Io's actions. I appreciate the dissenting opinion as a good check on something as serious as a RFC or AN/I posting.

I was stalking your talk page - I noticed your 'how to link to pubmed' link. Were you aware if you include the pmid = feature in a citation template that it will put the pubmed # in the reference and link to the abstract? I ask for two reasons - I used to link to pmid and url pubmed abstract, until I was informed they were redundant. I'm also acutely aware that there are many advantages to doing things that I'm totally unaware of and was wondering if there was an added benefit to including the pubmed link? Learning new stuff is fun. Also, were you aware of geo reference generator? Useful for obscure citations, social science and stuff pubmed doesn't spit out. SandyGeorgia also turned this neat isbn finder which is easier than Amazon. I find it handy.

Final comment - have you seen WP:POPUPS? I love spamming things I've found handy. If you use anything except Internet Explorer, User:Wikidudeman's hodgepodge worked very well in the brief time I was able to try it out. WLU (talk) 01:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Per your comments a few months ago...

I remember your comments during the FAC process for Everglades National Park. I also remember my promise. It is taking me some time, as I knew it would, but I am steadily banging away at Everglades. So far, I have added Etymology, Geology, Climate, and Native American history, including a satellite article for Indigenous people of the Everglades region. I anticipate there will be three more satellites and perhaps four or five. I invite you to critique and make suggestions, please. I would like to take the Everglades article to FAC someday along with all of its satellites. --Moni3 (talk) 18:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

regatding you you conflict/mediation with Dreadstar and Keilana i suggest you look at my discussion page... The group you are involved in mediation with always act together..I some times suspect the are all the same person...I also wonder if they just do things to create issues to allow the to play through the process.. I wish you luck kate 100%freehuman (talk) 16:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rhythm/calendar methods

I just wanted to let you know I replied to your comment. Thank you for your response to my request on the doctor's mess. Lyrl^Talk _C 20:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please

OK, so here we go again. Two things, please: 1) This is English wikipedia. Adding stuff on Spanish and Latin American traditions is nice and interesting, but keep it in context of WP:UNDUE, a guideline that you yourself pointed out to me a while back. 2) On articles where you KNOW we are probably going to disagree, why don't we propose edits on the talk page of the article and sort out if there can be common ground? When we have done this, the overall article usually is the better for it; if you and I can agree, it has to be almost a universal truth!

Oh and another thing: If any of your sources are on Google books or elsewhere online, it would be a courtesy to provide a link in your citation to make verification possible without requiring others to obtain lesser-known texts via a two-week wait for interlibrary loan, with fees. Montanabw^(talk) 06:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

You first. --Una Smith (talk) 06:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Starting now, how's that? Montanabw^(talk) 06:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Please, Una, keep it civil. The NUMBER ONE rule of Wikipedia: Assume Good Faith. I can't stress the importance of talk pages enough in articles where two or more people have strong feelings. I work on the Book of Mormon page because I am from Utah and grew up there (although I'm not LDS). Talk about strong opinions between two mutually opposing camps! But on the Talk page we work out every piece of wording BEFORE it goes to the main page. It has been a very beneficial practice because we have formed (both believers and nonbelievers) very strong bonds between us of respect and a mutual attitude toward "protecting" the article from the casual editors with a POV. This article has (at least) two "caretakers"--you and Montanabw, at least--who want it to be the best, but you come from different viewpoints. It is critical that you work out issues ON THE TALK PAGE. It's simple cut-and-paste once you have agreed on some wording. (Taivo (talk) 09:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC))

"You first" is not civil? I think it is a fundamental principle of civility: do unto others as you want others to do unto you. --Una Smith (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Una, but "You first" is what two five-year-olds say to one another. A civil response would have been, "Yes, let's begin to do that now." But there's no need to point fingers or assign blame at this point. What is important is that the conversation about the Chaps article be conducted on the Talk:Chaps page before it is committed to the article. That way there are no surprises for either of you, no edit wars, no hard feelings.... (Taivo (talk) 14:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC))

The same holds for frentera, fiador, and Una, please quit trying to degrade the hackamore article into a disambig per your little remark at the NPOV noticeboard. That one was settled a month ago by the intervention of Rlevse, and now you are off "asking the other parent" again. My patience is about zero. This situation has now been going on for about two months and I still cannot figure out what your goal is, other than to make my life miserable and insert some kind of original research or fringe theory into all sorts of previously-stable articles on western equipment. Yes, much of the western riding tradition came from Spanish roots --500 years ago! -- Which borrowed heavily from Moorish roots based on the invasion in the Middle Ages, and the Moorish traditions borrowed heavily from ancient Persian roots. There is a mainstream view on these matters which you do not seem to "get," and instead are conducting original research in some attempt that appears to have something to do with adding more info on Spanish tack to these articles, which in and of itself is not a problem, except that you take it way too far and try to both "balkanize" articles that don't need to be split up (i.e. hackamore) and yet at the same time try to meld and universalize things that in the modern world are apples and oranges, no matter if they had some common principle in physics used (Australian cheekers are not a Frentera, a throatlatch is not a fiador, etc.). If you want to explain your overall goal here, maybe we could understand you better and try to help figure out if there is a mutually agreeable solution overall instead of these endless nitpicking edits. Montanabw^(talk) 23:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Elimination diet

At your request I have prepared a first draft for this proposed Article, it is located in a sandbox with that name accessed off my Talk page. Let me know if this is what you envisage and any comments you might have, also feel free to edit it further. It needs some more work and referencing, which might be some time before I get back to it. Jagra (talk) 00:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Santa Fe Southern RR

Thanks for writing this new article. As for the C&T -- yeah, I guess it is a Short-line railroad, as that article specifically mentions tourist RR's. Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 03:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome. I am trying to identify the "second" rail with trail line in New Mexico. Any ideas about that? --Una Smith (talk) 03:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Nope -- sorry! Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 04:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tapetum lucidium

See the article talk page. Spencer^T♦^C 19:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:HOP

I'm puzzled by this edit of yours, in which you add a pile of links to pages that don't exist. I haven't examined them, but are they perhaps like Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Japan articles by quality statistics? If so, are you proposing to create and maintain them? (You'd be welcome to do so!) -- Hoary (talk) 23:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes! Those are automatic; normally all the project has to do is use the table code to display the table. And I have found the table to be very useful. I have asked the Version 1.0 Editorial Team about why the table code isn't working for WP:HOP. Sorry about the ugly redlinks; feel free to revert my edit. --Una Smith (talk) 01:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

If it's all automated, well and good. I'd assumed that some poor drudge had to keep updating it all. (Certainly clicking the "edit" tab on Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Japan articles by quality statistics doesn't bring up any SGML comment telling people that edits aren't wanted/needed/appropriate.) Maybe human intervention is required just to start up these pages, whereupon it's all automated. ¶ I'd look into this myself, but the "real world" will make demands on my time over the next few days. -- Hoary (talk) 01:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I started the table for 2 other projects and it is maintenance free. --Una Smith (talk) 01:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eyeshine photo

I have inserted a speedy delete tag into the image file on Wikipedia and copied the description from Wikipedia to Commons. --Bowlhover (talk) 00:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

The photo on commons [1] is the only one that exists now as we lost the original. So I'm afraid there is nothing I can do. :/ I'm not sure how much the shine was altered, I imagine it was more of a white light before.--Silversmith Hewwo 00:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it. The original eyeshine must have been extraordinary. --Una Smith (talk) 01:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rail trails

I am referencing the bottom of the article of segregated cycle facilities "[edit] Cycle facilities in promoting recreational cycling" and the sentence "In the US, the Rails-to-Trails program seeks to convert abandoned railroad beds to recreational trails." And if you refer back to discussions of the article's naming, segregated cycle facilities is the term that gained common consensus of any pathway dedicated to bicycling. Thus under this "global" definition, rail trails are segregated cycle facilities. And seeing that no one has challenged the inclusion of rail trail text into the original article would suggest consensus on this as well. So it is not suggested they are, they indeed ARE segregated cycle facilities, only that in America this is not the universal term. .:DavuMaya:. 03:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Rotavirus

Hi Una. I have boldly removed this part of your response to the IP editor at Talk:Rotavirus as that could, unfortunately, clearly be construed as medical advice. I hope that's OK with you (removing your response entirely as done by another editor certainly wasn't a good idea); per WP:TALK, removing content not necessary to discussing improvement of the article is acceptable, and I think removing that particular note to the anon doesn't detract from the rest of your comment. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Diagnosing a medical condition is medical advice: "So, to answer 71.246.221.99: your gastroenteritis probably is not rotavirus." I can't partially edit your words above your signature, which would leave you saying something you didn't say. I assumed you could just put back the non-medical advice part. You cannot diagnose someone's gastroenteritis on Wikipedia, this is giving medical advice. --Blechnic (talk) 21:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)