User talk:Bfpage/archive/March 2014 to December 2014

Note

Though my first edit is in 2007, I received not even on message on my talk page until March 2014. I have no explanation. Wikipedia was a silent place with communication with no one. My first message was from an administrator letting me know that I was going to be blocked for violating some spam policy. ("What is that?, I thought? Was this a joke from someone? What is an administrator?} What a strange experience, I hope if you are reading this, you never have to go through a similar experience.

Monarch

Thanks for the kind words. On the bird project, we have have evolved a standard style of presentation for featured and good articles, so they all look much the same. I don't know if there is any thing similar for insects, but no reason anyway why the bird model should apply. My comments below assume that you are aiming for GA and are mainly MoS

Done the lead should summarise the article; as it stands, it omits major sections, like reproduction
Done as a summary, the lead should have few if any references. It's all going to be referenced later in the body of the text
Image captions should not normally contain the name of the article. It's assumed that the pictures are of monarchs unless the caption says otherwise
Only first word of a section heading is capitalsed
Galleries per se are discouraged. Yours tells a story, which is fine, but some of the adult pictures are superfluous
You don't really need to link countries or continents
consistency is important. A quick glance shows that the capitalisation of monarch is inconsistent, and that your retrieval dates for references are formatted inconsistently
There is some overlinking. Install and run this script
Lists are rarely a good idea. For the food plants, I'd put several species of milkweed and.... If you don't want to lose the list altogether, hive it off as List of monarch butterfly food plants and link
Web references need a publisher
On-line versions of real journals and books don't need retrieval dates, that's for web-only publications
refs 31 and 32 appear to be identical
binomials should be italicised in references too
Other referencing inconsistencies include capitalisation of article titles, full stops after initials, surname/first name order, book publisher location (give for all or none)
Spell out journal names and US states in full (but the country should be US, not written in full)
You may have some dead links
Up to you, but I prefer to put explanatory bits like your refs 19 and 20 as footnotes (see Fulvous Whistling Duck or European Nightjar) but that's certainly not required
Personally I avoid linking to google books unless it's fully free to use. Access varies from country to country and often changes, so I prefer not to give the courtesy link. Up to you though. I also don't link to journal abstracts, only full text if available
I can't see a ref for your claimed IUCN status
You have some bare urls

I'll have another look when I've a bit more time, there's some good stuff there, just needs tweaking a bit Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:54, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redback spider is a current insect FA, I don't know if helps you Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:28, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support

Bfpage, I would like to take this moment and thank you for the trust you had placed in me and for your support in my RfA that happened a while ago. Although it didn't turn out as I had planned, I certainly appreciated all the comments and suggestions given by you and other people. I will learn from all of them and will hopefully run again someday when I'm fully ready. Thank you. TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:23, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing Interior reconstruction

In regard to the article: Interior reconstruction, the assessment you placed on the page is not appropriate on the talk page, so I removed it and added two WikiProject templates instead.

My editing on this article was limited to a spelling correction, done by the tool WP:AutoWikiBrowser (AWB) as shown in the history of the article. Such a change does not imply any knowledge of the article at all. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:28, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Harikarank

A tag has been placed on User:Harikarank requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free Web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Drm310 (talk) 16:12, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Bfpage/archive/March 2014 to December 2014. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by (Rovinemessage) 22:31, 19 July 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Copyright violation

On the log of edit history of the article Monarch buttrfly the following edit was posted: 07:49, July 15, 2014‎ Mdann52 (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (68,291 bytes) (-635)‎ . . (→‎top: rv link to copyvio material (Ticket:2014071510000218)) I would like to maintain that no copyright infringement was done. I referenced a url to a website, a normal and typical practice. No copyrighted material (the raw data itself) was/is used in this section of the article. No word-for-word text was copied from the reference and then pasted to the article.

I would suggest that User:Mdann52 may also be known as User:Southwest Monarch Study. There seems to be some confusion of what constitues a copyright violation. I can only say that this/these users are well-intentioned and are responding in good faith, wishing to enhance and improve the article. I have been privately contacted by a representive of Southwest Monarch Study via email. I would rather resolve this issue with the assistance other editors who have the expertise of determining copyright violations here on wikipedia rather than thru private corespondance.

bpage (talk) 02:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs

Please take care not to add {{stub}} to an article such as Parshuram Temple which already has a specific stub tag - it just wastes other editors' time. Thanks. PamD 12:59, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication

And your COI tag on Tunnel problem duplicated an existing tag. Please slow down and take more care. Thanks. PamD 13:13, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing article Scott Slapin

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I was reviewing the article Scott Slapin as it appeared in the new pages feed filtered by the oldest articles needing review. After reading the editing history of the article I was unsure of what had actually occured with the article becuase it seems to have been moved around and renamed. I will pass up on this article's review but would appreciate someone else's interpretation of this article's editing history.

bpage (talk) 01:24, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That article was deleted following this discussion, was undeleted and turned into a draft to allow for improvement, was improved and now has been moved back into articlespace. I've just declined a speedy deletion nomination because the current version is significantly different from what was discussed and deleted before. That doesn't imply there are no other reasons to delete the article, though; I haven't checked references or content beyond comparing them with the old version. Huon (talk) 12:23, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UNESCO World Heritage

Bfpage, thank you for your support. The Churches and Christian Sites in Nagasaki, Japan, were submitted on the Tentative List of the UNESCO World Heritage in 2007 and Adami was martyred in Nagasaki. I keep the Wikipedia notability guideline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoshisato (talk • contribs) 16:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yoshisato,

You have created a great article. I reviewed the article and found it perfectly acceptable. I don't have any notability issues with the Adami article. Are you sure that was a comment that I made? If I questioned the notabibilty of the article I would like to sincerely apologize and wish you the best.

bpage (talk) 17:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Butterfly count, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Migration. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have signed my guestbook!!

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Hello Bfpage/archive Recently you have signed my guestbook! Thank you very much for signing my guestbook. Cheers NickGibson3900 - Talk - Sign my Guestbook 02:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Combat Outpost San Juan

Thanks for the pat on the back. I created the page on OP San Juan because my comrades and I served there and it was an important operations outpost at that time during the Iraq war.

Unfortunately, I am having difficulty finding sources to use as reference which are not original. Do you have any suggestions as to where or how I might be able to better validate the history of this place? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyjumper77 (talk • contribs) 22:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did a quick google search and found this, except is probably a different point of view from the arab side:

http://www.matrixmasters.com/blog/iraqarchive/2006_10_01_archiveiraq.html Are you familiar with searching on Google?

bpage (talk) 23:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Monarch butterfly

This was not a violation of AWB rules. I did not believe the bold belongs, end of story. People do edit with AWB and not just run bots. Your original edit is also against accessibility rules.
We do not revert because of a violation of AWB rules. There has to be a valid reason. You specifically wanting a bold is a valid reason.
WP:Deviations of the accessibility rules clearly state that <b> is not allowed. Currently, there are no articles on Wikipedia with this tags.

Bgwhite (talk) 16:43, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bgwhite,

Thank you showing interest in the monarch butterfly article. I will certainly defer to you on this issue seeing that you have much more editing experience than I do. I don't know about any people that edit with just bots (does this really happen? If so, this is the first time I have read that this practice occurs - I'll just assume that I am clueless about this.) I certainly don't think you edit with just bots. I read your contributions log and know for a fact that you do not.

This is also the first time I have heard of accessibility concerns. I have read up on it since your post here and I understand now why you have this concern. Thank you bringing this to my attention, I learned something important from you. I think though you might mean 'accessibility guidelines' or 'accessibility practices' or some other issue settled upon by consensus. I write this because of what I read here: WP:IAR Therefore, I would like to suggest that I most certainly did not break any rules. In the spirit of good faith, I again defer to your well-intentioned comment about me breaking the rules.

Again, I defer to your opinion that the bold doesn't belong - your "...end of story" addendum might be a little harsh, or I may just be over-sensitive.

I reverted because I thought my edit was valid and added to the readability of the article. You cited AWB, I went to the article describing AWB guidelines and determined that my edit was insignificant/inconsequential. You also wrote: "You specifically wanting a bold is a valid reason." You probably meant the opposite, but I actually agree with your original statement. I really do believe that wanting a bold is a valid reason. If the use of bold is not used on any Wikipedia articles, then why does the option to use bold even exist?

I assume good faith on your part, I defer to you on this issue, and please assume good faith on my part.

The Best of Regards,

bpage (talk) 22:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did not edit via a bot. AWB is a tool. If the editor's name has the word "bot" in it, then it is a bot. I'm used to editing this way. If the edit is going to be complex, then I edit a browser. Some people edit via the Visual Editor, some a web browser and others a tool.

I think you misunderstood and I have trouble explaining things. There are two separate things going on.

One should never use <b>, but instead use '''. This is spelled out in accessibility rules.
I removed the bold entirely because I didn't think it belonged there. There is no rule about this. This is entirely an editor preference.

You were entirely in your right to revert because of the removal of the bold. I had no problem with this and even said up above, "You specifically wanting a bold is a valid reason." Yes, I meant removing bold entirely is a valid reason to revert. What I objected to was adding back in the <b> instead of using wikicode and saying what I did was a trivial edit against AWB rules. I see no foul or harm in any of this. Looks like there was confusion on both parts.

I do think you misunderstand IAR. IAR is not a reason to go against any rule. (I use rule, policy and guideline interchangeably). If there is a valid reason for needing to go around the rule, then it is acceptable. When it comes to accessibility, there are very, very few valid reasons. Going against an accessibility rule usually means somebody not being able to view/read information. Some of the other MOS rules are more easily "broken".

I do miss seeing Monarch butterflies. I haven't seen one in years. There used to be a ton of milkweed plants around and not there are none. I lived in the country and walking home from school, the side of the road was full of milkweed plants. What a beautiful creature. Bgwhite (talk) 00:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoy shifting gears with you here. I could write forever about the monarch. I am hoping to get access to JSTOR so that I can cite more recent journals and monographs with up-to-date information. I travelled to Mexico to the sanctuaries there filled with overwintering, dormant butterflies. The sight of millions of butterflies was completely overwhelming. Even, sitting here at my dining room table, I have my eyes on six crysalids that are soon to be adult monarch butterflies. I raised from eggs I found on the milkweed in my front yard. I have sent away to the University of Kansas to participate in their citizen-scientist program of tagging southbound, migrating monarchs. I hope this not considered original research.

Shifting again, do you assess articles and their importance?

Best Regards,

bpage (talk) 01:25, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rock Symphonies (David Garrett album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Garrett. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Bfpage/archive/March 2014 to December 2014. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by NickGibson3900 ^Talk ^{Sign my Guestbook} ^{Contributions} 07:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

I have expanded on what a previous user said. Sorry if you have already received a notification. NickGibson3900 ^Talk ^{Sign my Guestbook} ^{Contributions} 07:12, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your review of Shaikh Burhunuddin Post Graduate College

Please look at this again. There are no references. Fiddle Faddle 07:48, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Garbhagirha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Idol. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hazara virus may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

{{issues|{{cleanup-bare URLs|date=July 2014}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hazara virus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Antiviral. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Monarch butterfly migration) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Monarch butterfly migration, Bfpage!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I'm sure this page will look great when it's done.

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Talkback

Hello, Bfpage. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 00:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Monarch butterfly migration, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Stratification and Migrate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YGM - NODE+ page questions

Hi there,

I sent you an email concerning this page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NODE_(wireless_sensor)). Maybe you can help me out? Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MyishaC (talk • contribs) 15:47, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Myisha and thank you foe getting in touch with me. I checked my email and did not see anything from you for the past few days. I am sorry if that made you wait for a response. Are you referring to this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NODE_(wireless_sensor)&oldid=624816737 This looks like an archived page to me but I am sure that is probably not the case. Can you ask your question here on my talk page?

Bfpage |leave a message 19:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

I edited the Monarch page today and did something different with the references. This is how the more scholarly and Featured Articles do it. Give me a yell if you have questions. Bgwhite (talk) 07:25, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the only US butterfly I've seen in the UK! I've just got back from a couple of days in Norfolk, I'll look tomorrow Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:01, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bgwhite I like what you have done. I think we need to take discussions to the article's talk page. Someone has reverted some of your edits.

Bfpage |leave a message 17:49, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template for new users

Hello bfpage. Could I make a suggestion to improve your "Registering new users" template? It would be good to create wikilinks to the three bulleted pieces of guidance on "Five pillars", "first edit" and "first article", so that the new user can more easily access these guidance notes. Also, in the first line of the template, shouldn't it read "thank you" and not just "thank"?: Noyster (talk), 10:08, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My Recent Activities

Wow, it's been along time since I've logged into my account honestly. I'm currently finishing my degree in Uni so I haven't been active in what must a be a few years but I check back in on and off for nostalgia's sake; It's also nice to see my contributions haven't been forgotten. I honestly was hoping the Wikiproject would take off the ground without me but it seems that it is rather slow, hopefully in the near future I can pull some time together in-between work and my studies to get back into being a regular Wikipedian :) Bugboy52.4 ¦ =-= 17:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Haj Omran

Hi Bfpage; I've officially declined your request at the GOCE Requests page. I've however done some quick clean-up on this single-sentence stub and have added the geographical coordinates as you asked. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:30, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Haj Omran, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kurdish. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1978–79 Biathlon World Cup article - References are not dead links

For the 1977–78 Biathlon World Cup, 1978–79 Biathlon World Cup and 1979–80 Biathlon World Cup articles I have for the most part used the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten's online archive, as they are the most accessible news outlet which followed the BWC at that time. The refrences might seem like dead links, but they are not, one must, however, log into the archive via the Aftenpposten website, if one is not logged in, one will not get access to the source material. Thus, I can do little to improve the refrencing as there are few other sources out there, it would have to be similar news archives in Germany or perhaps Russia.

To your point on red links, I believe it is a bit to early to decide whether or not these athletes should be deemed not notable.Newtonseple (talk) 01:07, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying this information for me. I know that when journal articles from JSTOR are referenced, but you need a subscription to view them, the need to have a subscription is included as part of the reference. I understand now why I can't access the references but perhaps you could explain this in the reference itself. I would suggest that you just include the phrase 'subscription required' so that it doesn't appear as a dead link. You don't have to do this, but you may have other editors saying the same things I did.

I am glad to hear that the red links may be 'in process'. It makes me optimistic that this article will develop into something good.

Bfpage |leave a message 01:15, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Page move of Butterfly zoo

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Butterfly zoo a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Butterfly house (conservatory). This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. VeryCrocker (talk) 08:00, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article creation Butterfly House

Thank you so much for taking an interest in the 'Butteerfly farm/Butterfly house (conservatory}'. I was instructed once, probably by a well-meaning editor that the procedure for correctly 're-naming' an article was to create a new article with a new name, paste the content for the poorly named article into the new article, and delete the content from the old article into the new article and then ask for a speedy deletion of the old article....I am guessing right now, that this may not be the 'proper' way of doing things like this.

What is the next step in the 'proper' way of doing this? Please assume good faith on my part, my 'renaming' was meant to improve the content of the subject and to improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia. The bare urls were in the old article and I realize that they have to be re-formatted into the 'proper' way of citing references.

I have already begun to edit the new article and so I am not sure that merging would work in this instance. I've still have all of the information from the old article in the new article. It is probably in the best interest for all involved to know that I will continue to work on the new article to improve the citations and wikilinks.

Again, thank you for letting me know that there was a better way of renaming an article...at least I was bold!

Best Regards,

Bfpage |leave a message 13:36, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As as I understand it, editing at the new location shouldn't be a problem for whichever admin performs the history merge. The tricky cases are when the original article location develops a significant history of edits beyond the cut-and-paste move. In this case, that hasn't happened. Regards, VeryCrocker (talk) 14:37, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I want to resubmit my article created on Convergence Services. Below is my article -

Convergence Services

Convergence Services is privately held Indian based IT Company headquartered in Mumbai. The Company was founded by Vicky Jain and Priyanka Bhor in the year in 2008. Currently, Vicky serves as a CEO of the company. The company is a member of NASSCOM.

Products & Services uKnowva The Company offers cloud and on-premise based enterprise collaboration platform known as uKnowva. The product helps the organization in team communication, creating social Intranet, sharing of Knowledge, storing of documents and managing projects. The product is known for its high level of scalability and extensibility that allows user to integrate third-party applications and customize the platform as per their business requirements. The first version of uKnowva 2.1 was officially launched in 2012 and after the reviews from the customers the product underwent bug-fixing and improvements the current version of uKnowva 2.4 is available with additional features like Single Sign On, Direct Download Link, Document Version control, system information, User manager, Documents log, and improved user access control. It also has uKnowva app store that offers free and paid applications that can be integrated with the platform. uKnowva is released under open source GPL license. Convergence Support Desk The company offers Convergence Support Desk to maintain CMS based websites. User can purchase the plans that are available on their website and using ticket based support system get their issues resolved. Open Source CMS Convergence Services offers open source CMS website and application development on popular platforms like Joomla, Wordpress and Drupal.

Clients Capital First Bajaj Corp Exim Bank Wockhardt Foundation Bhatia Hospital Accelya Kale Solutions Ambuja Cement Foundation

Recognition 1. uKnowva Wins NASSCOM IP4BIZ at Cloud Connect 2013 2. Convergence Services rated as one of the top 25 web Design and Development Company in Mumbai 3. uKnowva was featured in Product Excellence Matrix in Nasscom and Frost & Sullivan Report

Here are the reference links:

http://yourstory.com/2012/07/know-about-uknowva-an-enterprise-collaboration-tool/ http://www.nextbigwhat.com/uknowva-enterprise-social-networking-collaboration-297/ http://product.nasscom.in/ip-biz-cloud-connect.php http://www.crunchbase.com/organization/convergence-it-services http://convergence-it-services.yspages.com/ http://memberdirectory.nasscom.in/mms_company_free_search/company/Convergence%20IT%20Services%20Pvt%20Ltd http://www.siliconindia.com/profiles/Vicky-Jain-P9UIzvd1.html http://www.newsvoir.com/release/uknowva-featured-in-nasscom-and-frost-sullivan-product-excellence-matrix-report-1338.html

Please help me at you earliest in creating and publishing this article. Many thanks in advance.WikiEditorP (talk) 12:49, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome template

Template:Bfpage/registering new users is encompassing all talk on a user's page within the blue frame. Can you please fix it so that it is not everlasting?--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 22:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will certainly change that immediately. Although I do have to admit I kind of like the blue even if extends throughout the whole talk page. I do think though that you are right.

Bfpage |leave a message 22:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Bfpage. You have new messages at Amortias's talk page.
Message added 23:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Amortias (T)(C) 23:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your note on my page

My question..? I think you notified the wrong editor. You probably meant to leave the note on User talk:Ane wiki, right? Bishonen | talk 13:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Interested in mentoring?

Hey Bfpage, this is Jethro, another host at the Teahouse. I'm actually developing a mentorship space with a small team called the Co-op. We're looking to create a space to develop more sustained relationships where editors can come in and get matched to a specific mentor based on how they are interested in contributing, and learn what they need to one-on-one. We're looking for volunteers to help mentor during our pilot phase. If you're interested, please feel free to sign up on our talk page, and ask any questions you might have about the space. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 21:51, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jethro, I am so flattered that you would ask me to do something like this. I think that I would like to cooperate in this project. I usually try to follow up on people who come to the Teahouse to see if their problem has been solved. So I think being involved in this project is really doing the same thing that already do.

Something humorous has happened in one of my attempts to mentor one of the editors who was having trouble with an article. This editor did not really understand the whole concept of Wikipedia not being a place to advertise her company. So I actually requested that the deleted article be put into my sandbox so that I could work on it and try to bring it up to standards. For some reason, that I don't completely understand. I seem to have edited the article into a form that is still unacceptable to two other editors. So it may get deleted anyway. But I've learned a lot through this experience.

Bfpage |leave a message 11:29, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest--I also noticed your practice of following up with editors and felt you'd be a good fit as a mentor! Feel free to feel sign up at the project page when you're ready. To speak to your anecdote, there have been a few occasions where I've tried to rescue articles up for deletion, but have not succeeded, despite that I thought the sourcing and notability of the topic was good enough (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anarchist stamp as an example). In retrospect, these were often borderline cases and keeping the article was probably not the best option. I agree that these kinds of experiences teach us a lot as editors! I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Foodology

That was just too much, and the author clearly has a conflict of interest (in fact I was close to blocking them per WP:ISU but I didn't want to pile it on). If you want the text back let me know. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Foodology

Hi, I'm Aytea. Bfpage, thanks for creating Foodology!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. It seems as though this could be a page of value. Good work with the citations. Needs more expansion of all sections.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Aytea (talk) 00:55, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Foodology for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Foodology is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foodology until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. the panda ₯’ 10:01, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Foodology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page App. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Bfpage:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:18, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Talkback

Hello, Bfpage. You have new messages at Northamerica1000's talk page.
Message added 11:59, 27 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:59, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Bfpage:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– Jim Carter 18:50, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Is it possible that we can forget any fellow Wikipedian? No. We can't, we value every single edit and you are certainly a valuable editor. As already Northamerica1000 noted on his talk page that Wikipedia at times is harsh but there are some people who really cares. Anyway, Happy halloween and have a nice day! Jim Carter 18:50, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Monarch

I made quite a few changes to the Monarch page – most of which were formatting. Could you be more specific about what changes concern you? I don't see anything glaringly wrong. I read the two articles referenced in regards to the subspecies and also consulted the funet.fi for the taxonomy section. Dger (talk) 16:14, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

I guess I was looking for another editor who seems like he/she knows what they're doing and would be able to help get the article up to featured status.

Bfpage |leave a message 20:03, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Bfpage:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– JudeccaXIII (talk) 19:00, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Bfpage/archive/March 2014 to December 2014. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Bfpage |leave a message 21:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

awesome — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junway690 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Deletion conversation

I hope you don't mind if I continue the discussion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delhaize Group here, Bfpage. I wanted to discuss my thoughts on AfD for COI edits and didn't want to derail the conversation there.

For me, the question here is whether or not we tear down the house (AfD) vs make some minor repairs (edit). If someone comes along and sprays graffiti or puts flyers up on the side of the house, we should just remove the graffiti and ads. There would be no reason to tear the house down for this. Since we can see who is actually performing each action, then we can notify that editor that what they did was not cool. Since we're assuming good faith, we're trying to educate them to Wikipedia's policies in the hope that they'll decide to stop spray painting and slapping up advertisements. If that doesn't work, the admins can be brought in to block those folks from being able to make those unsightly changes. We may also add maintenance tags/templates to the article to alert readers and editors. The templates include {{advert}} and {{COI}} for these instances.

Note: COI editors are not prohibited from editing. They are only strongly discouraged from editing. A resource I like to point COI editors to is WP:BFAQ or to a specific FAQ on that page (WP:BFAQ#EDIT, for example). Thanks, Stesmo (talk) 20:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much for your kind and patient reply. I guess we could explain it like this also: somebody puts up a refrigerator box in their backyard and then someone comes along and sprays graffiti all over it. Tearing down a cardboard box is not very significant. And the graffiti artists would be warned not to do it again. But then, the cardboard box would be thrown away and the graffiti artist may have all their cans of spray paint confiscated. It is easier to delete a small article with a conflict of interest and block the user from further editing than it is to fix a large notable article and warned or blocked the user from further editing. It was a good idea to take this discussion to my talk page. No one said that Wikipedia was fair. We just know that it's an encyclopedia. I have taken no offense over this whole thing. It has just oriented me to more nuances related to notability and conflict of interest. I have learned a lot.

Bfpage |leave a message 21:00, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad I haven't offended you. Speaking to the analogy, the cardboard box is more akin to how new articles are handled (usually via Speedy Delete's G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion or A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events)). In the case of Speedy Delete's G11, it's not about the size of the article, but that they "...are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic".

Since a more permanent structure exists with the article for Delhaize Group, we clean it up but keep the existing structure. We don't have to fundamentally rewrite the article, we can just revert the offending edits or remove text that doesn't meet Wikipedia's policies or standards. Now, if it turns out the house should not have been built in the first place (for example, the company is not WP:Notable, then perhaps the house should be torn down.Stesmo (talk) 21:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the misunderstandings. Please understand that I am new at editing Wikipedia and did not intent to violate any policy or standard practice. I am now trying to learn how to enter the discussion. Is this the correct venue? Thank you. BBLean — Preceding unsigned comment added by BBLean (talk • contribs) 20:50, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, BBLean. I think Bfpage and I are discussing the concepts of submitting a page to Articles for Deletion (AfD) on this page and not necessarily if Delhaize Group specifically should be kept or deleted. What you may be looking for is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delhaize Group. Though, you may note that the consensus is currently heading towards Keep. For discussing the Delhaize Group article in general (instead of just the AfD process), give Talk:Delhaize Group a shot. Or, if you have questions about my edits, my Talk page. Stesmo (talk) 21:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Book of Elchasai

Hello Bfpage, I replaced untrusted websites in the article Book of Elchasai. Please see the discussion on the article's talk page and my talk page as well under section Book of Elchasai. I tried to place reliable sources like adding the official Nag Hammadi Library website as reference #2 and a google book source to replace http://www.earlychristianwritings.com. I did my best to please user Ignocrates who reported me to RSN as you were in that discussion, but I think the editor just wants to oppress my progression on Wikipedia as an editor. And one question, what gives this editor the authority to determine the reliability of my sources? — [[User:|JudeccaXIII]] (talk) 03:48, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The new article has a lot of overlap with the parent article Elcesaites, so that should be kept in mind as the content is sorted out. With respect to my "oppression", please see my comments here. Anyway, thanks for helping out. Ignocrates (talk) 13:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings JudeccaXIII and Ignocrates,

This article has piqued my interest since I have had some studies on the Gnostic Gospels. I am familiar with the controversies of the Manicheans and the conflicts with the early church fathers. I have located some reliable references and respected journals which I will use to expand the article and hopefully make it better. I probably will not even have to get involved with the controversies or conflicts that have been occurring related to this article, since I have so much material that I can use that is specifically related to the book and not the person.

What often happens when I write an article, and I am no expert, during the initial writings I don't usually have the best of references...yet. As I continue researching the subject, I slowly replace the less reliable references with more reliable references. For example, when I began to write the article on Monarch butterfly migration, I used what someone referred to as a "flaky" source for some of my statements. The source that I used was a PBS documentary show. That seemed to upset another editor, but I told him that I will would soon replace the references to the documentary with more solid sources. And that is exactly what happened. I stopped using the PBS documentary as a source as new information became available to me. Just because something can be deleted doesn't mean it must be deleted. Leaving the references in the article while it is being developed may be a good thing. At this point because those references that are not considered very reliable may lead to citations to more reliable sources. This is a work in progress and I don't think we should try to get it in its final form just yet. If all the all of us research more references on this topic we may be able to come up with even more solid documentation. For example, here's an excellent website where English translations exist of ancient Christian and Jewish writings: http://www.ccel.org/ . I have only just begun to search this website to find more references to this apocryphal book. You both are welcome to search that website to of course.

If someone's goal is to simply be critical of references, I am not sure how that would help create a better article until better references are found. Hey, at least you have references. I am a new page patroller also and I can't tell you how many people write an article with absolutely no references at all. Even these new articles are given a lot of time to come up with references and they are not automatically deleted. What this says to me is that the development of reliable references is an ongoing project, and that we shouldn't probably hastily remove references.

Bfpage |leave a message 15:46, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the category of religious articles! I have learned the hard way to be impeccable with my edits whenever possible, and that includes the use of sources. That's partly a result of going through GAC and FAC reviews and learning what the reviewers expect in articles of that caliber. There's no point in doing something that you (or someone else) will have to clean up later. Short answer for JudeccaXIII: I learned how to determine the reliability of sources through hard experience, just like everyone else here. That said, perfect is the enemy of good, and it's better to begin with what you have available, knowing that an article can and will be subject to further improvements. Ignocrates (talk) 16:54, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am truly enjoying our discussion, but one of my main points is this: your references do not have to be impeccable when the article is still in the process of being written. I would never deny the experiences that you've had in writing these other articles to which you refer. You will find editors who will expect your references to be impeccable and excellent and perfect and from journals and other respected sources. But you may not find these right away. On Wikipedia, someone will always be cleaning up after you because they will think they need to edit something you have written. I clean up after people. Copy editors love to clean up after people. The purpose of putting tags on new articles is to have them cleaned up by other editors who want them cleaned up.

Long answer for JudeccaXIII: (speaking as a friendly Teahouse hostess) . I appreciate your contributions to this article and I thank you for leaving questions at the Teahouse. Please don't be discouraged as you write and look for references for this article. I'm sure you will be able to find even more information and more references, because this article has the potential for being good and for providing information for people who may need it. Please keep on editing. I look forward to seeing other articles that you create. Remember, you will run into all sorts of people here on Wikipedia and try not to take things personally (even though I sometimes do, myself). I assume good faith on your part and on everyone else who has contributed to this article.

Bfpage |leave a message 17:15, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Church History

Category:Church History, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Editor2020, Talk 03:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Book of Elchasai, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hippolytus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Bfpage. You have new messages at Avono's talk page.
Message added 13:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Avono♂ (talk) 13:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts about your welcome template

I've noted that you have created your own welcome template (User:Bfpage/registering new users). There are a few items about this template that you might want to address:

First and foremost, why do you have it at all? Wikipedia has multiple welcome templates (see Category:Welcome templates) that have been reviewed and improved by the community over the years. It seems that if you're going to use a welcome template at all, it is better to use one that has the community seal of approval.
If you insist on using your own template (and I can't say there is a policy or guideline against it), you should substitute it:
{{subst:User:Bfpage/Registering new users}}

otherwise, every time the user's talk page loads, it has to load your template page as well, which might cease to exist at some point, leading to a broken format.
Again, if you insist on using your own template, it should be stylistically and gramatically correct. Herewith some suggested changes:
1. The sentence
  I look forward to your editing and seeing you creating your first new article
  
  implies that a) only you care about this user (I should be we) and b) that the user is expected to create a new article. Very few users ever create an article, and there is no reason to place that expectation on them.
2. You are receiving this message from me -- well, yeah, who else would the message be from, other than the person sending the message?
3. From now on, you are an editor: someone who creates articles and does editing on other articles. Or not. Perhaps they'll never edit a thing. That's fine, and again, no need to add an expectation. But if you're going to retain this sentence, does editing is much simpler as just edits.
4. The best one of the places to ask questions if you need help, is the Wikipedia:Teahouse.
  I think you want that to read If you need help, one of the best places to ask is the Wikipedia:Teahouse.
5. It's here where you will find other, experienced editors that will answer your questions with courtesy and understanding.
  Should be: That is where you will find other, experienced editors who will answer your questions with courtesy and understanding.

I hope these suggestions are useful to you. Again, I think you should stick to the community-approved templates, but I suppose to each his own. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:53, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bfpage/sandbox/Vane-Wright

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. WWGB (talk) 12:41, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved this page into your userspace, which is the appropriate location for it; you had created it as an article in mainspace. I've removed the CSD tag; your previous content is available in the page history and can be reverted to if you wish. Yunshui ^雲 _水 14:04, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is my talk page and I have the ability to edit here, I have taken the opportunity to address nomination and the use of the template used to nominate this sandbox page for speedy deletion. This is not my first article, and the speedy deletion template and the editor nominationg this page for speedy deletion should have referenced that information from my log of contributions.I have been able and priveleged to be able to write many articles on Wikipedia. This is not my first article, nor was it even a draft of article. Again, the speedy deletion template and the editor who applied the template should have refered to that information from my log of pages created. I am familiar with the policies quoted about writing 'your first article and refer new editors and new users to this policy quite often....I have been editing for many years. I probably don't need a welcome message applied to my talk page. I have personally welcomed hundreds of new users and I always check their talk page for another welcome message. If the editor who nominated the page for deletion would have taken a very quick look at my talk page and seen the many messages left here, perhaps this editor would have realized that speedily applying a speedy deletion template with a welcome message probably is not needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfpage (talk • contribs) 15:09, November 6, 2014‎

I've taken the liberty of extracting your comments from WWGB's message above; it's generally good practice to respond after another user's message, rather than in it (see WP:TALK). I think it's worth pointing out that the deletion of the page was actually entirely correct; you had created an article consisting of page numbers and fairly unrelated statements. Had this been in a user sandbox, no-one would have batted an eyelid, but you ommitted the "User:" prefix and therefore created an actual article. Perhaps it would have been more prudent of WWGB to move it into your userspace for you, but he's under no obligation to do so; he took the actions that in his view were the best way of protecting the encyclopedia and was right to do so. If anyone has erred here, I'm afraid that it's you, by putting your page in the wrong namespace to begin with. Yunshui ^雲 _水 15:20, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Welcomer Award
		Thanks for welcoming so many new users. NG39 (Used to be NickGibson3900)^Talk 08:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I need your help!

Is it possible for us to create an article on a subject (as a stub article) and afterwards other contributors can add more Verifiable References to it? On contributor level I have seen many articles from months & years which are mentioned as kind of STUB in multiple categories - Entrepreneurs, Organisations, etc. I don't know much about it. If you can guide me on it, that will be a great help. Thanks & Regards Ndtv.news (talk) 10:04, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ndtv.news. You have asked a couple of questions. Yes, it is possible for you to create an article on the subject that would be created as a stub article. Sometimes though, no other editors will add verifiable references to it. From what I can tell, there are very few editors that actually do this. Another factor that is related to the creation of an article on the subject is that this new article is subject to being deleted.

If you create and submit an article and it has little content and no references, it is very likely to be deleted from Wikipedia by another editor who reviews your article. It is in your best interest to provide as many references as you possibly can even before your article appears on Wikipedia. The choice of your username implies that you have a conflict of interest in the creation of an article that would describe your organization. Will create the suspicion that you are using Wikipedia to promote your organization or commercial business. If this is not the case, or even if it is the case, make sure you reveal your Association to the organization on the new articles talk page. In addition, if you need time to improve the article after you created on Wikipedia, I would suggest that you insert a template on the top of your page that lets people know that it is a new page and that you are still looking for references. Here is what you insert at the top of your new article, page{{newpage}}. This will let the editors who are reviewing your new article that you are still working on the article and they will delay deleting your article. Even if they have problems with it. I do this all the time.

Here is what I would do if I were you:

I would change my username.
I would draft my article on the word processing document off of Wikipedia so that I can make sure that it is well written and referenced
I would then create a sandbox page in which I would cut and paste the article from my word processor so that I could see how it looks on Wikipedia.
I give my new sandbox page the title: User:Ndtv/sandbox/new article creating a user sandbox page will prevent the page from being deleted until it is ready to be published onto Wikipedia.
At this point, you can ask another editor, even me, to please review the new article that you have in your sandbox.

This is the procedure that I typically use when I create articles and has worked out very well for me. Please write back so that I know if this worked, and possibly there are other solutions to any anticipated problems.

: Bfpage |leave a message 11:36, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I request you to just review the article in my Sandbox: User:Ndtv.news/sandbox, and let me know about it. Thanks & Regards Ndtv.news (talk) 17:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

wikEd

Hi Bfpage, please use User talk:Cacycle/wikEd for wikEd comments, suggestions, and bug reports. Please also check the help page, especially User:Cacycle/wikEd help#wikEd main switch, version info, and error indicator (maybe you have just switched wikEd off using the main switch). Cacycle (talk) 11:06, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much.

Bfpage |leave a message 02:08, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Bfpage/archive/March 2014 to December 2014. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Bfpage |leave a message 13:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

rolfing

this appears to be a case where they have copied us. if you look at the source of the rolfing article you cite (view-source:http://www.playnlive.com/blog/rolfing/) it was uploaded in sept 2014 and our article predates that one by a long way. you will find that this happens a lot. Jytdog (talk) 14:29, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tucson Botanical Garden

Thanks for the heads up on my Talk Page! Since I'm not contacted very much, whenever I am, it's usually because someone wants to yell at me! My parents and brother moved to Tucson a number of years ago, which is why I read the Tucson listing from time to time. I'll check out what you did on this listing! Asc85 (talk) 13:31, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dictionary Of The $oul

I need someone to take care of the wiki-article about it. Please see: userpage of user user:DictionaryOfThe$oul DictionaryOfThe$oul (talk) 10:59, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

About Hsinchu Dong Yuan Elementary School

OK. I just came English Wikipedia, so I didn't understand the rules of here very much. You can delete the article, I will do better for the wiki.--T Gordon Cheng (talk) 11:04, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I like to write article, so I won't give up, of course. I will write new articles in the future!--T Gordon Cheng (talk) 11:36, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Lucia!

Happy Saint Lucia's day!

"Good Morning" Bfpage:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia!
13 December is the day when Swedes perplex the rest of the world by showing up way too early in the morning dressed in white tunics, candles in their hair, singing and bringing saffron buns and breakfast in bed to nice people. Hope you have a bright day!
– w.carter-Talk 00:30, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank

Thank you for the nice note - I always wondered why swedish girls had candle wax in their hair. Bfpage |leave a message 11:58, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 18 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Monarch butterfly page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Monarch Butterfly

See Talk:Monarch_butterfly#Article_Size_and_Images. -- RM 02:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seasonal Greets!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!!

Hello Bfpage, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015.
Happy editing,
JudeccaXIII (talk) 21:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Happy New Year Bfpage!

Happy New Year!

Bfpage,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.
Sent using Mass message sender. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from User:Northamerica1000/Mailing list.