User talk:CaroleHenson/Archive 5

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

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

→

Working out the details at Wikipedia:Today's article for improvement

The RFC for TAFI is nearing it's conclusion, and it's time to hammer out the details over at the project's talk page. There are several details of the project that would do well with wider input and participation, such as the article nomination and selection process, the amount and type of articles displayed, the implementation on the main page and other things. I would like to invite you to comment there if you continue to be interested in TAFI's development. --Nick Penguin_(contribs) 02:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Hope you are well! :D RexRowan Talk 21:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I hope you are, too! How is your new home?--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:09, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

The new house is very neat, 3 bedroom semi detached with front and back garden. Hope you are having a relaxing Sunday, hugs and smile! :D --RexRowan Talk 13:05, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I am actually taking a trip along the Santa Fe Trail this weekend and trying to keep warm. I hope you're having a lovely Sunday, too!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Morning Carole, how was your trip? :D --RexRowan Talk 09:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Great thanks! It was one of those magical trips where everything went very well - far better than I could have expected. I everything is going well for you. How are your courses going?--CaroleHenson (talk) 09:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

So nice to relax and enjoy a nice trip! I missed you very much! I was chosen to take an online course on copyright laws from Harvard Law School, I hope after the course I can be more helpful around here :D --RexRowan Talk 09:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for cleaning up the articles I wrote or partly wrote. Hugs! :D --RexRowan Talk 10:04, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, your course sounds interesting - I hope you enjoyed it. Regarding the editing - I haven't been on in a long time so I ran the AWB editor against everything in my watchlist. Glad I could be of help. It's good to be chatting with you again!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

the birds, orphans and fools barnstar

		The WikiProject Film Award
		I, k kisses, hereby award CaroleHenson the WikiProject Film Award for his/her valued contributions to WikiProject Film. for Birds, Orphans and Fools Awarded 20:47, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, that was a lovely surprise!--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:08, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code that was emailed to you.
To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 18:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Excellent! Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The Conjurer (painting)

Dear editor: I see that you've worked on this article. Perhaps you know the answer to my being lost in regards to the last part of the paragraph within the article that reads,

The use of animals support the message of the painting. The owl from the basket at the conjurer's waist signifies his intelligence. Frogs jumping out of the mouth of the central character represent the extent to which the victim let go of reason and gave in to animalistic impulses, and the white stork in the window.

I see the stork in the engraving version, but the article's text seems to "dangle" in its explanation. Any idea what was meant? FeatherPluma (talk) 04:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I have no idea what that meant. For the moment, I removed that dangling part of the sentence which looks to have been added by User:Lotje. I'll scout around a little, though, and see if I can find an explanation and source. Thanks for catching that.--CaroleHenson (talk) 05:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. There might be some interesting symbolic significance. Wonder why it's not in the painting, just the engraving. Take care. FeatherPluma (talk) 03:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

TAFI

Hello,
In the past few days, Today's Articles for Improvement has gone through many changes.

We have modified the process for adding Nominations, which now uses a template/table format and requires only 3 supports for an article to be selected.
There is now a Holding Area, where articles are kept for discussion before being selected for a particular date.
The TAFI schedule now involves adding 10 articles weekly, chosen from a variety of topics.
We now have an Accomplishments page where we will be highlighting our older TAFI articles which have now become quality articles on the Wikipedia.

The Project is almost ready to hit the Main Page, where it will be occupying a section just below "Did you Know" section. Three article from the weekly batch of 7 will be displayed randomly at the main page, the format of which can be seen at the Main Page sandbox. There is also an ongoing discussion at the Main page talk over the final details before we can go forward with the Main Page.

If you have any ideas to discuss with everyone else, please visit the TAFI Talk Page and join in on the ongoing discussions there. You are also invited to add new nominations, and comment and suport on the current ones at the Nominations page. You can also help by helping in the discussions at the Holding Area.

Above all, please do not forget to improve our current Today's Articles for Improvement

Thank you and hoping to have some productive work from you at the Project,
TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
(From the TAFI team)

ITN Credit

On 6 April 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2013 Thane building collapse, which you substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 09:40, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Good job on Thane incident article. Numancia (talk) 09:36, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your work on 2013 Thane building collapse article. Samuelled (talk) 10:09, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

What a nice surprise! Thanks both of you!--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguator's Barnstar for Rickshaw

		The Disambiguator's Barnstar
		The Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians who are prolific disambiguators. This award is normally for fixing disambiguation links, but you deserve it for fixing a whole bunch of links at once with your excellent work turning Rickshaw into an article. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:18, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that was really nice of you!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Underlinked

Would you please suggest a few links?[1] Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:46, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for asking the question! Of the edits from the automated browser - underlinked, until now - hasn't been one I check closely because it didn't seem to be one that came up a lot. I'll check closer now. You had already had a pretty good number of links, but I added a few more. Good work!--CaroleHenson (talk) 13:53, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Isn't providing links for actor, dancer, writer overlinking ? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 13:58, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

That's funny! It's sometimes hard to find the right balance - if you prefer to unlink those, go for it!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:05, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh! Don't worry! It is harmless, but I've encountered blokes who've been fussy about such things.[2] Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:25, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, my goodness! I am sorry that there was such a major fuss! I must tell you User:Sitush is an amazing experienced editor and I learned a lot from him. I don't know enough about your situation to comment, other than to say: My approach is to try and sent context right off the bat on a biography by stating where the person is from in the first part of the intro. I appreciate your patience on working through underlinking - which I think may have been a false start from AWB, like I said from now on I'll watch that more carefully rather than quickly accepting the WP:AWB underlink tags.--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:57, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Never mind, it takes all types. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:57, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Thanks CaroleHenson for your suggestions . As i am new to wikipedia , i am trying to learn the same . I appreciate your support . I have few news paper cuttings to support the death date of Harbans bhalla . how can i upload the same ? pl guide.

Punjabi university website link is also there as it is a famour university in India, punjab, patiala. thanks once again . looking for more support.  Bhallamonish (talk) 00:10, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks! That was nice of you! Sure, I'll be happy to help out! I'm not sure what you mean about how to update the info -- there's a really cool tool called "Prove it" that makes adding references easy

Or you could fill in this template: <ref>{{ cite news | title= | publisher= | date= | author= | url= (enter url if you have one) | accessdate= (enter current date) }}</ref>

See: Template:cite news - or there are examples in the article in edit mode.

Sounds great that you've got newspaper clippings for Harbans Bhalla's death - and it sounds like info about the University publishing his material.--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:37, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Evolutionary psychology of language

The recently created page Evolutionary psychology of language, to which you have contributed, seems to cover a topic quite similar to that of Origin of language and may constitute a content fork. Please see my comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics#Evolutionary psychology of language and contribute your opinions to that discussion. Cnilep (talk) 03:34, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Benson

Dear Carole, Thanks for your openness about changes to the list of works page. You had done a wonderful job. I've added links to some other images, but I have never added images to Wikipedia myself, so I'll leave it to somebody else. I used to edit with a username but I found the debates exhausting. I now only edit pages where there aren't debates. S.

My pleasure. You did a wonderful job! I hope you got the Benson Barnstar that I sent you. When I post to an IP users address, I'm never sure if it's going into a black hole.--CaroleHenson (talk) 02:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

George Maxwell Randall

Thanks for your helpful assistance with restructuring and citations for this article. I can understand why genealogical websites might not be considered reliable resources by Wikipedia, although I do believe much legitimate research goes into them. I'm going to add a citation from a separate publication to help clarify about how the multiple jurisdictions works. As far as using more recent publication dates, I'm not sure I'm in agreement with you on that. I would think older publications would be closer to the original source. Newer publications more than likely base their facts on previously published information (especially in the areas of history and biography), even if their process of editing and verification is more advanced than older publications. Is there a Wikipedia style page that discusses a preference for newer publications that might provide me with some helpful guidelines? Janus532 (talk) 16:34, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I understand your point about genealogical work - I've written four genealogical books for our family. {In the beginning I got held up by uncited information on personal websites.) When someone here at Wikipedia that I couldn't use genealogical sources, it was a bit of an adjustment regarding use of published genealogical books, but I get it.

Regarding the age of source material, that was an adjustment for me, too! I cannot find the info on the help page regarding age of the sources, but I'll keep looking. I can give you an example, though. Older sources can be closer to the information, but with the lack of information sharing that we have today it could also be "tunnel vision", subject to past tendencies to "shine a good light" on the people, and without consideration of other material. This was brought home strikingly when I did a series of articles about Abraham Lincoln's mother, Nancy Lincoln, and other family members. There were historians in the 20th century who were able to dig into the records from numerous places and sort out the story. The earliest sources were not reliable - and there was a "George Washington slept here" kind of phenomenon of people that wanted to lay claim to who and where Lincoln's mother was and where she came from. I hope that makes sense. I'll keep looking for the bit about use of newer sources, though.

Keep up the great work!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, those are helpful thoughts to hear. I'm just afraid that, regarding someone like Bishop Randall, there may not really be any newer publications which mention him, outside of perhaps a diocesan history. That said, I do still believe him to be notable and worthy of inclusion here. Besides, Batterson's work (as well as a similar one by William S. Perry) seems to be the chief biographical source of information on Episcopal bishops in the 19th century. Janus532 (talk) 17:06, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

[Edit conflict]

On the noticeboards there is tons of commentary about the use of newer sources:

1) Because historical sources are "notoriously" inaccurate and newer sources benefit from historians who have sorted out material from numerous sources.

2) The sources are often close to the situation, making them a "Primary source". The cited policy on the noticeboards was Wikipedia:No original research - which speaks to the use of primary sources.

3) If using old sources (like more than 100 years old), it's recommended that there's a qualifier that "Historical author" (name).... provided the information.

So, generally that's the scoop. In this case, I don't think it's likely that the source is inaccurate, based upon the nature of the book, but it's better to use a newer source - or back up older sources when you can. I hope that helps.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I agree with what you're saying. I'll try to see if I can find some newer sources; If I find them, I'll add a "Further reading" section with the information for you or anyone else that's interested to use as sources for citations. If not, I think the article should stand, perhaps with a comment about "Historical author".--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for all the helpful information. That does make sense. I found a published source (again old) that listed his parents and wife in a biographical entry. That should help with those citations for now. Janus532 (talk) 17:50, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Cool! I found a reprint of Banyard's book from 2003 - and two books that were printed in the last 20 or so years. (In the "Other" section of Further reading). There's more publications of Randalls - and more books, most of which seem to be older. If you're interested, I'm using: to find the books and to make the citations. All the best.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:56, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

St Hilary, Cornwall

If you can remember so far back as writing up the lives of Annie Walke and Bernard Walke: the German WP article on St Hilary has a paragraph about the same subject. Perhaps someone who knows German could expand on this; the broadcast plays which Bernard Walke wrote might get mentioned as well because of their importance in early radio history. (If this makes no sense: it is now the middle of the night in England.)--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 02:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I hope you're doing well!

I wish I was (ignore that)

Yep, I am a little confused, but that's par for the course at times for me.

My feeling is that the confusion can be reduced

This St Hilary article is a short article that roughly translated, in one blob, is: "St Hilary is a village and a municipality in the former Penwith District of Cornwall in England. The local church, built in the Perpendicular style, has a bell tower from the 13th Century. The rest of the church, which was heavily damaged in a fire in 1853, rebuilt in 1855 and constructed by William White. It is dedicated to St. Hilary of Poitiers. The community was very well known in the 1930s as a radical Protestants invaded the church, where the stolen furnishings or those destroyed. The furniture was the local priest Bernard Walke installed previously. In the vicinity of St Hilary are copper and tin mines as the Penberthy Croft Mine, to 1840 in the copper-tin ores were mined. This is the type locality of the rare mineral Bayldonit. [1]"

"St Hilary is a village and a municipality in the former Penwith District of Cornwall in England.((Penwith needs amending: this "Penwith District" only existed until March 2009 ??)) The local church, built in the Perpendicular style, has a bell tower from the 13th Century. The rest of the church, which was heavily damaged in a fire in 1853, was rebuilt in 1855 and the architect was William White. It is dedicated to St. Hilary of Poitiers. The community was very well known in the 1930s as a group of radical Protestants invaded the church, where they stole some furnishings and destroyed others. The local priest Bernard Walke had been responsible for installing this furniture. In the vicinity of St Hilary are copper and tin mines such as Penberthy Croft Mine, to 1840 in the copper-tin ores were mined.{cannot understand this: by the time of Bernard Walke's ministry most of the mines were disused} This is the type locality of the rare mineral Bayldonite. [1]" The grammar of German can be very hard because the sentences go in what seems to be the wrong order: this paragraph shows where improvement might be needed I think.

The disambig page Hilary Church has St. Hilary Church (Cornwall) as a red link.

that could be improved, maybe

There's a Bernhard Walke, but he's an engineer.

we can leave him out; not competent in that field

Did you mean German?

Oh, or did you mean to translate the St Hilary Church article from English to German. Ahhh! If that's the case, I cannot help out. I could use translate.google to get close, but that's all it would be, some who knew German would need to sort out the grammar, etc. Is that what you meant, though?--CaroleHenson (talk) 02:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

neither of us knows enough German to improve that article; the German Wikipedia account of St Hilary might need to be different from the English one. Please do not spend any time with Google automatic translation; so it is for someone bilingual in English and German to do when they feel like it.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 21:58, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good! From your comment in the edit summary... I didn't know that Judy Collins was from Denver! That was a fun note! She absolutely wrote some great - and sometimes pretty eclectic songs - I just knew of her background starting in New York. Fun!--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

That is surprising: but many years ago I got a few of her recordings & the songbook she compiled. At one time my idea of Denver would have been a fairly large city somewhere in Colorado east of the Rocky Mtns.

Could I suggest another area where your talents could be applied: if you look at Homemaker; Housewife; Housekeeping; Domestic economy. As a man I would only get into controversy over there. (The German article Hauswirtschaft seems of a higher quality.) If there was a collaborator from the German end even better. // "Eclectic" is good; "folk music" does not mean quite the same thing in the United States as it does in Europe. "Its all folk music I guess; leastways I never heard a horse sing."--Louis Armstrong--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 08:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I've been finishing some Boston African American Community before the Civil War articles and starting some Manitou Springs articles at the moment. It's something I'll keep in mind, though. I'm not so sure that it's wrong for a man to write about women - or that we have to be the same race, gender to do a subject justice. But I guess since "housewife" can be a loaded subject I can see your point.

Love the Louis Armstrong quote! I can picture him saying it.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:09, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

"I'm not so sure that it's wrong for a man to write about women - or that we have to be the same race, gender to do a subject justice.": I agree wholeheartedly; but anything that is done around there is at risk from getting undone by a member of WP Gender Studies; WP Feminism; WP Women's history; LGBT project &c. if not now at some future time. (A good example of what it could be like English royal mistress). Carole, You are doing good work wherever you contribute: I hope our paths cross again.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk)

Thanks, that's very sweet of you -- same to you! The English royal mistress article could be very interesting to work on... I'll check it out in a few days.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:10, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

From my own perspective (and I am editing anonymously) the royal mistress / royal favourite concept is so difficult partly because the medieval worldview and the late modern worldview differ so much; and there are related articles for the royalty of other countries. Thank you for the kind words in return. The WikiProjects where I am involved are not very good at noticing the good work that is being done and awarding Barnstars and DYKs.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 09:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Hi Carole,

My Copyright course is going to finish next week! I am now doing some revision, how are you doing? Be good, keep smiling and talk soon!

RexRowan Talk 16:43, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, so good to hear from you - and such exceptional timing. It's been a bit rough, but coming around. It's so funny you sent me a kitten, though, my little cat - I call baby cat 'cause she's so tiny, returned today after about a week. She's never been gone for more than an hour or so and I thought she had died. And your note was sent just about the time she returned. How is that for coincidental?

I hope your class went well - and you're still enjoying your new home.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:04, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow, really? That is awesome! I think I have magical powers, I am a Sunday baby. Yes, the weather here is great and we had some BBQ! :D --RexRowan Talk 09:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Wonderful! I am glad you had a good time!--CaroleHenson (talk) 13:26, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

St James the Great East St Kilda

Hello again, This Australian church has some notable stained glass windows (including one referring to a criminal case). This is only a suggestion to you and has no urgency about it. (Manchester today has what the Germans call Donner und Blitzen.) Bernard Walke: there are still in 20 Years at St Hilary some topics well worth including like the reception of the radio dramas broadcast from the church of St Hilary. The mining history of the parish could be expanded as some of the copper mined in the district was turned into Newlyn copperware by local workmen. Bernard Walke's interest in animals, particular donkeys, might be expanded a little. Maybe his article is getting to the point of being too long for the significance of its subject. --Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 14:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Somethings definitely to think about. I'm in the midst of something right now, but these could be interesting a bit later. Nice to hear from you. I hope you're doing well!--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

We need not hurry to do this; perhaps the Australian WP members will do more for St Kilda East. St James the Great has a blessing of the animals service which reminded me of Bernard Walke whose respect and love for donkeys and horses are shown in his book. There is only so much time in each day and many other activities deserve attention.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 01:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok, sounds good!--CaroleHenson (talk) 02:58, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Content Creativity Barnstar
		For creating Jerome B. Wheeler, which we sorely needed. — Daniel Case (talk) 17:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Having created/expanded most of those Aspen NRHP articles, I had realized that Wheeler probably deserved his own article, and while I was going to do it I never got around to it. Thanks!

There's probably a lot of better source material on his bio in one of the sources I used for Wheeler–Stallard House if you want to expand it. Daniel Case (talk) 17:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I see that you also used Stacey Smith's paper for the bulk of the article about the Wheeler-Stallard House article. She found an incredible amount of detail! I'll check out the other sources as well. And, I've got some good biographical information from a nomination form for Wheeler Bank in Manitou Springs. Much appreciated, Daniel!--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome! Good luck! Daniel Case (talk) 00:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Diligence

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For contributions to North American history and prehistory.

Thank you so much for all your work. We really appreciate your efforts. Buaidh 14:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, that was nice of you and is pleasant start to the day.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Delia Webster

Thank you for writing the Delia Webster article. I bought a couple of books about her shortly after I wrote the Calvin Fairbank article (which still needs inline citations), but I didn't give top priority to writing an article about her. I think I hesitated because some of the facts about her, including the date and place of her death, were disputed. In any case, she was an important figure in the anti-slavery movement and clearly deserves an article. -- Cuppysfriend (talk) 16:16, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure. She sure had a lot of fortitude! It looks like I didn't find anything about different dates and places of death - or I would have noted it. What other information do you have about dates and places of death?--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll have to dig out the reference books. I'm going on memory. It must have been Frances K. Eisan's Delia Webster: Saint or Demon? (Pace Univ. Press, 1998) p. 167, which I just now looked up on Google Books. At any rate, Webster was more than a tad on the mysterious side, wasn't she? --Cuppysfriend (talk) 22:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, she sure was! She must have been a very unusual woman for her time - and brave by today's standards, too! I'm guessing that there's much more to the story about her.--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:06, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

David Harding (finance)

Hello Carole, thank you so much for making those edits based on my suggestions. I've just followed up with a reply hoping to make a few modifications; would you mind taking a look at it again? (Here's a link back to that discussion thread.) Thanks again! WWB Too (Talk · COI) 18:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! I've agreed with your changes and took care of them.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:49, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much! By the way, if you might have any more time, I've just posted a follow-up note relating to apparent typos and small factual errors. If you might have a chance to look at those, I'd be very appreciative—but you've been helpful enough, so if busy, I can ask around! Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 20:53, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I added comments to the talk page.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Cool, thanks very much. Let me see what I can do about finding answers to your two questions, and I'll follow up early next week. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 01:10, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm still working on research for the current discussion, although I just realized one of my suggestions from the last round didn't quite go in right. I've explained briefly in that previous thread; no big rush, but when you have a moment to look at that, let me know. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 15:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello again, Carole! Just posted a response to your two open questions on the Harding Talk page, here. Let me know if you have any other questions, and I'll keep an eye on that page. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 20:30, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:43, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Tremendous. On first glance, looks good. On Monday I'll pull out the fine-toothed comb, but regardless I really appreciate your help on this. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 06:30, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Carole! As promised I've looked carefully over the changes and everything looks good, except for one small typo in the introduction that I had overlooked until now. Can you take a look at my latest reply on the Harding Talk page when you have a little time? Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 15:02, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Medicinema

Hi. Thank you for your assistance in the page of Medicinema. I like your ideas. We'll work on it together and some of the other pages if you like. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnimationWhiz133 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure, it would be my pleasure! It was fun getting to know about MediCinema. Thanks so much for bringing it to Wikipedia.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:32, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Do you have any other ideas for either Medicinema or any other page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnimationWhiz133 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I put down all the ideas I could think of in the Medicinema article -- and added some sources to take a look at as a starting point. Do any of those sound interesting to you to explore?

Psycho cinema might be an interesting topic to explore - that could be linked to the MediCinema and Cinematherapy articles. Here's a link that shows how they identify helpful movies based upon individual's situations http://www.fit.edu/caps/cinema.php#domestic. Does that sound of interest?

One tip for you, if you would add: --~~~~ after your posting, Wikipedia will add your name and timestamp. That way we know who posted a message and when (without someone having to come behind and add the signature back in).--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I would love to look at Pyscho cinema. --AnimationWhiz133 (talk) 15:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Hunting for embedded outlines

While you are reading or browsing Wikipedia articles, please...

...keep a lookout for outlines embedded in articles.

I've run across a number of these over the years. One example is the Outline of fencing, which used to be part of the fencing article.

If you know about or spot any structured general topics lists in articles, please let me know (on my talk page).

Another thing you might find are articles that are comprised mostly of lists (without "Outline of" or "List of" being in the article's title). If you come across any of these, please report them to me on my talk page. I'd sure like to take a look at them.

Happy hunting.

I look forward to "hearing" from you (on my talk page). Sincerely, The Transhumanist 08:07, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Cinema therapy

Hello, CaroleHenson, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on Cinema therapy, appears to be directly copied from http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Cinema+Therapy. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Cinema therapy if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 06:06, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I have responded on your talk page and the article's talk page. It's not a copyright violation if it's quoted.--CaroleHenson (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Bindy Johal

Just saw your cite fixes....could you please review the contents of the infobox; I think some are spurious, and it needs reformatting anyway? I'm swamped, but did post a notice about this on the WP:BIO talkpage a moment ago.Skookum1 (talk) 04:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, yes, I saw your comments on the WP:Bio page - and I thought I'd start with citations first and then start working on content from there. I will definitely check out all the info in the article. Thanks for the heads up about it!--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:24, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Karkoc

Hello CH. Did you delete the birth date point unintentionally? You said "copy edit" in your summary, but in actuality deleted the item sourced from the video report. Surely if you think the birthplace thing should go in there, so should the birth date thing? -- Y not? 22:12, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

As I said in the comments, the print material just mentions year of birth. Videos are not generally considered a reliable source, print is much better. I am trying to edit what you've put in to ensure that it matches the source material, but thanks for taking out "village" for Lutsk. That was an accident.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, I was also confused by the entry of one month and day - and an update to another month and day.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I had a brainfart about the dates Videos are perfectly fine sources. The video thing didn't stop you from pointing out Horodok! I also didn't like edit about his notable subordinates. It feels like you're intentionally trying to cast doubt on his Naziness and suppress as many elements of the article as you can. Why? -- Y not? 00:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments are posted at Talk:Michael Karkoc--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	For all your help on David Harding (finance), especially fielding my detailed follow-ups with amity and aplomb, thank you so much! WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:49, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! Thank you for making sure the information was correct!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:00, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Alex Castellanos

Hi Carole, thanks again for looking at my draft for Alex Castellanos. I've been working through your comments and before I update the draft I have just a few questions for you. I've replied to your feedback on the draft's Talk page but just wanted to ping you here in case it's not on your watchlist. Can you take a look when you have a moment? Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, will do. And, I can start moving over the sections that are already reviewed and good to go.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Carole, sorry I wasn't able to respond yesterday and thanks so much for your help on this article. It looks really great and I appreciate the work you put in checking the sources. For the couple of pieces of info tagged "citation needed" I've found sources, and given the full citation details on the draft's Talk page, following your last comments there. Once those are added, I'll be all set and think that the article is in fantastic shape! Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 13:00, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Done My pleasure! Thanks for doing such a great, thorough job!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:22, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again! The article looks wonderful. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 18:56, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Carole, I am so sorry to be back to ask another favor of you: Mr. Castellanos has just pointed out that I made an error in the introduction of the article, he is still a partner at National Media, however I had written "former partner". As there are no sources that he left National Media Inc (this was my incorrect inference based on him founding Purple Strategies), would you mind removing "former" from the intro? Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 21:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Done I didn't catch that either.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:24, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for making the edit, and apologies again for not having caught that earlier. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 17:51, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Kevin Booth

Hi. Just wanted to comment on your work on the Kevin Booth article. A text book example of how to bring an article up to scratch. I wish I was as thorough. Only thing I'd question would be the IMDb cites. I know opinion is divided, but I'm not keen on using it. But an admirable job! --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:47, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I definitely see your point on IMdB - I have used it as a source for list of films, etc. - but I have never used it as a source for the summary information. If you'd like, I'd be happy to find a substitute source for the info that came from the summary. (I noted in the comments that it came from Kevin Booth when I edited the info to draw attention.)

I personally don't have a problem with taking lists of works from IMdB. Does that concern you?

And, thanks, that was nice to hear today!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:17, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!

for your bold clean-up of the Nepotism article. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 16:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:27, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Philosophy of Architecture

Dear Carole Henson! Thank you very much for attention to the article "Philosophy of Architecture"! I am new here, and probably do not understand rules. You placed many request for citation in this article, and I'm going to add them with time. But some paragraphs already had a reference inside them. Like there:

"As noted by C. Harris (K. Harries) in the framework of classical aesthetics of Kant and Baumgarten, architecture has dubious reputation, because of its relations with technical and engineering problems, what was then considered as incongruous with the ideal of "pure art.""

in this case I almost sure that I should use a direct reference to article, though it was in a list of litreture, and I was not completly sure, now I add it!

or there

"Lyotard believes that postmodern architects have nothing to do with Postmodernism (as noted by R. Martin),[2] and, as Lyotard puts it in his article, "The answer to the question: what is postmodernism?" architectes throw away the project of Bauhaus, splashing out functionalism along with the water and the child, who there is an aesthetic experiment itself.[citation needed]"

Last case most complicated for me, because it seems, that paragraph have two reference (to the reasercher who mensioned this opinion and to a book, where anyone can find this opinion). Or there is a rule, that author should place reference in the end of a paragraph? If it so, please direct my attention towards it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Konstantin.V.Azarov (talk • contribs) 10:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

sorry, I also dorget to sign Konstantin.V.Azarov (talk) 10:08, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

Welcome - and congratulations for starting an ambitious topic!

Yes, the citations need to go at the end of the sentence or groups of sentences that apply. When the article says "Lyotard believes" - that could come from an article written by Lyotard, a book that discusses his beliefs, etc. The only way to tell where it actually came from is to have citations in the appropriate places. Within a paragraph there may be several citations at the end of sentences, if the material comes from different places.

I hope that helps!

I'll be around in several hours from now and can check in with you then. Glad that you're here!--CaroleHenson (talk) 10:15, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much I will put a citation at the end of paragraphs!

Sorry, I was not ready for such operative response! Unfortunatly I left after sent my message.

I`m afraid that my problem with last example is a bit more complicated: not just "Lyotard believes" but "Lyotard believes that postmodern architects have nothing to do with Postmodernism (as noted by R. Martin),[2] and, as Lyotard puts it in his article, "The answer to the question: what is postmodernism? ". Now I almost sure, that an additional quotation (at the end of this paragraph) will not cause a problem. According to rules more usual for me, it will be a kind of excess. But if it is ok - I will be most eager to put it, it is not a problem!

I will add all quotations during few days (actually I already started to do this!) Konstantin.V.Azarov (talk) 16:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I understand what the problem is. Is it that 2 citations are needed for the sentences?

I also don't understand "The answer to the question: what is postmodernism?".--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Name of the article is probably wrong! just realzed, that I used my own translation here, found propper variant!^[1] For me, problem there, that if I add a quotation to the paragraph which already had it in implicit form (or inderect quotation, like in my last example - mention of specific author`s opinion in specific article). If after inderect quotation I put direct quotation (like this: author A believes B in article C ^[2] (I probably did something wrong, quotation here is: ref author A. Article C // journal D. year X /ref)) my editor in Russia will ask me to chose one of this two references.

Shortly, my question was: is it okey in Wikipedia to use such construction: author A believes B in article C ^[3] (I probably did something wrong again, quotation here is: ref author A. Article C // journal D. year X /ref, I my self cant see it))? Konstantin.V.Azarov (talk) 03:28, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah, you don't need to add the article name, it's in the citation.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

So, no implicit quotation then? Konstantin.V.Azarov (talk) 07:06, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm lost on "no implicit quotation". Maybe I need to back up to your example.

Regarding: author A believes B in article C"

You may say "author A believes B"

You may say "B" - if is a fact or a common belief

Yoy may say author A believes B in article C" if you like, it just gets a little wordy and the article name will be in the citation. If it's a ground-breaking article, though, you may want to mention the article name.

I hope that helps!--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I am afraid implicit quotation maybe not ideal name for this, I probably meant implicit reference (sorry!)! When author reference somethink indirectly (like in scheme author A believes B in article C - and then no reference to a concrete publication (so no year, journal, page - if author is widely known, and all knew article was published academically, just anyone can find it this article) not like - A believes B (then reference: A. Article C // Journal Z. pp. 999.) Sometime it is more usefull, not just more wordly. For example, if idea (which is quoted) is main idea of article, so, you cant help reader by sending him to concrete page. Or if name of article is enough to proof it hold such point of view. Konstantin.V.Azarov (talk) 04:06, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Happy to help. I am wondering if you're used to writing scholarly or technical papers where that kind of attribution is necessary. Here you can make the point, without having to name the author or page number. I'll check the article, though, to see how this might translate.--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:24, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Annery, Monkleigh

I'm not happy with your edits to this article. An estate is not "a house" as you imply in your new intro. What do you mean by "The Annery"? I despair. You've done some superficial research and waded right in! All the ISBN's are great, but your text is embarassingly awful and naive. Please tell me where Annery was mentioned in the Domesday Book. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 19:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC))

I have responded on the Talk:Annery, Monkleigh talk page.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

A Google scan request

Hi Carole! Regarding Heanton Satchville, etc., I'd love it if you could manage somehow to get a copy of Google's scan of The Royal Lineage of Our Noble and Gentle Families (principally Devonians) ... to me (I'm sure Lobsterthermidor would appreciate a copy too). It's clearly going to be out of copyright, but Google is particularly reticent in releasing later 19th century books to us in the UK - we only get snippet view here. I often find such books on archive.org instead, but this one isn't on there (though Vols 1, 2, and 4 are). Thanks in anticipation, —SMALL JIM 20:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Here's a link to pages inside the book: The Royal Lineage of Our Noble and Gentle Families (principally Devonians) .... Can you open this?

I'm not sure what you mean by "scan", I've downloaded the pdf (if you meant a digital version of the book), but am not sure how to get it to you. It doesn't appear that I can send documents via wiki email?--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:20, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, yes, the pdf is what I meant. If I access that link I just get the index page for the book (with the bibliographic information at the bottom) with a small input box to search, which only provides the snippets. I've emailed you. —SMALL JIM 21:16, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I returned your email with the PDF. Happy researching!--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:26, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Received, thanks. I'll see what use I can make of it. I'll also let Lt know I have a copy and can forward it to him if he wishes. —SMALL JIM 21:59, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good!--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:22, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

TemplateData is here

Hey CaroleHenson

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	For familiarising yourself with TemplateData so quickly, and spending your time helping others do the same :). Wikipedia is an educational resource, and even within the editor community, the opportunity to teach is one that should be jumped on. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

___________________________________

Georges Yatrides

29 june 2013

Dear Carol,

An initial response is sent you in order not to overwhelm you. The rest will follow.

I would first like to thank you for the changes you have made. I sincerely appreciate the tone you use for your comments. I hope the encyclopaedic style will give a correct idea of my life as a painter and scientist, because painting allows me to express what science can achieve intrinsically.
Concerning my career, about my fundamental research accomplished at CEA (AEC- French government Atomic Energy Commission) I demonstrated my theory on new properties of light from solid body incandescence and its influence on hydrocarbon materials (USA Patent No. 3,840,028 -08 October 1974), recalling here that the human race is hydrocarbon-like all mammals and that our Sun is variable thermonuclear incandescence like other stars. The results of my research determine the development of a second correlative theory: non interdependence of light, space and time, thus detected. If in chemistry are patentable only operations leading to innovative change of the experienced substances, they can demonstrate a specific theory. Extrapolation on an artistic plan, my theory gave me to apply on a flat surface, a painting, a new approach of light, of time (which is the case of the painting "The spiral of time pillar" 65x92cm, (1982).
Another added painting "Essential Vibration" 97x130cm (1982) applies a new approach of light and time. But also, it is the foreshadowing of the film Lars von Trier "Melancholia", about which background is represented by a collision with our planet the Earth. It is highlighted by Alexandre Sacha Bourmeyster (Alexandre Sacha Bourmeyster- SGDL Society of Men of Letters of France [3]).
Of patents in my name all exclusive claims were granted in countries with harsh examinations, honored in particular by the United States Patent Office in Washington DC" (yatrides.com> Its life> Entourage: Paul Perroud Director, Offices of Special Application of Physics, French Atomic Centre, CEA-CENG). This is what is shown in "Yatrides and his century" that you quote: On 17 January 1996, Yatrides et son siècle was established to protect the public, civil and professional interests of Yatrides works. The organization is composed of "senior officials".[15]. If this seems interesting for the understanding of my life as a researcher and painter, I will give you more specific information about my fundamental discoveries I extrapolated my painting.
Concerning the 8 periods of my work, I return to you: Extract from "Dictionary artists Dauphine " (Dictionnaire des Artistes du Dauphiné -ISBN: 978-2-3502-2065-9- 4ème trimestre 2008, Editions Alzieu ‘’La maison du livre’’ – 1 bis rue du Moulin, 38120 Le Fontanil, France :

I can put on the Commons page that matches the text below :

“Six phases trace the evolution of his work:
"Fauve" period 1945/1948 - "Abstraction" period 1948/1951;
"Pre graphic period " 1951/1955 - "Graphics" period" 1957/1962 -
"Graphics fundamental" US period 1963/1972 - "Apodictic period" 1973/1982 ;
(This apodictic period was the period of generating synthesis: "Synthesis first: root1945/1988 - :* "Synthesis last": root1989/2011).
In 1996 a constitution 1oi Association 1901
"Yatrides and his century" Prefecture of Isère, No. 24149, Official Journal
No. 3, 17/01/1996. " Yatrides et son siècle was established to protect the public, civil and professional interests of Yatridès's works. The organization is composed of "senior officials". On 17 January 1996".[4]

Thank you for your help

Best regards George Yatrides--Yatrides (talk) 16:53, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Numbering information above to facilitate responses. Will copy to article talk page Talk:Georges Yatridès to keep with article related content.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:49, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on the french article as well. Pleclown (talk) 11:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure.--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Citing sources/Example style

Following your master-class in citations, to which I have paid serious attention, I am now confused having read the above - for the first time ever it must be admitted. It seems to justify the style I have been using, that is omission of citation templates, stated to be optional, and "name attributes", also optional, and English academic citation style, apparently OK. I really want to find a form that satisfies you, WP and myself before I proceed with further editing. All I've been doing is using the style I learned in higher education institutions in England, i.e., "Vivian, Full title, place of publication, year, page no", or where already quoted, "Vivian, p.x". ISBN no's too are stated to be optional! There are reasons for my preferences, if you are interested, but I'll keep this short now. Thanks for your help. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:24, 2 July 2013 (UTC))

That sounds to me like you are being disingenuous, Lt. The problems, as you well know, are not related to whether or not citation templates should be used, but as has been pointed out in a friendly manner by Carole, and less so by me, by the need for you to provide clear and unambiguous references. You know perfectly well what the guidance on citations is: you discussed it with User:Motacilla here and here, and with User:Dougatwiki here. Please don't try to force Carole into defending her choice of citation style.

It is to resolving the referencing issues (advice points 2 and 3 here) towards which you should be directing your mind before making further substantial article edits. We need to see evidence of your good-faith attempts to improve in this area. —SMALL JIM 13:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Citation templates may be optional, but given how helpful they are I have no idea why anyone would omit them. When I came joined Wikipedia I disdained citation templates as clutter, fit only for folk who hadn't learnt how to format academic citations for themselves. I soon learnt to stop being so precious and appreciate how helpful citation templates are. They help to give articles a consistent appearance, without which Wikipedia would look like a collection of ill-related webpages concocted by amateurs. And the set of parameters to complete in each template helps a contributor as forgetful as myself to ensure that I haven't omitted key details. And in the years since I joined, Wikipedians more tech-savvy than I have made some templates significantly better. What's not to like? Best wishes, Motacilla (talk) 19:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Well said, I returned to using citation templates for just those reasons. I don't always use them, if there's an article that I'm editing or expanding with well-formatted and consistently formatted citations that don't use the citation template, then I use the style in the article (Chicago, AP, etc.) I used them most when cleaning up an article with disparate citation styles. And, they are incredibly easily created using Reftag tool from google books urls and WP:ProveIt.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:09, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Firstly may I say I'm getting a bit fed-up with Smalljim's lack of assuming good faith. I request that he retracts his above comment "sounds to me like you are being disingenuous". I am acutely aware of the problem of OR, which is why I have been studying the WP guidelines on how to make citations. Hence my question to Carole, who was my main critic in this area! As I stated above, I didn't want to make any more substantial edits until I complied with the required format, whatever that might be. You may all love citation templates, I don't, in fact I loathe them. I can give my reasons if you want. I don't find them helpful. That seems to be an acceptable position, per WP:CITEVAR. For new articles I will be creating, I intend to stick to the style I have been using, fully approved by WP guidelines, is that OK? If someone wants to change them to something else, that's a valid contribution, if they can reach consensus under the guideline. I don't care what they look like it's just I can't stand messing about with the fiddly little things myself. When done otherwise almost exactly the same result appears which enables any reader to obtain the source at a public library or on-line, which remember is the whole point. Many recent "improvements" looked great but lost the baby with the bathwater as editions, page numbers, work titles all became garbled in an impenetrable thicket of computer code. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 10:13, 3 July 2013 (UTC))

You say: "I am acutely aware of the problem of OR ..." As far as I'm aware, that is the first time you've actually admitted that rather than apparently seeing it as just a bit of a nuisance: had you done so before I wouldn't have used the word "disingenuous". So I won't retract it because at the time it appeared to be a valid assessment.

But based on your continuation of that sentence: "... which is why I have been studying the WP guidelines on how to make citations", and the rest of your comment, I'm still concerned that you don't really understand the huge difference between citation style (which isn't really all that important), and No original research, which is of prime importance. Don't use citation templates if you don't want to. But you must comply with the provisions of WP:OR and the other policies. Can you confirm that you've read and understand WP:OR? Please? —SMALL JIM 13:16, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

[edit conflict]

The main point for you is not whether or not to use citation templates, but to correctly cite the information in the article. And, Smalljim inserted references to early discussions about that.

The citation templates do not "lose" information like page numbers, editions, etc. The point is what the citations look like to the readers, not the edit mode. The citation templates ensured that the citations were correctly formatted; They had not been formatted consistently or correctly before hand.

There is absolutely no question that your participation in Wikipedia can be extraordinary based upon your subject knowledge. I hope you really here to make good / great articles according to guidelines, and help fix WP:Original research and uncited information, rather argue about whether or not to use citation templates.--CaroleHenson (talk)

Well said, Carole. Sorry about the ec! It's exactly because Lt's knowledge and research (and photos etc.[5] - I've been meaning to mention those for ages) are able to benefit WP so much that these issues are causing us such problems – if he wasn't able to add so much value, he may well have been subjected to some form of sanctioning some time ago. —SMALL JIM 14:07, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict * 2, response to ante-penultimate Smalljim) I'm fed up with this discussion. The answer to your question is clear from my response above. I look forward to receiving your retraction. Thanks. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:24, 3 July 2013 (UTC))

(Edit conflict * 2 response to penultimate): Carole, I'm going to do exactly that in my future contributions. There were problems with many of the new and "updated" citations added by someone else. Wrong Lauder book, wrong edition of Debrett, wrong book by Vivian ("Heraldic Visit of Cornwall" (should be "Devon" as I originally left it) still on Petrockstowe, last time I looked), etc. Yes, It wasn't the citation templates which garbled these but someone's human error, which resulted in very prettily formatted notes full of dud info. I really don't want to argue the point any more, I'll tell you in detail why I don't like cite templates if you want elsewhere, we're going round in circles. It should be clear that "I've got it". Let's move on. Thanks.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:24, 3 July 2013 (UTC))

Based on those two responses, Lobsterthermidor, you have not "got it" at all, and your work today on the {{cn}}s and {{or}}s that I added to Manor of Molland backs this up. Let's continue discussion of that point on the article's talk page.

I don't want to have to discuss these points any more than you do, but as a responsible editor (and particularly as an admin) I do feel a moral responsibility to ensure that any damage done to WP that I come across is removed, and the cause is stopped. —SMALL JIM 17:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok let's thrash it out there and be done with it. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 10:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC))

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements

Surprised you didn't copy me into the discussion on Annery. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 22:23, 5 July 2013 (UTC))

See the Talk:Annery, Monkleigh page where there had been an active discussion:

"I started a conversation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements#Advise please: Annery, Monkleigh.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:32, 26 June 2013 (UTC)"

You had posted that day, so it was not my expectation that I needed to post anything to your talk page - you had been quite engaged in the article - and I post article related information on article talk pages. An update regarding the edits (essentially answering my question) were posted by User:Smalljim in Talk:Annery, Monkleigh#Comments on the revert.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I do not intend to engage in any more conversations that start on the offensive. I'm over it.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:39, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

________________________________________________________

George Yatrides

02 July 2013

About my research in fundamental physics, it is interesting to note in my biography, I got severe examinations countries whose Patent Office in Washington DC, all patents granted claims. It has been so for all my patents in other subjects. The interest of my patent No. 3,840,028 granted for my accomplished research on the light emitted by an incandescent solid body variable in time and influence the hydrocarbon components. It is necessary to emphasize that the light of our star the Sun is in variable incandescence (thermonuclear) and that human race is hydrocarbon. I could extrapolate artistic approach on flat surfaces, paintings, and get the clear realization of volumes obtained without shadows contrast, neither shadow on the ground or in space. The image of the painting is an enlarged area because of an indefinable time. This is the case of the spiral of time.

I could extrapolate artistic approach on flat surfaces, paintings and get the clear realization of volumes obtained without shadows contrast, neither shadow on the ground or in space. The image in the painting is in a larger space because of an indefinable time. This is the case of "Spiral of time" and some of my paintings.

I suggest you include in my biography with your encyclopedic experience:

"The results of his research in fundamental physics carried out at CEA concern new properties of the light emitted by an incandescent solid body and its influence on hydrocarbon components. We know the light of our star the Sun is in variable incandescence (thermonuclear) and that human race is hydrocarbon. Extrapolation of the results in an artistic approach, in which paintings, although it should be flat surfaces, volumes appear without shadow contrast, neither shadow on the ground or in space; What puts this image in a wider space unusual time, without reference to the known world, very definition of the abstract, but not primary abstract, because the man is present. "

Concerning "Essential Vibration"

Extract of independent and not seller web site, belonging to Bruno Roche, Canada quoting text of Alexandre Sacha Bourmeyster [6].

"I had not noticed that one painting to another sphere grew and acquired an alarming light. The expression on the face of the man standing (essential Vibration) was stolen us. Was it joy or terror? It was the Terror because Georges has stopped painting after experiencing this revelation. Undoubtedly, despite himself, he had transcribed in the Final Phase. Revelation is the exact translation of the word Apocalypse. The painting is Yatridès apocalyptic prophecy. I got confirmation this year at Cannes for the film Melancholia by Lars Von Trier: sublime images, cruel and agonizing fresco, under the sign of Tarkovsky, the end of the world caused by the collision with the planet and its paralysed characters) Melancholia jutting irresistibly toward the earth, as thirty years earlier on the paintings of an unknown sphere Yatridès advancing towards a paralyzed painter". Signed: Alexandre Sacha Bourmeyster[7]

It would be interesting to mention these facts.

Concerning the events are missing, not cited:

"Contemporary French master" (March 24 trough April 18, 1959, which is already in the text that you made is an event different from the following two:

"Drawings and Watercolors 1900-1959", missing

"Watercolors 1910-1960" missing

On all Biennials I was the guest of honor: "Great master guest" as well as the Salon of Montmorency and Salon of Gatinais "Main master guest".

These events are important to be mentioned as the most affordable (ex: watercolors and drawings) works involve many collectors.

Concerning the 8 periods of my work,

I return to you: Extract from "Dictionary artists Dauphine " (Dictionnaire des Artistes du Dauphiné -ISBN: 978-2-3502-2065-9- 4ème trimestre 2008, Editions Alzieu ‘’La maison du livre’’ – 1 bis rue du Moulin, 38120 Le Fontanil, France :

“Six phases trace the evolution of his work:

"Fauve" period 1945/1948 - "Abstraction" period 1948/1951; "Pre graphic period " 1951/1955 - "Graphics" period 1957/1962 - "Graphics fundamental" US period 1963/1972 - "Apodictic period" 1973/1982 ; (This apodictic period was the period of generating synthesis: "Synthesis first: root1945/1988 - : "Synthesis last": root 1989/2011).

Paintings for these periods are in Wikipedia Commons.

They must be mentioned because they represent the development of my work since 1945 until our days.

Documents available

On all matters that depend on my career, I have copies of all articles, images, catalogs numerous exhibitions, world events. How to send these copies of these documents?

Important: It seems interesting to mention all those notes that are essential for holding preminent private collections of the works of these periods, but also for the more modest collectors that my work represents the only heritage.

I appreciate the way you look at my work, scientific as well as pictorial. It will justify the features and characteristics of my work.

Thank you for your attention

George Yatrides

06 july 2013

Note: I replied on July 02 Yatrides Talk. My message contained an important question: I hold press articles, international documents that have provided me Collectors obliging, such as the cover page of the Lyon's magazine club No. 333 with the title alone "YATRIDES" on the sale of which I have already spoken, and number of other catalogs and personal exhibitions in rooms as the guest of honor as well as biennials in rooms.

--82.122.228.177 (talk) 16:58, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

____________________________________

Georges Yatridès

11 July 2013

I'm in my previous post (06 July above and on my own talk page): Excuse me, this is the 331 number of Lyon's Club whose coverage consists of my name as single image magazine. The number 333 contains the auction of the painting "The New Roller" price for the benefit of Polish children with muscular dystrophy

Regards,

Georges Yatrides

--82.122.228.177 (talk) 17:37, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Lobsterthermidor

Hi Carole. You may want to know that following his last message at Talk:Manor of Molland, I finally ran out of patience with Lt and have raised the issue of his OR at the Administrators' noticeboard. I've mentioned his incivility to you as a supplementary issue. —SMALL JIM 21:19, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a great idea to resolve the OR issues. Thanks for keeping me in the loop.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:42, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Attention to detail

I have had to correct two shocking examples of an almost cavalier disregard for detail following your edits to Manor of Monkleigh. These concern highly material issues to the history of this manor, and I cannot understand how they could be treated so carelessly. The edits concerned are

23:15 7 July 2013, where you changed the existing "Alfred could not be identified as the same person as Alfred the Butler" to "Alfred was identified as Alfred the Butler" (both quotes paraphrased by me to emphasise sense given to reader)
04:34 8 July 2013, where you changed "Monkleigh was given to Montacute Priory" to "Monkleigh was given to Montacute Priory and Canonsleigh Abbey". ((both quotes paraphrased by me to emphasise sense given to reader)

Responding at Talk:Manor of Monkleigh.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I also noticed that in your edit of Mark Rolle you stated that he was born at Heanton Satchville, and linked this to Heanton Satchville, Petrockstowe, which is inexplicably careless, especially as you had made major edits to that last article, the banner headline above which states Not to be confused with Heanton Satchville, Huish. This was precisely the careless mistake you made. This would be understandable in the case of an editor unfamiliar with this confusing dual name, but you surely must be quite an expert on this topic by now, following your substantial edits to Petrockstowe, Heanton Satchville, Petrockstowe, Mark Rolle etc.

Incidentally, following my new re-education and fuller understanding of the OR policy, your inputs to which I genuinely appreciate, ~~I have in any case removed the reference to Canonsleigh in the Manor of Monkleigh article, as OR.~~ (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 09:45, 9 July 2013 (UTC))

Thank you for removing the OR material that you added back to the article. I struck out that sentence based upon the insinuation that I was the one that added it, when it was you.

I am blown away and very sad today based upon your recent and continued attacks - blaming me for something YOU did and blowing something out of proportion when there are sources that provided the information I posted for Manor of Monkleigh. I will next look at the Mark Rolle article.

I am so offended by the recent attack - when you have evidence of me working through things with you - that I am striking out the incorrect information.--16:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Struck out offensive and unneeded comments re: Mark Rolle article. The source does not say whether it was Petrockstowe or Huish - removed link.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:20, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Lt

Just spotted that he's retired again. Must dash. —SMALL JIM 15:29, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:31, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

I've closed both our AN/I reports, hope that's OK with you. —SMALL JIM 18:05, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, makes sense. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:17, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Outstanding Lt cleanup

Hi Carole! Just a reminder that if you're looking for something to work on, there's still plenty of unfinished business here in which your forensic examination of article sourcing would prove very useful. —SMALL JIM 10:36, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Will do! That's a handy list. I have a spreadsheet with 2208 rows (articles) for cleanup - based upon articles touched. And, you know I love resolving uncited or misappropriately cited info.--CaroleHenson (talk) 10:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, if you have a preference for whether I tackle OR tagged or other articles to check, let me know. Either works for me.--CaroleHenson (talk) 10:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

No real preference myself, though some of the tagged pages may be best dealt with by reducing to stubs, so Others is probably better, initially at least – there's a wider choice of topics there too. That list contains all the articles created by Lt and others that I've come across to which he added an appreciable amount of content. Some of them won't have any problems worth fixing: if you think that applies, just remove them from the list with an appropriate edit summary. Thanks! —SMALL JIM 11:11, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I'll start with others first. My car was vandalized and I have medical tests today, and a bit more, so I may not start today - but I'll get to it.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:00, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Well best wishes to you regarding all that. There's no rush here, of course. —SMALL JIM 20:15, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

This week's articles for improvement - 22 July 2013 to 28 July 2013

posted by Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I've added an opt-in section for those interested in receiving TAFI notifications on the project's main page, located here. Those that don't opt-in won't receive this message again. Also, a revised notification template has been created, located at Template:TAFI weekly selections notice. Northamerica1000^(talk) 05:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I've added my name to the list.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:04, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Nepotism links added

Hi,

I've added a good link to Talk:Nepotism/Archives/2015#Not_finding_sources_regarding_nepotism. Please see about restoring that section to Nepotism#Belgium as you see fit. As a Dutch speaker, I can confirm it's what was needed, and indeed gives an overview of the whole nepotism in Belgian politics situation. Biot (talk) 11:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

References about Yatrides Biography

hello Carole Henson,

I am the author of the biography, which was amended June 6, 2013. Documentary research Support in the Organization "Yatrides and his century" [8] , references I have provided for this biography have been carefully selected among hundreds of others [9] . Seeing your difficulty understandable to find them, I have made this selection of references in the site "Authentic Yatrides" [10] in imaged copies from originals. I leave it to you to check these references that embody the facts cited.

The dictionary of painters you mention, also contains many other elements, described on pages 5 to very concisely, which is, nevertheless, 8 times more than André Lhote great French painter dictionary of painters 5 pages copied entirely on "authentic Yatrides" that you can watch.

Including that Yatrides was "invited Grandmaster of Honor "International Biennials "BIENNALES FRANCE-CANADA BIENNALES FRANCE-CANADA 1991 1993 frequent guest of honor in other events XIII SALON MONTMORENCY 33 SALON DU GATINAIS 18 SALON de MONTMORENCY. To reassure collectors made uneasy by its modified biography, whose content corresponds to the value of their acquisitions works Yatrides, acquisitions which are priced between 65,000 CHRISTIE'S LONDRES VENTE ENCHERES 150000 and $ 2,000,000, PRESSE 1989 noting here that these prices represent between collectors and not for the benefit of Yatrides. You will also see that rigorous critics Claude Bandieri and historians Arthur Conte ARTHUR CONTE [11] consider Yatridès great innovative painter whose major collectors Gweneth Vidler-Dulles Chairwoman of the Franco British Chamber of Commerce and industry CHRISTIE'S LONDRES Pologne .. I was able to note the existence of other discrete Collectors, concerned about the anonymity of their acquisition of works of art for various reasons. Movies, TV news highlight the work Yatrides on both scientific and artistic Movies, TV News

I would add that James L. Crowley Specialist Advanced Science and graduated from Pittsburgh Mellon University research director at the CNRS (National organization for scientific research) robotic applications conducted a study of scientific approach, shape and background on the work and what it Yatrides determined. JAMES CROWLEY Great French composer, Jacques Charpentier composed "Prelude to Elsewhere" Jacques Charpentier string quartet tribute to a painting Yatridès "Les nouveaux Rouleaux” (the new scrolls) and Gustave Hodebert the French Academy wrote a characteristic poem, about "La femme à la mouette" another Yatrides painting 1978.

Yatrides remains modest and surely would appreciated Vanessa Fize recognizes his work. However it would be in the standards restore my text June 6, 2013 [[12]] which is only a reflection, without exaggeration, concrete made with confirmatory references. These references have been updated to match the copies of their originals that you find in the "Press articles, TV News information, catalogs" [13] site menu "authentic Yatrides"

Note: Having changed the biography YATRIDES not only Wikipedia in English but also Wikipedia in French enabled the French establishment reconnect with his behavior 1980s [14] Peaceful and non-litigious Yatrides never responded, allowing time to reveal the truth.

Gilbert Arnaud

--Arnaugi (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2013 (UTC) __________________________

Rectification erroneous links

--Arnaugi (talk) 20:37, 19 August 2013 (UTC) --Arnaugi (talk) 15:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Confirmation of my text above the August 14, 2013

At the end of my text above the August 14, 2013, it is stated that my text 6 June 2013 which I require put online is available with new references that appear in "Yatridès Authentic" under "Press articles, TV news, TV reports and catalogs" which are copies of the originals. This text seems long but in reality it is only a brief fragment of professional life Yatridès. You will see in the five pages of the Dictionary of painters you mention and other elements appearing in Yatrides Authentic.

Cordially,

Gilbert Arnaud

--Arnaugi (talk) 15:53, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Return to Cornwall

Hello again, You seem to have more than enough work which you might get round to doing. While I am here I will just leave two more Cornish places which are rather sketchy: Lamorran and Merther and St Mawes. The basics are there and no-one has added anything much yet. When I followed up the author of the 2nd quotation on this page I wondered how Audre Lorde's name would be pronounced. I would know how to pronounce "Audrey" but that does not help since English in New York will not be like British English. Things seem to have gone very quiet at WikiProject Cornwall so if I do anything it is part of some other wikiproject.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 09:15, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, That's sounds interesting! I've been working on a number of things with several organizations lately and have been very tied up. But when I get a bit of a breather, I'll look into it. Sounds good. Carole--173.227.164.35 (talk) 01:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I only just remembered to come back here. I have given up membership of the Greater Manchester WikiProject so I should be able to do some more on Cornwall. The problem is trying to find more interesting topics. I hope you were not affected by the Colorado floods.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 15:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, CaroleHenson. You have new messages at Vanjagenije's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Arab African International Bank

Hello CaroleHenson. I am just letting you know that I deleted Arab African International Bank, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Jujutacular (talk) 09:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Just an FYI, G4 only applies if there was a deletion discussion, like WP:AFD, not a previous speedy deletion. Quite minor :) Jujutacular (talk) 09:34, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 09:39, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Copyvio tagging

Just some friendly advice: always check the history for a good version before tagging. John Reaves 02:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm a little lost by this comment... Since good content is not supposed to be overlayed by bad, I'm a bit confused by this. I would expect that the lastest version of an article was the best -- and that the best wouldn't be buried in history.

The good news, is we'll get to the right place because of your watchful eye! Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 02:14, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Film sack

Can you hold off a bit? I'm cleaning up, and your edit conflicts have set me back on hours of work. --Lexein (talk) 08:01, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm done. I had no idea that anyone was editing at the same time. Sorry to have caused a disturbance.

If it helps, adding the {{in use}} template at the top of the page will let other editors know that the article is being worked on. I get how frustrating that is, it's happened to me a lot, too!--CaroleHenson (talk) 08:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

That is so strange - I was working inventory from the "New pages feed" - picking up the oldest items in the queue. I see now that you moved this from your sandbox to the article space.

So, I'm wondering... was it deleted previously and you've been working on it since in your sandbox. It was just a weird timing coincidence that I came in to edit just after you moved it from your sandbox to article space. I totally get how that would be frustrating!!!!!--CaroleHenson (talk) 08:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No biggie - I just thought it prudent to ask. It's a while since anybody else has bothered to edit the articles I work on. Doh! That {{in use}} tip is awesome - I'll definitely use that! Yes, it had been PRODed, unanswered, then deleted. I had requested userfication, and plopped the award and those reviews in there. After moving to mainspace with approval from GiantSnowman, I then realized I had forgotten to source a few paragraphs, and tag a few others, and fix the cats. --Lexein (talk) 08:47, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, cool! Well, happy editing!--CaroleHenson (talk) 08:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Please feel free to dive in. My slow edits are done. --Lexein (talk) 07:33, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I made just a few tweaks. It looks pretty good.

I did post on the talk page, though, that I really think the episodes should be split off to their own article. It would make it a more readable article but still have all the information just a click away (to the split page) - which is a good thing, right?

It's an interesting article. I didn't know about Film Sack, but I'm really interested after having read the article.--CaroleHenson (talk) 08:30, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Cheil Worldwide (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Orion and Han River

Spitakavor Monastery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Church and Vestibule

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 15:42, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Congrats... You asked an awesome question in the Teahouse!

	Great Question Badge
	Awarded to those who have asked a great question on the Teahouse Question Forum. There are no stupid questions, but some are excellent! Good questions are those that reflect serious curiosity about editing and help others learn. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
This is a very good question! I look forward to seeing if anyone can answer it. If no-one can quickly answer it, I'm sure I could dig it out of the Manual of Style where I'm sure it's hidden in some discrete corner. :) Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 03:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I was hoping someone would have a thought "off the top of their head" - if not, I can go searching myself. Much appreciated!--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:47, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

--

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Speedy deletion declined: Raja harpal village

Hello CaroleHenson. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Raja harpal village, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to villages. Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Martin MacNeill for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Martin MacNeill 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/Martin MacNeill 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. – S. Rich (talk) 20:07, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement

Oracle bone of the Shang Dynasty, ancient China – an example of recorded history Hello, CaroleHenson: The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection. Recorded history Posted by: Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:13, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

historical figures

As reviewing administrator, I am very reluctant to speedy delete any historical figure that is listed in standard directories; I've accordingly removed your speedies. I don;t think all of them are notable, but they would need discussion. I strongly suggest you do that one at a time, starting with the least notable; a group nomination where some are more notable than others is generally not productive. DGG ( talk ) 06:06, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

I got started on this when working on Special:NewPagesFeed and there seems to be an issue where articles are being created of essentially genealogical value, staring with Matias Nunes Cabral. And, it seems as if there is a new user ID being established for each article.

I touched based with the online help service and they checked around and agreed with the tagging. And, mentioned a potential WP:SPI if it seemed to warrant it. So, I've been checking around some more and have found a few articles that have marginal notability and one that has clear notability.

What is it exactly that you're suggesting as an alternate course to look at the non-notable articles as a group? I've never done that. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

By the way, I tried searching on the net and in books for Matias Nunes Cabral before I tagged him.--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:17, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes. I noticed the similarity, and that they are each coming from a different new editor. I agree this is not promising. It has happened before, and it has sometimes proven very difficult to find a good way to handle it. Immediate deletion is for articles with no real likelihood of anyone in good faith thinking them suitable for an encyclopedia article. That may not be the case here. The fist question in sourcing. Have you been able to check the biographic directories which are given as sources? I assume they do indeed list the information as given, but I am not likely to be able to do it myself for a week or two. If people are listed in standard biographical encyclopedias for the country, the usual practice is to include them in WP. But we normally pay attention to what is actually claimed for them. If someone is known only as a spouse of someone notable or possibly notable, then the articles are usually deleted, and I would not hesitate to list those, individually, at AfD. If on the other hand the person occupied some civil or military office, the situation is more complicated, especially if the office can be considered equivalent to a position which usually provides notability to a modern holder, such as mayor of a city or governor of a province, or, usually , general in an army. Practice for those known as nobility but not otherwise varies, but is usually fairly skeptical, and these would have to be discussed individually.

There is a way to nominate a group of articles at AfD, but what I am suggesting is that you do not do it--it can be confusing unless they are all equally non-notable, and I doubt this is the case. What I recommend is to take the least notable, prepare the AfD nominations, explaining all of this in full, and list them immediately one after another, in groups of 2 or 3 of approximately equal notability.

In the past, our approach to article production of this sort has been to try to get the contributor to stop it, and to make more useful contributions. It may be hard to get their attention if they use multiple names, these situations can be very annoying. The official way of doing it if it is impossible to find a way of explaining is to ask for a sockpuppet investigation, but this is somewhat complicated and always takes a considerable time.

From my experience with these, the best thing to do will be to see if it continues, and meanwhile, start the afds. If it does continue, I'll mention it tomorrow at a suitable administrative board. Please do keep tagging them, at least with a notability problem tag, and I will see from your contributions what ones they are.

I don't know who gave you advice on the online chat service--that's one of the problems with it: people are only responsible for what they do on-wiki. I can't ask you to tell me even if you do know; rather, please ask them to post here, or on my talk page, or at AN/I, or somewhere. I can't follow up longer tonight--it's 1 AM here. DGG ( talk ) 06:40, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok, one common denominator seemed to be the presence of "http://www.genealogiafamiliar.net/..." as a external link - and I found 42 articles upon a search, but some of them have a degree of notability. Regarding the sources, they are geneaology books, with just a snipet view. In some cases I see the name with limited info - the person's name and location - but it's really hard to tell anymore than that from snipets. In some case I cannot see the specific person in the snipet.

I've also tried tracking down the "what links here" route and there may be more that way. It's late here, too, so I'll reread this in the a.m. and tackle it with a fresher brain.--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:17, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, I nominated a couple tonight: Matias Nunes Cabral and Maria Simões de Melo - and posted a question on the Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#Genealogy articles regarding approach for the non-notable, genealogy articles.--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:58, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Costume museums

Hi, I see you created the category "costume museums" for museums with collections of costumes for the performing arts. Many of the museums you put in that category just have the word "costume" in the name, but are really fashion museums with collections of regular clothing. I am removing the category of costume museums for most of the ones you link. Unfortunately I think there are few museums that fit in the category. I suggest you search the Internet for other museums around the world that fit the category but may not have articles on Wikipedia. Some may be listed under Theatre museums, etc. Jllm06 (talk) 14:36, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the clarification!--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:33, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

You're invited to join WikiProject Women artists!

Hello CaroleHenson/Archive 5! Thank you for your contributions to articles related to Women artists. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject Women artists, a WikiProject aimed at improving the quality of articles about women artists on Wikipedia.

If you would like to participate, please visit the WikiProject Women artists page for more information. Feel free to sign your name under "Members". I look forward to your involvement!

SarahStierch (talk) 10:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Matilda Hays

On 21 December 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Matilda Hays, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Matilda Hays started writing periodicals, often regarding women's issues, from about 1838? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Matilda Hays. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:47, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks! It's great attention and I think the DYK process is great for polishing articles. Much appreciated!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:34, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michele MacNeill

The article Michele MacNeill has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

She is simply the WP:VICTIM of a crime. An AfD on her murderer Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin MacNeill is underway. – S. Rich (talk) 17:08, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. – S. Rich (talk) 17:08, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I commented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin MacNeill.--18:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I encourage further development of Martin MacNeill, in spite of the AfD. There's no consensus, and I predict same, for deletion. I just added the fact that it was the first trial in Utah history with broadcast and streaming coverage. --Lexein (talk) 12:12, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Please consider weighing in on...

Perhaps you'd like to weigh-in on:

If so, you're input there or at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#Genealogy articles (whatever it is) would be helpful!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I might comment on them. For now, though, I'll wait. WRT the FindaGrave-related articles, I've done some editing on them. FindaGrave itself is NOT a reliable source. Too much material, even that found in the memorials maintained by FindaGrave itself, is not verified. It is, however, RS when we see photos of the gravestones because we can verify what the gravestone says. I have done some work in that area with gravestones & findagrave links related to Medal of Honor awardees. – S. Rich (talk) 04:55, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Yep, agree about source reliability, it's just a starting point. Nice that you've worked on Medal of Honor awardees!--CaroleHenson (talk) 09:18, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Carole, I only read your article quickly but I thought the fact that she was a founding editor or that she had "come out" was maybe a bit hookier too. As it is I see its queued to go so I didn't want to create an alternative hook that might just have caused debate for only a small (maybe) improvement. Well done and great xmas Victuallers (talk) 19:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Makes sense!--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:19, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement

A typical Nepali meal Hello, CaroleHenson. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Meal Previous selections: Recorded history • Micronesia Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: Northamerica1000^(talk) 22:37, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

[15]...Modernist (talk) 03:40, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Personal Life Review

Hello CaroleHenson, I was wondering if you can help review the Personal life of the living male singer biography Slim Burna. 197.210.248.25 (talk) 08:07, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:59, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Carole. 197.210.248.17 (talk) 16:40, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Francisco Javier Muñiz

On 28 December 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Francisco Javier Muñiz, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Francisco Javier Muñiz was considered the first important naturalist from Argentina? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Francisco Javier Muñiz. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Harrias ^talk 12:02, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Nice, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 14:44, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Michelle

Suggest you email the deleting admin and request a copy be sent to you. I've done so in the past with success. – S. Rich (talk) 06:11, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! That's how I started, and he suggested that I post it on the admin undeletion page (in the event he was off-line). I did update his talk page, though, too.--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:16, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

^ Lyotard, Answering the Question - What Is Postmodernism? // The Posmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Minneapolis; University of Minnesota Press, 1984, pp. 71-82.
^ author A. Article C // journal D. year X
^ author A. Article C // journal D. year X

[1] Lyotard, Answering the Question - What Is Postmodernism? // The Posmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, Minneapolis; University of Minnesota Press, 1984, pp. 71-82.

[2] uthor A. Article C // journal D. year X

[3] uthor A. Article C // journal D. year X

[1]

[2]

[3]