User talk:Cullen328/2011 Archive

Nellie Deli

Nothing like writing a great article to open other editors eyes! Congratulations! Student7 (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Yount

I think it looks great and is very comprehensive for its genera of article. You should consider nominating it for GA status. I suspect it would pass without much ado. --Mike Cline (talk) 23:35, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

American Renaissance (magazine)

Thanks for your note. I rewrote the material to put it into a more logical flow. I think it's worth including, but I wish it could be combined into a general history section rather than standing on its own, which tends to give it additional weight. However there isn't such a section right now, so a standalone section is perhaps the next best solution. We might revisit the material in a few weeks to see if there have been any further developments. If not, it could be minimized further. Will Beback talk 22:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your kind comments. I wish I was quite as patient as you describe me, but I do try for as far as my tether will stretch! I very much appreciate your comments about Srebrenica and the Srebrenica genocide article. There has been an ongoing campaign of denial, driven by political and other considerations, that has made the article a bit of a battleground. The disputes have been slightly less energetic since the International Court of Justice rescued Serbia from the threat of reparations, but sadly there is still considerable residual conflict over the facts. The article could do with more tidying up but at the moment circumstances prevent me concentrating on dealing with more serious matters so I get distracted into discussions on subjects of perhaps lesser weight that I still think should be treated with adequate respect. All the best, Owen Opbeith (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC) After a losing battle over the deletion of John Monk MBE (essentially I believe the UK Honours List recognition of long-term, exceptional but low media profile community service should be respected by Wikipedia as a reliable non-elitist measure of notability but ... you can guess the rest), someone referred me to the WP Notability discussion forum. I haven't the time or energy to take it up there but I came across your comments on the subject of red links. I endorse them completely. Opbeith (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for those words about the Honours List effort, Jim. I'm holding back till I feel ready to subject myself to exposure to the full fire of battle (the proposal's a loser, I'm certain, but it's justified, so that's no reason not to give it a try). And first, once I can settle back to proper concentration, I need to get back to another head-banging session at the Bosnian genocide article. Once the time comes, though, I'd be happy to have a chat about the basics of the UK Honours system (hopefully without rendering you catatonic). Opbeith (talk) 22:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice save

Just wanted to say nice work on Grenville Anderson, looks like the article is now well on track to be kept, all thanks to your efforts. Jenks24 (talk) 08:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links - John Muir Trail

I'm trying to add something that I think is useful to the article on the John Muir trail. The social networking site for the trail on Yahoo has a very extended collection of files and links related for the trail. E.g., Excel spreadsheets that give mileages, elevations and GPS coordinates of all trail junctions and campsites; information on permitting dates for each potential trailhead, equipment suggestions. I see the usual prohibition on links to social network (Yahoo, Facebook) groups, which makes some sense to me, but this particular networking site has the best collection I know of online info about the JMT - it is way more useful than many of the links that exist in the article, some of which merely describe a single person's account of hiking the trail. Any ideas of how to get around this problem. Not a registered user - please respond to JohnLadd@Gmail.com (or I'll come back here to look for ideas) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.103.211.28 (talk) 15:56, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello John and thank you for trying to improve the John Muir Trail article. I encourage you to get more involved, and help make the article better. However, Wikipedia has a clear policy on external links to avoid, found at WP:LINKSTOAVOID item 10, which says that links to YahooGroups are not allowed. In my opinion, the article has too many external links now and a number of others should be removed. I recommend that you work on improving the article itself, which could certainly benefit from the input of an expert. I don't claim to be an expert because I've never hiked the full length, just a number of segments. More and better photos would be a good addition too. Cullen328 (talk) 16:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		Your speedy,accurate and possibly lifesaving historians section on the Obama Tucson speech may have saved the day-well done — Tumadoireacht ^Talk/_Stalk 07:42, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sierra Club Books

Thanks for noticing and offering to help out. i had created a stub article a while back, which was turned into a redirect within a day. based on the content at that time, and assuming it could not have been expanded, it made some sense. but of course this publisher is a major influence on environmental issues. I added it back once i had enough to feel comfortable it would not be summarily removed. I think it needs a lot more work, and i of course may not get to it (being a volunteer with a life outside WP:)). I have tried to add a few of the SCB titles already mentioned on WP, but i think some of the works used as references here should be added as well. I think the fact that the dust jackets for the pictorials had ordering and membership information on the inside of them is notable. I basically collected old SCB's at thrift stores, and worked from the hard copies. Generally, coverage of publishers and books here is not on a par with music and record companies, or movies. This is a small start. PLEASE feel free to rewrite or reorganize the article, as i think this is one of my less well written articles. You probably couldnt do worse unless you tried...Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:38, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unforeseen circumstances...

...like the discussion ending before I got there. Sorry I couldn't add my vote, and glad to see it was kept. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Levy

If you say "keep but source" it'd be better if you actually added at least one of the sources you've found. I've seen this happen far too often: an article gets pile-on "keep but source" and no one ever gets around to doing it, leaving an unsourced nanostub. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:25, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I expanded the article and added four solid references. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:12, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

National RTI Forum

Extended content

Thanks for your message. I shall post my observations on the articles talk / discussion page. Please watch it. Incidentally, despite being a regular contributor to this article before the AfD I was not involved and opine the AfD process would have been better had it attempted to include prior "deletionist" inclined contributors also.RobertRosen (talk) 06:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will watch for your observations on the talk page, as I keep this article and others that interest me on my watch list. I did not start the AfD but noticed it, began researching the topic, and added sources. The edit history, as I read it, shows you made three edits within a three minute period last November. Is that what you mean by a "regular contributor" or am I missing something? Cullen328 (talk) 06:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you missed my 30th Nov edit :-) I also extensively edited a connected article Amitabh Thakur. To cut to the chase, I think both these articles should be extensively edited to somewhere between our respective present positions to satisfy 5P.RobertRosen (talk) 07:01, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might also like to search public yahoogroups for messages like this [1] which admit that NRF is a "small organisation" and this one which is even more revealing [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti4ngo/message/2967. They have blanked out the names with XXX and YYYs which are available freely elsewhere. RobertRosen (talk) 07:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These Yahoogroup postings are repugnant rumormongering that have no place on Wikipepdia. You have weakened your case in my eyes by linking to these.Cullen328 (talk) 22:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am perfectly aware that YG is not a RS. I was clarifying the context of the individuals behind the NRF as you alluded to, and considering the pending sock report. In passing, do you plan to respond to my other concerns for that article, especially the issue that the sources do not back the sweeping claims made about NRF ? RobertRosen (talk) 08:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice now you have posted this previously [2] which referred to me in the context of this article and my deletions then. It is pertinent that very few of the links I removed then are back in the article. I dont think my edits, either then or now constitute vandalism. RobertRosen (talk) 09:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstood my question to Uncle G. I was not accusing you of vandalism. Instead, I was observing that you had accused another editor of vandalism in an edit summary of November 30, 2010, in which you wrote: "undid vandalism. SPS, NPOV, lack of reliable sources" when reverting an edit by Nutanthakurlko. I agree that this inexperienced editor, unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies, added SPS material, wrote in an POV fashion, and clumsily tried to use sockpuppets. However, all of her misguided edits were in good faith and none of her edits constituted vandalism. Please note that "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting patent nonsense into a page." Nutanthakurlko has not edited in six weeks or more. Her shortcomings as an editor are no longer relevant to the development of this article, unless she returns to the process. We can deal with that if and when it happens.

I don't think that your edits were in any sense vandalism, and assume good faith of your editing as I do of Nutanthakurlko. However, I perceive that you have a negative POV regarding the National RTI Forum, for whatever reason. Despite your personal POV, you have an obligation to edit this article in an NPOV fashion, and to base any observations about the topic on reliable sources, rather than your own opinions or personal observations. If you will work with me in a collaborative way, maybe we can agree on a good article on this topic. Let's try. Cullen328 (talk) 22:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You characterized the following sentence as containing "extraordinary claims": "National RTI Forum is a grassroots anti-corruption organization in India that advocates for government openness under the terms of the 2005 Right to Information Act." To me, an "extraordinary claim" would be that a certain person lived to be 200 years old, or that an inventor had developed a perpetual motion machine, or that space aliens controlled the United Nations. My intent was to describe the National NTI Forum in a single sentence based on what I've read in the reliable sources, and I don't see what is so extraordinary about any of it. Please explain. Cullen328 (talk) 22:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have reliable access to internet now. Will talk later about this article. 12:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertRosen (talk • contribs)

Hello. You have a new message at Salegi's talk page.

Hello. You have a new message at salegi's talk page.

Garry Wills opinion - reply

Thank you for the nice compliment. I also feel it was a very good speech and historically significant. I realized after our discussion on the talk page that the sentence still didn't describe Wills' opinion fully, so I tweaked it. Glad you like it! and Happy Trails! (and thank you for all the work you did making it a good article). --Kenatipo ^speak! 16:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Comment

I struck my AfD comments that you were referring to. I was a little annoyed at a few earlier discussions I had seen and that carried over. I didn't take the time to fully investigate before commenting on that one; nor did I have the tact I should when I made my comment. There were one or two !votes that I thought were SPA-ish, but I should have done my homework better. Thanks for calling me on it. Shadowjams (talk) 22:24, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your gracious comments are a credit to you. It is not easy for most of us to admit when we have made a mistake. Warmest regards. Cullen328 (talk) 22:34, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cullen328 I was wondering if you'd be willing to be my ambassador

Hello there, My User name is Msujsj and I am currently involved in a Native American Law and Policy course at Montana State University that entails updating indian law related articles. I was wondering if you would be willing to be my ambassador in this endeavor for this Spring semester . I am not quite sure if this would something of interest to you, but if interested please let me know. Sincerely, Msujsj — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msujsj (talk • contribs) 04:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would be happy to be your mentor. Please tell me a little bit about you, and what your goals are with regards to learning about Wikipedia. Do not hesitate to ask me anything, and I will do my best to be of assistance.

Hint - sign your talk page messages by typing four tildes (~~~~). That will generate an automatic signature with a link to your user page and your talk page. You won't have to type your user name.

Best Regards, Jim

Cullen328 (talk) 05:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request to mentor a student

Hi, I'm a Campus Ambassador in the Public Policy Initiative and found your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Online Ambassadors and was wondering whether you'd be up for mentoring User:JLapka, one of the students for Prof Gen's Environmental Policy class. I'll watch this page. Thanks! Dcoetzee 22:23, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I agreed to mentor two and just heard from the first yesterday. So, yes, and have the student contact me. Cullen328 (talk) 23:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, when I talked to Sage he said I should ask you to introduce yourself to the user on their talk page and add the {{WAP student}} template, something like this: {{WAP student|project=WikiProject United States Public Policy|course=Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Courses/Environmental_Policy_spring_2011_(Gen)|coursetalk=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Courses/Environmental_Policy_spring_2011_(Gen)|mentor=Cullen328}}. This should be a bit easier since the student doesn't know their way around yet. Please let me know if you want to do anything differently. And thank you for your help! Dcoetzee 00:37, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. I am away from my office and responding on a smart phone. I will get in touch in a few hours. Cullen328 (talk) 01:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, no big rush. Dcoetzee 02:21, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would you be interested in taking me on for the online ambassador program? I'm working under the the Wikipedia Ambassador Program and Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy, studying federal Indian law at Montana State University. I'm considering focusing my Wikipedia project on the Wyoming v. United States 1989 Supreme Court case dealing with water rights leasing. Chris.arneson (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding accepted practice for using content from other Wikipedia articles

Extended content

Hi Jim. I am taking an environmental policy class at San Francisco State University and my class is participating in the United States Public Policy WikiProject. Our project for the class will be to create or contribute to a Wikipedia article on a public policy issue of our choice. I was told that you will be my online mentor for the semester and I have a question that I am hoping you can help me out with. I would like to know what the accepted practice is for using content from other Wikipedia articles.

The topic I will be writing about is the application of the Clean Air Act to greenhouse gases. I am in the process of writing a portion of my article and there is a particular section of the article "Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency" which I think is well written and relevant to the piece I am working on. I don't want to simply include a link to the other article or transclude the entire article into my own, and am wondering if it is acceptable to simply copy and paste a portion of the other article into my own. If so, do I need to cite to the other article or otherwise indicate that it is a quote? I want to avoid any issues associated with plagiarism and am not quite sure what to do in this instance. Thank you for any advice you can provide. JLapka (talk) 06:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of issues to be considered here, and I don't claim to be an expert on these issues, so please check out and verify my advice on your own. These are my opinions. First of all, a given Wikipedia article, since it is a product of a user edited website, can't itself be considered as a reliable source for another Wikipedia article. On the other hand, the Wikipedia content is freely licensed, so the writing can be re-used or copied as long as the content is supported by reliable sources. You won't have any copyright issues, but if you incorrectly represent the writing as your own, you may have some plagiarism issues. Be certain that the source of the writing is identified properly. I think the main challenge for you will be to read the reliable sources that back the language in the article you want to use, to verify for yourself that the content is really justified and fully supported by those reliable sources. After you have read and verified those reliable sources, then you are perfectly free to use them in another article. I think that I would recommend to you that you re-write or paraphrase the content in your own words, reflecting your own understanding and interpretation of those reliable sources, so that you have made your own specific encyclopedic contribution to an understanding of the unique issues in the article you are working on. Please feel free to ask a follow-up question if anything I have written is unclear to you. I will think about this more, and may have more to add tomorrow. Thank you for your question. Cullen328 (talk) 07:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some personal information: After about five semesters at the City College of San Francisco, I completed two semesters at San Francisco State University before finishing my bachelor's degree at the University of San Francisco. You may notice that all the colleges I attended were located in San Francisco. I love that city, where my wife and both my sons were born. Unfortunately, I was born in Detroit. Cullen328 (talk) 07:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information Jim. It helped to get me started. JLapka (talk) 03:16, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ice pick/ax(e) terminology

Extended content

Hi buddy. Wikipedia doesn't seem to want me to edit pages tonight. I suspect that anonymous editors are restricted now to one edit per page for a time period or something, which is pretty useless really! I couldn't even go back to re-edit my own talk page just now. So sorry for the delay in responding - I've been trying to work the problem out! Here is what I had written. Feel free to copy and paste it to the relevant article and discuss further. Thanks.

I am over thirty years old and, although I am not an expert nor a climber, I have seldom heard this tool referred to by experts and non-experts alike, as an ice axe. That's not to say it isn't referred to as such. However, it is also referred to as an ice pick. Perhaps you both should have discussed it before you made the reverts, AND perhaps informed me of the debate.

Here are some links to people who use the term ice pick, some of which also use the word axe.

I'd be willing to bet the decoration referred to in the last link isn't merely the tip or head of the tool proper, but the whole tool, as a whole.

Now I'm sure there are many more examples. But I believe the generic name (in some places outside the USA certainly) is ice pick. I also believe it is probably more of a laymans' term, but popular enough to include in this article. The experts' name might well be ice ax(e). I don't know if this is a recent adoption or from the early days of mountaineering.

Also, this think about what Trotsky was killed by - I don't believe it was an error at all. It's just the name by which the tool had been generically known back in the day.

I am also not sure about how many different locations throughout the world use the term ice pick, as opposed to an exclusive usage of the term ice axe (or ax) to refer to the whole tool. So I could very well be wrong about it being American English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.130.116 (talk) 05:12, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IE8 seems to be working for me, so I'll copy and paste myself, with some additions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.130.116 (talk) 05:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your efforts here, and I concede that a mountaineering ice axe is sometimes incorrectly called an "ice pick", which the article already mentioned with regards to the Trotsky murder weapon. The key word there is "incorrectly".

Here on Wikipedia, we have to rely on reliable sources. Let's take a look at the reliability of your sources in order:

Source #1 is a caption on a stock photo website. This is not a reliable source for mountaineering terminology, as there is no evidence that the person who wrote the caption has any mountaineering expertise.

Source #2 is an item about something that is not a mountaineering tool, although the photo is fascinating. The item was found at the bottom of a lake that had a history of commercial ice making. The term "ice pick" is associated with domestic ice chipping tools from the days before mechanical refrigeration. This has no relevance to mountaineering.

Source #3 is a news story written by a reporter who is not a mountaineering expert, and accordingly, the article is not a reliable source for mountaineering terminology. The article uses both "pick" and "axe", and pick is the proper term for the part of the axe that caused the injury.

Source #4 is a YouTube video, which is in no way, shape or form a reliable source on Wikipedia for technical terminology.

Source #5 is a blog post related to a video game, and has no real world relevance to mountaineering terminology.

Source #6 is a list of key words associated with a stock photo. These lists include everything but the kitchen sink, and are not a reliable source for mountaineering terminology.

Source #7 is better than the previous sources, but is an article by a "culture and society" correspondent. There is no evidence that this reporter has mountaineering expertise.

Source #8 is a website domain name that is for sale, and dealers for these domain names will fill the space with roughly plausible material that is not fact checked. I know because I once bought one myself and transformed it into a genuine and accurate website. This is not at all a reliable source.

Source #9 is another example of a journalist, Carolyn Fry, who is not a mountaineering expert, inadvertently misusing technical terminology in an article about the history of the Alpine Club. It is not an article about mountaineering equipment, and the mention is in passing.

The simple fact is that in every English-speaking country, such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, the United States, New Zealand and also in English speaking outposts in every mountaineering locale in the world, the accepted English language term for the item discussed in this article is "ice axe". There is nothing "American" about the term. This is the term used in mountaineering magazines, journals and books published in all countries, and in the catalogs and websites of mountaineering equipment manufacturers and dealers worldwide. This is the term used by all active English speaking mountaineers. WP:UNDUE tells us that we don't highlight occasional erroneous usage by people who have no expertise in a given field. Cullen328 (talk) 05:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that "ice pick" is occasionally used, maybe mostly by non-climbers. But modern usage seems to be "ice axe". Scottish Mountaineering Club and the Mountaineering Council of Scotland both use "ice axe". Will Beback talk 06:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

T. Graham Brown

Hi Jim, axes aside, I've just seen your comment on Talk:Thomas Graham Brown. Yes, you are correct. I've just acquired a copy of Brenva so I'll be greatly expanding the article in the next few weeks. But see my rather weary comment on the Talk page. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The wheels of progress turn slowly. I will watchlist the page and look forward to your expansion. On another matter, I am 99% done with a biography of California mountain photographer Cedric Wright. That red link should turn blue sometime this weekend. Take care. Cullen328 (talk) 20:21, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few minor changes to Wright, mostly closing up the refs to the text immediately preceding them. Bit busy at the moment with work but will have a better look on Wednesday. Looking good, though. Ericoides (talk) 19:28, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HEIRO

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at Heironymous Rowe's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

He iro 07:10, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cedric Wright

Excellent article on a worthy subject. Thanks for contributing that. Will Beback talk 21:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am honored by your positive feedback. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 22:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Cedric Wright

On 20 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cedric Wright, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Cedric Wright accompanied his best friend Ansel Adams when three of Adams' most famous photographs were taken? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring students: be sure to check in on them

This message is going out to all of the Online Ambassadors who are, or will be, serving as mentors this term.

Hi there! This is just a friendly reminder to check in on what your mentees are doing. If they've started making edits, take a look and help them out or do some example fixes for them, if they need it. And if they are doing good, let them know it!

If you aren't mentoring anyone yet, it looks like you will be soon; at least one large class is asking us to assign mentors for them, and students in a number of others haven't yet gotten to asking ambassadors to be their mentors, but may soon. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Hagafen.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Hagafen.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hi there,
Thank you for your note on my talk page. Please do tell how you propose that we 'work together'. I am new on Wikipedia and would love to have discussion about best practices and developing high standard content here, including the RTI related article that you have highlighted to me. Conceptually, I am a keen believer in every person's right to information(which is why I work at developing articles for Wikipedia) and would love to collaborate with you. Feel free to contact me via 'talk' page or email me from my user page. Look forward to getting more details from you.
abhishek singh (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I have read the article and its associated discussion page.

Jim, thanks again for being so encouraging to people. In the last few days I've bumped into people at Wikipedia who have been helpful and courteous beyond any expectation and I've also come across people who give the impression of being graduates from the school of playground bullying. I'm resilient enough to take care of myself, but a lot of people aren't. Your reassurance is the sort of thing that helps the less robust find the resolve not to be deterred. Opbeith (talk) 08:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I came across a situation where you seemed to be having a bit of a problem with a copyright issue. If you need a very solid opinion you might contact User:Moonriddengirl. She is knowledgeable and authoritative but also exceptionally helpful - one of the people who encourage me to keep faith with Wikipedia. However save the problem until you're really stuck because I think she's got quite a lot on hand to cope with. Opbeith (talk) 11:05, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kalpataru Day

Hey Jim! That's good work you've done on Kalpataru Day! Its barely crossed 20 revisions, and its already a well sourced, fairly large article. Keep the good work going. Regards, TheMike •^{Leave me a message!} 11:05, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

National RTI awards

Hi there, it's been a while since we spoke. Inspired by RTI (as we last spoke), I recently added an article on National RTI awards. Can you please lend me your expertise? Take a look at the article, improve it, give feedback or rate it, anyway that you can help, so that it can be up to Wikipedia's high standards. Your assistance is greatly appreciated
regards
abhishek singh (talk) 19:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Online Ambassador Program

Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barack Obama Tucson memorial speech

As the major contributor to this article I am contacting you to let you know the article has failed GA review. Full notes are available on the talk page as well as a note about the article title.--Amadscientist (talk) 16:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Backes

I am basically clueless right now about how to navigate Wikipedia. I am starting to figure it out through trial and error. Thanks for your awesome work on the edit of the article on Scott Backes. I have read both of Mark Twight's books and Steve House's book and Feel like Scott is deserving of a place in history. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr1sandman (talk • contribs) 06:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please add comments to the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

World Clown

Nonsense or vandalism, the article was clearly ripe for a speedy, so I'm not clear why the exact categorisation matters? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback re:AfD stats

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at User:Snottywong.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Marking articles students are working on

Howdy, Online Ambassador!

This is a quick message to all the ambassadors about marking and tracking which articles students are working on. For the classes working with the ambassador program, please look over any articles being worked on by students (in particular, any ones you are mentoring, but others who don't have mentors as well) and do these things:

Add {{WAP assignment | term = Spring 2011 }} to the articles' talk pages. (The other parameters of the {{WAP assignment}} template are helpful, so please add them as well, but the term = Spring 2011 one is most important.)
If the article is related to United States public policy, make sure the article the WikiProject banner is on the talk page: {{WikiProject United States Public Policy}}
Add Category:Article Feedback Pilot (a hidden category) to the article itself. The second phase of the Article Feedback Tool project has started, and this time we're trying to include all of the articles students are working on. Please test out the Article Feedback Tool, as well. The new version just deployed, so any bug reports or feedback will be appreciated by the tech team working on it.

And of course, don't forget to check in on the students, give them constructive feedback, praise them for positive contributions, award them {{The WikiPen}} if they are doing excellent work, and so on. And if you haven't done so, make sure any students you are mentoring are listed on your mentor profile.

Thanks! --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 18:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Wishna

Just to let you know to keep an eye out for anonymous vandals on the Wishna page. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 17:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up - I will add the article to my watch list this evening as I am responding on a smart phone and the button doesn't work on this interface for some reason. It doesn't look like true vandalism but rather POV pushing. You and I can make sure that doesn't succeed. I appreciate your concern. Cullen328 (talk) 18:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Stone

Sorry, looks like we edit-conflicted while trying to add sources. I'm done now, so if I broke anything you were adding, sorry about that! 28bytes (talk) 03:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, with a little more fleshing out, this might be a good WP:Did you know candidate. 28bytes (talk) 03:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hook approved! [3] Nice work on that article. 28bytes (talk) 23:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Climbing Portal

Hi Cullen328!

I just thought that I'd drop you a quick note to inform you abou the Rock Climbing Portal is up and running.

Should you happen to stop by and decide to contribute, please:

Pick a new selected article and picture every two weeks or so.
Update the 'Did You Know?' box every week.
Check and update the 'Tasks' box regually to help develop climbing articles.

Thank you

Cj005257 (talk) 21:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SMARTPHONE (copied)

Extended content

Hello, I noticed that you have written about editing on smartphones. I often edit on a Android device, namely the Droid X. I am using one now. This allows me to make minor corrections and also participate in AfD debates when I am away from a computer. The limitations can be frustrating though, and I have had other editors say, "Why didn't you do so-and-so", such as put a reference into an article. That's almost impossible when you can't cut and paste. I wish I could do more, and wish there was a more robust Android editor available. Your thoughts? Cullen328 (talk) 06:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, I have an iPhone. It allows me to do just about any form of editing Wikipedia. Since I got it, I have actually done quite a lot of editing on it. It can get to the exact same screen as a regular computer, input all the same characters, and copy-paste as well. I have even created a few articles with it and managed to place references in them too. I'd say that the only thing I cannot do with it is to take a picture and place it on Wikipedia without the intervention of a regular computer.

Before my iPhone, I had a Blackberry-like phone that could sign in and edit. But it had a lot of limitations. It could not copy-paste, so I was unable to use it to move text between locations. Getting to anything that was not a letter or number character was tricky, especially the [[brackets for linking]] and {{templates}} and the vertical lines used within them. It was totally impossible to get the bullet • that is used in a lot of navboxes. It took three keystrokes on the tiny keyboard to get each ' when bolding or italicizing anything. Not to mention what I had to go through just to get the <ref></ref> tags.

Despite all these limitations, I managed throughout the time I had the device to compose with it lots of articles and edit many more. I was just happy to be able to do it at all. I edited with it constantly while away from home for part of the day, in various public places, on multi-day trips, even during a weeklong hospital stay. There were times when some event happened and I had it on Wikipedia within minutes.

Prior to the Blackberry-like device, I had a Motorola RAZR phone. I could not sign in on it at all. I could edit (but not create articles) with it . . . sometimes. Sometimes, it let me edit short articles using a random IP address from a certain range that varied each time. Other times, it would send me a message that I was blocked from editing, probably because that IP had a problem from someone else. It was frustrating because what I typed would be lost as a result. Not to mention, I had to input the text using the iTap method on a number key pad. I rarely edited this way at all.

Given all my smartphone experience, this has led me to do certain things. For one, I have pushed for grace periods in which new articles won't get deleted simply due to the lack of references. This is one reason why I created the template {{newpage}}. I have thought about creating a similar template just for smartphones to let others know that one created the page on their phone and would make improvements as soon as they get to a regular computer.

I also made a suggestion somewhere recently that there should be the ability to send a picture one takes with their camera phone straight to Wikipedia for uploading. IPhones allow videos to be sent directly to YouTube without an intervening computer. There should be something similar for pictures on Wikipedia. Sebwite (talk) 00:54, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Mentee?

Hello Cullen238,

I'm a grad student at the University of San Francisco and am working on the WikiProject United States Public Policy project to update and create public policy pages on Wikipedia. I'm completely new to the world of Wikipedia and am wondering if you could be my mentor.

Best regards, Elyane (Elsnthesea) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elsnthesea (talk • contribs) 00:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Elyane, feel free to ask any questions at all. Do you have specific articles in mind, new or existing?Cullen328 (talk) 01:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your insight on my resources re: the Chevron case. I agree, it's very opinionated. I do think it will serve as a good resource to find other resources.

Cheers,

Elsnthesea (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2011 (UTC)User:Elsnthesea[reply]

You just figured out how to indent properly. Very good. Cullen328 (talk) 20:15, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, It was a pleasure to meet you on Saturday. Thanks for all the good tips you provided for editing on Wikipedia. Sonam and I are coming along with our article. We actually decided to change our topic after your feedback and a conversation with Aaron. We're now writing about the California Truck and Bus Rule which is much more straight-forward. When you have a moment, could you take a look at what we have so far? It isn't much - just the background. But any thoughts on the format or the writing itself would be great! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Elsnthesea/sandbox

Thanks! Elsnthesea (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:46, 20 April 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Hello Jim!

It looks like you're a popular Ambassador, that's wonderful. Sonam and I have a pretty good draft of our article on the California Diesel and Truck Rule. I'm wondering when you have a free moment, if you could take a look at what we have so far and give us some feedback. We've gotten some so far from other students and wikipedians which has been helpful. Here's our page: California On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles Regulation. Thanks a bunch! User:Elsnthesea (talk) 17:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the nice note. I just wish I was spending more time in the mountains. Will Beback talk 03:58, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. The gorgeous snow in the high country should last well into July, and the streams and the waterfalls will be gushing for a long time to come. Cullen328 (talk) 04:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May I Use You as A Mentor?

Extended content

Hi Jim or Cullen238,

I am new to the Wikipedia editing world and also a part of the US Public Policy Initiative underway at the University of San Francisco’s Environmental Management Masters Program. I was wondering if it was possible to use you as a mentor. I would love to ask you questions as I begin this online journey.

Thank you,

Kimiye Kkihara (talk) 05:03, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kimiye,

Yes, feel free to ask me any questions you want. I am happy to help. Cullen328 (talk) 05:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim,

I am working with Kimiye on our article and I was wondering if you could be my mentor as well. We're going to work on Citizens to End Animal Suffering and Exploitation v. The New England Aquarium.

Thank you, Stephanie

(Slum125 (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Sure, Stephanie. Let me know why you think this case is notable. By the way, sign your talk page remarks with four tildes. This is a tilde: ~. Good luck. Cullen328 (talk) 15:24, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, Thank you for your response. I feel lucky to have you as a mentor. I have found a few articles that I thought were notable. If you could review them and let me know what you think. The first article I discussed with my partner (Slum125) and saw your comment to her. We will discuss our thoughts and try to come up with a solution. I have added a summary and a link to the other articles. Thank you for all you help. Kkihara (talk) 05:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Articles

1. Citizens to End Animal Suffering and Exploitation v. The New England Aquarium

Summary: The primary issue addressed by the court was whether a dolphin, named Kama, had standing under the MMPA. The court found the MMPA does not authorize suits brought by animals; it only authorizes suits brought by persons. The court would not impute to Congress or the President the intention to provide standing to a marine mammal without a clear statement in the statute. http://www.animalrights.net/2003/citizens-to-end-animal-suffering-and-exploitation-v-new-england-aquarium-1993/

2. Defenders of Wildlife v. Dalton

Summary: Plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction to prevent defendant government official from lifting the embargo against tuna from Mexico's vessels in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. Plaintiffs alleged irreparable injury if three stocks of dolphins became extinct. The court found plaintiffs failed to produce evidence showing irreparable injury. http://animallaw.info/cases/speciescases/caspdolphin.htm

3. Anderson v. Evans

Summary: Advocacy groups challenged governments approval of quota for whale hunting by the Makah Indian Tribe. The Court of Appeals held that in granting the quota, the government violated the NEPA by failing to prepare an impact statement, and, that the MMPA applied to the tribe's whale hunt. REVERSED.

4. Cetacean Cmty. v. President of the United States

Summary: Plaintiff, a community of whales, dolphins, and porpoises, sued Defendants, the President of the United States and the United States Secretary of Defense, alleging violations of the (NEPA), the (APA), the (ESA), and the (MMPA). The Plaintffs were concerned with the United States Navy's development and use of a low frequency active sonar (LFAS) system. The community alleged a failure to comply with statutory requirements with respect to LFAS use during threat and warfare conditions. http://animallaw.info/cases/speciescases/caspwhale.htm

5. Stryker's Bay Neighborhood Council v. Karen

Summary: The Court of Appeals erred in concluding that, when the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) considered alternative sites before redesignating a proposed site for middle-income housing as one for low-income housing it should have given determinative weight to environmental factors. http://supreme.justia.com/us/444/223/

Correction STRYCKER'S BAY NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL v. KARLEN 444U.S. 223(1980) Cullen328 (talk) 23:02, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Each of these court cases is a promising topic for an article. The main criteria I would use for making your selection is notability, and I am referring the the Wikipedia meaning of the word. Please read the overall notability policy, and especially the section called the general notablity guideline. The key sentence is "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list."

Let's say, for the sake of discussion, that four of these cases are mentioned just a few times in passing in reliable sources, but the fifth has many sources that discuss the case in depth. The fifth case should be your choice. The analysis is unlikely to be that clear cut, and if several have in-depth coverage, then you can use other factors to decide. But, in my opinion, notablity (in the Wikipedia sense) should be among the most important factors in your decision. Cullen328 (talk) 22:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a quick Google search on these cases, and noticed that your new user pages show up very high in the search results! That's either a tribute to how highly Google values Wikipedia in its search results, or how obscure these cases are, or perhaps a bit of both. You can't just "count" Google hits to determine notability; instead, you have to evaluate the sources, and find those that are reliable, independent and discuss the case in depth. The judge's ruling is not independent, and neither are publications by the plaintiffs. These can be referenced after notability is established, but can't be used to establish notability itself. Article in major law journals, books, newspapers, magazines and so on are best. I think that a Supreme Court decision would be considered notable by most editors, but that's just my opinion. I have lots of Wikipedia experience, but none directly related to court cases.Cullen328 (talk) 23:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, Kimi and I chose a new case: Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon. Also, see Jodi's talk page regarding a visit to our next class. (Jodi.elizabeth) Slum125 (talk) 07:37, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the talk between you and Jodi below. Thanks for your help! Slum125 (talk) 07:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim! Kimi and I pretty much completed our article on Wiki. Please review at your convenience. Thanks! Slum125 (talk) 20:35, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rob Stone (actor)

On 2 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rob Stone (actor), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that former Mr. Belvedere actor Rob Stone later became a producer of documentaries, including a short film on homelessness that featured Mr. Belvedere himself? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:05, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

will you be my mentor

Hey Jim,

I will be working on the same project as elsnthesea will you help mentor my work as well? Sonamgill (talk) 19:54, 2 April 2011 (UTC)user:sonamgill[reply]

Hello Sonamgill, Since you are working on a team with another student I am mentoring, I will say yes. Please feel free to ask any questions, and welcome to Wikipedia! Cullen328 (talk) 20:00, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cody Orick

Thanks. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, was deeply saddened to read of Dr. Marable's death. Along with many others, I've been looking forward to publication of his book. His death is a loss to us all. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:37, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Class Visit at USF

Hi Jim, thanks for your message on my talk page. Sorry for the delay in responding to your question about a potential class visit. Thanks for your offer and willingness to come to class to help out. I discussed this with Aaron Frank, our Professor and we think it is a great idea. Would the afternoon of 4/16 work for you? I was thinking we could ask one more wikipedian to come and help (either Annie Lin or someone she suggests). I think it would be good to have a brief presentation of some of the things I haven't covered yet and then a Q&A session. Jodi.elizabeth (talk) 21:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to be of assistance. Please give me the time and address, and also an idea of how long I should talk. What are the things you've covered and those you would like me to cover? I am looking forward to it. Cullen328 (talk) 22:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, sorry for the delayed response, I didn't see that you had responded until today. I will email you via your Online Ambassador link. Thanks, Jodi.elizabeth (talk) 00:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff existing

You are correct, of course. I just used the shorter name, as both point to the same rule ... the points being two sides of the same coin.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:56, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cool to meet you

Yes, thank you for your great suggestion. And yes, what a tale. And yes, we have much in common: construction, writing. I have the sense you're a west coast version of me, but with many more contributions! I posted things on the Bounty Board about donations; my sense is it's a good idea, overall. I like to choose what to write about here -- people I meet, authors I like, stuff that I want to learn more about. Inevitably, people coming in contact with me would like to hire me to write stuff, and I feel somewhat awkward doing that here. So the essence of the bargain I'm thinking of making is this: IF I get sent a check to my mailbox which is made out to Wikimedia Foundation (or whatever the wording is -- gotta learn this) THEN I'll write on the particular topics asked for, and do that, while making a note on the talk page that this is a donation request. So we're all above board on this. So, that's kind of how I'm thinking of approaching it. I've learned over the years that being upfront about things is the only way to go, and not to try to trade my reputation away for a few bucks. And then of course I mail the checks to WM foundation. (I'll need the address). What do you think about this? Have you ever used the Bounty Board?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lacey Banghard

LOL. Bearian (talk) 13:08, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flavia

--Hi Jim! This is Flavia, also working on the Syracuse's public policy initiative. I've made several edits to the Save the Children page, but I'm having some trouble referencing my sources. I've been using the 'cite' toolbar add-in, but somehow it isn't referencing my sources the correct way. Any chance you know what I'm doing wrong? The page is largely unsourced, for now, so I want to make sure it gets the proper citations soon! Thank you so much! Fccolang (talk) 22:09, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mirelis

-Hi Jim, This is Mirelis (Syracuse University senior working with the Wikimedia Foundation's Public Policy Initiative) just informing you that I've made some minor contributions to the entry on the United States and the International Criminal Court. I except to edit it much more within the next few days, so I just wanted to keep you in the loop! Thanks so much for offering your help! --MTGonzalez (talk) 23:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Online Ambassadorship

April 16, 2011: Hi Jim, If you have the time and interest I would love for you to be our Online Ambassador for Aaron Frank's Environmental Law II course. Sarah Favrot and I (Amy Parsley), will be working on the Ocean Beach Public Policy page. Thanks for all of your help and your great lecture in class today!

Here is a link to my sandbox where we currently have our outline and will be putting up the rest of the article as it comes along: User:Amybekah/sandbox
Thanks!
Amybekah (talk) 21:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

online mentorship

Hello Jim- I'm wondering if you might be able to serve as my online mentor for our public policy class at USF My partner user:dradams5 and I are working on covering the San Francisco Mandatory Recycling and Composting Ordinance Ckgurney (talk) 21:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Online Ambassador Help

Hi Jim. Thanks for volunteering to help with our Environmental Law Course. We really appreciate your input and it is great to have an USF alumni helping with the course! Jodi.elizabeth (talk) 17:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC) Hi Jim, My name is Mehrshad, and i a student in USF. I am takeing En Law with (Aaron Frank). I am new in Wiki. Could you please, give me some advices and idea that how can i start? Best.mehrshad user talk: mehrshad006[reply]
Hi Jim, It was my pleasuer to meet you on Saturday. As you know I am going to work on Audubon v. Dept. water and power. Could you give me your advice on my work? I have started my research, and I am going to post it late this week or early next week.Best.Mehrshad006 (talk) 22:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC) I should be this if it is not let me konw.User:justintaplin/justsandboxtestMehrshad006 (talk) 23:53, 18 April 2011 (UTC) Jim, I am responsibale for two parts, case and issues. I started to post a few sentences, but it looks ugly. What should I do? thanks.Mehrshad006 (talk) 00:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC) Hello Jim, I have attached two sections (case, Issues) could you please, look at these and give your advice. Thanks.MehrshadMehrshad006 (talk) 21:23, 20 April 2011 (UTC) Hello again. I should say i posted in my sandbox.Mehrshad006 (talk) 22:01, 20 April 2011 (UTC) Jim, Could you please let me know how can i do citation? thanksMehrshad006 (talk) 23:08, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

USF Public Policy initiative

Jim,

Thanks for the talk today at USF, very helpful. If you have time to help my partner Scott and I out we would appreciate it. We will be working on a case for the environmental law class that revolves around the clean water act, EPA and power plant cooling water. May not be ultra interesting but the case may have some implications for future rules and regulations. We will be working on the content this week and let you know if / when we have questions if you are up for it.

Thanks again and let me know if you would be an online ambassador for us.

Cheers,

Gil Falcone Gbfalcone (talk) 23:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback! We will be working on it this week and bring it to main space Tuesday April 26th evening. Will incorporate Summary and better organize as we develop, Thanks.Gbfalcone (talk) 16:21, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for agreeing to be my mentor. Doug and I also look forward to working with you and we both enjoyed your in-class presentation today. Take care.Ckgurney (talk) 01:03, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you Jim for your kind words. I'm still learning the wikipedia language- but I am really trying to remember the signature. I know about it, I just forget :-). I'm a former- Californian, and thanks for all the work you've done on Cali wikis- especially on our beautiful mountains. Nightenbelle (talk) 17:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC) (woo hoo I remembered ;-))[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 22 April 2011

The newsletter of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program – Volume 4, 22 April 2011

This is the fourth issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed.

Voting begins for steering committee - The voting phase for the Wikipedia Ambassador Steering Committee election started this week, and will continue through 27 April.
Seeking more Regional Ambassadors in the US - We are still looking for Regional Ambassadors for the United States! The deadline has been extended to Friday, April 29th.
India pilot being organized now - Plans are currently underway for a pilot expansion of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program – in India! Hisham Mundol and other Wikimedia staff have begun recruiting Campus Ambassador candidates for Pune.
Document DYK, peer review and other milestone at the trophy case - If students you are working with (or any others you notice) are doing work that makes to DYK, is nominated for Good Article status, or is just solid content worth marking, then please help us document the students' success at the trophy case.
Ambassador program at Wikimania - We're planning a set of Wikipedia Ambassador Program presentations for Wikimania 2011, in Haifa this August.
Changes to mailing list - A new low-volume mailing list, [Ambassador-announce-l], is being created. It will be reserved for key announcements and news, which we'd like all ambassadors to be subscribed to.

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:31, 22 April 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Vandalism accusations

There are at least four people on the ANI page accusing me of vandalism, not just one admin. Corvus cornix_talk 06:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heather Knight

I realize you likely have little to no interest in Pacific Union College, but you might be interested in helping edit this article on its current president, currently in sandbox: WP:SDA/Heather J. Knight. PUC, is, as you may know, located in Angwin, CA so in relative proximity to your town. BelloWello (talk) 08:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I am interested for a number of reasons. I am an active member of Napa's only synagogue, and PUC students sometimes attend our Shabbat services as part of their study of comparative religion. I always try to welcome them and answer their questions when I meet them. I am also involved in Napa County politics, and land use issues at PUC have been widely debated in recent years. I will make some comments about the Dr. Knight article on the sandbox talk page. Cullen328 (talk) 15:31, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool! Thank you for your comments. Please feel free to edit the article as well.. I may make a project out of the PUC page later on, it would be nice if you could get some pictures and upload them, but I realize that is asking a lot. I will try to make some edits to the article based on your comments. BelloWello (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Angwin is off my beaten path, but next time I am in that area, I will be happy to take my camera and take a few photos. Cullen328 (talk) 19:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be excellent. I think the content you provided would be more pertinent on the Angwin, California article. BelloWello (talk) 01:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why your fingernail leaves a mark

Hi there,

I reviewed the edit and it seems that I used the CSD criteria incorrectly. In hindsight, I'm not sure it meets any of the CSD criteria. After consultation with other admins, the article has been restored and the AFD re-opened.

Sorry for my mistake!

Thanks,

The Helpful One 00:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

USF Environmental law article

Jim, Thanks for your initial input on our USF Env Law article we have moved into main space and added a summary paragraph in the beginning (as suggested). It is a work in progress until May 10th so please let us know what you think at this point. We still have some to add but please let us know if it flows and tells the story in an unbiassed manner. Entergy v Riverkeeper Thanks fro any feedback. Gil (and Scott) Gbfalcone (talk) 19:53, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also what is the best way to "reference" to the NOTE section. Cammauf1 (talk) 12:26, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your feedback on our article. We will continue to improve it through this weekend and try to incorporate. Gil Gbfalcone (talk) 05:44, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please help assess articles for Public Policy Initiative research

Hi Cullen328/2011 Archive,

Your work as an Online Ambassador is making a big contribution to Wikipedia. Right now, we're trying to measure just how much student work improves the quality of Wikipedia. If you'd like contribute to this research and get a firsthand look at the quality improvement that is happening through the project, please sign up to assess articles. Assessment is happening now, just use the quantitative metric and start assessing! Your help would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 17:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help with linking sections within our article

Hi Jim, I'm having trouble trying to add links within my article. I have a bulleted list (separate from the TOC) that describes the sections in our article and I want it to jump to tha section when you click on the bullet but it's not working. I've tried the code for linking to sections: Section linking But it doesn't seem to be working.

Do you know what may be going wrong? Thanks so much! Amy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amybekah (talk • contribs) 20:50, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like you figured it out, Amy, as the function seems to be working perfectly now. Good work. Cullen328 (talk) 05:03, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-ee

Please note that there is no such thing as a "mentee". There would only be such a thing as a "mentee" if what a mentor did was "ment".

An author does not auth. A tutor does not tut. DS (talk) 03:07, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, I did not choose that word, but rather the folks who run the Wikipedia Ambassador program did. I just volunteered to be a mentor for that program, and they call the students I help "mentees". It is not my favorite word, but it does appear in several dictionaries, so I am not going to fight it. You are welcome to take it up with the program if you wish. Happy editing! Cullen328 (talk) 04:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Key point is that you didn't choose the word. Good enough. DS (talk) 11:12, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

Any idea on when you'll be able to get pictures of Pacific Union College? Partially in anticipation of your promised pictures, I have refocused my energies on articles related to that school. An article on the Church there WP:SDA/PUCChurch is nearing readiness for mainspace and I would like to feature it with an image of the organ in DYK, so it would be nice to get a picture soon. Anyways, no pressure, just wondering when you'll think it would be so the article can be held for then. BelloWello (talk) 04:33, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I had considered driving up there this afternoon, but the weather turned cloudy and forbidding. We have rain expected soon. I can't make any promises, as it is about a one hour drive from where I live, nearly half of which is on winding mountain roads. The next time I have an afternoon to spare, and it is a nice sunny day, I will drive up there and take some photos. Cullen328 (talk) 04:44, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. That's cool, and I really appreciate you doing this! Do you have any ideas for what you're going to take pictures of? From the articles now, I think pictures of the bell, music building, cafeteria/student center, organ, outside of the church, the sign, and whatever else you think would be nice, but again, no pressure. :) I'll be excited to get any pictures at all! I'm tempted to take a picture of a PUC T-Shirt I have sitting around and putting it up. haha. BelloWello (talk) 04:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will certainly take your suggestions, as I am not very familiar with the campus. I have probably only driven through Angwin four or five times in the 19 years I've lived in the Napa Valley. It is really quite out of the way (and they don't sell wine there). It is a very scenic area, though. By the way, did we have an interaction or two under your previous username? Cullen328 (talk) 04:54, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I visited the school earlier this year. I wish I had taken pictures then, for an east coaster like me, the campus and area in general was very gorgeous. And, yes, we did. :) I'd rather not disclose publicly what it was (or who I was, due to the outing incident) but it was very positive. You were able to provide some advice at one point and gave me some helpful words in another. BelloWello (talk) 04:57, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand completely. Feel free to email me at any time. Cullen328 (talk) 04:59, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dude, I just thought of some more. When you take pictures of PUC, some pictures of the Prayer garden, Art Gallery, Gym and Airport would be really amazing as well! I hope I'm not asking for too much, just do what you want. I may be able to get out to PUC at some point next year if all else fails. BelloWello (talk) 17:22, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moonlight Cocktail

My reference for the date of the Glenn Miller recording is:

Moonlight Serenade (A bio-discography of the Glenn Miller Civilian Band) by John Flower published by Arlington House 1972

Regards John Rogers

Thank you very much, and I will add that to the article. Please send the ISBN number if you have it. Cullen328 (talk) 05:36, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Congregation Emanu-El

I think you are over managing Congregation Emanu-El. If editors can't add things, even unreferenced, there is no room for improvement. If you give editors a chance I think most of the time they won't disappoint. Just think about it. Russbus64 (talk) 23:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, as content must be referenced properly, or will likely be deleted. Please add comments to the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

Please take the Wikipedia Ambassador Program survey

Hi Ambassador,

We are at a pivotal point in the development of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program. Your feedback will help shape the program and role of Ambassadors in the future. Please take this 10 minute survey to help inform and improve the Wikipedia Ambassadors.

WMF will de-identify results and make them available to you. According to KwikSurveys' privacy policy: "Data and email addresses will not be sold, rented, leased or disclosed to 3rd parties." This link takes you to the online survey: http://kwiksurveys.com?u=WPAmbassador_talk

Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments, Thank You!

Amy Roth (Research Analyst, Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 20:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From Cara

Hello - hope I'm writing on your page correctly. Thank you for the welcome! Yes, I would be happy to talk with you outside the delete discussion. Especially if it can help me with editing and creating articles. CaraSchulz (talk) 20:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)CaraSchulz[reply]

You did it perfectly: Created a new section with a good title, signed your name with the four tildes, and best of all, friendly. I am working now but will respond at greater length later. The one thing I will say now is that I will do my best to answer any specific questions you may have. Thanks. Cullen328 (talk) 21:04, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a specific question, but it is not time sensitive. What is the process a news organization goes through to be considered reliable or real or authentic? I've successfully gone through - and am going through - the process to gain Press credentials for our organization, but I'm unclear how this process works on Wikipedia. Is there information you could direct me to? CaraSchulz (talk) 14:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)CaraSchulz[reply]

I suggest that you read WP:RS carefully, and also review relevant past debates on the reliable source noticeboard in detail. My very preliminary opinion (based on very little experience in this specific area) is that a news service itself is unlikely to be judged an inherently reliable source, but rather that would be determined by the character of the publications that actually use the material in question. That's because there is an additional layer of editorial control involved. Let's say for the sake of discussion that the Associated Press put out a story on some obscure topic in 1960, and not a single newspaper ran the story. Then, that material from the AP archive might not be considered a good source for that topic. People might ask, "What dis those editors back then see in this story that led them NOT to publish it?" So, my preliminary thought would be to identify the most solid and professional of the publications that use your material, and have those publications discussed as reliable sources. Hope this helps. Cullen328 (talk) 15:09, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've been reading the areas suggested for the past week and I think the problematic area for PNC is the word "mainstream" and how you look at that word. Is a small, niche news org ever going to be considered mainstream? Sometimes. The MinnPost, which generally passes muster as a reliable source on hard news on Wikipedia, is extremely similar to PNC. (Former mainstream journalists, non-profit, alternative funding, etc) They're about 2 years ahead of us. I can't find if they've ever been challenged as a source. But their wiki is still up so I would think not? I'll look into this more, later. However - thank you! I'm sure I'll have many more questions.CaraSchulz (talk) 16:54, 25 May 2011 (UTC)CaraSchulz[reply]

Venceremos Brigade

Seems you indicated some interest in this article. I've started some work on it and would welcome any input. Thanks. Pjefts (talk) 03:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Khan (Tom Kahn)

Thanks for help with the typos. I have many Pakistani-descended friends! Kiefer.Wolfowitz 06:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

William Keith

I haven't been working on Wikipedia much lately, so struggling with the coding, but I cited a source for Keith style with a direct quote as well as a link. I plan to add more to his article with some historic clippings I have access to at the library. The conclusion was in direct contradiction to the paintings on display all over California. The early Keith paintings were all in the epic, romantic style of the Hudson River School, like the paintings at the Crocker in Sacramento. Then, under the influence of the Barbizon School from his trips abroad and his friendship with Inness, he adopted the Tonalist style or what they called "Quietism" back in the day. You are a Northern California person, so you can visit the Crocker and see the large works on display there and then contrast them to some of the later, more intimate scenes in the St. Mary's Collection. His compatriot Thomas Hill worked in the grander style throughout his career, but Keith changed dramatically and the nice quote you - or whoever posted it - have from the exhibition catalog reflects his later philosophical approach. The LACMA painting in the link is a mid-career painting, large and grand but the later, darker style works are not usually on display and are not very popular today. His tonalism rarely had the subtle approach of an Inness. Jim, I have the CAC article you mention by Mrs. Adams. The biography I sourced is actually almost identical to the Keith biography published in the 2001 California Art Club Gold Medal Catalog I have on my desk with many of the same bios as the site, so the book can be cited if it makes you happier. Same author as Jonathan Club Collection book I just received, also frequent writer for CAC in the past, which I also get newsletters from. I understand the guidelines, that is why I looked for and referred to a source for what I felt needed to be said. I was trained as a classical musician, but I was an intern at a gallery and work in an art atelier part-time. I actually spent some time with Mrs. Adams at a wedding last year with her husband and have access to all their publications User talk:Redefineculture —Preceding undated comment added 04:23, 28 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]

I appreciate your help as you can tell I have problems with formatting at times. It's easier sometimes to start a new article than to work on an existing one because there is more than one format for links and references and I am not always used to the format someone else has used. The essay on Keith comes from the California Art Club's 91st Annual Gold Medal Exhibition Catalog by Jane Dini and Jeffrey Morseburg, Published by the California Art Club, Pasadena, California, 2001, Page 18-19. ISBN 0-9672257-3-6. For several years there was an exhibition of historic works along with the contemporary paintings, the one with Keith was titled "From the Desert to the Sea: Paintings by Historic American Artists and California Art Club Members, curated by Jeffrey Morseburg and Jeanette O'Malley (Pasadena Museum of History). Redefineculture (talk) 28 May 2011 (UTC)

June 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

re Notability of clergy

No, for some reason I got that confused with another thread and thought that it was current for some reason. Well, no harm (it's not forbidden to comment in a thread three years after the last comment), anyway you read it, and I'm always up for a bit of pontification and/or ranting. As the the content, well, if Person A or B met the WP:GNG standard of, basically, some coverage in the papers (which Person B possibly might but probably not Person A, unless he did some other stuff), then maybe -- maybe -- they would have a case for an article. But probably not: you generally have to meet some additional criteria (WP:PROF, WP:ATHLETE, WP:ACTOR, or whatever).

I don't know if that's good or bad. If Person A and Person B meet the criteria, then probably a few million other people do, which would mean a large expansion of articles. Which would be OK, I guess, although it would mean a major expansion and raises the question of whether someone is likely to need to look up someone who was, at the end of the day, just an everyday person, albeit an accomplished one. And if Person A and Person B qualify, why not someone who was a forklift driver for forty years -- after all, a lot of people knew him too, and he might well have impacted the lives of scores of people in a meaningful way if he was that sort of person. So his successful and useful career was blue-collar rather than white-collar, so what? And at that point you are pretty close to including everyone, which of course would mean several billion articles, potentially, and are we set up to handle that? So I don't know. Herostratus (talk) 13:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD/DB

I just mainly incorporated my two comments in the introduction. I would remind you only discuss notability issue on the AfD page. If you wish to reply my comments on DB's talk page, please do so only on that talk page; you should also read the older version of the DB article before you made your judgement. STSC (talk) 03:19, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gladding, McBean

So very nice to see the Gladding, McBean page finally included on Wikipedia. I am just beginning on Wikipedia - experimenting on my user page. Now I can link to GMcB, and delete the extra material from my experimental article on Franciscan Ceramics! One big correction to GMcB. GMcB never had a plant or factory in Glendale, California. This misconception is wildly held in all prior publications including my own books & the Wedgwood Museum's web site. GMcB had two plants in Los Angeles, the former Tropico Potteries plant acquired by GMcB became what the company called the "Glendale Plant" as they already had a brick plant in LA. The former Franciscan/GMcB plant "Glendale plant" at 2901 Los Feliz in Los Angeles borders Glendale - and never was in Glendale - though FYI - prior to the GMcB acquisition of Tropico Potteries, Tropico Potteries was in the unincorporated city of Tropico, California. Tropico, California never incorporated and the land was eventually annexed by the cities of Los Angeles & Glendale - further research still needs to be completed regarding Tropico, California. The Franciscan web site at gmcb.com/franciscan can be cited for the correct information regarding the "Glendale plant, in Los Angeles" until a new book is published this fall which will clarify this misconception.

I will review the information on GMcB, and will make additions & corrections as needed - especially regarding Washington state acquisitions and Tropico Potteries in LA. I edited the "Growth Section," you may wish to format the information differently & make corrections. Without going into the Glendale plant argument, I referenced the different plants: LA & Glendale. See what you think. Gmcbjames (talk) 00:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

James Elliot-Bishop — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmcbjames (talk • contribs) 15:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

US National Archives collaboration

United States National Archives WikiProject

Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts.

There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I want to thank you for signing up to participate. I had a special request from NARA staff, so I thought I would ask personally to see if you might be interested or know someone who is. I was contacted by the head of NARA's Archival Recovery Team about ways that Wikipedia might be able to raise public awareness of their activity. Now, this is a public agency, and one with a fascinating job, but it would still be somewhat improper for them, or even me, to make edits related to it, but we'd like to put the question to the Wikipedians at large to see if you think this merits a mention on Wikipedia. The team has received some media coverage in its own right, and might even merit an article of its own. I have listed some of the coverage in my note at the bottom of Wikipedia:GLAM/NARA/To-do. If you're not interested in working on the request, that is perfectly fine, and if you don't think it is even notable, that is also okay. :-) Dominic·t 20:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For your message. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's appreciated, I usually only get noticed when I rebuke someone who - no matter what the census says - has some odd ideas about what race Latinos can and cannot be. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:53, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ismail Darbar

Hi Cullan328, please see the talk page of this article. You have removed some of the most important details from this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Free Contributor (talk • contribs) 05:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you are a new user. Welcome to Wikipedia! Please read and study our policy on biographies of living people. We do not include malicious rumors and gossip in such biographies. We do not echo tabloid newspaper sensationalism. There are plenty of other outlets for such material, but we include only material which has been widely reported and verified in reliable sources, and we are scrupulous to write from the neutral point of view. This approach is non-negotiable. Cullen328 (talk) 05:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boston?

Hey Cullen, have I not run into you yet? I mean, have I met you as a real person without connecting you to your wikidentity? ;) Drmies (talk) 03:14, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning. My name is Jim, I am about 6'-3", clean shaven and almost 60 years old. I'll be wearing a dark square patterned shirt and jeans today. So say "hi" when you see me. I am enjoying meeting lots of Wikipedians here. Cullen328 (talk) 11:25, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I'll be on the lookout! Drmies (talk) 18:11, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

California

I am Californian, but alas I am just finishing my thesis and really don't have time to pursue other academic endeavors. Best of luck and thanks for thinking of me. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:27, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi! I'm the guy from Berkeley currently talking to you irl. Kevin (talk) 00:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assassin's Creed

Hi, I don't think that the editors intimidated by my username, I like this username, because of it I don't want to change it, please...--—AssassiN's Creed^(talk) 15:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

August Hermann Ewerbeck

Nicely done! Congratulations, and thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter

The first ever WikiProject National Archives newsletter has been published. Please read on to find out what we're up to and how to help out! There are many opportunities for getting more involved. Dominic·t 21:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter
July 2011

News

Featured article contest

This week, our first multilingual featured article contest was announced. We are aiming to improve the articles on the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, or Bill of Rights to featured or good status in English and other languages. Prizes for winners will be a gift package from the National Archives including a book of your choice or a tote bag, and other swag, plus, of course, a special barnstar.

August 6 backstage pass

Plans are in the works for a meetup and backstage pass event at the National Archives II facility in College Park, MD. There will be a regular social meetup, a discussion with Dominic about WP:NARA, a tour of the building by NARA staff, and then time for a scanathon and editathon in the research rooms and library until the building closes at 5 pm. Keep your schedules open!

From our recent uploads:

...see more.

Special requests:

This section includes special requests from the NARA staff:

Archival Recovery Team

The National Archives' Archival Recovery Team (ART) is a team of law enforcement agents and archivists who investigate NARA's lost and stolen documents. They have received media attention ([4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]) and would like to request an article be written for the team, if Wikipedians deem it notable. It is hoped that making more information about the group available on Wikipedia will increase public awareness of the documents they are seeking to recover.

Ongoing

Today's Document challenge

The Today's Document challenge is an opportunity for Wikipedians to get their work related to National Archives holdings spotlighted on Archives.gov and the National Archives' tumblr. Each day the National Archives selects a document related to the day's date to showcase. The goal is to get articles related to the selected documents on the main page in ""Did You Know...?" the same day that the National Archives features the document. Alternatively, other appropriate articles related to National Archives holdings not already selected will be used for new documents of the day by NARA staff and posted to their tumblr.

Wikisource

WP:NARA has a sister WikiProject on Wikisource, WS:NARA. On Wikisource, editors transcribe, proofread, and arrange documents. This helps to make little-known documents more discoverable, or well-known documents more searchable, and improves accessibility. See the files being worked on. If you are new to Wikisource and would like to participate, there are experienced Wikisourcerors willing to be mentors.

New contributions

A list of some recent contributions to the project:

Wikipedia

District of Columbia Compensated Emancipation Act (Fetchcomms)

Court of the Patriarchs (CutOffTies)

Opposition to the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom (Fetchcomms)

Wikisource¹

Memorial of Queen Liliuokalani in relation to the Crown lands of Hawaii

Petition from women of Brookline

Resolutions of the Joint Committee on the Washington Monument

H. R. 4982

A Petition For Universal Suffrage

Susan B. Anthony petition for remission of fine

Alexander Hamilton's commission to take rank as Colonel

¹Credit goes to Prosody, Theornamentalist, Inductiveload, Digipoke, George Orwell III, Kathleen.wright5, BirgitteSB, and Zhaladshar

Tools

Archives.gov grabber (Slakr)

Future plans

Major image contribution The National Archives has hundreds of thousands of digitized documents in its holdings. We are working on a bulk upload to Commons of one particular cache of about 123,000 TIFF master files in the next few days! Once uploaded, these will require a massive community effort to help categorize the files on Commons and add them to articles on Wikipedia or transcribe them on Wikisource.	Inclusion in the online catalog We are currently working on a system for including links to pages on Wikimedia projects in the National Archives online catalog. The Wikimedia projects are hosting an increasing number of transcriptions of National Archives documents and high-quality image and video files that are not available through NARA's own site. Links to these Wikimedia pages in the documents' actual catalog records will benefit the end user by providing them access to further resources about the documents, and they will also demonstrate the National Archives commitment to supporting Wikimedians' efforts.
To stop receiving this newsletter, please remove your name from the list.

Steve Comisar

Just an FYI, I removed your link in the Steve Comisar per WP:COPYLINK. It appears to forward to a copyrighted text not owned by the website owner - I am assuming it is property of GQ magazine and not author. reddogsix (talk) 19:20, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your assessment. This is the website of a professional, successful freelance writer for major magazines. She is the author of the piece. I think that it is reasonable to presume that she is authorized to maintain an archive of her published articles on her own website. Presumably the magazines that hire her are familiar with her website. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:20, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 00:25, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your defense re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louise Teuber. It's true he got a lot of stuff wrong, but I understand where he is coming from. --MelanieN (talk) 01:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's because you believe in assuming good faith, as do I. I hope that the other editor shares that value as well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly

	Thank you for your support
	Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. I shall endeavor to meet your and the community's expectations as an admin. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ambassador Program: assessment drive

Even though it's been quiet on-wiki, the Wikipedia Ambassador Program has been busy over the last few months getting ready for the next term. We're heading toward over 80 classes in the US, across all disciplines. You'll see courses start popping up here, and this time we want to match one or more Online Ambassadors to each class based on interest or expertise in the subject matter. If you see a class that you're interested, please contact the professor and/or me; the sooner the Ambassadors and professors get in communication, the better things go. Look for more in the coming weeks about next term.

In the meantime, with a little help I've identified all the articles students did significant work on in the last term. Many of the articles have never been assessed, or have ratings that are out of date from before the students improved them. Please help assess them! Pick a class, or just a few articles, and give them a rating (and add a relevant WikiProject banner if there isn't one), and then update the list of articles.

Once we have updated assessments for all these articles, we can get a better idea of how quality varied from course to course, and which approaches to running Wikipedia assignments and managing courses are most effective.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of Dishware to Tableware

Thank you for your comments on the merge of Dishware to Tableware on Talk:Tableware. Since none of the notified major contributors of either page have discussed the merger, I don't think the merger proposal pros and cons has been fully covered prior to forming an opinion to merge or not. I have added some comments on the tableware talk page I would appreciate you reviewing and discussing. I was looking forward to a lively discussion and now maybe there will be. Just for fun, as I have typing this, the word dishware has been flagged by my spellchecker as not a word. Again, thank you for your time and consideration. Gmcbjames (talk) 06:00, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic notability

I've now decided to keep away from articles and arguments, life's too short, but remembering your kind comments in the past I just wanted to say that you're not the only person who is utterly bewildered by "innovative" notability criteria - gobsmacking, to use an expression! Opbeith (talk) 19:27, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your kind words. Perhaps after a restful break, you may decide to return to the wonderful world of Wikipedia editing. At least I hope you will. In any case, I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your calm, generous response seems to have helped achieve an amicable conclusion - I'm glad. Opbeith (talk) 20:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Being a dog that can't resist returning to its vomit, to use a lovely expression, I went back to clamber over the wreckage at Anders Behring Breivik (3) and look at what had been said again. I noticed that you considered my (and others') editing to be "ill-advised", apparently endorsing the general suggestion that this was a bad faith attempt at guilt by association. It was not. I don't want to get into an argument on the subject so no need to reply, take my word for it or not as you choose. Opbeith ([[User talk:Opbeith|talk] ]) 11:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I made a one paragraph contribution three hours into that ten day debate, and my main point was in opposition to those who argued earlier that we should have no Breivik biography per a strict interpretation of WP:BLP1E. I think that it was "ill advised" for editors to comb through the manifesto assembling a list of every commentator Breivik praised, then adding that primary source factoid to the BLPs of those people as, "Wow, XXX inspired Breivik to kill a bunch of innocent people!" I've only now read the entire debate, and, as usual for me, end up in a moderate position. I think that Robert Spencer emerges as a special case because of the sheer number and depth of Breivik's discussion of his work, plus Spencer's in depth response. Hope this helps clarify. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:52, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not very good at keeping away from scenes of disaster or resisting semi-addiction, so thanks for your message which it didn't take me very long to get! I still very strongly disagree, but (a) I'm trying to keep away from the argument and (b), more importantly, I know that your opinion is an honest and generous one that I respect, so I'll not say more on the subject. I do appreciate your kind comment and good wishes. Opbeith (talk) 17:02, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Baggage claim

Add the sources you found, then I'll withdraw. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 05:26, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Go spend time with your wife! I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 05:42, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy

The top dog is always a mongrel!

You don't need me to tell you that Cullen is a common Irish name - I just wondered if there was a connection to that place, and I guess we'll have to call it a maybe. Anyhow, may I take this opportunity to congratulate you on your diplomacy with this barnstar - it may come as some surprise but it isn't just for the interaction on our talk page - it's for a pattern of decent, thoughtful behaviour with and toward other editors that jumps out after a short review of your talk page.

Yours,

Egg Centric 23:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Salathe

Hi Jim, We are looking for relatives of John Salathe, Swiss-born (1899), pioneer rock climber in Yosemite Valley and blacksmith. We are writing a series of articals in a Swiss Journal on rock climbers. Please respond if you have any knowledge of his background. We thought you wrote about him and added a facebook page for him also. Thanks, Max Matter via Sandy James — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxmatter (talk • contribs) 13:22, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Max and Sandy, I expanded the article based on sources listed in the references. It is tough to find extensive information about him. You could contact Tom Frost through his website. Frost photographed him in 1964. Allen Steck knew him fairly well, but is very elderly now. I don't know how to contact him. Perhaps Royal Robbins or Yvon Chouinard may have some information. I had nothing to do with a Facebook page. Sometimes such pages are created in an automated way by computer programs to drive traffic to Facebook. Feel free to email me if you wish. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited

...to this discussion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:33, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barney Glaser

Just wanted to say thanks for your kind words. I got a bit frustrated at one of the users and it was nice to read your comment. Thanks! 14:19, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusionism

Much like an alcoholic is "anyone who drinks more than I do," an inclusionist is anyone who votes "keep" more than I do... (Oops, that old alcoholism joke might be over your head, but it will make more sense after your 21-er in a few years...)

Nerk nerk! best regards! Carrite (talk) 05:21, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude, I know that "almost sixteen" sounds a lot like "almost sixty" but it has been decades since I've been carded at the local pub. I could post a recent photo, but it might scare the kids here. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's live, and you have my thanks

		The Special Barnstar
		During disussions on the talk page for Wikipedia:A Primer for newcomers you shared some wonderful insights that I was able to incorporate into the essay. I am grateful for your assistance and hope that WP:NewbieGuide will be of benefit to newcomers for years to come. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:05, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A neutral party would be invaluable

There is currently a dispute resolution open for a page I've been trying (unsuccessfully) to resolve, Heroes in Hell. The dispute page is located here and the relevant dialogue related to this dispute is on the talk page of the article. It would be helpful to get another opinion in here from someone uninvolved with the dispute. I must warn you though, you might want to get comfy before you start going through this material-- there's a lot to read. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 04:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Let me add my thanks for your help at DRN. If you have a bit of extra time, we'd welcome your help with other disputes there as well. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:28, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First publication of Gilgamesh in the Outback

In reply to your question, I don't know which edition of Gilgamesh in the Outback first appeared for a reader to see. Both have a printed July 1986 publication date. The Asimov's edition probably went to subscribers before July and appeared on some newsstands before July, too. Review copies of Rebels in Hell might have gone out before July. However, I have not claimed first printing or original publication of either edition. In terms of a known publication record, I have asserted both have a July 1986 date, as several citations show, most especially Silverberg's web page. I think this is the most accurate description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dokzap (talk • contribs) 09:10, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Online Ambassadors: Time to join pods

Hello! If you're planning to be an active Online Ambassador for the upcoming academic term, now is the time to join one or more pods. (A pod consists of the instructor, the Campus Ambassadors, and the Online Ambassadors for single class.) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) explains the expectations for being part of a pod as an Online Ambassador. (The MOU for pods in Canada is essentially the same.) In short, the role of Online Ambassadors this term consists of:

Working closely with the instructor and Campus Ambassadors, providing advice and perspective as an experienced Wikipedian
Helping students who ask for it (or helping them to find the help they need)
Watching out for the class as a whole
Helping students to get community feedback on their work

This replaces the 1-on-1 mentoring role for Online Ambassadors that we had in previous terms; rather than being responsible for individual students (some of whom don't want or help or are unresponsive), Online Ambassadors will be there to help whichever students in their class(es) ask for help.

You can browse the upcoming courses here: United States; Canada. More are being added as new pods become active and create their course pages.

Once you've found a class that you want to work with—especially if you some interest or expertise in the topic area—you should sign the MOU listing for that class and get in touch with the instructor. We're hoping to have at least two Online Ambassadors per pod, and more for the larger classes.

If you're up for supporting any kind of class and would like me to assign you to a pod in need of more Online Ambassadors, just let me know.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:31, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS: There are still a lot of student articles from the last term that haven't been rated. Please rate a few and update the list!

Pod suggestions

Hi Cullen! I'm in the process of trying to find Online Ambassadors to support each of the classes for this coming term, and I want to recommend a few to you: Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Political Participation (Tess Marchant-Shapiro) and Wikipedia:School and university projects/HardenPsy101. If you're up for it, please check out the Memorandum of Understanding (linked above) which sketches the expectations for Online Ambassadors this term, and then you can sign on to a class and get in touch with the professor.

If there's another class you'd rather support (or if you're up for joining more than one pod), feel free! We're shooting for at least about 2 Online Ambassadors for each class.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:12, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Yosemite fatalities

I personally could go either way on this issue. I added the note about the fatalities seeing as they have catapulted Yosemite into the news a lot lately – I read the Los Angeles Times and it seems as if almost every day there's a notice about yet another luckless soul who's been killed there. (And they're not even counting the latest death because they rushed the poor kid out of park boundaries before he expired? What is that? But I digress.)

My train of thought was that if a notice I posted in March about the park's temporary closure, which I consider to have the same level of or even less importance than the fatalities, could survive in the article then almost certainly this fact would be able to. Then again, now that I brought the March edit to your attention it's likely that will get removed as well, but these things will go the way they want to. The point is that I can think of roughly the same number of arguments for both keeping and removing the edit for a variety of reasons, and I would not at all be bothered if it was deemed insignificant, so I'll leave it up to you on this one.

(By the way, thank you deeply for allowing me to get in my two cents on the matter before taking action; I know that some other people would not have given that courtesy.)

RedSoxFan274 _{(leave a message~contribs)} 23:45, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guess what?

Turns out this guy is just another sock of a blocked user with a long history of repeated copyright violations. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 04:38, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That may or may not be true, but you shouldn't call edits "vandalism" unless they clearly and unambiguously meet the definition of vandalism. Did they in this particular case? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:44, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because of their rush to get valid images listed as orphaned fair use. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 04:46, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please quote the relevant language from WP:VANDALISM that describes this type of edit. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:48, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What section of WP:VANDALISM actually identifies vandalism? That page discusses what to do when you find it. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 04:50, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Their edits and uploads were, at a minimum, suspicious, because of the multiple minor edits they had made just to get enough edits to be able to upload images, their multiple uploads all of a sudden with no previous valid edits, their major changes without discussion, and the need to keep valid images from being deleted because of their suspicious edits. I wouldn't have given them a vandalism warning if I didn't think what they were doing was vandalism, which it has proven it was. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 04:49, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will readily concede that their editing pattern was suspicious, and if investigation shows that this was a sockpuppet of a banned user, then so be it. Ban the sock. But the offense is sockpuppetry not vandalism. I still don't see vandalism in this particular group of edits. Don't arrest a burglar for armed robbery. Those are different crimes. Where's the vandalism here, and when you answer, please quote policy. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:54, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sierra No. 3

I'll take a look when I have a more reliable connection, probably tomorrow. For now I'll suggest that with the films, maybe list how the locomotive appeared in the movie rather than the actors. (Reply here; I'll watch your talk page) Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. I will try to add a description of the locomotive's role in at least some of the films based on descriptions in reliable sources. I thought that listing the names of the most famous human stars would give readers a sense that these were major Hollywood films and not just something trivial. I look forward to more of your opinions. Thanks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've rated it B-class and mid-importance for Wikiproject Trains, and honestly you've built such a good article that I can't suggest much improvement. You could probably get it rated GA now with only a few minor changes needed during the process. Perhaps lengthen the lead section - so that it's not as dependent on the direct quotes - and add citations for some of the stuff at the end of the history section. Otherwise, that is a fantastic article. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your kind words. I will go over the article with your comments in mind. I am grateful. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tala

I was reviewing my edits in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tala_Raassi and recognize that I should have probably used a more calm and reconciliatory tone. I apologize for that. While I still don't believe that Tala should have an article in wikipedia, for the reasons that I enunciated in the AfD, I am not going to post any longer there, and will leave it to other contributors. We have a disagreement on the policies, which is fine: that's why there is a vote. I trust that you and other contributors, more experienced than me in interpreting wikipolicies, will find the right solution. Again, my apologies for the tone used. Bye now and be well.Divide et Impera (talk) 22:33, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 13:49, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

If you want to, please take a look on the AfD for 2011 failed Gothenburg terrorist attack.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:38, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although I am sure that you are acting in good faith here, I will decline to comment on this AfD. I don't want anyone to get the impression that I can be influenced by canvassing by other editors. Thanks for asking. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:36, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

declaring conflicts of interest

Hey, thanks much for your note at Wikipedia talk:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest. I would like to work out a good standard approach to this. Your disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is agreeable. Like mine, it expresses only mild conflicts of interest, so I think we agree that most users have some kind of mild conflict and it may help to get it out in the open.

After some rumination I am thinking that COI statements are too long and grim for everyone to put on a user page. An editor may well want the main user page to be more expressive and joyful. How about this: userpage/COI could be a standard location for a conflict of interest statement; then it can be long, legalistic, explicit, and boring, and the main user page need only link to it. I put an example here. What do you think? If you and I were to agree on this standard, we would already have a plurality, as far as I can tell. -- Econterms (talk) 17:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that it is best for you to put your COI statement on a sub-page, then that is fine. I see the logic behind your thinking. However, I don't see my own disclosure as "grim" but rather as (I hope) honest and forthright. So, for now, I think I will stick with what I've got. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:33, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign the MOU for your pods

Just a reminder to sign (~~~~) the Memorandum of Understanding at Wikipedia:United States Education Program/MOU/sign for the course pods you have signed up for. -- Donald Albury 20:45, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've done so. Thanks for the reminder. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at Prust's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

First group

Thanks for your note. It seems there is no one so indignant as a spamming webmaster. Will Beback talk 05:15, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, Will. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:24, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Mulder

Nice work! I decided also to have a go at him and found a curious but wel documented book that resulted in another article entirely-> Gunterstein. Still no high resolution images, but he's got a commons category now. It turns out (as is usual for engravers), that several etchings of his were already out on commons attributed to the original artists. Jane (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great article. It's wonderful to see how the encyclopedia grows. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I'll give you a barnstar later when the discussion closes, but for now I'll have to make do with saying thank you for saving the article Print Council of America. Please see my comments on the page. Jay _{Σεβαστός}^discuss 11:34, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Breakfast at Tiffany's debate.

Hi, Julia Butterfly Hill does have a page, but not every tree climber that protests does. I would like to clarify that I have the hugest respect for people who climb trees to save them, sorry if the allusion diverted from the topic. Anonywiki (talk) 01:44, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment was fine. My response was to point out that the main issue is notability. If reliable sources give significant coverage to a topic, then a Wikipedia article is appropriate. That applies to tree-sitters as well as racially controversial movie performances. That's my view. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

improvement - European Youth For Action

Extended content

Hi Cullen, your sources seem to have had a big affect on the keep result of this afd, do you intend to add any of them to the article? - European Youth For Action - Off2riorob (talk) 05:05, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rob, Thank you very much for your good faith question. At the moment, I am editing on a smart phone sitting next to my wife. I am a volunteer as are you. I happen to be self-employed and working today and tomorrow 75 miles away from where I live. So the commute has been long and brutal, and I can't add the sources with a smart phone. It's late where I live and I'm not going to walk into my office at the moment to sit down at a computer. However, I have identified the sources for any editor, including you, to add to the article. Feel free to do so, and I will send brownie points to you. If you are too busy, I will do it in the next few days. The important point is that the reliable sources have been identified and are in the article talk history. You can add them, or I can add them, or some other editor with more spare time than either of us can add them. Consensus is that the topic is notable. Warm regards to you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they are notable and I don't think your citations assert they are so I won't be adding them - as your comment and so called sources that assert they are notable "swung" the AFD imo you have a duty of care to improve the article. There is no imminant hurry to improve just that some improvement occurs. In the afd you say, "Keep I see significant coverage in New Statesman Society, Magazines for Libraries, Carfree Cities and a Dutch book Leven volgens je idealen: de andere politieken van huidige sociale bewegingen in Nederland which Google translates as "Living according to your ideals, the other policies of current social movements in the Netherlands" - when you have time I would appreciate you showing me this significant coverage, what is the coverage about? and turning that into actual article improvement, thanks - Off2riorob (talk) 05:41, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised that you think that I am influential enough to "swing" an AfD debate on my own. I would have preferred to think that it was the reliable sources I identified that accomplished that goal. I will add the sources when I have the time since your personal opinion is that they are not adequate. That is fine and I respect your opinion. Let me again repeat, as I said the other day, that I consider you a very useful and valuable editor here at Wikipedia. Even though I am sure that you and I will disagree again, I treasure the times that we agree. You do good work here, and thank you for what you do. I truly mean that. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, they don't look adequate to me,(a mention in a book/line, what would I add, "and they were mentioned in a book"..) perhaps I will be presently surprised.I look forward to the improvement of the article - enjoy your real life work, regards. - Off2riorob (talk) 06:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update on courses and ambassador needs

Hello, Ambassadors!

I wanted to give you one last update on where we are this term, before my role as Online Facilitator wraps up at the end of this week. Already, there are over 800 students in U.S. classes who have signed up on course pages this term. About 40 classes are active, and we're expecting that many more again once all the classes are up and running.

On a personal note, it's been a huge honor to work with so many great Wikipedians over the last 15 months. Thanks so much to everyone who jumped in and decided to give the ambassador concept a try, and double thanks those of you who were involved early on. Your ideas and insights and enthusiasm have been the foundation of the program, and they will be the keys the future of the program.

Courses looking for Online Ambassadors

Still waiting to get involved with a class this term, or ready to take on more? We have seven classes that are already active and need OA support, and eleven more that have course pages started but don't have active students yet. Please consider joining one or more of these pods!

Thanks

Thanks, I just recently "went legit" but I've been lurking and editing here for a few years now. I believe you sent me something after I added some info to the American Canyon High School article. I don't know all of the ins and outs but I'm willing to learn and would appreciate any help you can lend. I also created another article on a Napa related item-Queen of the Valley Medical Center. I noticed you have Charles Krug on your list of to dos. I do also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Napa56 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Active courses that really need Online Ambassadors:

Courses that may be active soon that need Online Ambassadors:

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hi , regarding ...

Extended content

your post here - has the content your discussing been deleted, I don't see anything in your logs, if it has, what was the topic? I think that smartphone of yours might have led you to the wrong talkpage ... Off2riorob (talk) 09:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to the editor's comment on your talk page (since deleted) that started "Why not continue the protests here?" and alluded to discussion above of the pepper spray incident. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok thanks for the detail, yes that user I have asked not to post on my talkpage, hence deleted and reminded not to on his talkpage. For added detail - dispute with the user goes back nineteen months to the deletion of this article he created - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daphne_Caruana_Galizia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - Off2riorob (talk) 21:54, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are Kont Dracula and Qattusu two different editors, or is one a sockpuppet of the other? I notice that we still have an article about Malta, not suprisingly, but no article about the journalist. When someone is completely wrong about one thing, there seems to be an increased chance that they will be wrong about other things. I guess we can call it "wrongheadedness". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:33, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With the demand place on the importance for substantiating contributions to wikipedia, I would certainly hope that you have some sort of evidence to back up your claims of "sockpuppet" accounts made about me. Spreading falsehoods does not seem to be a problem on wikipedia, while so many lesser issues are. The court case involving the subject of this deleted article has engulfed the Maltese media for many months. Here is one article, to which you will see many more linked.

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110907/local/Columnist-accuses-magistrate-of-cavorting-with-policeman-and-chatting-with-defence.383607

You have no reason to feel smug about the deletion of the article as, in truth, it is you who are completely wrong. The article should not have been deleted as it was an article about a very eminent Maltese personality. There was nothing in my original article that contained anything remotely contentious or unverifiable, ~~despite your lies to suggest otherwise~~.So much for my "wrongheadness". Now I know what you mean by "Let's Discuss it" though. Your idea of discussion is very different from mine. Kont Dracula (talk) 14:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two points, Kont Dracula. First, I did not accuse you of being a sockpuppet. ~~Off2riorob made that implication~~ (After rereading the exchange, Off2riorob did not imply that), and I asked him for further information. I have no way of knowing one way or the other, and saw no evidence myself. Secondly, as to the deletion of the article about the journalist, I have no reason to feel smug or anything else, because I expressed no opinion in that debate and have made no attempt to see if the person is notable or not. If the person is notable and you write a well-referenced article that fully complies with our standards on biographies of living people, then I am sure that the article will stay and that will be fine with me. The "wrongheadedness" that I referred to was another editor's comment (Qattusu) that if an article about a Maltese journalist was deleted, then the whole article about Malta should also be deleted. I am unsure about the notablity of the journalist and you may very well be right about that. However, I am certain that Malta is notable. If you and Qattusu are unconnected, then my comment has nothing whatsoever to do with you. So, please tell me what I am "completely wrong" about here? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You seemed to be claiming that Qattusu was completely wrong in petitioning for retaining the article on Daphne Caruana Galizia and as you were openly questioning whether that Qattusu and I were the same person, I took that personally. I had not seen ~~Off2riorob's original lies~~ claiming that I was using a "sockpuppet" account so I didn't appreciate the context within which you were asking that question. To the subject of my deleted article, I can see on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daphne_Caruana_Galizia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) that some of his more hysterical objections to the articles deletions were possibly counter-productive but in essence he was certainly correct about the notability of the subject. Just because you disagree with the manner in which someone expresses something, it doesn't mean they are wrong. I have no way of knowing what had been added to the article at the time of its deletion but from the article for deletion page, I surmise it was after the subject was arraigned in court for defamation of a magistrate. How it turns out that this made an article which had remained uncontested for over a year less and not more notable is beyond logic. For what it is worth, I have no idea who Qattusu is. Recently, a third party added an inline citation for the birth date of Sam Leith, about whom I also started an article. Within just over sixty seconds, Off2riorob was once again on the scene to delete, not just these amendments but all references to the subject's birth date. I notice that the entry for Barack Obama does not carry and inline citation for his birthdate, as do not those for Adolf Hitler, Charles Darwin or William Shakespeare. To state that Sam Leith was born on the 1st January 1974 is a fact which, besides being accurate and referenced in a public document (the use of which Off2riorob describes as "investigative journalism"!), is hardly contentious. Does the fact that the user Off2riorob came to undo a reference to this fact from the General Register Office mere seconds after it was added does not suggest to you that he is motivated by something other than a desire to improve Wikipedia? I admit that I do not know Wikipedia policy chapter and verse but it is very clear that those who do (or at least purport to) are very selective about how and where they choose to interpret it. Where is is stated that birth dates need references anyway? And if they do, when are you going to remove those for the thousands of articles on Wikipedia where they are absent? Sam Leith seems a rather odd place to start. After all, if the same user has stated in his infinite (if very poorly spelt wisdom), that the subject is not notable, then how on earth can the date of his birth be considered contentious? Off2riorob is simply bruised that I have taken him to task for his past incompetence. I can only assume that, deep down, he knows he was wrong to petition for its deletion and so has turned his attentions to trying to discredit me by attacking my articles on completely unreasonable grounds. Here, with you at least, he seems to have had some real success. I think to an unbiased third party, it is quite self-evident ~~how pathetic his petty, misspelt objections to the Sam Leith article have been.~~ It may have been my error of misjudgement to take you for an unbiased, reasonable individual. This is really quite a sad episode though. I only ever wanted to add some knowledge to Wikipedia but it seems that some incompetent editors egos are a real stumbling block. The fact that Off2riorob has achieved any position of authority on this site really is cause for alarm. Thankfully, the wider Wikipedia project continues, not because of, but despite the ~~dishonesty and idiocy~~ of people like Off2riorob (in deleting the citation to Sam Leith's birth date, he actually spelt register as 'regestor'!). I can well understand why so many people just give up. Kont Dracula (talk) 12:30, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, while I am here. your continual personal attacks are getting boring. I have struck the worst - you are wrong to assume any focus on your contributions - stick to content and policy please. Off2riorob (talk) 21:42, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did not claim that Qattusu was wrong to advocate keeping the article, but remain convinced that the tactics Qattusu used in that debate were wrong. You acknowledge that "his more hysterical objections to the articles deletions were possibly counter-productive" and you have said it here better than I.

Off2riorob told no lies - on first reading, I misunderstood things and wondered if you and Qattusu were the same person. Blame me for asking the question if you wish, but don't blame Off2riorob.

I admit that Daphne Caruana Galizia may well be notable, and that if so, a neutral well-referenced article about her would be a good addition to Wikipedia. I have never said otherwise, and several other editors siad the same thing 20 months ago.

Comparing Sam Leith's birth date to Obama's, Hitler's, Darwin's and Shakespeare's is a real stretch. Not even the birthers contest Obama's birth date, which all informed people know was published in the Honolulu newspapers within days of his birth. I assume that ample references are available for Hitler and Darwin as well, as many reputable biographies of each have been published. I don't know how good the records are regarding Shakespeare's birth, but I am certain that Shakespeare scholars have explored the subject in great depth. These people are indisputably notable and have extensive biographical coverage readily available. Sam Leith, on the other hand, is known pretty much solely for his published writing, as far as I've seen. All we ask is evidence of some significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Please note that bios printed by the newspapers he writes for are not independent sources. Newspapers promote their own writers. So, there's one passing mention in an article about his family. Is that all there is? If so, it is not at all unreasonable for a Wikipedia editor to question his notability in Wikipedia terms. Surely, he is notable to his regular readers. But the question is whether he's notable enough for a biography in an encyclopedia. I readily admit that there may be adequate sources out there that have not yet been brought forward. Please add them to the article. Improve the article, don't attack the messengers.

You charge that experienced editors are "very selective" about applying policy. That's inevitable when dealing with 3.8 million articles. We pay attention to the articles that come to our attention and attract our interest. A birth date only needs a reference when an editor asks for a reference. The legitimate request has been made, so either an acceptable reference should be provided or the birth date should stay out of the article. If a Wikipedia article has a reference to a full length published biography of the person, no one is likely to question the birth date. When an article is utterly lacking in-depth independent biographical references, as does Sam Leith, then questions are entirely legitimate.

Attacking Off2riorob because of his poor spelling is utterly unpersuasive. It is his thoughts and his understanding and his interpretation of policy that you should address, and cheap shots about his spelling don't do much to advance your case. Your analysis of his feelings and motivations is also out of place. He has well over 75,000 edits here, and I am sure that less than one tenth of one percent concern you in any way. Here on Wikipedia, we comment on an editor's contributions and statements regarding the matter at hand. Psychoanalyzing an opponent is frowned upon, to say the least. Please desist from such commentary.

If you think that I am siding with Off2riorob because I always instinctively agree with whatever he says and does, then you are wrong on that score as well. He and I have disagreed on more than one occasion, sometimes passionately. However, we treat each other with respect. We expect the same from you.

Please cease your personal attacks on my talk page. Any further such personal attacks here will be deleted immediately. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was not comparing the notability of Barack Obama and Sam Leith, I was merely comparing the double standards which have been applied here: Obama's birth date is stated without being referenced while the demand for Leith's birth date to be referenced (though it has been referenced, from public records by a third party) is such that his birth date is actually deleted. It is not even the year of his birth is not contended, just the actual date. So I am not comparing Leith and Shakespeare's contributions to humanity. You are right though, Sam Leith is known solely for his published writing. So, however, is Shakespeare. I chose Shakespeare not because I thought his works were comparable with Sam Leith's but because the example of Shakespeare's birth date being uncontested demonstrates that Wikipedia editors do not normally place any importance at all to citations for birth dates. This was to illustrate the fact that your friend is not targeting this article because he is interested in it, but because of personal animus towards me because of his past blunders. If you actually thought I was comparing the two people in terms of notability, I am not sure why I continue to try to reason with you. This isn't very complicated. I am sorry, but I have to ignore your claim that "psychoanalyzing an opponent is frowned upon, to say the least". Your page caught my attention solely because of the "implication" that I was being dishonest and duplicitous. Apparently, that is not a "personal attack" or "psychoanalyzing" but my denial is! Besides, pointing out someone's inability to spell is hardly psychoanalyzing. If someone can not spell a word as simple as "register" then it is surely valid to question their level of education and competence. You sort of give the game away when you state "I assume that ample references are available for..." though. If we are dealing in assumptions here, what is the point of anything on Wikipedia? Clearly, you are not the person I thought you were. As for apologising to Off2riorob, I make this apology: I am sorry for taking Cullen³²⁸ at his word when he stated that you had "implicated" that I was operating "sockpuppet" accounts. Evidently, I should not have done this. I am not sorry for stating that you are incompetent. Someone who can not spell words such as 'April' and 'register' deserves that description. "Well over 75,000 edits" in itself is no achievement, unless those edits have actually been useful, which I doubt. Out of those 75,000, I don't suppose you would care to point me to some articles he has actually started. I am very curious to see how he has accounted for birth dates in his own articles. He has revisited the [Sam Leith]] article by the way: this time to remove reference to the subject's children!! Your statement that birth dates are only required when editors feel like asking for them tells me what I had suspected all along. I have seen your claim that I am the one "nursing a grudge". Yeah, someone petitioned for the deletion of my article about a very notable figure. When I objected, they targeted my latest article on the grounds of notability. When that was provided they targeted the subject's birth place. When that was provided they targeted the subject's birth date. When that was provided they targeted the subject's children! Yeah, sure.... I am the one with a grudge! Kont Dracula (talk) 08:13, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because of your ongoing personal attacks, Kont Dracula, the conversations on my talk page is over. You are no longer welcome on my talk page until you withdraw all personal attacks and agree to make no more personal attacks in the future. We can discuss anything you wish on your talk page, if you want to continue the discussion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Krug

I created a page for Charles Krug however I failed to capitalize his last name (see Charles krug. Could you please tell me how I can edit this? Thanks Napa56 (talk) 17:48, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I took care of it for you. At the top of any article, you will see a number of choices to the left of the "Search" box. They say "Read", "Edit", "View history", then a star (click to add an article to your watch list), and then a little triangle/arrow thingy. You click on that triangle to "Move" an article. In essence, "move" renames the article. Just type the new name (accurately) into the proper box, and give a good reason. In this case, I said "Proper capitalization". Click the "Move page" button, and it's done. Happy to be of assistance. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:07, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other Editors Behaviour

Extended content

Thank you for your note. I am afraid I have experienced real problems with the behaviour of a few editors on Wikipedia. The editor in question has attempted to question the notability of subjects in articles I have authored due to reasons of personal animus, after I highlighted his incompetence on other pages. He has repeatedly questioned this article Sam Leith, the subject of which is a very prominent and respected British journalist, raising silly questions and non-issues about his notability and demanding citations for his birth date when, in reality, the vast majority of articles about subjects do not include such citations, including the articles he has worked on. It is quite depressing to see that Wikipedia is run like this. To be honest, I just want to make my contributions and have these contributions edited and improved by people who are competent and knowledgeable about the subject areas. That seems too much to ask. Kont Dracula (talk) 09:21, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After I have had the chance to do some research, I will make specific comments on the Sam Leith talk page. In general terms, I encourage you to assume good faith of the other editor here. His prose on talk pages may not sparkle and he is prone to typographical errors and run on sentences. However, he knows a lot about Wikipedia policy and what motivates him, I believe, is a strong desire to improve the encyclopedia, rather than "personal animus". Please also be aware of the importance we place on inoependent sources to establish notability in Wikipedia terms. A journalist may be "notable" in common pdrlance if widely read, but not meet our notability standards if not covered significantly in independent sources, namely publications he doesn't write for. Furnish such sources and there will be no question. I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:12, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is very difficult for me to assume anything like good faith from the "editors" in question. There seems to be something of a tag-team element to the behaviour of User:JohnCD and User:Off2riorob. User:JohnCD petitioned for the deletion of my article and User:Off2riorob deleted it. This was an article about someone who is indisputably notable. When I questioned User:JohnCD about deleting an article about an obviously notable figure, he immediately informed User:Off2riorob, who promptly targeted the most recent article I have started, about Sam Leith. All very cosy and, I am sure, all within accepted Wikipedia etiquette. The facts remain that Daphne Caruana Galizia is an extremely notable Maltese journalist and Sam Leith is a very notable British journalist. I think there were and are easily enough external references to satisfy the notability of both. Except, that is, if the articles I have contributed to are not being held to standards not required by the articles to which certain editors contribute. If I had enough time, I am sure I could find a thousand Wikipedia articles about far less notable figures, with fewer references. It took me half a minute to find one which User:Off2riorob himself had contributed to, an article about a Brazilian actress, Adriana Ferreyr, where almost all the references are in relation to her sexual relationship with an American billionaire. You will note that, despite User:Off2riorob's numerous contributions to this article, he has somehow neglected to add a tag demanding a citation for the birth date of the subject of this article, as he did with the Sam Leith one. I have looked at many, many Wikipedia articles and the vast majority do not contain citations for subjects' birth dates. This is very far from being even-handed or transparent. Forgive me if I am not intimately acquainted with the Wikipedia etiquette of commenting on users' pages. On the nature of etiquette and social conventions on Wikipedia I will bow to your greater knowledge, but I do not accept this apparent attempt to redefine elementary English language words; I did not "harrass" him. He attacked some of my articles at the prompting of his buddy and I responded by questioning the motives behind his behaviour. It is as simple as that. If anything, I have been the victim, rather than the perpetrator of harassment, though I would hesitate to use such an emotionally charged word. I have not conspired but been conspired against. In the end, I only want to contribute knowledge to this site. The likes of the two "editors" mentioned above only want to sit as judge, jury and executioner on topics they very clearly know nothing at all about. Surely, this is not what Wikipedia has come to? Surely there has to be some mechanism to prevent people like this effectively operating in teams to effectively vandalise and destroy the work of others purely for their own sense of self-aggrandisement at the expense of accuracy? Kont Dracula (talk) 09:03, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When you accuse other editors of colluding in bad faith, you are expected to provide specific evidence in the form of diffs. I am very familiar with Off2riorob, and have sometimes disagreed with him strongly and sometimes agreed with him. I've never doubted his good faith. As for JohnCD, I am unfamiliar with the name. You say that Off2riorob deleted an article. That can't be as he is not an administrator and doesn't have the power to delete articles.

As for Adriana Ferreyr, I am somewhat familiar with that article, as I advocated deleting it partly for the reason you alluded to. The consensus decision was to keep the article, and I see Off2riorob adding references where readily available, and tagging the article with a request for references when they are lacking. In other words, trying to improve the article as with Sam Leith. I do not see a birth date in the Ferryr article. Perhaps it was deleted, as it should be if reliable sources don't verify it.

You assert that two specific journalists are notable. Fine. All you have to do is provide reliable, independent sources discussing these journalists in order to establish their notability by Wikipedia standards. I recommend that you develop future articles in your sandbox, and take them to main space only when they are adequately referenced to show notability. That will avoid such controversies, and it is what I have done with the articles I've written.

Please be advised to avoid WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS arguments. Instead of searching for other articles that have shortcomings and pointing to them as a reason to keep Sam Leith, instead I recommend that you concentrate on improving that article by finding the sources requested, and adding them to the article. You can then go on to add references to the other articles you've mentioned, and then all and sundry will agree that you have been a productive contributor to the encyclopedia. I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well-said, Cullen. I think that new material will come to light. I'm a Hilary fan too and lean to the left in Australian politics. I think Chloe Fox is a strong politician. This is why I think transparency and an unbiased approach is so important. Here are some articles that do hint at what may happen next. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8304082, http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/no-appeal-over-malcolm-fox-suspended-prison-sentence/story-e6frea83-1226140735953 In time, this may deserve its own article. Peace. (123.2.53.91 (talk) 09:53, 7 October 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Mem Fox explained

Extended content

Whoops! I'm sorry, I responded on the talk page before seeing your invitation to talk here. My bad. Look, I don't really want to spend anymore time on this. It's an ugly topic. I stepped in because it looked like other editors were being dismissed and bullied by people like yourself who haven't grasped the issues, and I didn't think that was fair. There is a lot of ignorance on that talk page about Mem's connection to the trial and the storm that has caused nationally in Australia. Rebox or Robox or whatever is actually raising some valid points that have been attacked and ignored. The part that you're not getting is that to not acknowledge this on Mem's bio page is seen as a biased act. This is because there has been a lot of discussion about her husband recieving special treatment and because the victim of the sex attack was afraid to come forward for many years because of Mem's power and political influence, and this has been quoted on the news many times. So not recording this at all reads to many people in Australia as a bias protecting Mem further. You can say "well, that's garbage and I don't know anything about that" but it doesn't help. The stance you've taken on this issue isn't neutral and not knowing any better doesn't alter the way it comes across, especially as people are now trying to tell you as clearly as we can. This is why I raised the Lewinsky issue as a comparrison, although an affair pales in comparrison to a sex attack, which I'm sure you'll agree. I also understand Bilby's point, that to target Mem too much is swinging too far the other way. This is why I have been persuaded towards the arguement for a soft one-line acknowledgement. That is the only neutral response. What is complete nonsense is this stupidly naive idea that Mem is unconnected to her husband of 20 or more years, or that because he is (arguably) non-notable that the issue itself should be buried. Mem's notability is at the heart of the case. You keep saying that the policy does not allow for this, but I have read it, and I think it does. Other users have pointed out that a negative story can be included on a biography provided the sources are there, and they are and more will generate, and I have given you an example where a husband's actions are included on a wife's biography, because any reasonable person can see that a husband's actions impact on a wife's life just as a wife's actions impact on a husband's, or a parent to a child. Also, Malcolm is already mentioned on the biography, so the connection has been established prior. The issue here isn't only that the case is in the news because of Mem, but that because of her the case itself has changed, the sentence was suspended, and the victim has not come forward for many years. It's not 'coatracking', it's a legitimate part of her biography. Her decisions and her public profile have influenced these events. Feel free to disagree and stick to your guns, but please do so with some understanding of the issue and a more empathetic attitude towards those who've raised legitimate objections. This isn't gossip, but a crime with a victim and a political issue with widespread shockwaves. I know you're acting in good faith, and I officially withdraw at this point to leave you to a long and happy life, but this is a messy and highly emotive topic and I think it could have been handled better. I'd ask you to reconsider a soft mention or perhaps request an expert on the main page, or perhaps advocate a 'wait and see' approach, if such a thing exists on wikipedia, because I think ultimately this will be recorded in sources outside of the news of the day and that there will be further developments, in fact there already are if the DPP decides to launch an investigation. Lastly, to conclude this novel, I'm sorry if any of my words came across as personal attacks. That wasn't what I meant. (123.2.53.91 (talk) 03:10, 5 October 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Let me start by saying that I am not at all offended by any of the remarks that you've made, and in no sense consider them to be personal attacks. I admire your passion and dedication to the truth. I, too, am a bit tired of this debate, and perhaps a rest from it will benefit all of us who've chimed in. I regret that you think I've bullied you, as my intent has been only to maintain the high standards that the Wikimedia Foundation insists we maintain, especially with regards to biographies of living people. You claim that there is "a lot of ignorance about Mem's connection to the trial". I've read pretty much all the coverage in the Australian media brought forward in this debate, and I see nothing in reliable sources that says anything more than she accompanied her husband to court, gasped, put her hand on her chest, hugged the lawyer, and so on. Where are the sources that document more than that? We don't read between the lines at Wikipedia. So far, I've seen no reports that she's commented in detail about the trial. That's the difference between Mem Fox and Hillary Clinton, and explains the reason why Clinton's biography contains two paragraphs on the Lewinsky affair. Hillary Clinton (who I admire greatly) spoke and wrote extensively about the Lewinsky matter, changed her story as the facts emerged, and even discussed it in her memoirs years later. That's why it deserves a small place in her biography. If Mem Fox discusses Malcolm's behavior and conviction in a comparable way, then I will change my mind regarding Mem's biography.

Are reliable sources in the Australian media reporting that it is a "biased act" that Wikipedia has no information about Malcolm Fox's trial in Mem Fox's biography? If so, please send me those references.

If Malcolm Fox is notable or his crime is notable by Wikipedia terms, then a biography of him or an article about his crime can be written. If the trial and the sentence which some see as too lenient have actually caused a "storm" nationally in Australia, then certainly there will be significant coverage of that controversy in reliable sources that can be used in an article about Malcolm Fox's crime and the reaction to his conviction. That's the place for such material, in my view. Of course I understand that this is a crime with a victim, and I sympathize with that victim and do not belittle the crime. However, it's not Mem Fox's crime, and she did not victimize the young man. So, if the crime is so notable, write a well-referenced article about the crime rather than including the material in a biography of someone entirely innocent of that crime.

When I refer to "gossip", I am most assuredly not referring to reporting of the crime or the conviction or the impact on the victim. I am referring to descriptions of Mem Fox's gasps and sighs and hugs. I do believe that specific content is titillating gossip that adds absolutely nothing to an understanding of the crime or the trial. Nor does the media's seeming preference that almost every photo of Malcolm Fox must show Mem Fox at his side. One can almost imagine the assignment editor instructing the courthouse photographer to not bother with any photos of Malcolm Fox by himself.

If reliable sources report in detail about Mem Fox's "power and political influence", then that material may belong in her biography. Feel free to furnish such sources.

I am not at all concerned that some people who do not understand Wikipedia's standards may misunderstand why we include some things but not others in biographies of living people. It is only by striving to uphold our standards that we maintain a reputation as a useful reference source, and if we allow every factoid that the newspapers report into biographies of celebrities, then our reputation as a reference source will inevitably deteriorate. We do not attempt to record every fact about every thing, but rather the notable, relevant facts reported neutrally. There is no way that we can please every person who wants to add controversial material to our articles. I am sorry, but we can't please all the people all the time and still stay true to our mission.

By no means do I argue that Mem Fox is not "connected" to her husband, but on the other hand, it is his crime rather than hers. You argue that a negative story can be included in a BLP if it is well-referenced and of course, you are right. But the negative story here is about Malcolm Fox not Mem Fox. If Mem Fox was convicted of a sex crime, of course that fact would belong in her biography. If Mem Fox gave a press conference and defended her husband publicly or denounced him publicly, then that would belong as well. If a reliable source publishes a long analysis (not an opinion piece) based on facts not speculation about her role in the case and how it has impacted her, then perhaps I might reconsider. But these "well-referenced" items about the sighs and the hands on the chest and the lawyer hug simply don't justify including that kind of trivia. That kind of material simply does not belong in a reputable encyclopedia biography.

You say that her decisions have influenced these events. If that is reported in depth in reliable sources, then please furnish me with links to the sources that advance that claim, and I might change my mind. In the stories I read about the suspended sentence, I don't think that the judge said he made his decision because of any influence his wife or his daughter exerted, but rather because of his mental and physical health and the excessive publicity the case had received. If the publicity was as a result of her "decisions" or actions as reported in reliable sources, then we may have something. If the publicity was as a result only of her long-standing celebrity status in Australia, then that is another matter entirely.

You ask me to reconsider, or to take a "wait and see" approach. To that, I readily agree. If I see new and significantly more in-depth coverage in reliable sources that discuss what Mem Fox herself has said and done regarding this matter, then I will be happy to reconsider. However, if I read a new story that says she sniffed or sneezed or blinked or winked, and tries to connect that to her husband's conviction, then my response is almost certain to be the same.

Let me close by apologizing for anything I have said in an over-enthusiastic way that made you feel like I was attacking you. Based on our interactions so far, I truly feel that you are acting in good faith, and I sincerely wish you well. My mind is always open to new information and new arguments. Please also take a moment, if you have the time, to look at Grenville Anderson, an article about an Australian race care driver that I helped save from deletion on Wikipedia. I am proud of the role I played with that article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:52, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well-said, Cullen. I think that new material will come to light. I'm a Hilary fan too and lean to the left in Australian politics. I think Chloe Fox is a strong politician. This is why I think transparency and an unbiased approach is so important. Here are some articles that do hint at what may happen next. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8304082, http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/no-appeal-over-malcolm-fox-suspended-prison-sentence/story-e6frea83-1226140735953 In time, this may deserve its own article. Peace. (123.2.53.91 (talk) 09:53, 7 October 2011 (UTC))[reply]

AfD for Zip Code 30052

I've added a number of other ZIP codes to the nomination, you may wish to have another look. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:28, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you

Thankyou for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake... Redrose64 (talk) 15:58, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saving The Alteryx Page

First thanks for the welcome back. Now just need to make sure I don't get sucked back into editing too much :-) I really don't have the spare time at the moment.

Thanks for the feedback. In that case I'm going to have a go at addressing some of the issues over the next week. (I'm also at work at the moment, and I'm a developer not part of marketing, so this will be a spare time effort.) --AdRiley (talk) 20:25, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Will see what I can do. --AdRiley (talk) 21:51, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wole Oguntokun

Hello, I wrote earlier to state that the living biography page on me, "Wole Oguntokun" was created by a third party, a page I tried to edit and make as factual as possible when I discovered it. After an absence from Wikipedia for a long period, my recent efforts to make it less top-heavy resulted in the loss of citations and to my belief triggered off a deletion warning by the administrators of Wikipedia.

I have since returned the citations and added more. I would like to affirm that there are no exaggerations in the statements made and "Wole Oguntokun" truly represents the theatre related work of the subject. I would appreciate you reconsidering the decision to place the page on the list of those currently being considered for deletion. Bobagunwa (talk) 14:04, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you are Wole Oguntokun, then please say so on your user page which is now blank. This is advisable if you are participating in an article about yourself. I understand that someone else started writing the article and that you are trying to improve it. Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and I will be happy t o answer any questions you may have. It would be best if you would work with experienced and disinterested editors to make further changes.

I have recommended keeping the article and think it likely it will be kept. However, there needs to be more discussion. My very best wishes to you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:44, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

mountain sites navigation

Looking through the mountain category then -titles with country-... a person from a Category:Sacred Mountains search, Omitting -titles with country- complicates navigation (other than the obvious few chinese language names)as Mount Garibaldi sounds Italian (Giuseppe Garibaldi) ,Black Virgin Mountain is infact within Vietnam, Mount Shasta is infact a Russian name (located California),etc . the solution for this specific problem is to attach the locations from the Category :Sacred Mountains link that shows therefore the locations only from this link, otherwise omitting the locations as viewed from any other web location.

Otherwise since classified geographical locations, would prefer these to have the countries attached, since is a principle of an encyclopedia to be informative whether a wikipedia protocol states otherwise,and no harm is done to the articles to have the country added.plus already eight pages have this type of title, so the Sacred mountain category is left unresolved(i.e. some with countries some without)Drift chambers (talk) 08:05, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

restructured the above comment Drift chambers (talk) 08:23, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! How do I start?

Hi Cullen (and everyone else),

Thank you for reaching out to me.

First of all I apologize in advance if this isn't the correct way to discuss something.

Second, thank you for helping me through my unexpectedly hostile start to Wikipedia. You made things much less frustrating!

Third, anytime you log into Wikipedia looking for something to do... where do you start? I assume there's got to be categorical forums or lists of pages that need more work? Or do you just troll?

Fourth, I followed your recommendations and suggestions for my latest post on the discussion board for the Corporate Insight page on Friday. So far there has been no response... how should I interpret that? Does that mean I have finally convinced people or does it mean nothing? Also, what is the timetable for issues like these/who ends up making the final decision/any other suggestions for what I should do at this point?

Thanks!

Marino9813 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marino9813 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Shasta and other ill-advised moves

Yikes! It looks like this set of moves was undone before I got back to my computer. Let me know if I can be of further assistance. Will Beback talk 19:58, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Yikes" is just the beginning of it. Thanks, and I'll make a further comment on your talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The AIV section on my talk page

Cullen, thanks for your comments, and thanks also for your response on that user's talk page. How they ended up with me, I don't know, and I don't think I really care. Anyway, thanks for handling it quickly and elegantly, while we were out for dinner, haha. I had a margarita on the rocks and drank to your and Mrs. Cullen's health. Drmies (talk) 01:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, life is "odd" as you said on that new user's talk page. I am glad you drank a healthy Mexican dinner, and our health, fortunately, is robust in most ways. Best to you, friend. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:44, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, when you're done working, maybe you can lend a hand to what seems to be a crucial article in the development of Wikipedia: Suikerbrood. There is a lot at stake here, and right now we need a good picture. Perhaps if Mrs. Cullen isn't busy tonight? ... Drmies (talk) 03:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have offered a clue to this profound dilemma on your talk page. We wouldn't want the entire encyclopedia project to collapse due to a weakness in a single article. Battles ... horses ... nails. If we had an authentic Dutch recipe (hint, hint), perhaps we could bake up an authentic Dutch version, and photograph it just before we devoured it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:27, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Self and mutual criticism

My RfC is winding down, and I am disappointed that you have not yet discussed or shown disgust with my character flaws.

Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I read the thing yesterday. There is something about such proceedings that I find distasteful, but also they may be a necessary part of Wikipedia's governance. If I thought that my input there would make a difference in encouraging you to moderate your behavior in interactions with others, then I would say so there. The fact that you have reached out to me here says something, and in conclusion, I respectfully request that you consider whether it might not be wiser to simply ignore or work around your opponents, rather than attempting to convince them through repartee of the error of their ways. I hold your work here in the highest regard. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 14:58, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have found it heartening that David/WTT has joined 28Bytes, Professor Bialy and others who suggest that a look at interaction should be made.

Perhaps you can understand that, when I consider the course of silence, I find that silence is suggested by political expedience and cowardice rather than a concern for the common good or listening to my conscience.

I should have eaten lunch earlier, to reduce the temptation of jokes. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 15:13, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus of the Heroes in Hell Merge - Did it include all of the Books and Stories?

According to my memory during the Lawyers in Hell AfD discussion about merging the Heroes in Hell articles into one large article, it was decided ALL the articles were to be merged. No mention was made of leaving any of the articles separate.

When I went to merge the one remaining article, one editor got really upset saying that the merge discussion did not include this article, Gilgamesh in the Outback. I believe that the consensus was for all articles. The admin who is currently handling the dispute was not involved at the time, and needs to see a show of hands. If you have any opinion on the issue could you please make your opinion known at Talk:Gilgamesh in the Outback. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 15:59, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mizabot Installation

By the way, I would be happy to volunteer to install Mizabot on your talk page for you. Mizabot is a great automated talk page cleaner, take a look at my talk page for an example. It's no trouble, would take me no more than two minutes. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 16:02, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your kind offer and am very glad that certain bots operate on Wikipedia - especially the one that reverts a large percentage of the vandalism within a minute or two. However, I don't use bots or do any automated editing myself. I prefer to edit manually, and to weed out my talk page selectively from time to time. I like keeping some of the old comments around, especially the friendly, welcoming comments from when I first started editing and continuing until today. So, I guess that I will continue with my quirky, old-fashioned way of doing things for now. But thanks for paying attention to my talk page, even if it sprawls a bit. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for the improvement of my article. Ggarcia1207 (talk) 22:36, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A comment on the "Candle" article

Hello Mr. Cullen,

I noticed a small apparent discrepancy in the Candle article you've been editing recently and thought I'd bring it to your attention as I don't feel comfortable editing the article myself. I'm not sure which value is the correct one. In the paragraph under the subheading "Light" the article states that a candle typically generates about 80 watts of heat, but in the paragraph below that with the subheading "Temperature" the article says that a typical candle "creates 50 BTU's per hour" of heat. Since 1 watt is roughly equivalent to 3.4 BTU/hr, something doesn't add up, unless it's simply me that's confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronchristie (talk • contribs) 01:17, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert on such matters but follow the article because I have a general interest and it is often vandalized. The key question is to determine what the reliable sources say. Have you checked that? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Martha Wilson Page

hi, thank you for popping over to the page and helping, do you know of any way of changing the info box so that the ' :file ' and 'frameless ' are not there any more. i am new to Wikipedia and even though i have looked through the help pages, i cannot seem to understand how to change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr.D.J.Brown (talk • contribs) 15:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bare URLs

Don't worry i am in the process of changing the bare url's at the bottom of my page, i am part way through referencing and i am about to commence this as we speak! Please do pop by later on to provide any critical analysis as all will be appreciated. --Christopherjdockerty (talk) 08:40, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

Based on the few comments at User:Factiod's Talk page about possible socketpuppetry of Factiod and User:Ran kurosawa, I decided to submit an SPI report. Frankly, I couldn't follow Rob's response as to the possibility. Although SPI is an unusual place and it's never been clear to me when having more than one account is allowed (other than when it's self-declared and used for obviously legitimate purposes), I decided the worst that could happen is they'll close the report with no action.

If you want to look at a kurosawa creation, take a gander at Net Talk Live!. I've trimmed it back, but it still is a poorly sourced mess, and even though the show is real and actually did run for a long time, I see little evidence of notability in major secondary sources (mostly Dallas papers that mention it in TV schedules). Can't decide whether to AfD it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:36, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at ToniSant's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hey

Yeah,I mean't the same.I have the content box now.:) I wan't to know how do you add images in Wikipedia articles?Annie maverick (talk) 15:48, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arts Catalyst

by notability could you specify particular sections is this just the sections marked critism needed? Within our references we do have primary and secondary sourses however have not been able to find a vast amount on The Arts Catalyst group as a whole if you could be more speficic with your critisium it would be very helpful --Jessie Megs (talk) 12:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notability has a specific meaning on Wikipedia, and the concept applies to the entire topic "Arts Catalyst" and not to sections of the article. Do several reliable, independent sources give significant coverage to Arts Catalyst? If so, the topic is notable and the article should summarize what those sources say. If not, the topic isn't notable and the article should be deleted. We don't keep articles that parrot what groups say about themselves. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Cullen - a belated note of thanks for your encouraging comment on my talkpage at a time when I was in need of such - I am very grateful - best wishes to you. - Off2riorob (talk) 19:20, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, Rob, and I hope you enjoyed your time off. I see you've returned to productive work here. I appreciate your kind words. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:40, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - although I am still around - I am still only contributing in minor ways and still semi officially on a break and still unsure as to my ongoing position in regard to the project. Off2riorob (talk) 23:20, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that a "one on one" conversation with a guy like me would be of any use, feel free to use the email link. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:21, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ongiong personal attacjs

Hi - I have reverted an edit from your talkpage as a personal attack - I had warned the user on more that one occasion but they continue - please see this edit , another personal attack I have given them another warning - the repeated attacks are akin to bullying, please stop allowing them on your talkpage. Off2riorob (talk) 01:11, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just made a comment on the user's talk page that I hope exonerates you entirely in this matter. I apologize, Rob, if my offhand question has brought you grief. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:20, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cullen. As an experienced editor I am sure you have seem such situations previously this is the website that anyone can edit. I doubt this user is going to stop their personal attacks. Please do not allow them to attack me again on your userpage. Off2riorob (talk) 01:25, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANAT technology page

Now that the Robotics Design is beyond reproach for the exact reasons you outlined, lets talk ANAT technology. Several awards for the technology itself, nominations, and many awards won for the products it has generated. That should make it notable. The things the technology is capable of make it notable. See roboticsdesign.ca entry page (in any browser but IE) and that is my source, among many others. It has been featured in major confrences around the world. See the first-of-its-kind symopsium in France that was recently held, with Robotics Design presenting what it does (twitter.com/roboticsdesign lists it. In Montreal, many big confrences with international leaders feature it. What the cut off bar for notable? Please dont refer me to a wikipedia page, I will change my tone, as I will now assure you I have read notability and such in detail.Please help me save the page if you can, and join the deletion discussion there.Canadiansteve (talk) 09:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

note

After your formal request to the User;Kont Dracula not to post on your talkpage, he did again with another personal attack against you - I have deleted it. I have also notified an administrator with this comment . "Hi, could you please add this user User:Kont Dracula to your watchlist - after repeated personal attacks and warnings he has been requested not to post on my talkpage and User:Cullen328's talkpage but he continues. Off2riorob (talk) 00:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

tony discipline

Hi You invited me to chat with you? Orangehate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangehate (talk • contribs) 05:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Mingus

In regards to your comment on the talk page of Richard Mingus, I have improved the context in the quoted reference. Thanks for your thoughts.

Jimerb (talk) 22:49, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen or Bbb23

So, Mr Cullen, what about the Codie? What is the resentment to this file? How can you delete ? I offered for comments and you (or you as two) made none? Why no make suggestions? ProofPlus Professional Researcher 15:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Here is what I sent the other ID: To ALL in this discussion group.

The edits to the Cue cat record were posted for two weeks for comments. Bbb23 and others were notified of the corrections to be made and left open for comments. Repeatedly Bbb23 for some reason seems to act hostile to this record. This has me wondering? Does Bbb23 have some axe to grind? His repeated deletions to this record are an insult to everyone trying to improve ANY wiki article. Bbb23 what exactly are your issues? All the links were there. All the facts were there. And you used some bogus claim of "can't find nomination"? Does not an award being awarded, in fact by shear default show somewhere a nomination of some sort? Plus, the link directly to the Codie Award -which clearly states the award given for Best Reference Tool, and you just deleted it???

http://www.siia.net/codies/2011/pw_2001.asp

In an enviroment where Wiki is seeking donations, you are doing harm to people by turning them off to wiki, thus why would they give money to have hostile acts by individual users like you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proofplus (talk • contribs) 15:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated in my edit summary and on the article's talk page, I agree with Bbb23 on this matter. You accusations against Bbb23 are without merit in my opinion, as Bbb23 is an experienced editor who works with great dedication on articles on a wide variety of topics, as do I. You, on other hand, are new to Wikipedia and so far, work in a single topic area. It seems to me that you have not yet learned how to interact with other editors in a respectful and civil fashion. I hope that you will change your style. Please take a few minutes to review my history on Wikipedia, and Bbb23's as well. For you to call my good faith edit a "hostile act" is really without any credibility whatsoever. Please reconsider your course of action, and Shalom. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen, just because I do not agree with your style and edits, does not make me a bad egg. Credibility? How about this? Why was the Codie Award reference deleted? Here is what I posted for review- and btw, professionnalism here is DEFINED by asking for comments NOT approval. You, nor Bbb23 acted in good faith and provided comments. How is that respectful? How is that treating someone with professionalism? You did it under the cloak of an edit and did not even leave the facts remaining? How about YOU as the experienced proficient editor and contributor correct the cue cat record with the following? ProofPlus Professional Researcher 16:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

In my last edits to the record for Cue Cat, Bbb23 (the master of all edits cue cat) has decided to leave off the following award for cuecat:

Best Reference Tool

CRQ Technology, Digital: Convergence Corp.

http://www.siia.net/codies/2011/pw_2001.asp (listing of award given)

http://www.siia.net/codies/2011/story.asp (history of award)

Please review. SINCE this is a COMBINED RECORD of Cue Cat and Digital Convergence this award belongs here, Unless the record is split.

Please make comments, or hide until I make the updates in a week, and then come out of the woodwork and start setting the reputation of wiki further back.

COMMENTS ProofPlus Professional Researcher 15:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC) (ProofPlus Professional Researcher 15:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proofplus (talk • contribs)

Mr Cullen, with your high standing and experience with wiki, would you consider UPDATING the record of the Codie Award within the Cue cat record? Maybe your touch is what is needed, since I am a woman with little experience in these matters and have not earned the respect and authority of those who limit this record. Your personal assistance would be greatly appreciated by this mother of three trying to make her way in this editing world on wiki and trying to earn up to the rank of a worthy contributor and editor. I chose a record I researched well and would love any help. Thanks you ProofPlus Professional Researcher 16:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proofplus (talk • contribs)

I am leaving for work within a few minutes so don't have time to delve into this right now. However, I will read the sources you've provided with great care this evening, and if I conclude that the award is notable and well-referenced, I will be happy to add it to the article. In the mean time, I respectfully request that you consider withdrawing the false accusations you have made against two editors acting in good faith here, Bbb23 and myself. I guarantee you that you will be much more successful here on Wikipedia through collaboration and cooperation, as opposed to confrontation and accusation. That's my good faith advice to you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:25, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Cullen for looking over the links and I would assume since the Codie is one of the top software awards there is, and the awards and site is managed by Codie, I am sure you will find the links and award relevant and on topic. But then again the proof is in the pudding, right? Look forward to seeing how you view the award given and, in fact, if not accepted it means that the 2000 references to the award all across wiki then become invalid. Will be interesting to see. Thank you two for your help. ProofPlus Professional Researcher 19:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proofplus (talk • contribs)

India project

Hiya.

They gave me a link to a page listing the various student pages to which I was assigned. The first thing I did was go down the list placing a personal greeting and my contact information on each student's page, offering to help if they had any questions about the technical aspects of page creation or difficulties with WP politics. Then I went down the list of projects checking to see if the students had done any work on the pages they said they were working on. Most had not done anything. In one case the page was speedied, so I got that reversed by the deleting admin. From there it has been answering a few questions.

The foundation seems to think that we're supposed to check for copyvio as part of the process, but that's really not what I signed up for. I just want to help the two or three or whatever potential serious WP contributors out of 20 or 25 through the learning curve... Carrite (talk) 19:43, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate your quick response. They linked me to the same page, and I saw your name but not my own. So I am asking for clarification on that. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:49, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Drop them a line. They assigned me and didn't even tell me about it at first, or if they did it was lost as spam due to a subject line of something like "URGENT HELP NEEDED NOW" or some such... The foundation is definitely feeling their way as they go. Carrite (talk) 19:24, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They clarified. My name was on the spread sheet, which is so big that its hard to navigate and so wide that my name was off the right hand side of the screen. I've started reviewing Indian student articles. Tons of fun! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio tips

Hi Cullen, I saw your message on Kudpung's talk page. I've been doing a lot of unofficial clean up at the IEP, although I'm not connected with the project, nor am I an Online Ambassador. Here are some tips from my experience. Don't hestitate to contact me if you need any more help. And frankly, I think you should do only the amount of work you feel comfortable with, regardless of what they have "assigned" to you. As Carrite said, this isn't what you signed on for as an Online Ambassador.

Preliminaries

Check all the student's contibs. The stated article on the list is very often no indication of what they actually edited. Many of them have also filled their sandboxes and user pages with copyvio.

Checking

English prose too good to be true? Run a few striking phrases through Google, regardless of what they've listed as the source. And be sure to check Google Books and Scholar separately, as the standard Google search (for some reason) doesn't always pick them up. I've found that many times the students have been listing a book source, or even a web source which covers the same material (more or less) but have actually not used them. Instead they pasted from another website which they haven't listed.

Be prepared for them to have pasted in from multiple sources. It can sometimes take an hour to find all the sources they've copied. I cleaned one article that consisted of pasted chunks from 6 different websites.

If you find a likely source for the copyvio via Google, use the Duplication Derector to verify. Also, check on the off-chance that the site has a compatible license that permits copying (very rare).

I've found that another quick way to spot copyvio is to open the editing box of the version that shows the first big addition of material. This is an example. If you see text in narrow columns instead of extending all the way to the right-hand edge of the editing box, it almost invariably means that it was pasted in from a PDF or a website. Also, a peculiar layout (which only shows up in the editing box) often indicates pasting from a website. Compare this from a WP article (scroll down to the end of the History section) and its source.

Also, look for non-standard wiki characters e.g. « » or slanted quote marks and apostrophes ? The latter are more easily seen when looking at the text in the open editing box. I've found that they are often a strong indication of copypaste

Don't be fooled by bulletted lists. Often they paste in connected prose from an article and then format it like a list.

Essential reading

WP:Close paraphrasing

Best, Voceditenore (talk) 21:43, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Cathedral Range; Napa Valley Register; Tuolumne Grove; Yosemite Creek; Matt Visser; Lake Vernon; William A. Spicer; Lou Guzzo; Mount Sill; Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico; Geography of the Yosemite area; Debbie Barham; Yosemite Creek Campground; Anupam Mishra; Swinging Bridge; Mattole; Sentinel Rock; Siddhartha Basu; Secretariat Building, New Delhi

Cleanup: Ahwahnechee people; Chuska Mountains; Yosemite Falls
Merge: Jutti; Wisconsin Lutheran School; Redundancy (linguistics)
Add Sources: Jesus and Messianic prophecy; William Edward Colby; Abraham Lincoln
Wikify: New York Foundation for the Arts; Seclusion of girls at puberty; Iron fist fighting
Expand: North American Cordillera; Joseph A. Melley; Pacific Union Recorder

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:39, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

It's about Proofplus and CueCat, Cullen.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:29, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Cullen, notify is about your edits and I have replied to both of YOU. ThanksProofPlus Professional Researcher — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proofplus (talk • contribs) 20:54, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kbb23 maybe you can post the link

Saw you did not like the mark cuban cue cat link, but if you google Mark Cuban + cueCat+ dumb idea and you find about 10 references. Sure you can find one that you can approve for all that is wiki? Right? Think it should be poseted.ProofPlus Professional Researcher 20:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC) ProofPlus Professional Researcher 20:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC) (ProofPlus Professional Researcher 20:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proofplus (talk • contribs)

I am Cullen328. It is a passing mention of Cuban's comment, not significant coverage, and Mark Cuban is not a computer expert or a patent expert. It does not belong in the article, in my opinion. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AFD for Phil Fletcher

Hi Cullen-- I found a few things for Fletcher that has me (weakly) supporting keeping the article. I could be persuaded the other direction if others don't think they are very good. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 00:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your effort to find sources. Though I disagree with your conclusion, I do appreciate your work. I've responded at length in the debate.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:36, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at I Jethrobot's talk page.
Message added 03:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 03:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Barnes, about that editing and sources problem

Cullen, I'm marking the page so I'll get back here somewhere in the next week or so; I'll scout around for some up to date sources (or send updates to a couple places, and then when they correct, you can use them as sources). Sorry about my mess; last time I did any wikipedia edits was back in the much looser days. I'm in the middle incipient stages of going to blogging and at that point it will probably all get much easier for anyone who wants to write about me. Anyway, once again, sorry about the mess.

Thanks to whomever decided to drop Kara Dalkey; again, she was a holdover from a successful debunking, and now that there's no more bunk, there's no real need to mention her. I'm afraid that even with two divorces and three marriages I maintain a pretty dull personal life; if I ever do anything interesting, I'll post it in the correct place, with a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.96.50.54 (talk) 06:08, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No rush, as there are no deadlines here on Wikipedia. Our long term goal is a better article about you and several million other topics. Just bring the sources to my attention. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All right, a couple more resources for whoever wants them. I now have a blog called Approachably Reclusive, currently at thatjohnbarnes.blogspot.com, probably going to move in the next month or so but should be findable with those keywords. I've recently updated and improved the bios at my Amazon author page (tinyurl.com/JohnBarnesAmazonProfile) and at one of my selling sites (tinyurl.com/WhereToGetJohnBarnesStuff); there are also some links to other interviews, articles, and supporting materials at the selling site. Damien Broderick has covered my work in some of his critical books, available through Google Books. Jo Walton has also put in a fair bit of criticism at tor.com. The Clute/Langford SF encyclopedia now in beta sent me an article copy I vetted for accuracy, and it was pretty solid. Anybody that wants to can drop me a note (use the email feature on my blog or Amazon profile) and I'll happily send back issues of my online newsletter, which includes essays and a fair bit of personal news. Between all that, someone who is interested can probably put together a fairly good article. Just to repeat-clarify, a controversy you can probably afford to skip over that you will almost certainly run across in your research: because my novel Earth Made of Glass came out not long before my divorce from Kara Dalkey, and it's a bummer of a book with a divorce in it, and it was followed by several books that were less enthusiastically received than my earlier work, there was a fansplanation floating around that I had written the book because of the divorce and that the slump following was caused by my depression. The book was actually complete 4 years before the incident that led to the divorce (book substantially complete, Oct 96, published 1998, incident, July '00, resulting divorce May 2001) and the real life event bears no resemblance at all to the fictional one (see the acknowledgments to The Armies of Memory for more about that). For about 5 years there, that was pretty much all that Wikipedia had except the bibliography; the editors may choose to debunk (if they think it still requires it) or ignore (my preference) but the old tale is simply not true. If spouses are important, and I don't especially see why for this article, they were Kathleen Albe (1981-90, microbiologist then, a physician now), Kara Dalkey (1993-2001, musician/writer), and Diane Talbot (2011-till I'm dead, I hope, teacher/sculptor); I truly don't see why the writer is of more interest than the scientist or the artist. Anyway, that should be more than enough resources for someone to prepare a reasonably good article. Thanks again, John Barnes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.29.255.199 (talk) 07:52, 26 November 2011 (UTC) Yet another good source for whenever someone decides to use them: the 3rd Encyclopedia of SF entry is now fully accurate on factual matters, and reasonably conventional and quite fair on literary interpretations. http://www.sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/barnes_john Again, this is John Barnes choosing not to become a wikipedia editor, so sources are provided for the first Wikipedian to find the project interesting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.96.41.51 (talk) 04:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Curious multiple account attack on CueCat

Your contribution is encouraged. Mangoe (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ServiceMagic

Hi Cullen, Sorry for improperly adding content to the ServiceMagic page.

Here is the content I want to add: A civil lawsuit was filed October 19, 2011 in United States Federal Court against ServiceMagic, Inc., their subsidiary Market Hardware, and Market Hardware's CEO Brian Kraff for bad faith business practices, unfair and deceptive trade practices, unfair competition, cybersquatting, and other serious violations of law.

Here is the reference: http://dockets.justia.com/docket/maryland/mddce/8:2011cv02981/195176/

The information is relevant to consumers.

Thanks, User:216.15.41.64

The problem is that the court documents you reference above are a primary source, and are not sufficient for inclusion of this material into a Wikipedia article. We would need secondary sources, such as newspaper or magazine articles specifically about this lawsuit. In addition, please read the fourth paragraph of WP:UNDUE. Almost all big companies get sued at one time or another. A lawsuit must be well-covered in reliable, independent sources, and of major significance, in order to be added to a Wikipedia article. Normally, we would not include information about civil suits until a judge has made a decision, and then only if it has attracted widespread attention in reliable sources. Please be aware that lots of information may be "relevant to consumers" but is not appropriate for inclusion in a neutral encyclopedia. The proper place to discuss this further in on the talk page for ServiceMagic, although I am happy to discuss Wikipedia policies on my talk page at any time. I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:34, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Future of the US Education Program and the Ambassador Project

There is a discussion about the future and the growth of the US education program along with the future of the Wikipedia Ambassador Project here. Voceditenore (talk) 06:30, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ansel Adams and his friends

Hi Jim, I really enjoyed those articles! I see you're in Napa. Makes me homesick. Although I've lived in London all my adult life, I grew up in San Francisco. My husband and I still go back there every year, and always to Glen Ellen too, where my grandparents lived for many years. At one point they also had a resturant in Santa Rosa. And my great-grandmother, well, she was quite a character. This restaurant was named after her (more about her on p. 2 of the article). Best, Voceditenore (talk) 18:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my gosh. Not only did I eat at Dago Mary's many times, it was there that one of the most dramatic 24 hours of my life began. On December 13, 1984, I was halfway through a business lunch when a waiter said my name and told me there was an emergency call. My pregnant wife had gone into early labor, and the next morning my son was born 10 weeks early at 3 lbs 1.5 oz. Fortunately, he flourished, is tall, confident and healthy, and now works in my family business. We'll celebrate his 27th birthday in a few weeks. The restaurant was wonderful and full of the old working class San Francisco traditions. I almost always ate fresh fish there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gay Donor Ban

Thank you for your feedback. There are two main points I would like to make in relation to this matter. Firstly, a number of countries have changed their rules regarding gay men donating blood and I think this should be recorded on both pages as it serves to inform readers that other countries have adopted polices in this area that differ from Ireland and the US. A recent ruling by the European Commission declaring such bans to be illegal under EU law also needs to be added to the pages concerned – Ireland (IBTS) is obviously affected due to being a member of the EU, but also America, as the FDA, on their website, reference EU law to claim legitimacy for their blanket ban on gay and bisexual males donating blood.

Secondly, it is a matter of public record that this ban is highly controversial yet there is no mention of it on the FDA’s main page and I strongly believe that this needs to be rectified.

I feel therefore that it is unfair to simply delete these entries when they are based in fact. If the editor concerned had a problem with the way I presented these facts (such as choice of language etc) I would have appreciated him contacting me directly and outlining such concerns before deleting my additions in their entirety. I would also direct you to this editors talk page where a number of contributors have criticised his approach to editing and also the fact that on some topics (UK Premier David Cameron’s British nobility ancestors for example) he openly displays bias.

I don’t wish to get into an editing war so perhaps if I changed the way the additions are entered as opposed to the additions themselves being an issue, that might be acceptable? That’s something I can look at if it means the factual information remains in place.

I would also be grateful if you could clarify something that I have always been curious about concerning Wikipedia. There must be millions of individual pages so when I amended the FDA and IBTS pages for example, how did this come to notice? Would it require an editor having an interest in this area or are editors automatically notified of amendments? PinkPolitico80 (talk) 14:16, 18 November 2011 (UTC)PinkPolitico80 Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PinkPolitico80&oldid=461276854"[reply]

I have little time right now as I have to leave for work, but I will answer one item now and go into more detail later. Experienced editors monitor their watchlist frequently, and that is a list of updates on articles (or other pages such as user talk pages or internal debates) that interest them for whatever reason. You will see the "My watchlist" tab at the top of your screen. You can add article of interest to your watchlist by clicking on the star to the right of the heart at the top of any article or other page on Wikipedia. When the star turns blue, it is then on your watchlist. Many active editors monitor a large number of articles for vandalism, addition of unsourced material, and edits that advance a point of view. I will respond to your other points later. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:54, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editor in question has now deleted small changes I made to another related page and I believe he is now acting in a disruptive and malicious fashion towards me. I have also read his talk page in more detail and there is a worrying pattern of behaviour on his part. What is the best way to lodge a complaint about said behaviour? Many Thanks. PinkPolitico80 (talk) 20:48, 18 November 2011 (UTC)PinkPolitico80[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	Thank you for your work expanding and adding sources to Jennifer Lim (theatre actress). Yunshui 雲‍水 20:24, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Researcher's Barnstar

		Researcher's Barnstar
		I am both pleased and honored to present you with the Researcher's Barnstar in appreciation for your superb work in finding sources showing Jennifer Lim (theatre actress) notable enough to be included within Wikipedia. While research is not always easy, such due diligence is always appreciated. Excellent work! Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Care to do some digging on Adeel Ahmed? Same situation: Weak on ENT but receiving media attention for his stagework. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Harvey Oswald

Thanks for the info, and for understanding my point regardless. If I'm going to spend a lot of time on a deletion debate, I'm going to use it to either find references or research the relevant policies; since I clearly made my point and I don't really know where I stand on the article in question, it probably wouldn't be the wisest use of my time to find a better way to drive home a WP:point.--~T P W 15:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why this ended up in the above thread, and I can't seem to fix it. Sorry about that.--~T P W 15:02, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My fault. Fixed it. Forgot to "close" my barnastar template. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:54, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I need some help at searching for a reliable source

I can't seem to find a good source for my article America West Airlines Flight 564 and I'm in desperate need of help.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Jacqueline Jossa; Cathedral Lakes; Carl Parcher Russell; Jim Bridwell; San Jose Convention Center; Happy Isles; Asad Shafiq; Housekeeping Camp; Chilnualna Falls; Big wall climbing; McGurk Meadow; Camp 4 (Yosemite); Cane gun; Leaning Tower, Yosemite; Fairview Dome; Granite dome; Liberty Cap (California); Clouds Rest; Jerzy Fedorowicz

Cleanup: Slavery; Colin Powell; Theresa Yelverton
Merge: Orant; A.S.K. M.E.; CNC Router
Add Sources: Adam Dant; Alexander Huber; Gift
Wikify: Networkers International PLC; Office of Criminal Investigations; C program control operations
Expand: Charles Albert Browne, Jr.; Labour movement; J. Patrick Lewis

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tb

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at MichaelQSchmidt's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tb

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Film#Images of cast members in an article about an unreleased film.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Lincoln

First look at Daniel Day-Lewis as Lincoln [12]. RAP (talk) 16:13 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's an offset photo, so i don't think it would work. But when they release an official photo, not one uploaded by a bystander, then we put it in. RAP (talk) 16:20 1 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for George Meany

On 3 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article George Meany, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that, in supporting peace negotiations to end the Vietnam War and opposing a U.S. withdrawal, AFL–CIO President George Meany stated that "in Vietnam the AFL–CIO is neither hawk nor dove nor chicken"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/George Meany.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC

Congratulations, Cullen! I dreamed I saw George Meany last night, alive as you or me, and he said that the GA/FA bosses would not shoot his article down, if you continued to write and organize!

Cheers, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:12, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

Thank you for your comment and support at my recent successful RFA. Being now the new fellow in the fraternity of administrators, I will do my best to live up to the confidence shown in me by others, will move slowly and carefully when using the mop, will seek input from others before any action of which I might be unsure, and will try not to break anything beyond repair. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:34, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am confident that you will do well, Michael. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:40, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

McGinn POV tag

I understand that you still have NPOV concerns with the McGinn article? I'd request you make an effort to engage others in an effort to resolve those issues if you want the tag to remain up. Tags serve the purpose of highlighting ongoing problems with an article, not simply to act as advertisements of discontent. I'd be happy to take it up here, my talk page or the article's talk page. TomPointTwo (talk) 05:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to nag, but have you come up with anything? TomPointTwo (talk) 22:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great, just wanted to make sure it hadn't fallen by the wayside. I look forward to reading your notes. TomPointTwo (talk) 23:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have expressed my concerns in great detail at Talk:Michael McGinn and also at WP:BLPN. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:03, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You would probably be interested in the Barefoot Contessa article

Thanks for your interest in the Ina Garten article. You may also be interested in the Barefoot Contessa article as well. Once there, click on the star icon to keep abreast of it. --Javaweb (talk) 02:57, 7 December 2011 (UTC)Javaweb[reply]

Thank you very much for the advisory. I have that article on my watch list now as well. You and I can race to be the first to revert BLP violations. It will be like a contest. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

	The Talk Page Stalker Barnstar
	For your dedicated work at my talk page since the fundraising banners went up! :] – GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:28, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Three Brothers (Yosemite); Middlebury Panthers; Horsetail Fall (Yosemite); Masaki Nashimoto; DCAP-BTLS; Hotta clan; Crusader (Sara Douglass novel); Abe no Hirafu; North Dome; Tunnel View; Gōzoku; Ono no Takamura; Ciliau Aeron; Sue Harukata; Joy of all who Sorrow; Medial condyle of femur; Akamatsu clan; Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln; Perseus with the Head of Medusa

Cleanup: Medicine; Abraham Lincoln and slavery; Big Oak Tree State Park
Merge: DOTS (mnemonic); When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloom'd; Emerald Pool
Add Sources: Poetry of Abraham Lincoln; NatureBridge; Lincoln–Douglas debates
Wikify: Benjamin De Casseres; Wax melters; Criticisms of communist party rule
Expand: Capitán Trueno; Santa Maria La Nova (Campagna); Karlsbrunn

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:40, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

--Kumioko (talk) 04:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cullen328. You have new messages at SpeakFree's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DYK for Hotel Polen fire

On 21 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hotel Polen fire, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Ania Bien's 1986 photographic installation on the Hotel Polen in Amsterdam, which was destroyed in a fire that killed 33 people, included images alluding to the Holocaust? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hotel Polen fire.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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.

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ania Bien

On 21 December 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ania Bien, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Ania Bien's 1986 photographic installation on the Hotel Polen in Amsterdam, which was destroyed in a fire that killed 33 people, included images alluding to the Holocaust? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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.

Orlady (talk) 08:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to thank you for your contributions to this DYK! S_peakF_ree ^(talk)_(contribs) 03:02, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is always a pleasure to make even a small contribution to this wonderful encyclopedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

St. David School (Richmond, California)

St. David School (Richmond, California), I added a new source to article from USA Today and additional commentary to the deletion debate that you may be interested going over.LuciferWildCat (talk) 04:32, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I responded on my talk page.LuciferWildCat (talk) 05:46, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Nevadan orogeny; Wapama Falls; Shiba clan; Jack Klaff; Nevada Fall; Pywiack Cascade; Jim Marshall (businessman); Sierra Nevada Batholith; Tamasin Day-Lewis; Barrie & Jenkins; Snow Creek Falls; Mount Hoffmann; First inauguration of Abraham Lincoln; Flora Lake; Mount Starr King (California); Tenaya Canyon; Olmsted Point; Sentinel Fall; Alexander Hamilton (Fraser)

Cleanup: FDA Food Safety Modernization Act; Yosemite High School; Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
Merge: Ask Sponsored Listings; Orans; Karl Messner
Add Sources: Half Dome; Cronus; Illilouette Fall
Wikify: Hazrath Syed Shah Yousufuddin; Icon Theatre; Interstate Hotels & Resorts
Expand: Doughface; Joshua Tree National Park; Felicitas Goodman

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:41, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Cullen328, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Cullen328/Sandbox/Anthony Berger.

See a log of files removed today here.
Shut off the bot here.
Report errors here.
If you have any questions, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From London...

Happy Holidays, Jim.

I loved your story about Dago Mary's. What a small world Wikipedia is after all!

All the best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:42, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Happy Holidays, Thanks!

Just wanted to give thanks to you for your tremendous help on many, many articles pertaining to Yosemite (including some I started!) and also to issue you a belated but still warm Happy Holidays from up here in Halfdomeland! (Try saying that five times fast!)

RedSoxFan274 _{(leave a message~contribs)} 08:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are very kind. I've never been to Yosemite in December though I often go in March. I've been meaning to add some references to Bracebridge Dinner. Maybe by New Year. Have a happy one! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:42, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also should thank you for your kind words of a year ago on my Shelton Johnson userbox; it's little things like that that would make Wikipedia a better place if everybody engaged in them.

My family and I are taking advantage of the rare fact that the Tioga Road is open and going out via Tuolumne Meadows tomorrow (which probably isn't even open in the spring when you come). Thanks again! RedSoxFan274 _{(leave a message~contribs)} 07:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool. You will pass close to one of my favorite areas - Saddlebag Lake and the Twenty Lakes BasinLakes Basin, and also my favorite restaurant, Whoa Nellie Deli. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:56, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]