Jump to content

User talk:LadyofShalott/Archive 21

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23→Archive 25

Please comment on Template talk:Very long

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Very long. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:16, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Science lovers wanted!

Science lovers wanted!
Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 01:30, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Avoiding talk-page disruption

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Avoiding talk-page disruption. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Spaghettisburger

I even looked for a suitable place to redirect it, just to keep the page history. Sadly the world has not adopted spaghettiburger (without the Gettysburg Address) like they have embraced pizzaghetti. --kelapstick(bainuu) 03:32, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

←So what do we do about this? MfD? Leave it alone (it is tagged {{User sandbox}}? My concerns:

  • Use as a copy/paste template for recreation (although it provides minimal time savings in recreating).
  • Factually incorrect, because as everybody knows, a Spaghettisburger is a spaghettiburger wrapped in the Gettysburg Address, not the Gettysburg Address in a spaghettiburger.
  • Will Drieber become a useful contributor, and do we want to nominate his joke for deletion? Wikipedia is a serious place you know. --kelapstick(bainuu) 02:36, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Enh, I think I'd ignore it. Unless Drieber continues to create hoaxes in mainspace, this seems harmless enough in a sandbox. WP:NOTWEBHOST, I know, but there are lots of silly things in people's userspaces around here; this doesn't seem all that egregious. LadyofShalott 03:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
It would be appreciated, if you would check your email. If you do, I will cook you a spaghetisburger the next time I see you. --kelapstick(bainuu) 03:58, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Check your email. LadyofShalott 16:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Tagged. Much thanks. :) --kelapstick(bainuu) 22:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
You're the best, thanks Lady. Now I just have to get an edible copy of the Gettysburg Address. --kelapstick(bainuu) 22:23, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome. I'm sure there's a bakery somewhere that wouild be glad to print-up that edible GA for you. ;) LadyofShalott 22:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Aquatic ape hypothesis

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Aquatic ape hypothesis. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:J Street

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:J Street. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on File talk:System of a down.jpg

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:System of a down.jpg. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:16, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank You

Hi LadyofShalott, I'm sorry for the delay. Life circumstances don't always equip you with enough time to do it all :) Thank you very much again for this learning opportunity. I cannot explain my gratitude. You jumped out of nowhere and helped me. Your advice and the rest of the info you posted on my talk page is very helpful, more important, it tells me that you are a great human being who doesn't look down on people like me who are just trying to get started... I wish you were adopting, but I saw that you are not. I'll ask someone who goes by Drmies if he wants to adopt me, even though he had a wiki-fight with my father over a page called Protonism. Dr. Mies doesn't know this, but I will tell him when the time is right. I do not have his email address. I love my father, but in my opinion, he was wrong and Dr. Mies was right. Actually, that's why I decided to become a (small for now) wikipedian for life. I want to be fair and follow the wiki rules instead of being too greedy like my father just because he happened to know the subject personally. I want to prove to him that things can be done in accordance with rules and without unnecessary divergences. He is a great man and well educated. But he was born in Bulgaria and tends to take things personally. As soon as I'm done with Marinaj project, if you don't mind I would like to ask your advice regarding my next project. I love all the arts, biography, and soccer. Once again, thank you very much for your kindness! Hope all is well in your world, and please let me know if you see me going out of line :). Please delete the non-essential parts of this message when you're done reading it. --Earlybirdofthewest (talk) 08:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Marius Moutet

Hi! Can you check the translation of this? Its one of those how is this missing articles!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look. LadyofShalott 01:26, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Explicitly specified origin of Drexciya

I previously discussed how I had come to the same conclusion as you did about the myth of Drexciya, although I hadn't seen that conclusion explicitly stated anywhere. I must admit that in the back of my mind I still hoped that there was some basis in centuries-old mythology.

However, using my new Highbeam account, I discovered that "Unlikely as it may seem, Drexciya was the invention of a Detroit music group of the same name".

BTW, if you don't already have Highbeam access, they're still accepting applications for the next round of free accounts. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Too bad - it did sound like an interesting myth - somehow it doesn't feel the same knowing it's a modern invention of a band (though novels with fictional mythologies are quite fun). Oh well. I have not gotten one of those Highbeam accounts yet; I should probably put in for one. Thanks for the heads' up about the next round. LadyofShalott 01:43, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

UAA

LoS, I don't think that one you just removed had been blocked already. I'm showing a blocked version that had a 1 on the end. Calabe1992 03:14, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, I first clicked the block button, and I got a page saying that one had been already. ??? (I did just see where someone else blocked another version of the same thing... we've got a persistent jerk here.) LadyofShalott 03:18, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, and another was just reported at UAA. Calabe1992 03:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Great god, can someone get a rangeblock on that guy?? Calabe1992 03:24, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
I don't know the first thing about range blocks, unfortunately. WP:ANI? LadyofShalott 03:27, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm guessing NawlinWiki's probably addressing it considering he's rev-deleted the edits on his page. But whoever that guy is is persistent. Calabe1992 03:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Ah, NawlinWiki. I hadn't seen the edits to know which user with those initials ws being harassed. LadyofShalott 03:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah. I don't know of anyone else's talk page that has more rev-deletions in history. Calabe1992 03:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
That's an unfortunate distinction. :( LadyofShalott 03:40, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah. Although he obviously has accomplished quite a lot on here. Calabe1992 03:41, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes! No criticism of him was intended. LadyofShalott 03:43, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh no, I knew that. Not seeing any more socks in the log for 30m (obviously it's one since the name was removed), so hopefully it's quieted now. Calabe1992 03:46, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

SORRY

Sorry, I didn't even know of that rule after I "broke" it. Didn't even notice it in the rules stuff. I won't forget again, p.s., try to cut a new guy a little slack, thanx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xylon Draganthus (talk • contribs) 12:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

It's ok. BTW, you did get a little slack cut as a newbie - you weren't blocked for violating that rule which normally does happen. Anyway, now you know about it. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions I can help you with. LadyofShalott 13:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Yes, thank you. There appears to be a backlog at 3RRNB - would you like me to update the report that I filed there? - Sitush (talk) 23:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

No, I did it. Maybe this will get the editor's attention. LadyofShalott 23:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Ta. Is it ok if I revert to the more stable, sourced version again? I will reinstate the missing "References" section head that another user spotted had been lost in the back and forth? - Sitush (talk) 23:40, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Go ahead. When it got to wholesale section-blanking with no discussion, no edit summaries, it really amounted to vandalism. LadyofShalott 23:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Done, Made a bit of a mess of it but we are now back at where we were. It is not often that I use the vandalism word but it means a lot to me that you saw it as I did. - Sitush (talk) 00:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for I Don't Want To Blow You Up!

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Nice Comment
Thank you for your help. I am doing this for a class project. I would like to get better. And I saw that you are in the top 1100 Wikipedia article editors. That is pretty impressive. Thank you for your comments. PJay23 (talk) 15:18, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
You are most welcome. I'll keep an eye on the article - on which you've made a fine start - and continue to offer what help I can. Feel free to ask me any questions that you might have! LadyofShalott 15:21, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

thanks for your help with article Jemima Kirke Greatpumkin (talk) 16:24, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
You're welcome, and thank you for the berries. LadyofShalott 16:28, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Solid State PLC

Hello, again, I see you archived the previous discussion thread: Solid State PLC

Hello, I'd like to create a page Solid State PLC but it was previously removed: 18:11, 17 August 2011 Edgar181 (talk | contribs) deleted page Solid State PLC (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) 16:18, 17 August 2011 Tnxman307 (talk | contribs) deleted page Solid State PLC (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) 15:47, 17 August 2011 Tnxman307 (talk | contribs) deleted page Solid State PLC (A7: No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content)) The intention was to create a brief, factual page outlining the AIM listed companies details and history but not be an advert or promotion. Would you be able to assist me in achieveing this and move it into my userspace and suggest how we might complete this? --jjakaalbinoboy 16:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjakaalbinoboy (talk • contribs) Do reliable sources exist that discuss this company? If there are multiple reliable sources that discuss it, yes it should be possible to write an article on it. (I'm not familiar with the subject, and my question is not rhetorical.) It might be better to start from scratch at User:Jjakaalbinoboy/Solid State PLC. If you do that, and can show some decent sources, I'll help you work on it and make sure it's in reasonable state before moving it to main space. LadyofShalott 16:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I have found a similar company page to the one I wish to create at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASOS.com This page also appears to contain advertising type content however. It is part of two projects http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Business and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Companies both of which would be appropriate for AIM listed Solid State PLC. The main source I've found thus far is the London Stock Exchange itself at http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/summary/company-summary.html?fourWayKey=GB0008237132GBGBXAIMI, the Solid State PLC website at http://www.solidstateplc.com/ and various other financial news sources such as Google Finance, Yahoo Finance and a whole host of financial PR sites.

--jjakaalbinoboy 11:03, 23 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjakaalbinoboy (talk • contribs)

Hi, yes, I have my page set so that a bot automatically archives threads after 10 days of no activity. Your ASOS.com comment sounds like WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - that can unfortunately make learning by example challenging. However, it sounds like you have some reliable sources to use to discuss Solid State PLC. Do you want to start a new version in your sandbox? LadyofShalott 01:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Ah I see. Well I already have the page setup but its empty at the moment, is it possible to start with a default framework or template and then just fill in the appropriate info and sources? --jjakaalbinoboy 11:09, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean about having an empty page set up. Are you referring to a sandbox? I don't know offhand of any templates for articles, other than copying the style of existing articles. However, there is an WP:Articles for Creation page; I'm not sure if that might have the sort of template you want, or if it is just to get your article reviewed by an experienced editor before it goes into mainspace. (I know it does have that latter component.) Why don't you go ahead and start a sandbox article? I'll help you make sure it's acceptable for mainspace and has proper formatting and all if you just start it. LadyofShalott 12:53, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I meant like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jjakaalbinoboy/Solid_State_PLC I have added the content I have so far. --jjakaalbinoboy 11:08, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Book

I'm reading an interesting novel: Irène Némirovsky's All Our Worldly Goods. You might like it. It's woman's fiction, haha. Drmies (talk) 17:49, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! It's not in our library system (yet anyway), and it's not one I want to buy right now based on the description, but maybe I'll request that we get it - seems like something we ought to have. LadyofShalott 19:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Purchase request entered! LadyofShalott 19:42, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Excellent! I'm sure you all have Suite Francaise. Drmies (talk) 20:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh no! They've been seeing each other secretly! He'll have to call off his wedding! Drmies (talk) 21:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I just read The Fault in Our Stars by John Green. It's very good. LadyofShalott 05:29, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Paris polyphylla

I saw your edits to this new article. I've been through it trying to (a) get the running text into proper WP formatting (b) ensure that the botany is correct (the creator had used rather out of date sources). But it still needs quite a bit of copy-editing, in my view. The material sometimes feels a bit "dumped"; it needs sorting and re-organizing. E.g. why have a single section on Conservation and cultivation? I don't have any more time at present to work on the article, so if you do... Peter coxhead (talk) 14:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll take another look. (BTW, if you look through the history, you'll see that some of the same edits have been made 3 or more times.) LadyofShalott 14:57, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

William Umpleby Kirk

William Umpleby Kirk article you tagged with notability. While the contributing editor may have seemed like a stretch before, isn't a Royal Patronage notable? Kirk's work is only being rediscovered, but catching the first photographs of moving objects and being acknowledged for it with such a warrant by the Queen should be notable regardless of the time. Notability is temporary, but for the time period and even today, Kirk's work is still in a museum and while the matter of Christie's auction is deemed not so reliable, but all these things together go to show Kirk was notable. Sure some of the sources may not be top-notch, but they all attest to a certain aspect and owe a piece to verification of a century old work. Anyone given an honor for services to royalty should pass muster alone. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:03, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I actually do think he probably meets notability standards, but I think it needs to be better shown. Personal websites and Christie auction pages are not reliable sources for biographies. Maybe "refimprove" would be a more suitable tag. LadyofShalott 04:42, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
The contributor put those up after I was looking for a more notable source, the article in the magazine makes reference to him and his work, but it is not lengthy either. Refimprove seems a better choice, as only archives would have records from a century ago about his work, doesn't seem to be easy to find even with Google Scholar. Hate to risk the chopping block when the records which exist are not typically online. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:56, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Slow down a bit. If you think it shouldn't have been added you should have talked about it. Seems somewhat authoritarian to me (and I do have a reference for that if you need one). Are you Wikipedia? You have previously demonstrated problems getting your head round the issues raised here. In my opinion you should undo the undo that you perpetrated. If you choose to re-write the page or have me blocked I'll live with thatJacksoncowes (talk) 18:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

(a) I have no need or desire to have you blocked. (b) Just what issues have I "previously demonstrated problems getting [my] head round"? (c) WP:BRD. You were bold in adding an infobox; I reverted; now we discuss. Articles about people do not get infoboxes about boats in them. The article in question is about a person. (d). No, I'm not Wikipedia; I am, however, an experienced editor (and administrator). LadyofShalott 18:43, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
(a) Good. (b) That question does not seem to me to be within the spirit of (c) WP:BRD. Surely it is not necessary for me to set out your insertion, after a gentle intervention by another, and then you change on 25 April? I had put the issue succinctly on 27 and 29 April. My first comment was ignored by your warm reply and the second simply ignored. (d) I know you are an experienced editor (and administrator) and, like any of us who are interested in the whole concept of Wikipedia, I am grateful for all you have done - but not, necessarily, for what you will do. You surely should have acknowledged that you reverted because you were wrong? I now go back to your (c) and ask you most seriously to consider your use of the word 'bold' and what it implies.
The issues are these: if you, or Wikipedia, define any page headed with a person's name as a Biography it is not possible, properly, to have a page headed W.U.K. He is from the turn of the centuary, no published works about him exist. His life has been researched and chronicled but not in a respectable, citable, way. If I were research him, and I have, it would be original work. However his work was published and is, as I assume you now accept, notably.
If Wikipedia wants to box itself in with narrow definitions that merely hide wood amongst trees then, as Ian Paisley might say, so be it. Jacksoncowes (talk) 20:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC) BTW your reversion hasn't reverted yet Jacksoncowes (talk) 20:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I put a notability tag and then, after Chris commented, decided that a different tag was more relevant (that's not a reversion). I would not characterize that as not being able to wrap my head around the issues. I guess you do; so be it. As for what you are calling first and second comments, do you mean this part: "If you think it shouldn't have been added you should have talked about it. Seems somewhat authoritarian to me (and I do have a reference for that if you need one)."? I did address the first part with my BRD comments; yes, I did ignore the authoritarian comment, which is rather insulting. Now, as for the biography thing, Wikipedia, to the contrary to your characterization, does take a rather wide meaning of biography in that any article which is primarily about a person or that person's work, comes into the realm of biography. Even if a proper biography can not be written about WUK, the article is about his photography, not about the yachts which he photographed. LadyofShalott 20:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and as for the "bold" thing: I truly don't care whether your infobox addition was "bold" in any real sense of the term. That is irrelevant. I used the word because it is the wording in the relevant page to which I wanted to point you. You made and edit (bold or not, who cares?); I reverted; now we are discussing. LadyofShalott 21:03, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to interrupt, but I am making a lengthy post about this on Jacksoncowes main page. To specifically address the frustrations of the editor and his rough history with Wikipedia's so far. I think most of the issue stems from the first negative interaction with Wikipedia from me denying the first draft, having Drmies deny the second, I assist and pass the next version and then this happens. Jacksoncowes just seems to be frustrated with what is happening and doesn't understand why we do what we have done. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Your input is welcome, Chris! I think Jackson and I may be talking past each other, perhaps for the reason you've suggested. LadyofShalott 21:13, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
The subject is important to him and while we do not have a demonstrated interest our edits no doubt come across as threatening, even if we are merely going by our own standards. Pulling some of these sources obviously required lots of work and any negatively perceived change can be taken to be personal or demeaning in nature. I cannot fault him for his reasonable confusion, disgust and frustration over our slow-moving approach, versus real-time feedback and guidance. I must have done a hundred Articles for Creation that day, the I only found it again due to his post. He thought I had abandoned a duty to watch the article and guide it through and I had no knowledge of what was going on until Drmies refusal make him upset. I'm posting a welcome user screen to help out. (Wish I knew how to do that earlier with Twinkle) I just believe he feels alienated and that he is looked down upon because of what has happened thus far, and I want to mentor him through this difficult process. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

By your last sentence, (20:59 30 April) it would seem that we are, perhaps, getting a little closer to nub of our discussion. The article is about his work. The fact that a very large amount of his original work, some 4000 negetives, has survived and been kept together in just two large collections for approximately 100 years is one of the main planks of his notability. The other plank is when and where he practiced. The subjects of his photographs, the people, their clothes, their floating and their static palaces etc. etc. is what is notable. This collection is a unique, historical, visual record of a long dead era. It is not just a collection of photos of old boats. Kirk was uniquely positioned to photograph a distillation of an aspect of society. That aspect of society existed here and there, now and then, throughout this and other countries. But it came together for a short period each year at Cowes in what I have called a distillation. He did photograph it and his work has remained together, its existence, until recently, known only to a small group.
The trustees of the two collections feel, I am sure, that the photographs are too valuable to be published willy nilly on the internet. In any event that would be impractical and was not my intention. My plan had been to try to make the collection's scope known. Not as an advertisment but as a dissemination of information.
As an analogy consider the article about a national collection described in page 10 of today's Guardian. The article describes the collection and claims or advocates its importance. The Collection was started as the Fawcett Library. Biographical details of Millicent Fawcett are not central to the theme of the article, an account and illustration of the contents of the collection is. Jacksoncowes (talk) 15:00, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
I have no problem with your discussing details of the collection of photographs, and encourage you to do so. There is a difference between that and details of the yachts though. Take the photo that is currently in the article. It makes sense to name the yacht there (which is done). Beyond that, details of the photo would include what sort of camera he used, the focal length of the lens, how open the aperture was, how he processed the photograph, etc. These are details of the photography, not of the yacht. LadyofShalott 15:08, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps there is a related topic that is notable which you might want to start: say Yachting in Cowes or Cowes Yachtclubs? LadyofShalott 15:12, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Lots of individuals have the subject of their work listed in the biography, I just believe the matter was using the wrong templates or infobox, right? The boat itself, as are the specs, unnecessary on his biography... he didn't build the boat, but only photographed it. A bio infobox (about Kirk) is what we should have and further down the page should be the example of his work (the photo) with the photography related information would be ideal. Finding the right infobox can be quite annoying when you don't use them often. Either way, the article keeps looking better and better from the time it was created, that's the most important thing. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

You really don't get it. It must be very difficult. Never mind. Jacksoncowes (talk) 16:51, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Jacksoncowes, the article is about a person, not about a yacht. It's really quite simple. I think there was a Monty Python joke about a guy with the word "yacht" in his last name--"luxury yacht"?-- but this is not it. I'm not quite sure why you want to belabor that point--you are talking to two editors (not me) who for whatever reason thought your article was notable and have worked very hard to bring it into mainspace. Picking a fight with them over something silly (not to mention that you're incorrect about this infobox) should be the last thing you want to do. Nice photo, BTW. Drmies (talk) 05:23, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Shooting of Trayvon Martin

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Trayvon Martin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:16, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Hardy

I don't know many admins so I thought I'd ask you this question. Someone recently changed the Thomas Hardy page into a dab, redirecting the famous writer's page to Thomas Hardy (writer). Thomas Hardy the writer gets 50000 views per month while none of the other pages on the new dab get even 1000. It seems like a strange thing to do to make 50000 people per month search a dab page to get to the Thomas Hardy writer page. Any thoughts? INeverCry 22:33, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree entirely with you. The writer should be the main page; Thomas Hardy (disambiguation), the dab page. LadyofShalott 22:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Have you opened discussion with the editor who did the move? LadyofShalott 22:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I asked the person who did it about it, and they replied that they would try to reverse it etc. I just want to make sure it gets properly fixed asap. INeverCry 22:41, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Let me know if admin help is needed to move it back. LadyofShalott 22:45, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Nevermind, I see it's been done already. LadyofShalott 22:46, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Stichting Oud Politieke Delinquenten

Thanks for your copy edits. The editing process was kind of messy, working on four articles simultaneously with these big fat book citation templates inline. If you have a moment, can you look at the others? Or maybe you have already... Thanks Lady, Drmies (talk) 13:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I had, but went back and made some small edits to each. LadyofShalott 02:06, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Institute for Cultural Diplomacy

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Institute for Cultural Diplomacy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Tears of a Tiger (film)

Hello LoS. I am afraid that we are being hoaxed with this article. The book exists as does the author but I can find no info about a film. Not a single member of the cast has this on their record nor can I find Forest Whitaker having directed anything by this title. I am about to logging off soon so if there is any followup that you need from me please leave a note here and I will pick things up when I get back. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 01:12, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I well know the book is real. Hmm... I'll look to see if I can find any evidence that the movie is also. Meanwhile, you could stick a hoax template up there before you go. LadyofShalott 01:14, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I think you were right, Marnette. I see you put the G3 tag up, and I have deleted it. I have having my time wasted that way. >:( LadyofShalott 01:25, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Didn't take long to recreate Tears of a Tiger (film) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict)I hear ya about the time drain. Sadly this editor just recreated the article Homeboy98 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) so it looks like someone is just playing with us and our AGF. Thanks for all you've done. MarnetteD | Talk 01:32, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

You were getting things taken care of while I was typing my last message. looks like this List of Raising my Siblings episodes is the last hoax they created before you blocked them. Thanks again for the quick action on this. MarnetteD | Talk 01:35, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Got it. Thank you for alerting me to the hoax. Sometimes I A a little too much GF. Thanks also for pointing out the recreation, Dennis. LadyofShalott 01:37, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

It is your own fault.

This is what happens when you talk to me, I start asking unrelated questions. An IP was making changes to Pandeism, capitalizing Pandeism and Universe, etc. under the rationale that "a Pandeist would", I explained NPOV, but he raised one point that Wiktionary only confused more on [1]. Should Pandeism/pandeism be capitalized? I assume the same as Deism/deism. I never have as I consider it a philosophy, and don't see it as a proper noun, but I'm still not an expert on MOS and thought you might know off-hand. Since he asked on the talk page of the article (after I reverted one vandalism and one good edit), I said I would get another opinion. You seem smart enough ;) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 21:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Post here anytime, Dennis. As for your question, my inclination is the same as yours. I don't think pandeism should be capitalized, nor would I capitalize deism. The real question though is what do the relevant sources do? Is there a preponderance of capitalization or not capitalization in WP:RS about the subject? If the editor who wants it changed can show that RS do capitalize, then so be it; if not, oh well. LadyofShalott 22:31, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
A lot of the sources are of the dead tree variety, but a sampling shows only small letter. I just wanted a good faith effort to make sure it wasn't just my opinion here. Thanks! Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 22:43, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Speaking of dead tree sources, a dictionary can be your friend, and according to mine neither deism nor pandeism should be capitalised. Malleus Fatuorum 03:09, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
My dead tree version is still packed from the move, and admittedly, I've been lazy enough to just rely on the internet. Dictionary.com doesn't even list pandeism/pan-deism, however. Thank you for the additional confirmation. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 12:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I forgot to mention, God's Debris is a short but interesting novel on the topic, if you haven't previously read it. The author now kindly offers it as a free PDF after making his share on it. I still prefer dead tree over ebooks, however. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 15:19, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Pixie bot

I think it was only one. And in fact, it had (oddly) gotten there just before I had been there. Efforts more or less crossed in the mail. I understand your concern. Am not knowingly making these mistakes, but there is always likely human error. Sorry. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:05, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

It was at least two: William U. Kirk and Mildred Rutherford. The Millie Rutherford article had been visited I think two days ago. I think it was similar for Kirk. Take a look at article history before posting Pixie me. LadyofShalott 23:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Understood. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:20, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear LadyofShallott: I put a note on my talk page. I appreciate your watching over DYKs, as they are (typically) new and not monitored by hardly anyone. So what you do is a mitzvah. Keep up the good work. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:08, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words (and for the link to an interesting article - I was unfamiliar with that phrase). If there's ever an article you'd like me to take a look at, please do drop me a note here. Regards, LadyofShalott 23:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Special:UnwatchedPages

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Special:UnwatchedPages. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

PolTx still editing

Hi, I wasn't sure where to take this but you seemed like a good bet as an admin familiar with the situation. The IP 174.56.89.176 apparently wasn't blocked following the most recent SPI and made this edit today (adding party affiliations to the list of Albuquerque city council members, a PT favorite). If you could make sure he gets properly blocked, I'd appreciate it. Camerafiend (talk) 23:51, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, one edit wasn't proof, but a quick glance at that list of contributions left no doubt in my mind. I've blocked the IP for a month and tagged it as a suspected sockpuppet of PT. I have several of his haunts on my watchlist, but not all. Feel free to post here with any concerns on this matter if going straight to SPI isn't what needs to happen. Thanks, Camerafiend. LadyofShalott 00:20, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of that. The IP was supposedly autoblocked after the last SPI, so I was surprised to see it being used again so soon. Anyway good work, I'm sure we'll meet again next time he shows up. Camerafiend (talk) 01:16, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't think the autoblock lasts very long (just a day, maybe?) - certainly it's not the indef that the account got. Anyway, yes, I'm sure we'll meet again - he won't be gone for good. LadyofShalott 01:29, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Your thoughts regarding Fanny Crosby

Please see this at the talk page of Drmies. - Sitush (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

  • NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! NO! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Help

Hey Lady, can you help out with Hexie Farm? I need a pair of eyes and I can't seem to find the proper categories. I've nominated it for a DYK (it came from AfC), so I expect Chinese government hackers to enter my netbook any minute. Drmies (talk) 02:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

See what you think now. I found a couple categories and created another. Interesting article!LadyofShalott 18:46, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Well done--thank you very much! It still needs a reviewer, I think... Drmies (talk) 00:06, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

FYI

I wrote Frog and the Birdsong this morning. I'd appreciate your help, with categories, the infobox, ISBN, talk page templates, etc...! I was not able to dig up more than snippet views in English publications; perhaps you know better where to look. I referenced a digitized version: it doesn't take a lot of skill in Dutch to follow the storyline. Thanks for your help--I'm putting that up for DYK also. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

So it looks like you took care of most of that before I got here. (Sorry, long day in more than one sense, no chance to get on the wiki until now...) Anyway, I did turn your redlinked category blue and add wikiprojects to the talk page. Is there anything else that I'm not seeing at the moment (entirely possible as I'm pretty tired)? LadyofShalott 02:08, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Looks good, thanks! Now take a rest. Hey, did you see we have a shed? I'm turning it into a man cave; I started by hanging old license plates on the wall. I think that's a required element. Drmies (talk) 04:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I just wrote Seamus (dog) on Twitter (not the article, just the link), can you source it, write it, nominate for DYK, and bring it to FA status for me? --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Don't make fun of our fellow editors, Kelapstick. They might think they're being oppressed. Drmies (talk) 04:45, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, or was that repressed? I can never remember. And who says I'm joking. Ah well, it's fly day today, back home. I've been considering returning to Mongolia, it would be either a really good idea, or a really bad idea, I haven't decided which. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:51, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
If I wasn't already of Shalott, I could be a watery tart who hands out swords, whether or not you think that's any basis for government. Have fun in the man cave, Drmies. What does Mrs. K think about a return to Mongolia? LadyofShalott 13:44, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm fascinated that you're fascinated by Mongolia. I think I'm jealous that you've been there and I haven't. Drmies (talk) 00:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
It's mixed. We would be going back to Canada, and I would be back to Mongolia. But less At a time. It has it's pros and cons, but such is life. --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:27, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Georgian

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Georgian. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:16, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Naming conventions of music articles

Greetings LadyofShalott (what a lovely name) hope this message finds you in good spirit.

Drmies pointed me in your direction, in regards to an article naming dispute at Talk:Cute (Japanese band). A user is suggesting to request a page move to Cute (band), which if the band was the only one in the world, then I'd happily agree with him. However, there are two bands in the world called "Cute", and Wikipedia has articles for them both (the other being Cute (Maltese band). My common-sense tells me that as there are two bands of the same name, then they need to be differentiated more by showing their country of origin in the title also; which would mean Cute (band) would need to remain as a sub-disambiguation directing to the band section of Cute (disambiguation). Is what I'm thinking the correct procedure or not? If don't mind, would it be possible to post your comments/views on this matter over at the Talk:Cute (Japanese band) - thank you ever so much Wesley☀Mouse 17:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the upgrade!

Thank you for the upgrade to B-class for the Giulia Marletta article! Doc2234 (talk) 19:46, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Great American Wiknic for Atlanta in June

Howdy! I would like to invite you to join the Great American Wiknic this June (you could update Wikipedia:Meetup/Atlanta) :) Also, please confirm any preliminary details at Wikipedia:Wiknic#2012 Wiknic.--Pharos (talk) 23:51, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to say thank you LadyofSharlott, for the lovely words you left on Drmies' talk page. In their own little way, they brought a hint of warmth and comfort at this shallow time. Its now 2:20am here, and I'm that distraught and confused that I can't even sleep. So I've popped by to just read and re-read every page that I've either worked on, or talk pages I've interacted with. Isn't it strange how we do the weirdest of things like that in circumstances such as this. Reflecting on the past, and trying to figure out what the future now has in store. Again, thank you from the bottom of my heart. Wesley☀Mouse 01:22, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. Difficulty sleeping is certainly understandable. Take whatever comfort and peace you can, whether here or elsewhere. Best, LadyofShalott 01:27, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rape culture

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rape culture. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Frog and the Birdsong

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring Djembe page

Hi, seeing that your edit to the Djembe page was just reverted as well, I though I'll let you know about this issue: [2] --MichiHenning (talk) 01:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the pointer to the 3rr page. I'm now "involved" so I won't block. I suspect someone else will though. LadyofShalott 01:46, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Djembe categories

Hi, just saw your edits to Djembe in the category section. I guess it makes sense to remove Category:Drums, seeing that Category:African drums was already present an is a sub-category of Category:Drums.

But I'm puzzled by the removal of Category:Membranophones. The djembe clearly is a membranophone, so I don't understand why you removed that category. Is it also because it is a super-category of Category:Drums? I'm not sure what the rules are for categorisation, but I notice that many other drums with a membrane use that category. Maybe it would be better to have both categories? This is because not all membranophones are drums, and not all drums are membranophones. --MichiHenning (talk) 03:17, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

@$%# WMF error. I just lost the reply I'd typed out here and have to do it again. LadyofShalott 03:27, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Michi, yes, I removed the membranophone cat because it's a parent to Cat:Drums (which is in turn parent to Cat:Hand drums and Cat:African drums. Now it sounds like what you are really telling me is that perhaps Cat:Membranophones should not be a parent to Cat:Drums. I'm not prepared to argue that either way. It might be something to bring up for discussion at the Percussion WikiProject. LadyofShalott 03:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Shallott, thanks for the clarification. Well, not all drums are membranophones. For example, log drums are idiophones. And not all membranophones are drums. For example, a kazoo is a membranophone, but not a drum.
For the time being, I think it would be best to put Category:Membranophones back on the page, and sort out the confusion with the Percussion WikiProject, as you suggested. Does that sound OK to you? I'll raise the issue there. --MichiHenning (talk) 03:51, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Further to this, it appears that categories are not transitive. For example, when look at Category:African drums, Djembe is listed as one of the pages in the category. However, when I look at Category:Drums, Djembe does not show up as one of the pages in that category, even though it clear is a drum. I've browsed help pages on categories and the like, but I can't find any rule that would state how categories should be used in an article, that is, should an article list only the most specific category, or should it list all categories along the branch of the category tree. (Actually not a tree, but a graph, because a single category can be a sub-category of two unrelated super-categories.) This is all a bit confusing right now… Can you advise?
I have a feeling that it might be best to put both Category:Drums and Category:Membranophones back on the Djembe page, if only because that seems to follow existing practice when I look at other percussion pages. --MichiHenning (talk) 04:15, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Please do not put back Cat:Drums, as that one is clearly redundant to its daughter categories African drums and Hand drums. (If redundant categorization is being done elsewhere, it needs to be fixed, not emulated.) I have no objection to your replacing Cat:Membranophones; you make a convincing argument there. LadyofShalott 04:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah, I missed some of your added questions. Categories should be the most specific elevant ones, not every parent, grandparent one. Djembe is not in cat:drums, because Cat:African drums and Cat:Hand drums are, and it shows in those. Does this help clarify it for you? LadyofShalott 04:22, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
It does, thanks! :) Is there a help page somewhere that explains this? I haven't been able to find it (yet). I'll put Category:Membranophones back and I'll leave out Category:Drums. I'll also check the other categories for that page to see whether there are any other sub/super categories that should not be there. --MichiHenning (talk) 04:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm glad! Take a look at Wikipedia:Categorization. I think it's what you want, and it links to a FAQ that you might also find useful. (By the way, HotCat is a useful tool to add if you haven't.) :) LadyofShalott 04:44, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, for pointing out that log drums are idiophones. I had not thought about those. I'm in a drum circle myself. Most of us (including myself) play djembe. We have two dunun, two sangbans, and 1 kenkeni. A couple people also have log drums that, depending on the song, they may pull out (as well as shakere and other such instruments. LadyofShalott 04:50, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks heaps for the Wikipedia:Categorization link, that's exactly what I was looking for! I'll check out HotCat too!
Hey, your drum circle sounds serious if you actually have dunun players there (which is a rarity in drum circles)! I strongly recommend you join the discussion forum at djembefola.com! Lots of interesting stuff happening there, with some very experienced participants. And it's a good way to keep up with events, such as community drum circles and djembe/dunun workshop. --MichiHenning (talk) 05:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of Level Up episodes

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Level Up episodes. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:16, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions! SwisterTwister talk 16:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you! That's a surprise. :) LadyofShalott 16:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Re-open concerns you. MBisanz talk 22:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Question

Given the editor's recent issues with Autopatroled, etc, I noticed this this today and had a look. The article Norfolk County Council is word-for-word a copy of Norfolk#Politics. I don't see anything on talk pages about wp:split and the information remains on the Norfolk page. Is it kosher to create a new article with a copy/paste from an existing article and then call it 'new'? The access dates for the refs are (again) problematic. Most before the editor had an account on WP. Wikipelli Talk 10:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) while attribution is given in an edit summary, it most certainly would not be OK at DYK to accept it as a new entry, it is in the rules there somewhere. --kelapstick(bainuu) 10:59, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Specificly Wikipedia:Did_you_know#DYK_rules Point 1b. As I said, the attribution for the split is fine with the edit summary link, but it wouldn't be eligible for dyk. --kelapstick(bainuu) 11:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! I wasn't sure. Wikipelli Talk 13:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I left an explanation there, and rewrote the thing. My timings are terrible. Page was already patrolled. :/ --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 13:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Given those circmstances,I think i would have to be a 5-fold expansion of the existing material. I have not checked that, but I think that an experienced DYK reviewer should. I'm glad the notes have been left by all on the nom. page. LadyofShalott 17:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Ernest Nys/Translated page template

I didn't know there was one. Thank you. I've added the template both to Ernest Nys and Augusto Pierantoni. IMHO (talk) 19:18, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem! :) LadyofShalott 23:33, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Review

I would rather not continue this line of conversation. LadyofShalott 13:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I am tired of TAP's lies and Confusion so can you please review some of my Pseudotomoxia articles.--Deathlaser :  Chat  18:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Deathlaser. Do please be careful with repeatedly accusing someone of lying - that falls rather under WP:NPA. You should maybe also take a read of WP:USERPAGE regarding what is not acceptable in your userspace, in particular "Users should generally not maintain in public view negative information related to others without very good reason. Negative evidence, laundry lists of wrongs, collations of diffs and criticisms related to problems, etc., should be removed, blanked, or kept privately (i.e., not on the wiki) if they will not be imminently used, and the same once no longer needed".
LadyofShalott, you've rather encouraged this sort of thing with your accusation about Thine Antique Pen. Please try to assume good faith here - it's quite reasonable for him to hold the view (flawed or not) that he never "technically" gained or re-gained autopatrolled because it wasn't approved at WP:AN which is where he was told he'd have to go for such things in the future. It's a messy and unfortunate set of circumstances, none of which is your fault, but that doesn't mean we any of us should jump straight to accusations of dishonesty. Let's just focus on improving articles, right? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:56, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Demiurge, I generally agree with your point. In this case, however, I know for a fact that I had given the right, and that he knew he had it (because I told him), and it was subsequently removed again. Then to say it was never granted? Really, that rather strains the AGF. LadyofShalott 23:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I worded that terribly. Starting over; I was granted autopatrol without WP:AN permission, but it was removed before I could use it for the purpose I had in mind, and it's full extent. --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 07:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
DL, I'll try to take a look at some of your articles this evening. LadyofShalott 23:44, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pseudotomoxia articles

Deathlaser, I have gone through all the species of Pseudotomoxia and found 3 recurrent problems:

  1. In the taxobox, all the species except P. albonata were wrong, because you had them all showing as P. albonata. You needed to change the species name to match the one the article was discussing. I have fixed all these for you.
  2. Several of "Animals described in WXYZ" categories were incorrect. I suspect you forgot to change them to match the article text. As you create future articles, you'll need to watch for this. I have fixed all these for you.
  3. You are saying that the genus authority in each case is the person who discovered the species. This is incorrect. If the genus authority listed in Pseudotomoxia is correct (please check the source), then that is always the genus authority. I think the real problem (which you inherited from TAP's design) is that the taxobox ought to have additional lines for species name, binomial, and binomial authority - I think you were trying to call the binomial authority the genus authority. The taxobox isn't worthless without these additional lines, but it would be better with them. I have not fixed this for you and you need to either add the relevant lines or delete the genus authority line.

Please let me know if you have further questions about these or any other articles. LadyofShalott 05:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Just delete the Genus authority line.--Deathlaser :  Chat  15:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
How do I do it.--Deathlaser :  Chat  16:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Like that. LadyofShalott 16:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 Done now what.--Deathlaser :  Chat  16:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just a suggestion, as this is around the same size, have a go at these? --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 16:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Am I getting the Hang of Wiki then?--Deathlaser :  Chat  17:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Tommorow.--Deathlaser :  Chat  17:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I'd say you are. --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 17:09, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Example please.--Deathlaser :  Chat  17:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Can you please get me more sources for My maths.--Deathlaser :  Chat  17:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:16, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Mildred Lewis Rutherford for GA?

I think you should just submit it. As I noted, the lead could be expanded a bit. It would be nice if you got Clare's Thunder and stars; it's the one full-length biography listed. Some might quibble over the wikilinks inside quotations--I found two--but you can just see how it goes. It's a great article. Drmies (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll work on the lead. I've gotten rid of the wikilinks in quotes. Please see what you think. I'm ok with the Baptist one, but the Lost Cause one seems needlessly wordy. I do need to get Thunder and Stars again. I read the first chapter or so and then got caught up in other reading. I'll order it again. (I think we own it, but it's a non-circulating copy.) LadyofShalott 14:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Go for it. Even without the book it's a good article, and the process can be lengthy--perhaps by the time someone starts the review you've already finished the book, and the Divine Comedy. Drmies (talk) 15:06, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
OK. I'll do it. Thanks, LadyofShalott 15:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah, help! What category? None seem ideal, but... History? Education? LadyofShalott 15:19, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Oh, now I understand. Hmm...whichever one has the fewest articles listed? Drmies (talk) 18:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Good strategy! LadyofShalott 19:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I've done it. Question for you about this edit: my intent there was not to reference page 245, but to say that it is 245 pages long. Do you know the proper way to do that, or should I just not? LadyofShalott 23:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I smell socks

[3] is an interesting read. Two articles are at AFD and likely hoaxes, the first article was ok, but they're moving articles from user pages of other SPAs to main space, etc. Hoax article Drug Guitar from User:Drug Guitar, hoax article Haweli Ek Paheli from User:Haweli Ek Paheli, questionable and unsourced article Silver Screen Awards from User:Silver Screen Awards. They were linking the actors in the movies to user space, which MichaelQSchmidt and I have delinked independently. Their first article, Ranbir Kapoor looks ok at a glance, but is out of my field of expertise. A more experienced set of eyes is needed here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:23, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dennis, I have not yet had time to give this the attention it deserves. You might want just to go ahead and open an SPI case though. LadyofShalott 16:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Someone beat me to it [4], and found a few more along the way. The pace of edits was such I wasn't in hurry, but it was definitely socky. Wierd case. Maybe next time. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 17:33, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:%s

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:%s. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

AfD tit for tat

See if you agree: I am learning is AfD'ed on 22 May, and on 23 May, 17:52, Deathlaser weighs in at the AfD. 16:39, 24 May 2012, TAP responds to it, and then two minutes later nominates MyMaths, Deathlaser's article, for deletion. I'm going to close that last AfD as a Speedy Keep, BTW: there is no need for that to drag on. Drmies (talk) 02:57, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

That was exactly my impression. LadyofShalott 03:02, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
A little birdie told me. Now what do we do? I've had questions about this person's editorial qualities (see their easy promotion at Template:Did you know nominations/Mike Daniels (American football) and the issue of Jacobus Deketh--tomorrow I'll yank that star: the reviewer has bailed out), and there is a kind of battleground mentality. As for Deathlaser, I don't know; I think I remember the two of them duking it out at ANI but was not interested in reading all of it. An interaction ban seems reasonable if it's a two-way street. And TAP probably needs to stay away from reviewing of any kind, given the problems with the Daniels article. I'm about to check another of their DYK promotions to see if the writing is up to snuff. Drmies (talk) 04:07, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
His Foxley Wood is up at DYK--but most of the content is a list of plants found there. I wouldn't pass that. (BTW, this has little to do with our initial conversation, of course.) Drmies (talk) 04:11, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
See this.--Deathlaser :  Chat  13:56, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Article

Are my last 3 articles right (look at contribution).--Deathlaser :  Chat  11:28, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

  • First your article subsequent was only a definition. See WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Someone else already made a soft redirect to Wiktionary.
  • Second, please see my tweaks and fixes to Glipidiomorpha leucozona, Glipidiomorpha intermedia, and Glipidiomorpha kuatunensis. In all three you had the wrong year category - please make sure you make sure that the year cat matches the year you are saying the animal was described. Only genus and species names get italicized, not family, superfamily (or higher order taza). I've tweaked the phrasing slightly to be both more concise and less repetitive. LadyofShalott 21:42, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Here's the thing, Deathlaser. Your "opponent" apparently knows something about this subject matter also, hence the list they made. Lowering the number of mistakes will make it less likely that they feel the need to come in and correct them, which is their good right of course. As a matter of diplomacy, I've asked them to stay away from your work, but you can do your part by not inviting them, so to speak. Neither suggestion of mine is dictated by any kind of rule, of course, but it might make getting along easier. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 13:48, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, found another mistake. Could you update categories to the correct year, and did what I did in this diff, here? Thanks! --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 16:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

You are both still making really basic errors. See here where I have further corrected TAP's corrections. I have yet to be convinced either one of you needs to be giving anyone lessons. LadyofShalott 22:13, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, but they're also talking... I consider this progress. Drmies (talk) 04:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, they were. :/ LadyofShalott 16:00, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I've asked Deathlaser to stay off my talk. --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 16:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I think LadyofShalott can see that - you should experiment with resisting the temptation to reply to every single talk page comment ever made anywhere. Also, you don't need to comment on or about Deathlaser. At all. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:05, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Clearly wasn't going anywhere constructive - they both feel an overwhelming need to criticise the other at every possible opportunity, and both over-react to the other one doing so. They're better off as far away from each other as possible. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:05, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, they need to avoid one another. It's a big website. Finding different corners to work in would be a good idea. LadyofShalott 16:11, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Can you get me more stubs to create then, or more articles to improve.--Deathlaser :  Chat  16:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, I've never been into mass stub creation myself, so I'll have to do a little looking before answering that part. A couple things you might find useful though are User:SuggestBot and WP:Requested articles. LadyofShalott 17:07, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Look also at Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants/Article requests. LadyofShalott 17:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LadyofShalott/Archive_21&oldid=1148822478"