User talk:Lagrange613/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

WikiProject United States

I just saw you joined and wanted to say welcome to the project. --Kumioko (talk) 23:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I hope to be an active and helpful contributor. Lagrange613 (talk) 00:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Quantitative easing

If you want to add text under your own name that i originally added i dont have a problem with that. But if you want to attribute it to me when i felt what i said was very poorly written and unhelpful then naturally i will feel obliged to correct what you are wanting to attribute to me that i think was unhelpful. What i said was more or less totally dyslexic and i dont know why it was so written. It was not part of a dialogue involving others because my comments were added later and simply ignored. Andrewedwardjudd (talk) 02:23, 17 June 2011 (UTC)andrewedwardjudd

Deleting entire paragraphs' worth of comments to pretend they never happened is the wrong approach here. If you'd like to indicate that a previous comment you've made isn't something you stand by, WP:REDACT mentions a few options, including striking out and substituting a placeholder. There's also Template:Nono. Any of these would be acceptable here. I'll give you some time to decide what you'd like to do, but if you do nothing, as I said, I'll be reposting your entire previous comment and indicating that (1) it's your work and (2) you deleted it. Lagrange613 (talk) 06:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Portal 2 Gameplay

Hi, I really appreciate your help, and I have some friendly advice for you. First, use the show preview button to make multiple passes through the article. Seeing 20 different edits in a row isn't very helpful, and I just go to the combined changes, which can also be kind of jarring. Second, don't assume that something which is obvious to you, like what a Thermal Discouragement Beam is, is clear to everyone else. A big problem with Wikipedia, in my opinion, is articles that only make sense if you already know what they say. Third, while I admire you're eye for saying the same thing in fewer words, also try to look at the big picture of how sentences and paragraphs flow into one another. I made an edit of my own which keeps most of your tweaks but puts back a few key concepts and maintains the structure. Finally, I'm willing to iron out any disagreements you might have over any particular change and work together towards a clearer explanation. When in doubt, communicate! Cheers, HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 04:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I always use show preview. My instinct in approaching big projects is to fix one thing at a time for my own sanity and to make reverting easy; as you say, combined diffs can be jarring. But you're right, I probably went a bit overboard this time, so I'll try to condense more going forward. The Thermal Discouragement Beam was defined as a laser three sentences prior, but reiterating that it's a laser is better. I make no claim to having the best answer, so please continue to improve on my changes where you see a need. We'll head to the talk page if necessary. Lagrange613 (talk) 05:55, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

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)

Kamusi Project Copyright Problem

I pinged the main man at Kamusi and I think this has been addressed, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurbuliva (talk • contribs) 04:45, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Sure looks that way! Thanks. Lagrange613 (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Karl Denninger

Why are you deleting the edits on Karl DEnningers Page? They are not libelous, simply follow the links back and what im saying is the truth. Everything i said was factual and backed up by a link which proves the statements. You either did not read them, or are in his little fan club. You are merely hiding the truth, when wikipedia is about the truth. REally losing respect for wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnyringo49 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. I see that some other users have informed you about how Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons requires that all contentious material be supported by reliable sources. The sources you use are all forum postings, which are not considered reliable.

I expect you've found that you can no longer edit the article. The page was protected because your edits were not in compliance with these policies and guidelines. I would be happy to assist you in contributing properly sourced content to the article. If you'd like to propose that something be added, please submit the request on the article's talk page, and we can discuss it there.

Please be forewarned, though, that leveling accusations that other editors are "hiding the truth" or members of anyone's "fan club" is not going to get you what you want. Around here, civility isn't just a policy; it's often the thing that makes the difference between being taken seriously and being ignored or blocked. Lagrange613 (talk) 23:08, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Jacob Have I Loved (moved from user page)

Why did you undo my stuff on Jacob Have I Loved (comment left on user page by User:Hauntedfishbowl at 16:08, 2 August 2011 UTC)

Because in your edits you removed content without citing a reason and made the lead look like a mess. I explained in more detail on your talk page. Please use show preview before saving. Lagrange613 (talk) 17:50, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Lagrange613 Qualifications

Thank you for the introduction and starting tips. A tad patronising, perhaps... I'm 21. Is that too young to be part of wikipedia. (A whole year wiser than 20, which is apparently "an issue"!!!) I hope that you can overcome your ageism and that's the only discrimination you possess. Please tell me your expertise in divinity or even professional editing? --That'sSoSabrina (talk) 20:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

The intro I posted was a standard welcome template. A lot of people come to Wikipedia, don't know where to start, and find a little direction helpful. Others find they don't need it and just delete it from their talk pages, as you are free to do. I did intend the welcome sincerely.

Wikipedia welcomes contributions from people of all ages; if I recall correctly, we even have a number of administrators under 18. It is not the age of the contributor that matters but the quality of the contributions. Personally, I would like to see more diversity of background (including age) among Wikipedia's contributors, as I believe that would help improve the encyclopedia.

The standard is different for contributors and sources. The word "reliability" has a technical definition on Wikipedia, defined in the content guideline on reliable sources. My use of the word "reliability" in my comment at Talk:Conservative Judaism was intended in this narrow sense. I did not intend it to reflect upon the quality of the author's writing or even the validity of the points he made. When deciding whether a source is "reliable" in the technical sense, we consider a number of factors, one of which is whether the author is an expert on the subject matter. Often we can judge whether someone is an expert without being experts ourselves. I pointed out the author's age in this case to suggest that he may not have had enough experience to be considered an expert on comparative theology. Again, it's not about whether he's a smart guy or whether we can learn something from reading his article; it's about whether it makes sense to include this source in an encyclopedia, which is what Wikipedia is. (And then there's the fact that his article doesn't back up the Wikipedia article's claims; this disqualifies the edit all over again.) You are free to disagree with me on any of these points and make your disagreement known at the talk page; your success at persuading others will likely hinge on whether you correctly cite Wikipedia policies in a civil tone.

I hope I've answered your questions. Now I have a request of you. The title you've chosen for this section could be construed as a personal attack, which would mean it violates one of Wikipedia's conduct policies. I would ask that, in the spirit of assuming good faith, you choose a new title for the section. You can just write it in place of the old one. Lagrange613 (talk) 21:25, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Lagrange613's qualification that justify expertise in both theocracy and editing are:--That'sSoSabrina (talk) 13:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

(to be completed by Professor Lagrange613)

(PS. I have changed the heading at your request - love Sabrina ;-))

If by theocracy you mean theology, I'm not an expert. As for editing, you can check my contributions. Lagrange613 (talk) 13:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps Lagrange613 you should stick to topics like Maths and Economics that you have expertise on,

unless you're planning to become a rabbi too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by That'sSoSabrina (talk • contribs) 15:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Anyone can edit. Like I said above, you don't always need to be an expert to tell whether someone else is an expert. If you disagree with a specific contribution you can say so, but comment on the contribution, not the contributor. Lagrange613 (talk) 16:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Love Always copyedit

Hey, I just wanted to thank you for the copy edit of Love Always! I really appreciate it!
—Michael Jester (talk) 01:58, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck at GA. Lagrange613 (talk) 02:27, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Aftermath of World War II

Dear Lagrange616, God knows why we have to use these daft contact names, however, thanks for your comments. I of course have no idea where you are or who you are-so I'm flying blind! I have found Wikipedia very helpful for research in writing books, or researching issues. I felt in the spirit of its aim I could put something back. So I added my economic piece ('British-USA special relationship')to the 'Aftermath of WWII' as I believed it relevant to anyone seeking background information. Of course it might have needed some editing (not wholesale slaughter) -to fit in with the overall theme, but the content was relevant. By taking items piece-meal out of my contribution does little for the clarity. For example, the post war loan the US made to Britain is described '...the loan was agreed on reasonable terms its conditions included what proved to be damaging fiscal conditions for Sterling'. A contradiction in terms. I could go on - but these 'talks' are meant to be brief. Regards Long Ben Avery (name adopted after too much research on a pirate). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Long Ben Every (talk • contribs) 13:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I reverted your contribution the first time because it cited no sources and, in my opinion, didn't conform to our policy that Wikipedia must be written in a neutral point of view. Since then my only contributions have been copyedits; it was GraemeLeggett who changed your contribution here and here. I tend to agree with him that it did not reflect a neutral point of view, at least as written, and that most of it was not really about the aftermath but rather about the UK war economy. I suggest you read Help:Section and WP:Footnotes, as these would have helped you format your contribution better. Going forward, let's discuss the article's content on the article's talk page. Lagrange613 (talk) 16:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Re your comments on 'The aftermath of WW2' -points taken.
Could be re-written in a 'neutral' tone to reflect UK's post war situation, including source material. However events in the war did create the aftermath -obviously. Do I assume you and Grahame control that Wikipedia page? regards LBA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Long Ben Every (talk • contribs) 17:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Part of the magic of Wikipedia is that nobody controls pages. GraemeLeggett and I have just been working on it recently. If you'd like to discuss adding some of this material back I'd be happy to, but it would be best to have that conversation on the article's talk page. That way GraemeLeggett and everyone else who's watching the article can participate. By the way, you should sign your posts on talk pages. Lagrange613 (talk) 17:56, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

will do. 82.24.3.56 (talk) 14:11, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for copyediting The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.!

Thank you for your terrific work on this article. I wrote pretty much all of the text and have looked at it for so long, I was just mentally incapable of catching all the errors and needed changes. Good job, and much appreciated! AstroCog (talk) 00:51, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem! I know just what you mean about needing some distance from an article. I can't believe I've never heard of this series. I'll have to get it on Netflix. Lagrange613 (talk) 00:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dianne Burnett

Thank you for an excellent discussion. I agree that there is currently not enough available online to link Diane Burnett to the projects she (allegedly) co-created with ex-husband Mark Burnett. I suggest we redirect the article on Dianne to Mark Burnett#Personal life and encourage that her earlier partnership with him be expanded and sourced over time and through regular editing. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:39, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. It looks like we're coming to consensus, which is great. Lagrange613 (talk) 16:41, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 barnstars

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		This barnstar is awarded to Lagrange613 for copy editing articles totalling over 60,000 words during the GOCE September copy edit drive. Your contributions are greatly appreciated. -- Dianna (talk)

		Leaderboard Award—Word Count—3rd Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Lagrange613 for copy editing articles totalling 60,146 words during the WP:GOCE September 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thank you so much for your contributions to the project. -- Dianna (talk)

		Leaderboard Award—Number of Articles—3rd Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Lagrange613 for copy editing 46 articles during the WP:GOCE September 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive. Your contributions are appreciated. -- Dianna (talk)

		Leaderboard Award—Number of 5K Articles—2nd Place (tied)
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Lagrange613 for copy editing 4 articles of 5000 words or more during the WP:GOCE September 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive. Your contributions are appreciated. -- Dianna (talk)

Some bubble tea for you!

Good job on the Lexicon Page! I worked really hard on it and planned to add more, only to find you have done a great job already! GoCubs88 (talk) 20:41, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I was planning to add a section about how they operate since it's been documented in numerous sources, but I've been pretty busy. Feel free if you're interested! Lagrange613 21:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

thanks...............

thanks for your suggestions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherry,charan (talk • contribs) 10:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem! Lagrange613 16:34, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Bond films

It more of a split than a duplicate... but the series article is/will be undergoing a revamp - I'll ask the other guy who's helping on that to do it in a way that makes the separate list justifiable. igordebraga ≠ 02:20, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Best wishes for the article. Lagrange613 (talk) 02:25, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

If you can give us some help: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of James Bond films/archive1. Thanks. igordebraga ≠ 14:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

The Truman Show

Dear Lagrange613,

I saw an edit you made today, and would like to encourage you to reconsider.

The Truman Show has been analyzed, by one or more authors, as a thesis on libertarianism. Whether these analyzes are well-argued, poorly-argued, or somewhere in between, is, of course, entirely irrelevant. The incontrovertible fact of the matter is that it has been analysed, by one or more authors, as a thesis on libertarianism.

Today, I edited the The Truman Show page to reflect the reality that it has been analyzed in the above-mentioned fashion. I also cited one of at least three examples of such analyzes that can be found online, just to be sure that no one could thereafter falsely claim that the movie has not, in fact, been analyzed as a thesis on libertarianism.

To your credit, you did not falsely claim that the movie has not been analysed as a thesis on libertarianism. But, I nevertheless remain dismayed at its removal.

I can locate no less than three analyzes of the film contending that it has libertarian themes. The authors of these analyzes include Xavier Cromartie (XavierCromartie.com), Alexander S. Peak (alexpeak.com), and Jacob G. Hornberger (Future of Freedom Foundation).

Given the incontrovertible fact that The Truman Show has been analyzed as a thesis on libertarianism, I would like to re-include this fact in the The Truman Show article. If it makes you more comfortable, I can cite all three above-mentioned sources instead of just one of them. But what I'd really like not to do is leave the article the way it is, for I feel that, as it is currently written, therre is a glaring ommision in its content, an obvious hole that needs to be filled.

I look forward to hearing from you.

98.117.56.140 (talk) 19:37, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your note, and welcome to Wikipedia. As I explained in my edit summary, I reverted your addition because it was not backed by a reliable source. Sources that are self-published such as blogs and personal websites are generally not suitable for an encyclopedia, which is what Wikipedia is. Cromartie and Peak's contributions are definitely self-published. Hornberger's probably are as well, given that FFF is his operation and his blog there likely lacks the editorial oversight a news organization's blog would have. My own (admittedly cursory) search hasn't turned up anything approaching a reliable source for a libertarian perspective on The Truman Show, but I wouldn't object if one were found. Let me encourage you again to create an account; it makes communication much easier and gives you additional tools like the watchlist. Lagrange613 20:16, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Lexicon Branding

Thank you Victuallers (talk) 00:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Princeton University Chapel

The article Princeton University Chapel you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Princeton University Chapel for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK review

Hello. You have a new message at Template:Did you know nominations/Timeline of modern American conservatism's talk page.– Lionel ^(talk) 09:46, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Henri Ford

The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Whitelist request

The link you requested to be whitelisted at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist#Education Update has been whitelisted. Sorry for the slow response time, but that's pretty typical for that request page. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for your help and for letting me know. Lagrange613 21:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Henry DeWolf Smyth

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Lagrange613. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Airborne Avenger.
Message added 23:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Charles Phelps Smyth

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Zoe Graystone

I removed the template because it's incorrect and there is no issue. -- Noneofyourbusiness (talk) 18:34, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, actually, there are some statements that need references, but no original research. I'll address that now. -- Noneofyourbusiness (talk) 18:41, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it looks much better now. Thanks! Lagrange613 23:04, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Hal Foster (art critic)

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:02, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sacrifice (Battlestar Galactica)

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Allen Shenstone

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 16:03, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Allen Shenstone

Hi Lagrange,

I've reviewed your article at DYK. Nice work!

Best – Draco^E 17:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Lagrange613 18:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the page number issue in the PDF source: I didn't know how to edit the reference so that it would open on the required page. I left you the note at DYK hoping you would know what to do. Luckily, I married smart, and my husband has now fixed it. Draco^E 18:12, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I tried his solution, but it didn't/doesn't work for me. Maybe it's browser-dependent? Anyway, thanks. Lagrange613 18:42, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Have you tried it now? Works fine for me in Firefox and for hubby in Chrome. Étrange ... Draco^E 18:53, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Just for reference, in case it ever comes in handy, there are examples of how to specify an opening page number, zoom level etc. in URLs for pdf files on page 8 of this adobe document (which should open on page 8 for you). If it doesn't work for you in the article, you may have to clear your cache. Anyway, it's nothing of great importance, as the page number is specified in the ref anyway, but it's useful in that it saves the reader having to scroll to the right page. Cheers, --JN466 18:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Beatles/The Beatles

The group were known as The Beatles so I am trying to make articles that link to Beatles gramatically correct or rewriting them so that The Beatles makes sense. I'm aware of WP:PIPING but I suppose a couple of mistakes have been made. Quentin X (talk) 18:19, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: A Bent Spoon cupcake for you!

First of all, forgive me as while I've edited and written numerous articles, I'm not aware of the protocols for talk pages. But indeed I think that putting the rest of the article into Wikitables would be excellent. Also, there is overlap between some of the categories. Some of them separate faculty and students ... others do not. Journalists are double-listed with authors. Authors are double-listed with pulitzer prize winners. Putting thing into tables would be a great step ... go to it! Thanks, Sev Onyshkevych '83 vsevolodUser talk:vsevolod4#top 21:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again. I agree on all points and have replied over at the article's talk page so that others can participate. Lagrange613 23:03, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jean-Claude Bajeux

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for List of Princeton University people (politics and government)

Orlady (talk) 05:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC) 08:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Charles Howard McIlwain

The DYK project (nominate) 20:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Welcome

Thanks for the warm welcome. I contribute occasionally on another account. Good to see people using the welcome template! 61.102.1.44 (talk) 23:33, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism to Quaker Valley School District website

User Lagrange613: Please refrain from vandalizing and removing content from the Quaker Valley School District Wikipedia page and our various school pages. The communications and administrative departments for the district make efforts to keep the pages updated and as accurate as possible, to fairly represent the district and our offerings, yet you continue to revert back to earlier versions of the pages with inaccurate information. You are more than welcome to edit content on the pages for accuracy, suggest improvements, notify us of issues that you see, or cite missing sources, but please refrain from reverting the pages to old versions and eliminating the content the district has published. Thank you for your consideration in this manner. - Quaker Valley School District — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quaker56 (talk • contribs) 13:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

As another user and I have explained to you, removing copyright violations is not vandalism. I warned you that you could be blocked for this, and so you have been. Your note above suggests you may have a conflict of interest when editing these articles. Please be aware that Wikipedia accounts may not be shared by multiple people or within an organization. There's more relevant information at the FAQ on organizations. If you own the copyright to this material and would like it to be on Wikipedia, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials, especially the section "Granting us permission to copy material already online". Lagrange613 17:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Your input is needed on the SOPA initiative

Hi Lagrange613,

You are receiving this message either because you expressed an opinion about the proposed SOPA blackout before full blackout and soft blackout were adequately differentiated, or because you expressed general support without specifying a preference. Please ensure that your voice is heard by clarifying your position accordingly.

Thank you.

Message delivered as per request on ANI. -- The Helpful Bot 16:36, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

DRV

A notification that the Templates for Discussion discussion (oy, repetition) has been taken to a deletion review discussion. The Article Rescue Squadron was notified, and as notifications to previous involved parties isn't normal practise, I and a few ARS members agreed that, in the interests of transparency and fairness, we should let everyone know...hence this talkpage message ;).

If anyone has an issue with me sending these out, do drop me a note on my talkpage. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 10:27, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

World Factoring Yearbook

I'm leaving this message as you're listed as a current participant of WikiProject Business. I was informed yesterday that the current World Factoring Yearbook (circa £150) is now free for download as an ebook. It's a matter of filling out this form. I'm not sure if you'll find this useful as a reliable source, but I thought I should let you know that it's freely available online. I apologise in advance if this doesn't interest you! All the best, The Cavalry (Message me) 14:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians Ottawahitech (talk) 00:59, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Seattle Public Library

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:44, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of James A. Krumhansl

Hello! Your submission of James A. Krumhansl at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Harrias ^talk 16:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for James A. Krumhansl

Orlady (talk) 04:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Timothy Massad

 — Nyttend (talk) 03:20, 13 January 2014 (UTC) 16:52, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Huey2323_and_bad_faith_accusations.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Citation Needed (talk • contribs) 23:07, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Janice Eberly

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Phillip Swagel

Materialscientist (talk) 13:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Charles Henry Smyth, Jr.

The DYK project (nominate) 10:50, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Arthur Francis Buddington

The DYK project (nominate) 23:28, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Frederic Brewster Loomis

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Sportfan?

When did you suspect that he was a sock? I admit that I'm not well versed in this kind of thing, but I was blindsided by this one. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:29, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

It never occurred to me. I just noticed the indef block in the aftermath of the CheckUser. Lagrange613 17:11, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

All the difference of opinion stuff aside, I just hate scammers... Ugh! --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:49, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Abuse of Template:Uw-biog4im "only warning"

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates, as you did to User_talk:Stybn. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you.

DYK nomination of Adolph Knopf

Hello! Your submission of Adolph Knopf at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Odie5533 (talk) 17:27, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for William Henry Collins

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 19:47, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Adolph Knopf

Thank you Victuallers (talk) 20:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Duh

My brain is too tired to follow the categories today. Thanks for setting me straight. - Gorthian (talk) 04:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

No worries! Lagrange613 15:07, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Charles Whitman Cross

Gatoclass (talk) 19:29, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Notification: RfC on Game of Thrones and chapter-to-episode statements

The RfC: Is Westeros.org a suitable source for this content? was closed with the result that Westeros.org is reliable but that whether the disputed text was valuable enough to include should be addressed separately. The closing editor recommended that all participants in the RfC and related RSN discussion be informed that such a discussion was under way:

RfC: RfC: Should the article state which chapters appear in the episode?

If any of you wish to make a statement on this matter, you are welcome to do so and your contribution would be greatly appreciated. If any of you would prefer to stay away from this dispute, I think we can all get that too. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:10, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Belle Knox

As you may or may not know, the second AFD for Belle Knox has been relisted. As you were specifically named by the closer of the first AFD, I thought you would be a good person to include in this renewed discussion. I have included a great deal of sources covering the months between the original outing and now, please review them to see if your !vote remains the same. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:59, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! I'll take a look. Lagrange613 02:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Sidney L. Jones

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:03, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Cindy Smart

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:29, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

reworded purpose of quantitative easing from reducing government debt to duty to absorb unsold government debt

The FEDs 600 billion purchase of government debt makes it so. This discussion is very important. The reference is the article mentioning this mega investment in US treasuries by the FED funded by quantitative easing. Is this enough, what do you think about this.

I liked your comments that the role of quantitative easing to reduce debt costs is shared by many, but as yet is still in the works. I agree with you and thought that was well said by you. Our description of quantitative easing is the foot in the door to do this! Long live the free world. --184.69.101.180 (talk) 01:02, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

But it cannot be ignored that 600 billion in government debt purchased EQUALS that quantitative easing tinkers with government debt sales. It must be that when this much government debt is bought by the FED the reason was to buy it. --184.69.101.180 (talk) 17:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC))

I get that you believe that, but on Wikipedia we report what reliable sources say. And as I pointed out on the talk page, they say that QE's purpose is stimulus. Lagrange613 18:10, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Time will tell. One can have a few drinks and is not a drunk. But if one drinks every day then they become one. If the Fed continues to buy government securities with quantitative easing, likewise the reason-to-be for quantitative becomes about government debt costs and refinancing and issues of demand and maintaining government debt market stability. The debt problem is not getting better, obviously, so most likely the FED cannot stop drinking. So, the quantitative easing wiki article is going to eventually include something like my edit. Best of luck.--199.60.104.18 (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Maths rating template on Category:Fellows of Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics

Hello! I've removed the WikiProject Maths rating template you added to this category, not because it was incorrect but because the maths project actually doesn't keep track of categories (or disambiguation pages, redirects, templates, books, portals...). Having it tagged for maths would mean that it would become a permanently unclassified page, causing confusion and untidiness in keeping up with the state of the maths project. For most other WikiProjects you'd have been spot on, but the maths project only tracks mainspace articles. Didn't want the revert to seem like a slap in the face! Thanks for contributing to the encyclopedia! Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 03:08, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks for explaining. Lagrange613 03:11, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Princeton Lectures in Analysis

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of William E. Bradley, Jr.

Hello! Your submission of William E. Bradley, Jr. at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Canadian Paul 03:04, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for William E. Bradley, Jr.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Alicia Munnell

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:03, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles Henry Smyth, Jr.

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Charles Henry Smyth, Jr. you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 16:01, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles Henry Smyth, Jr.

The article Charles Henry Smyth, Jr. you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Charles Henry Smyth, Jr. for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 04:01, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles Henry Smyth, Jr.

The article Charles Henry Smyth, Jr. you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Charles Henry Smyth, Jr. for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 03:01, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Tags

Could you maybe be a little more selective in your use of tags, please? E.g. in this single edit you added {{BLP sources}} to an article whose one claim is properly sourced, {{dead end}} to an article with two wikilinks (one per sentence, a reasonable density of links), {{lead missing}} to a stub (stubs don't need leads), and {{orphan}} to an article that already had an incoming wikilinks (from the prize he won) and would soon have another from list of mathematicians (S). Wouldn't it be better and not much more effort to just fix up any issues you saw with the article rather than splattering it with red paint like that? —David Eppstein (talk) 03:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

There were five new articles on mathematicians that all had the same issues, and I didn't have time to flesh them all out. In accordance with WP:NPP, I tagged the articles with the issues I saw in the hopes of attracting someone who did. The system worked here. Maybe take your own advice and fix up some articles instead of splattering a bunch of paint of whatever color over my entirely legitimate edits. Lagrange613 02:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring at Taj Mahal

I don't know what your problem is for adding the conversion so readers can more easily comprehend the values - we now have ways to do so mathematically the same way we can now carbon date. If we left it up to you, WP articles wouldn't be carbon dating fossilized remains. The statement, "at time to be around 32 million Indian rupees ($ 501,000 US)" is a mathematical calculation which takes into consideration a number of factors and allows readers to see a cost comparison. Your deletion of that information is not an improvement and in fact removes significant information from the article. If you have an issue with it, then take it to the Talk Page and stop reverting the edit. Atsme^📞📧 23:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

If you'd actually read my edit summaries instead of reverting reflexively, you'd understand the problem. See you on the talk page. Lagrange613 00:06, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Boston Hymn

Materialscientist (talk) 13:36, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Deprod

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from [[{{{1}}}]], which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! 2602:30A:2EFE:F050:F462:E14B:BD77:9AA8 (talk) 07:34, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

AIG content dispute

Hey Lagrange, would you be willing to help mediate the dispute between Rjensen and myself? While we got off on the wrong foot, I'm trying to make amends, but he has no interest in working with a "PR machine".--FacultiesIntact (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Given that I've already expressed an opinion on the issue at hand, I'm a poor choice to mediate the dispute. You might try WP:DRN. Good luck. Lagrange613 01:26, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

New York links

As noted, there is consensus to pipe these links, so I certainly hope that you will conform your conduct to the consensus of the community. However, there are many editors working on this project, so others will get to it. Cheers! bd2412 T 00:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Responded at Talk:New York#Proposed action to resolve incorrect incoming links. In short, you do not have consensus as you claim. Lagrange613 01:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid we will have to disagree on that. I would ask that you let the links be, at least until this project is completed. It would be great if you could help out with it, actually. There are still thousands of links to fix. bd2412 T 01:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Your definition of "fix" does not match mine. But don't worry: I won't interfere with your strange, pseudopedantic crusade on pages off my Watchlist. Reverting all the links you piped as redirects to those very links would be only marginally less stupid than the piping itself. Better things to do with my time. Lagrange613 04:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Lagrange613. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

File:MajGen Harold W. Chase USMCR.png

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:09, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Harold W. Chase

Hello! Your submission of Harold W. Chase at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hint...Hint...Hint...

It is WP:OVERCATEGORIZATION to put an article in both a parent and one of its subcategories. You're committing Overcategorization by putting articles like List of California State University, Northridge people in Northridge people without taking them out of Category:Lists of people by educational affiliation in California....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:11, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

@WilliamJE: So your solution is to... remove the child category instead of the parents? C'mon, you know better than this. Lagrange613 18:25, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Fix your mistakes instead of whining about getting them reverted....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:33, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

For someone so committed to preserving the integrity of categorization, you're awfully lazy. Unless, of course, you enjoy blanket-reverting for its own sake, in which case a collaborative encyclopedia project is probably the wrong place for you. No matter, I'll get to this in due course. Lagrange613 19:14, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

For someone so committed to preserving the integrity of categorization, I'm sick of idiot editors who don't know what they're doing, or editors who rather whine than fix their mistakes....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:46, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Harold W. Chase

On 6 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Harold W. Chase, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Harold W. Chase argued that conscription in the United States benefited the Air Force, Navy, and Marines at the expense of the Army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Harold W. Chase. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Harold W. Chase), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 6 February 2019 (UTC)