User talk:Mesconsing

Welcome!

Hello, Mesconsing, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Valfontis (talk) 21:52, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire

Hi Mesconsing,

I saw you added the "academic boosterism" tag to the UW-Eau Claire article. All claims made about the university are properly referenced. If you could point to any peacock terms, I would appreciate it. I can't find any. I think the article is disinterested and encyclopedic. 88guy88 (talk) 03:31, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Eau Claire Cont.

Hi Mesconsing,

Thanks for promptly replying to my message. Let's keep our future conversations in a single spot, if you don't mind. I would be happy to continue our discussion on the university's talk page, or right here. Whatever the case, it might become confusing if we post in multiple places.

1) Can you point to any other peacock terms beyond "high marks." Further, is "high marks" really a peacock term or is it simply factual? The statement is sourced quite well. Do me a favor and read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. Also, if you could point me to a wiki style guide that specifically disallows any mention of notable alumni in the introductory section of a university article I would appreciate it.

As I tried to explain, the problems with the article aren't as simplistic as just using peacock terms. The entire tone of the article and the severe cherrypicking of "facts" are problematic. Yes, "high marks" is definitely a peacock term. I don't have time to wikilawyer right now, but look at the college and university articles that are good or featured to see what a lead should look like.

2) When you say "vague" plaudits (and again refer only to "high marks") I must again disagree. The comment appears in the introduction to the university. It would be an inappropriate place to expound on the specific rankings of the institution. The statement is heavily sourced in a later section of the article: "reputation."

You're absolutely right. Rankings don't belong in the lead.

3) I am happy to change "currently" to 2012/2011 (or whatever year a particular ranking happens to be from) if you feel this word is innapropriate.

Typically, articles will say something like: "In 2011 USNWR ranked Podunk University 653rd." Use the year the ranking occurred so the reader can determine how recent it is.

4) You write, "Although many of the peacockisms have citations, they're citations to UWEC promo literature. That's hardly an objective source. Please read the Wikipedia:College and university article guidelines." First, please specify what other "peacockisms" you are refering to. Second, the article is sourced with a combination of both UW-Eau Claire articles and articles from specific rankings institutions. I did not see a section of the guidelines article you pointed me to that disallowed citing articles published by a university. The facts that these articles cover are backed up by other articles from the rankings institutions themselves.

Please read the guidelines more carefully and try to avoid wikilawyering. Self-published sources are definitely suspect, although not prohibited.

5) You write, "Overall, the tone and the cherrypicking of "facts" cause problems with this article. Example: The placement rate of chemistry graduates is not a widely accepted standard for evaluating colleges, and seems like a silly item to include in a WP article about any college." Please cite a specific wiki guideline that disallows the inclusion of chemistry to PhD rates. It might seem "silly" to you, but that isn't quite enough. Further, clarify the facts you believe are cherrypicked.

Again, please stop wikilawyering. Mesconsing (talk) 23:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for helping edit this article.

88guy88 (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Admin needed

Clearly, an admin is needed to sort this out. Your charge of "wikilawyering" (which allows you to ignore my reasonable, non-confrontational, respectful objections) is inapropriate. Let's not let this discussion devolve into a series of ad hominem attacks.

88guy88 (talk) 23:29, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I've asked the folks at WikiProject Universities to take a look at the article. So far, the only comments received were that my editing made the article "much better". Mesconsing (talk) 23:32, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. I would be interested to see those comments. 88guy88 (talk) 23:38, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Controversy moved

Hi Mesconsing,

Just so you know, I moved our conversation to the UW-Eau Claire talk page. It's the appropriate spot, I think. Let's have all further conversation take place there. 88guy88 (talk) 00:09, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution steps taken

Hi Mesconsing,

I just took some steps to resolve our dispute. You can find out more here: Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard 88guy88 (talk) 00:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Gogebic Range, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Montreal River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Dead link in article 'Wisconsin'

Hi. The article 'Wisconsin' has a dead link that could not be repaired automatically. Can you help fix it?

Dead: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/MilkProd/MilkProd-03-18-2011.pdf

• You added this in September 2011.
• The bot checked The Wayback Machine and WebCite but couldn't find a suitable replacement.

This link is marked with {{Dead link}} in the article. Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!

PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding {{Bots|deny=BlevintronBot}} to your user page or user talk page. BlevintronBot (talk) 18:56, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks

Many thanks-RFD (talk) 15:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Template:Historical populations/doc

I reverted your edit on Template:Historical populations/doc as changing the infobox title on the Complete template in the documentation, in this case removing the 's' after 'population', will make its corresponding template, Template:Historical populations, useless (red link) if someone would copy and paste the complete template into an article. --Briarfallen (talk) 17:08, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. When you recently edited Black Creek, Wisconsin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Planning Commission (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:42, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Blue Stars Drum and Bugle Corps

Hi Mesconsing. The GOCE Coordinators have agreed that we need to decline your request for a copy edit of Blue Stars Drum and Bugle Corps, as it seems to be more of a content dispute than a copy editing issue, and we don't have the muscle or skills to handle those. Sorry we couldn't be more help. Regards, --Stfg (talk) 17:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Wisconsin Barnstar

		The WikiProject Wisconsin Barnstar
		Many thanks for your edits-RFD (talk) 23:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

tb

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

Tvoz/talk 22:08, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Statistics

I have 15+ years as a statistician. Statistical interpretation requires some statistical test otherwise it is simply numerical analysis. Furthermore, Silver did not claim his analysis was statistical in nature or make some claim of statistical significance. Ryan, for example, is not statistically different than most of those that he compared against, he even stated as much when he made his comparison against Bachmann. Heck Silver didn't even do a statistical test at all. All he did was pull up the information from another source and compared the numbers, it is a diservice to the actual science to call it a statistical analysis, especially when he didn't make the claim. Arzel (talk) 01:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited Todd Wehr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ripon College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:20, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Paul Ryan

In the course of an edit to "reduce wordiness" you removed material that was provided to allow for a better understanding of an event in the subject's life. The material regarding the death of Ryan's father is currently phrased in a manner that is short on relevant details and almost flippant in its wording about something that would have obviously had a profound impact on Ryan. Would you mind restoring the information you removed? You can obviously rewrite or shorten the material, but I think it is important to explain that Ryan came home during work specifically because there was concern about his father and I would add that the wording "after suffering from" is less awkward than the current wording, so I believe that should simply be restored. Please also see my suggestions regarding other parts of the article at the GA review page since you seem actively interested in making substantial improvements.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 18:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Knights of Divine Mercy

Hi-The Knights of Divine Mercy is expanding. I added an article from the National Catholic Register that talked about that. I would not opposed prodding the article in 2007 at the time it was started but not now. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 18:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

When I added the the National Catholic Register and expanded the article as a result it was a good faith edit and not a crystal ball-I was using the NCR citation and it was in good faith. If you and anyone else wants to delete the article that is fine. Thanks-RFD (talk) 16:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Bissell, Wisconsin

Hi-Go ahead and merge the article. Also there are 3 other articles listed also in the Bristol, Wisconsin article that need to be merge as well-if you can do that also-thanks again-RFD (talk) 15:14, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Cypress, Wisconsin, Pikeville, Wisconsin, Woodworth, Wisconsin also merge into village of Briston, Wisconsin article-thanks-RFD (talk) 15:17, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Excellent-thank you for doing this.RFD (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Johnsonville Foods

Hi-I just deleted uncited materials in the Johnsonville Foods. The only section I kept in was some political activity of the owners and that was cited. Would you please lok at the article and see what can be done. It needs lots of work with citations. Thanks-RFD (talk) 00:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Dejope Hall section of University of Wisconsin-Madison pages

The University of Wisconsin-Madison page now has the materials about Dejope Hall in two places. You had moved and abbreviated the text and placed it in a different section. Can you remove the part that I had done with other students below that? Please leave the effigy mounds section intact though... Thanks; I can't remove it myself... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imervard (talk • contribs) 19:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Done. -- Mesconsing (talk) 19:19, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Mesconsing. Can you make the effigy mound section into its own section now? It seems to have disappeared. Thanks so much.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imervard (talk • contribs) 19:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Done. -- Mesconsing (talk) 19:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again for all your help on getting these two sections into the page. It's great to have them there and I appreciate your help!--Imervard (talk) 21:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Dinobasher

Did you ever file a SPI report for this, I couldn't find the results. I am curious to see if the other recent SPA edit to the page is also a SP? Tiggerjay (talk) 08:22, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Howards Grove, Wisconsin

Hi-I left a comment for Eschuh12 about the edits on the Howards Grove, Wisconsin article. He/she is making changes and would not give a reason why. I should had revert the changes; however, I am getting burnt out reverting editors who refused to give any reasons why the changes should be made and refused any consensus. It is frustrating. Thanks-RFD (talk) 22:17, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

You are welcome-thank you-RFD (talk) 11:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Three Lakes, Wisconsin

Hi-Would you please take a look at the article about the town of Three Lakes, Wisconsin-I have doubts about some of the edits that were made. Thanks-RFD (talk) 15:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi-the editor at the Three Lakes, Wisconsin had put in copyright materials that was taken out. I am wondering this will happening again. Mayor Harter announced he will not seek reelection in April 2013 Wisconsin Elction. You could put the sentence back in but I think it will be moot when he leaves office-thanks-RFD (talk) 17:43, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks-RFD (talk) 21:30, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Thanks for your editing on Wisconsin articles! Have some of our state beverage. Royalbroil 15:14, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Augustin Grignon

I see that you removed an unreliable source from the Augustin Grignon article, which totally makes sense. However, as of right now I don't know of any source that specifies his date of death. So I added a "citation needed." Please let me know if you think this is improper (or just change it). Laurentian Shield (talk) 19:24, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

List of lakes in Wisconsin

Hi! I just reverted that huge list of lakes you just put up. Here's why:

1. Way too large. I don't have a cheap puter and that page caused Chrome to freeze.

1. Not really useful. It wouldn't address the size issue, but if it were broke down by county, or alphabetically it might have some use. But still, how is it anything but confusing to list "Bass Lake, Bass Lake, Bass Lake, etc."?

1. A lot of not notable. The way it was before you changed it it only had listings of Lakes that had existing articles on Wikipedia. If it has an article here, it can be assumed that it is notable.

All in all, I think what you are trying to do would be best served by a category. Or in lieu of that, a set of county by county articles? This big list is really not a big help, and remember, that is what we are here to do. Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:07, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

You are also looking at a copyright problem to the PDF from the state that you removed as additional reading. Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:10, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, had to go start dinner. What is there now looks better than what was there before and what you added. I agree, a list of large lakes, or even of notable lakes, would be more appropriate. I'm thinking notable, because an argument could be made for the importance of the lake that the "Little Bohemia" Lodge (associated with John Dillinger) is on being notable, but it certainly isn't large. The thing that got me most about your addition was the "Bass Lake, Bass Lake, Bass Lake, etc" thing. A 15,000 item list with no organization other than alpha order is going to be pretty useless, and unless you are delineating by county (To take an example from Michigan, Indian Lake (Kalamazoo), Indian Lake (Berrien), etc) repeating entries of lakes with the same name is pointless. Hope the rest of your Christmas is wonderful; my part of Idaho is getting its first snow of the year right now. Good Timing, I think. Off to Christmas dinner.Gtwfan52 (talk) 01:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Thanks for the copyedit at Lorena Hickok. In honor of your Wisconsin interests, this is from Culver's, with a side of cheese curds. Khazar2 (talk) 14:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally, do you mean to have the "original page" link on your user page pointing to User:The Transhumanist? I wasn't sure if you were an alternate account, or simply took the template from her/him. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:59, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your comments. I am new to Wikipedia and trying to figure out how to operate in the space. The articles helped me realize that I was making edits the wrong way. I will use the talk function going forward. MfrankaTEG (talk) 20:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)MfrankaTEG

Talkback

Hello, Mesconsing. You have new messages at Ukexpat's talk page.
Message added 20:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ukexpat (talk) 20:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Durward's Glen

Excellent job! Thank you-RFD (talk) 16:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi-I heard of it but never been there. Several people I knew have been there for a retreat. Thanks-RFD (talk) 16:47, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

"is currently"

Thanks for your note. I knew something had to be done when I came across a sentence that began, "Now, X is currently...." I have taken matters into my own hands and am waging a campaign against the redundancy. I am also trying to catch "was previously", and "was a former" where "was" or "is a former" is meant, which is almost always.

I also choke on the overuse of "officially", which is usually used just to make things sound more grand. "Brack Obama was officially sworn in as president of the United States". Presumably this happened after his unofficial swearing-in in the Chief Justice's rec room over some beers.

I caution you about some of your other pet peeves: from what I understand, "graduated college" seems to be common American parlance, so is it a regionalism or is it incorrect? Similiarly "orientate" is the standard British word, and I think that Britons would have a problem with "orient" as a verb. There are other verbs where the Brits add an extra syllable that seems unnecessary, but I can't think of them at the moment. Regards, Ground Zero | t 16:26, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

[Evan Jenkins, Columbia Journalism Review]: "but the “from” is not optional if we don’t want to look illiterate." Well I don't want Wikipedia to look illiterate, so I think this a mandate to make that improvement. Thanks. I know there are over 125,000 instances of "is currently", and that doesn't include instances of "are currently". One does what one can. A surprising number of the instances are in articles about athletes and sports stadiums, for some reason. I don't have enough interest in those subjects to edit those articles, so I am leaving them, and focusing on articles in other subjects. Ground Zero | t 16:54, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mesc., I've posted a rant about "is currently" on my user page to explain the issue to people. I would appreciate getting your comments if you have a moment. Thanks. Ground Zero | t 22:53, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Long title of editions of the Wisconsin Blue Book

I see you've shortened a few of these that I've inserted. What I always do when citing the Blue Book is to use what form is proffered on the electronic reproductions of the old issues at the WHS website. If the proferred version is terse, I cut and paste that; if verbose, likewise. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Dominic

Re: Dominic what-ever his name is (the actor). Since when is a university's page not a reliable source for graduates of that school? (Besides the one I gave, there are other references to him on various LU pages.Kdammers (talk) 03:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC) Here is another ref (in case you think organization's blogs are not reliable LAWRENCE TODAY - Lawrence University http://www.lawrence.edu/news/pubs/lt/spring10/Spring10LT.pdf Jun 7, 2010 ... Opinions expressed in Lawrence Today do not ... In January, scores of Lawrence students participated in a day ...... Dominic Fumusa '91 actor ...

--I can't access this since it is a PDF, and PDFs often crash computers in third-world countries, like the one I'm in. If you go to www.lawrence.edu and put the man's name into the search box, you will get a number of articles mentioning him as a Lawrentian. The more official ones are generally PDFs, but here is one that isn't: http://www.lawrence.edu/dept/communications/media/lunews/spr98_sum98.shtml, which reads, i.a., 'Madison Capital Times, Madison April 23, 1998 All Edition Headline: McFarland native makes Broadway Byline: Doug Moe Excerpt: Dominick Fumusa's parents still live in McFarland. He moved to New York, where I reached him by phone Wednesday. "I went to Lawrence University in Appleton," he said, "and did my first serious acting at the Wisconsin Shakespeare Festival in Platteville." He worked for a time with the Milwaukee Rep, spent a year in Chicago and then made the New York move. Fumusa appeared in an "All My Children" episode last summer and auditioned for the Broadway production of Frederick Knott's "Wait Until Dark" with Academy Award-winning actress Marisa Tomei, in which he is now appearing." Kdammers (talk) 03:39, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

In the Dominic Fumusa article there is no mention that he went to Lawrence University. This has to be added to the article itself with citations. There are BLP concerns. Thank you-RFD (talk) 12:33, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I added ref improve template to Dominic Fumusa article-thank you-RFD (talk) 13:29, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

RFD is correct. You need to cite a WP:RS in the article, not just drone on about it on someone's talk page. -- Mesconsing (talk) 14:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Comment about new editors

Hi-I had been putting Welcome! templates on new editors talk pages. These are editors who signed up for a new account and who show up on the recent changes at WikiProject Wisconsin. Hopefully this will be welcoming and positive. I should be doing this for anon editors but I am not. Anon editors should be require to sign up for an account before they edit an article. This may cut down on the vandalism. But I can not see this happeing anytime soon. How are you doing? Many thanks-RFD (talk) 13:59, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Sparta, Wisconsin

Hi-Would you please take a look at the Sparta, Wisconsin article and see if it can be reorganized? I think the notable people section is in the wrong place. You probably have a better way of doing then I thanks-RFD (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this-RFD (talk) 18:17, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Joseph Dutton

Hi-there is an article about Joseph Dutton that you can work on. Joseph Dutton is being proposed for canonization. He would be notable. Thanks-RFD (talk) 18:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks for your comment. My suggestion would be to work on the article and then consider a change in the title.RFD (talk) 18:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Charles H. Weisse

Thanks for fixing the infobx in the Charles Weisse article-RFD (talk) 23:33, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Lynn Fontanne

I have no problem with someone questioning potential OR, but if you are going to label me, even though as far as I know our paths have never crossed, an "original researcher who likes editing Wikipedia", at an ORN colloquy to which I was never invited, you should have done so to my face (so to speak), i.e. on my talk page, where you have never left a single word, especially since the term "original researcher" is snarky and pejorative. I am just now discovering what happened (since the Fontanne page was not on my watchlist). Quis separabit? 19:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

P.S.: In case you plan on digging through my past (since 2005) to discover any skeletons in the closet, as some others have done following disagreements, you can save yourself the trouble. Such comments are unworthy of either perusal or comment on my part, do not disturb me in the least and are instantly deleted from my talk page. If you weren't planning to do that, then let's let bygones be bygones and start fresh as I am willing to admit that sometimes the fervor of poetic or dramatic license on uncovering new information does overcome my prudence at introducing text that might be subject to OR concerns, however "ancient and trivial", as a third party (Herostratus) pointed out. Ironically, if you review my own editing history I am usually deleting cruft, OR, POV, etc. from other people's articles. Quis separabit? 19:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Wow! Please leave your paranoia at the door next time you post to my talk page. (1.) I wasn't describing YOU personally. In fact, I had no idea who had added the info and citation. I was describing anyone who uses primary sources to inject original research into an article. (2.) The description was neither pejorative nor snarky, and the fact that you think so says nothing about my civility, my edits, or me. (3.) I have not gone digging through your past edits, nor have I even considered doing so. Why you would think that is beyond me. (4.) Yes, I can see that you were "not disturb[ed] in the least" by the description, and that you haven't let your fervor overcome your prudence. (5.) Weren't you bothered by another editor referring to you pressing a "random pet theory"? Be sure to leave a comment on that editor's page, too. -- Mesconsing (talk) 20:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not paranoid and the only reason I referenced people going through back history (since 2005) over things which are none of their business is because some have done exactly over disagreements. Some people are like that. I don't knwo you so I don't know if you are or are not that kind of person. And yes, the term "original researcher", at least on Wikipedia, although not in standard English, is decidedly pejorative. Anyway, that's all. Quis separabit? 22:51, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Wisconsin County list refs

Hey-GREAT job on the refs, However, it is critical that we agree on refs as far as a courtesy link. The courtesy link allows a user to have the ISBN and search for a copy or version of the book. This was a deal on WV FL. I have no idea why, but it became a "item". The WV fl has courtesy links for the refs now, and they should remain. ALWAYS keep in mind, a courtesy link will NOT take you to Amazon etc etc, it merely tells a user where they can get a copy of the said book. I am very sorry if I did not communicate this earlier. It was a real blast discovering this during the FL review, thought I would save lots of hassle up front. I am very very appreciative of all of the work that is done as this shows a true group effort. UPDATE, for a google book, the isbn would be the courtesy link, thanks again for your good eyeCoal town guy (talk) 21:37, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all your work on the article! I'm fine with adding ISBNs. I didn't put them in any of the citations I edited because they were all for old books that predate the use of ISBNs (~1970). I can look for ISBNs for the Blue Books, the only cited books that are post-1970. I'm not sure what you mean by "for a google book, the isbn would be the courtesy link". -- Mesconsing (talk) 21:56, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at List of counties in West Virginia and ref 3 (in refs section) as an example, my wiki language skills are sub par as you can tell. The strangest part about the whole FL experience for any state or county list is that the standards that you see on an older list, might as well be sanskrit...I do not know why, but after getting the WV list to FL, I knew I could help other county list folk as so0me of these lists are close, very close. Others, not so muchCoal town guy (talk) 22:00, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I followed through some of those so-called ISBNs on the WV article to the WorldCat entries. All took me to deadlinks. Is that what is expected of a good article? Plain and simple: Books published before 1970 do not have ISBNs, and to pretend that they do does no one a service. In addition, the citations in the WV article have parenthetical comments that appear to be part of the source title. Because of that, those citations do not follow any manual of style - WP, CMOS, MLA, you name it. It appears that someone has foisted their personal preferences on you... I added the ISBNs for the Blue Books and updated the figures. -- Mesconsing (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

The ISBNs are not so called. It takes you to the book search link at Wikipedia, you then click go. You then click find at google, the book came up. Lets be frank, shall we? I own all of the books in te WV FL list. ALL of them. I was 3 years away from a Phd in Appalachian studies, and have the primary texts. I am very well aware that my 115+ year old book, has no ISBN. However, if you find an ISBN for a version and you follow the links, you find a book. I do NOT appreciate the fact that you cant use the ISBN search and tell me, oh the ISBN is wrong and a preferance was foisted upon me. This is a volunteer effort. If you dont want my effort, fine, I quit, do it your selfCoal town guy (talk) 00:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

YOU have the balls to tell me, I am uncivil. YOU told ME that OTHERS had foisted their preferences upon me. Thats right, I am a moron who masturbates to gay porn while the powers that be, direct my actions. I got an agreement from the 5+ other editors involved, during the FL review that the format I used would be the best one to apply. Thats why 5 other people have to agree hey, thats a geat idea in the review. Dont you think if I cite a book from 1896, I might be aware it has no ISBN??? I own the dam thing. THEN YOU tell me, "this is what we call a good article???" What, the international house of tight ass has a new member? You are correct, not all search engines will return a perfect result. I used an ISBN that works on Google. Its search results will be better than WorldCat because I bet money, more folks will use Google, hence its a courtesy link. Congrats on your Phd. My father died and I had to stop my program and help the family. SO JAM IT UP YOUR ASSCoal town guy (talk) 01:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

"I am a moron who masturbates to gay porn ... the international house of tight ass has a new member - Just to be clear, for all the other readers of this page, those are your words, not mine. -- Mesconsing (talk) 02:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, those are my words, just as your vintage, put that in your pipe and smoke it, would be yours. I thought that your dig about building agreement on Wikipedia as some some sort of imposition on me, was insulting, just as your assertion that you are not able find a source with an ISBN calls into question if an article is good or not was also, without merit. I again will state , I volunteer for this, 5+ other editors and some admins, also agreed, it worked, you dont, ergo,everyone else was gravely mistaken. BEST OF ALL, I was uncivil....thats cute. Wikipedia is not censured, I question your method, we dont agree, life goes on. I do not get paid for for listening to this crap. WHY would I waste any more time? You cant have it both ways. You cant talk down to someone, or think you are, and then, whoah is me, when that person calls you out. The ISBN is for the inline citation, which is clearly stated on the ISBN search page here Coal town guy (talk) 02:29, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

How are you doing? Don't get discourage! Enjoy your wikibreak and then please come back!

RFD (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi!

I am wondering how you are doing? Please come back to Wikipedia-you are needed! Many thanks!RFD (talk) 22:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi! How are you doing? Please consider about returning to Wikipedia. Many thanksRFD (talk) 21:32, 21 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) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)