User talk:Misschrisparker

DYK Nomination: Mary Roach

Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia. Mary Roach is an interesting and well written article. I hope you will find time to write others. I placed the following review and comments on the DYK nomination page for Mary Roach. Since I make one minor suggestion and suggest an alternative if the hook might be found not to work, I suggest you go back to the nomination page and say you like the hook as proposed, or whatever is needed to give the appearance of absolute finality. Otherwise, the administrator who will approve it for movement into the prep area might decide there is an open question and delay moving it along. Notice that I do give it my unqualified approval but that does not necessarily mean he or she won't want a comment on the suggested possible alternative hook. Sorry about the possibility that I left an open question, just trying to be helpful; and it's easy enough to make sure there is no open question since I did not condition by review on any changes or further comments being required. Here is what I wrote on the nomination page:

I found this article, and the references, interesting and entertaining. Roach is quite a character and has written some interesting and humorous books and articles. The lighter side of science.

This article was expanded five times from its previous size (prose characters). It is new enough under that criterion, long enough, well written, well sourced, has quite a few inline citations, is neutral, and has no copyright violations or plagiarism that I could find. The hook is less than 200 characters, the fact is accurate, has an inline citation in the article, is neutral and does not deal with an aspect of a living person. Photo is on Wikimedia Commons, is used in the article and shows up well enough. (Hook would work just as well without it.) No QPQ needed since this is first DYK nomination.

I would suggest changing "learned" to "learn" in hook.

As an alternative, if the hook seems off-putting, something like this might work: ...that popular science writer Mary Roach picks topics that "have a little science...a little history, a little humor - and something gross?"

I will put this on the editor's talk page, but since I can recommend this as good to go, I would not hold this up for further comment by her. Donner60 (talk) 06:03, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thank you, this Mary Roach page was my first and I loved doing it, I will definitely be a regular here. Thanks for the information, I just replied that if someone else liked the alternate hook, I would be okay with changing it. Does that sound too open ended? It was definitely helpful though, thank you for that.Misschrisparker (talk) 19:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an eye on it. Some of the administrators/final reviewers want to be sure everything is final and definite and all agreed upon. They might call for a further response: that being: which one do you want since you are the submitter. Others may take the one they like better or, more likely, just take the original because that is what you proposed and I accepted that one. I have only done a modest number of reviews but I have seen one in which the administrator called for another more definite answer (a definite choice) in this type of situation and another in which the administrator thought the hook was unclear and called for clarification. I did not want to cause any controversy but I thought there could be several different possibilities for this interesting character and put another one up as food for thought. In a few of the DYKs I have submitted, I have been barely able to come up with one item of possible interest from the article - which is not to say the subject was not notable, just that there were few apparent hooks. That's a lot of words just to say keep an eye on it - because that could be the only notification you get. Also, don't worry too much if nothing happens for some days. Promotion or further action sometimes depends upon the backlog of earlier proposals. There also have been many Olympic and Paralympic proposals to include recently and in the next few weeks. Donner60 (talk) 01:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Mary Roach

On 16 August 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mary Roach, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in an article by science writer Mary Roach (pictured), we learn that upon flushing, as many as 28,000 virus particles and 660,000 bacteria are jettisoned from the bowl? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Roach. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Misschrisparker/Gulp: Adventures on the Alimentary Canal

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:04, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That page you want deleted

I moved it to User:Misschrisparker/Gulp, as that seems to be what you were trying to do. If you want that page to be deleted, you can put {{db-g7}} on it. Feel free to ask more questions at my talk page. Thanks! Ignatz mice•talk 01:04, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Same for User:Misschrisparker/Gulp: Adventures on the Alimentary Canal, just so you know. Ignatz mice•talk 01:15, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mary R. on C-SPAN

Hi - I just wanted to make sure that you are aware of this 3-hour C-SPAN interview with Mary Roach from last week. I particularly want to make sure that you know that at about the 2:05 mark, she talks about the experience she had with a Wikipedia editor (I am assuming it was yourself) when it came to getting linkable citations. Hope you enjoy the interview! KConWiki (talk) 00:27, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I had no idea, I'm very pleased to have seen this, it was me! Thanks! Misschrisparker (talk) 05:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Wikipedia:Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:25, 18 March 2016 (UTC) Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.[reply]

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. Qpalzmmzlapq | talk | contribs 01:00, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Mary Roach by Siska.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Mary Roach by Siska.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Majora (talk) 20:51, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]