User talk:Nurg/Archive 2

Thanks for Ngati Haua

Thanks for the heads up on this iwi -I was unaware there were 2 separate(?) iwi with the same name.I presume they were at one time linked? I know other iwi like Rangitane are widely scattered-this seems to have happened in the Musket wars mainly. Any further info you can add? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.62.226.243 (talk) 09:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you refresh my memory about where I gave a heads-up about this/these iwi. I can't readily recall what edits I made about this. Nurg (talk) 19:11, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For the wikivoyage answer! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:45, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CSA Illumina retired ?

Hi, I responded over at the ProQuest / CSA talk page here, about seven months after your query. The wheels of Wikipedia rotate slowly, at times, but at least they're movin'. --- Steve Quinn (talk) 07:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Typos

Thanks for fixing those links! Tony (talk) 09:29, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Tony, spelling is important when it comes to links. Winks. Nurg (talk) 09:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bitcoin

I think using the currency identifier "USD" is more appropriate in this situation than the country identifier "US". The "$" is too ambiguous. it can be used to denote the Peso, Brazilian real, Cape Verdean escudo, etc. I don't think that I'm 100% right, but my opinion is that the original edit should remain. --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 17:56, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. It doesn't say just "$". It says "US$", which is not ambiguous and is the usage specified at Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Currencies. Nurg (talk) 19:46, 5 December 2013

Oh ok. Carry on. --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 21:16, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OER inquiry

Hi Nurg, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where to now?

Following Gisborne, do you have any ideas or suggestions about where we go now regarding the regions articles? I learned my lesson about combining discussions—won't do that again. I was considering perhaps a suggestion to move West Coast Region back to "West Coast, New Zealand". Or would "West Coast (New Zealand region)" be better? I'm not sure. Your discovery of the evidence that "Gisborne Region" was a legal name gives me pause as well. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:07, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you dropped by - I was going to check with you what you planned next, in case a prelim discussion would be useful. If you proposed "West Coast, New Zealand", I would support that, unless new info or arguments came up. In fact, I think I would support "comma New Zealand" for a number of others that require disambiguation. I think Naming conventions (geographic names)#Disambiguation would rule out the "West Coast (New Zealand region)" form, as not the first preference. There are a couple of regions that might not need disamb and could possibly go to the simple name, like Otago did. There are a couple that need disamb but where the comma would not work, IMO, because the main part of the region name is the same as the main urban area - these are Wellington and Auckland. Not sure yet what I think should happen with these two - possibly even stay as they are. Nurg (talk) 10:34, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you comfortable for me to just proceed one-by-one?—I agree that there are some others (Northland, Southland?) which could use the "comma New Zealand" format, but given the complications that arose in the other situation, I'm a bit wary to combine discussions. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm comfortable with you proceeding one by one. Nurg (talk) 09:04, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. FYI, discussion is here. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:24, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Volkner incident

Hi Nurg, It's good to see someone helping to improve this article. What the article badly needs, however, is more inline citations. Presumably you're extracting your details from a book or website, so it would be very good to include the citations as you go. Thanks. BlackCab (talk) 02:36, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

For your recent tiding-up.

Stuartyeates (talk) 03:59, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Queenstown suppressed indecency case

In light of recent discussion on a certain biographical article, allow me to draw your attention to stub article 2010 Queenstown suppressed indecency case. It may be possible to discuss on the new article's talk page whether to name the alleged perpetrator and the correct way to do so. Nankai (talk) 09:41, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Internet Party and MANA Movement

Thank you for your previous comments on this article's name. I have proposed to rename this article at Talk:Internet_Party_and_MANA_Movement. I invite your input. Ground Zero | t 15:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]