User talk:Ragesoss/Archive10
Thomas Henry Huxley
[edit]If you can spare time, please give your opinion on the THH talk page!
A user has deleted the 'Quotes' section near the end of Thomas Henry Huxley, and I would like some opinions on this. The content is listed on the Talk:Thomas Henry Huxley page (section 18).
Obviously, such a section is unusual, but there are good reasons for having it in the case of THH. First, it improves the biography by making it easier to understand the man: this would not be true of most scientists, but it is true of Huxley. Second, he was, and still is, quoted extensively. Some individual quotations of Darwin may be seen more often, but the range of topics in Huxley is not easily matched. Thirdly, unlike my critic, I don't think it contravenes the 'Wikipedia is not a directory' policy, and if it did I would argue that policy should be a guide, not an absolute. Options, it seems to me, are:
- 1. section deleted, as now is
- 2. section reinstated, as was
- 3. section shortened and reinstated
- 4. create a linked page 'Huxleyana' to put it in, flagged on the main page
- 5. put it in Wikiquote (I am against this, both on grounds of remoteness (being on a different system, and little used, and on grounds that Wikiquote has developed into s place for longer excerpts taken from web sources)
Same user changed character of the Biographies section. This is a less significant change, but your thoughts are welcome. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Ep. 51
[edit]Hey. Episode 51. Go. Listen. Comment. Enjoy. WODUPbot 04:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Don't want these notifications anymore? Remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery.
Problem user
[edit]Hi. I've recently been having trouble with the rather strange user Logicus (talk · contribs) at Celestial spheres, an article that Steve McCluskey e-mailed me to keep an eye on while he's taking a wikibreak. I see that you, along with Steve McClusky, have in the past initiated (rather abortively) an RFC about this user, who seems intent on inserting his own views of the history of science into various articles. Frankly, it doesn't look as though anyone but McCluskey, Logicus, and I have any interest in the Celestial spheres article at all, so its recent history is becoming essentially a slow-motion edit war between Logicus and me. (See the article's and my talk pages for some insight into the situation.) I'd like to figure out a better way of dealing with this problem, so if you have any suggestions about dealing with editors of this sort, I'd be happy to hear them. Deor (talk) 22:49, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Please be educationally relevant rather than mannerist
[edit]You have posted the following text on my User Talk page
"Please be civil
Logicus, please take care to treat other editors with respect. Steve McCluskey, myself, and now Deor have all at times been frustrated by edits from you that seem to us to promote idiosyncratic historical interpretations and/or original synthesis. But personal denigration, such as your characterizations of Deor in this edit, will not be tolerated.--ragesoss (talk) 01:22, 6 July 2008 (UT "
Might I respectfully suggest you should be more concerned with admonishing Deor for his outrageously dictatorial and grossly mistaken claim that material on the impetus dynamics of the celestial spheres is irrelevant to the article on the spheres and his repeated deletions of such educational material contributed by Logicus ?
Also note how other users, such as Coffeewhite recently for example, find Deor's uncivil deleting arrogance unacceptable. His irritating invention of spurious rules and dictatorial pronouncements of what he imagines to be Wikipedia policy as though he owned the company or were a member of staff would be amusing if he did not also take the timewasting liberty of deleting material without rational justification. Please do beware of siding with this quasi McCluskey sockpuppet against Logicus ! --Logicus (talk) 01:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
- Logicus, I have not taken any sides regarding the content dispute at celestial spheres, since I haven't been following the discussion closely. But derogatory personal comments are always unacceptable on Wikipedia.--ragesoss (talk) 01:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Logicus"
- But you have very clearly taken sides in respect of berating what you arguably misrepresent as intolerable derogatory personal comments by Logicus, but do not condemn those of Deor against Logicus on the Talk page and in User Talk. Moreover you fail to say why Logicus's characterisation of Deor as imperious, arrogant and mistaken in his personal criticisms of Logicus's good faith contributions is incorrect or intolerable rather than simply true, and needs to be said.--Logicus (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
- Deor, from what I've seen, limits his comments to discussion of your edits, without extrapolating to negative personal comments. If Deor has also been engaging in personal attacks, please let me know where, as those would be equally as unacceptable as your own. In any case, please refrain from personal attacks (see Wikipedia:No personal attacks).--ragesoss (talk) 18:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, but having re-read both the 'No personal attacks' reference you give and also the Wiki article on 'Personal attack', it is now unclear to me I have made any personal attack on Deor in that text in which you claim I do, rather than just 'limiting my comments to discussion of his edits and comments' such as "Deor's latest arrogant imperious mistaken comments". Nor do I substitute these pejorative descriptions of his comments for rational objective criticism of them to substantiate these descriptions, unlike the Wikipedia definition of Personal attack ["...a personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when examining another person's claims or comments."], since I always give objective evidence of my criticism. So perhaps you would be kind enough to enlighten me by explaining where exactly, if anywhere, you think I have made a personal attack on Deor, and why it constitutes such on Wikipedia rules. It seems such clarificatory guidance on what constitutes personal attack is required before I can possibly comply with your request to let you know where Deor has made personal attacks, if anywhere.--Logicus (talk) 16:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- Logicus would be most grateful if you would kindly either substantiate your hitherto unsubstantiated allegation that Logicus has made personal attacks on Deor, as Wiki defined, by identifying any such attacks in the text you cite as containing such, or else retract your allegation as void. Hopefully such might also help clarify Wikipedia policy for Logicus’s future reference and guidance in the otherwise lawless Wikipedia epistemic American Wild West (-:
- --Logicus (talk) 17:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, but having re-read both the 'No personal attacks' reference you give and also the Wiki article on 'Personal attack', it is now unclear to me I have made any personal attack on Deor in that text in which you claim I do, rather than just 'limiting my comments to discussion of his edits and comments' such as "Deor's latest arrogant imperious mistaken comments". Nor do I substitute these pejorative descriptions of his comments for rational objective criticism of them to substantiate these descriptions, unlike the Wikipedia definition of Personal attack ["...a personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when examining another person's claims or comments."], since I always give objective evidence of my criticism. So perhaps you would be kind enough to enlighten me by explaining where exactly, if anywhere, you think I have made a personal attack on Deor, and why it constitutes such on Wikipedia rules. It seems such clarificatory guidance on what constitutes personal attack is required before I can possibly comply with your request to let you know where Deor has made personal attacks, if anywhere.--Logicus (talk) 16:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- Deor, from what I've seen, limits his comments to discussion of your edits, without extrapolating to negative personal comments. If Deor has also been engaging in personal attacks, please let me know where, as those would be equally as unacceptable as your own. In any case, please refrain from personal attacks (see Wikipedia:No personal attacks).--ragesoss (talk) 18:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
- But you have very clearly taken sides in respect of berating what you arguably misrepresent as intolerable derogatory personal comments by Logicus, but do not condemn those of Deor against Logicus on the Talk page and in User Talk. Moreover you fail to say why Logicus's characterisation of Deor as imperious, arrogant and mistaken in his personal criticisms of Logicus's good faith contributions is incorrect or intolerable rather than simply true, and needs to be said.--Logicus (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
new category
[edit]Thought you may be interested - I made Category:Plants used in bonsai Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Your [[WP:FSC|featured sound candidate, Etherea, gained a consensus of support and has been promoted. If you know of any other recordings of similar quality to nominate, please do. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 12:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Jessica King
[edit]
An article that you have been involved in editing, Jessica King, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica King (2nd nomination). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? JohnCD (talk) 10:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
FYI
[edit]This may be of interest to you. Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/History_of_evolutionary_thought Shyamal (talk) 06:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Meadow Pipit
[edit]Hi, I noticed you had opposed my picture of a Meadow Pipit on the Featured picture candidate page. A new edit has just been posted, less noisy etc, which I wondered if you might like to take a look at, and see if you like it a bit better.-- Seahamlass 18:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Meadow pipit
[edit][1] Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 00:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Would you take another look, please? I'm willing to work on the image, it would be a shame for it not to live up to its potential just because I don't know what your concern is, and I can't read your mind, I'm sorry. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 18:06, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for clarifying. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 06:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
History of evolutionary thought FAC
[edit]History of evolutionary thought is going through FAC at the moment and I was wondering if you would care to express an opinion as you have been interested in this article in the past. Rusty Cashman (talk) 01:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Proposal for standard infobox for History of [country] templates
[edit]Hi there! You're a member of WikiProject History, so I'm just informing you about a proposal I've made about standardizing History of [country] templates (like Template:History of France). The discussion is located at the talk page for WikiProject History—your comments and criticism are welcome. Thank you. Mr. Absurd (talk) 05:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Guide to referencing
[edit]Click on "show" on the right of the orange bar to open contents.
| Using references (citations) |
|---|
|
I thought you might find it useful to have some information about references (refs) on wikipedia. These are important to validate your writing and inform the reader. Any editor can remove unreferenced material; and unsubstantiated articles may end up getting deleted, so when you add something to an article, it's highly advisable to also include a reference to say where it came from. Referencing may look daunting, but it's easy enough to do. Here's a guide to getting started.
A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text. To validate "Mike Brown climbed Everest", it's no good linking to a page about Everest, if Mike Brown isn't mentioned, nor to one on Mike Brown, if it doesn't say that he climbed Everest. You have to link to a source that proves his achievement is true. You must use reliable sources, such as published books, mainstream press, and authorised web sites. Blogs, Myspace, Youtube, fan sites and extreme minority texts are not usually acceptable, nor is original research (e.g. your own unpublished, or self-published, essay or research), or another wikipedia article.
The first thing you have to do is to create a "Notes and references" section (unless it already exists). This goes towards the bottom of the page, below the "See also" section and above the "External links" section. Enter this code:
The next step is to put a reference in the text. Here is the code to do that. It goes at the end of the relevant term, phrase, sentence, or paragraph to which the note refers, and after punctuation such as a full stop, without a space (to prevent separation through line wrap):
Whatever text you put in between these two tags will become visible in the "Notes and references" section as your reference.
Open the edit box for this page, copy the following text (inserting your own text where indicated), paste it at the bottom of the page and save the page:
(End of text to copy and paste.) It should appear like this:
You need to include the information to enable the reader to find your source. For an online newspaper source, it might look like this:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Note the single square brackets around the URL and the article title. The format is:
Make sure there is a space between the URL and the Title. This code results in the URL being hidden and the title showing as a link. Use double apostrophes for the article title (it is quoted text), and two single quote marks either side of the name of the paper (to generate italics). Double square brackets round the name of the paper create an internal link (a wikilink) to the relevant wikipedia article. Apostrophes must go outside the brackets. The date after The Guardian is the date of the newspaper, and the date after "Retrieved on" is the date you accessed the site – useful for searching the web archive in case the link goes dead. Dates are wikilinked so that they work with user preference settings to display the date in the format the user wishes.
You can use sources which are not online, but which you have found in a library or elsewhere—in which case leave out the information which is not relevant. The newspaper example above would be formatted like this:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Here is an example for a book:
When uploaded, it appears as:
Make sure you put two single quote marks round the title (to generate italics), rather than one double quote mark.
These formats are all acceptable for dates:
You may prefer to use a citation template to compile details of the source. The template goes between the ref tags and you fill out the fields you wish to. Basic templates can be found here: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference
The first time a reference appears in the article, you can give it a simple name in the <ref> code:
The second time you use the same reference in the article, you need only to create a short cut instead of typing it all out again:
You can then use the short cut as many times as you want. Don't forget the /, or it will blank the rest of the article! A short cut will only pick up from higher up the page, so make sure the first ref is the full one. Some symbols don't work in the ref name, but you'll find out if you use them. You can see multiple use of the same refs in action in the article William Bowyer (artist). There are 3 sources and they are each referenced 3 times. Each statement in the article has a footnote to show what its source is.
The above method is simple and combines references and notes into one section. A refinement is to put the full details of the references in their own section headed "References", while the notes which apply to them appear in a separate section headed "Notes". The notes can be inserted in the main article text in an abbreviated form as seen in Harriet Arbuthnot or in a full form as in Brown Dog affair.
More information can be found at:
I hope this helps. If you need any assistance, let me know. |
Out of nowhere
[edit]No, nothing terrible. I noticed your ref added to Art Renewal Center and it seemed you weren't fully familiar with formatting a ref. It always looks better when it's done properly. There's some info in the guide above about formatting. I have tweaked the ref.[2] Date format is according to personal preference (or what exists for other refs in the same article). "Retrieved" seems to be the term of choice now. Ty 22:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
- Ah. OK. Let me encourage you to apply your skills more widely! Actually, checking your contribs, I realise I had muddled you up with another (new) editor, or I wouldn't have left the ref guide. Apologies for that. Ty 22:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Origins of chromatography
[edit]
|
On 26 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article History of chromatography, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 19:24, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly
[edit]Hello there! New: Episode 58: Wikimania 2008, Jimbo and Reflections. Have a listen. Also, if you haven't heard, all of the other Wikimania episodes are up and accessible through the homepage at http://wikipediaweekly.org. Peace. WODUPbot 09:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.
The Arbitration Committee has rendered decisions passing a motion to apply discretionary sanctions remedies to the case linked above. Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict ("articles which relate to pseudoscience, broadly interpreted") if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.
The final text of the motions can be found at the case page linked above.
— Coren (talk) for the Arbitration Committee, 14:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I think you deleted Gary Bryan's entry-he was just talking about it on the show this morning and I think he should still have an entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abw14721 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
I've moved the discussion and the GA review to the dedicated subpage here, and I've completed your requests. Mastrchf (t/c) 23:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. Have a great day, Mastrchf (t/c) 01:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Just a liddell bit mo' respect please ?
[edit]Referring to my most reasonable request to you here of 13 July above that you either substantiate, for my edification, or else withdraw your charge that I have made a Wiki Personal Attack on Deor, and to my further repeat of this request @ Template talk:Classical mechanics, I note you have now made the following comment at that location on 29 July:
"As for personal attacks, I'm choosing to ignore that for now, since I find those kinds of disputes extremely unpleasant. Please, just try to treat other editors with a little more respect.--ragesoss (talk) 14:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)"
(i) In the first instance if you find such disputes so unpleasant, then may I respectfully suggest that in future you should think things through just a little more carefully before you indulge in your long standing habit of making unsubstantiated cavalier accusations against me ? (ii) But yet again here you imply I have treated other editors with insufficient respect.
So would you please now kindly identify which editors you claim I have treated with insufficient respect, or else also withdraw that implication. I do not wish to deny this is possible. But without naming such your advice is completely impractical and empty as well as insulting. --Logicus (talk) 18:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Gary Bryan
[edit]I tried to work on teh Gary Bryan article and it looks like someone else went in and helped! I am new to wikipedia. Thanks for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abw14721 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Stephen Cook photos
[edit]Yes, he's the webmaster at my gliding club, the Cotswold GC. I would be happy to let you have further details if you could explain why you need them.--NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 08:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, I read your message before looking at the GA FAC page! Stephen Cook has given me written permission to use these photos on WP in accordance with the GFDL. All the best. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 08:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Done, as mentioned on my talk page. Cheers.--NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 20:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Hockney/Falco Thesis
[edit]On the off chance that you're not watchlisting a page you contribute to frequently and have submitted to GAN, I have provided a second opinion on the Hockney-Falco thesis. It's available on the GA review page. I welcome any comment or criticism you are willing to forward. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 19:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Along the River During the Qingming Festival.
[edit]Hello, I just want to let you know that I uploaded a higher-quality version of the same picture and I was wondering if you would reconsider changing your vote from weak support to support? Thanks. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 20:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay then, thanks for the support anyway. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 20:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
FAC comments for GA in the UK
[edit]Hi. Thanks for your comments in the FAC for General aviation in the United Kingdom. I've made some changes which I hope will address those comments. I wonder if you could drop by the FAC when you have a chance, and confirm or deny that they address the concerns you had? Cheers. --FactotEm (talk) 18:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Deletion review for All Stars (video game)
[edit]An editor has asked for a deletion review of All Stars (video game). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MrStalker (talk) 21:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 59
[edit]Hey there! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 59: An Interview with Sue Gardner at Wikimania 2008 has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page (at least one listener thought this could be the best interview ever), and as always, listen to all of the past episodes at wikipediaweekly.org. Peace. WODUPbot 01:03, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.
Darkness Within: The Dark Lineage
[edit]May i know who added the deletion tag in that article?. The game is confirmed here is the link to confirm the existence. Could you restore the article?. --SkyWalker (talk) 05:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, I could not find press release anywhere but i could find trailers. Is that notable enough?. As far i know the game is officially announced. --SkyWalker (talk) 07:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm, Even the official site only has trailers nothing but trailer. I think they will give full details in coming week perhaps. --SkyWalker (talk) 14:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Logicus
[edit]Dear Ragesoss: If I understand correctly, Logicus would appreciate finding out from you which specific parts of this post you consider to be personal attacks. See User talk:Logicus#Please be civil. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 18:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 |
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Peach Glow water-lily at Brooklyn Botanic Garden.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. John254 02:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
|
The article is currently up for AFD. Since you removed the PROD tag, I thought you might be interested in the discussion. Cheers --Patrick (talk) 07:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Second Annual WikiNYC Picnic
[edit]Greetings! You are invited to attend the second annual New York picnic on August 24! This year, it will be taking place in the Long Meadow of Prospect Park in Brooklyn. If you plan on coming, please sign up and be sure to bring something! Please be sure to come!
You have received this automated delivery because your name was on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 20:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 60
[edit]Hello! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 60: Diplopedia has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page, and as always, listen to all of the past episodes at wikipediaweekly.org. WODUPbot 05:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.
A small question
[edit]Hi , i am LadyofHats. for some time i made this image:Image:Avocado seed diagram-en.svg. now the question i have is that for some time i fot this mesage in my talk page: "...There is a mistake on your Wikipedia website about "Seed". The seed of an avocado (Persea americana, Lauraceae) does NOT contain any endosperm. The entire seed (apart from the seed coat) consists of the storage embryo with extremely short radicle and thickened cotyledons.
Best wishes W..." Now since i dont know who signed it i was wondering if someone in the biology wikiproject could confirm it before i change the image. is that posible? -LadyofHats (talk) 00:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 61
[edit]Hello! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 61: Corpus_Linguistics has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes at wikipediaweekly.org. WODUPbot 06:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.
Reminder
[edit]This is a reminder that the WikiNYC Picnic is tomorrow (August 24) from 2 PM to 8 PM. If you plan on being lost, be sure to come ahead of time! To clarify, the picnic will be taking place within or adjacent to the Picnic House in Prospect Park, Brooklyn. I hope to see you there! --harej 03:22, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Scrabble
[edit]
I have a little Scrabble tourney I'm running out of my apartment - it's 2K to buy in...want to join? None of us know how to play.... --David Shankbone 17:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
...and I would be...
[edit]IMG_9639... Lazulilasher (talk) 00:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Screencorder
[edit]You recently deleted the article Screencorder from existence, on the basis that it didn't contain any sources to establish notability. I'm quite new to this Wiki-thing, but I'm learning - and now I have the sources you request. Screencorder is part of a DiDA software suite, as described on this page. If you restore the article, I shall happily add the reference. Cygnuz (talk) 13:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Sarah Palin
[edit]In the future, it might be wise to start a discussion before removing semiprotection that 5 other admins seem to believe should be in place. [3][4][5][6][7] - auburnpilot talk 19:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your note about the discussion on the Sarah Palin talk page. I've replied there. - Jredmond (talk) 20:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Harvey Itano
[edit]|
|
On 1 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Harvey Itano, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--BorgQueen (talk) 01:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
More Palin
[edit]Hey, ragesoss, I hope you're doing well. Thanks for the link at YoungTrigg's user page, to the NY Times article. That reporter did a very good job, I think.Ferrylodge (talk) 02:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Novels is currently holding a roll call, which we hope to have annually. Your username is listed on the members list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active within the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:Novels editor, please add your name back to the Active Members list. Also feel free to join any of our task forces and take a look at the project's Job Centre to get involved!
Next month we will begin the coordinator election selection process. We hope to have more involvement and input this time around! More news will be forthcoming. Thanks, everyone! María (habla conmigo) 18:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Novels Newsletter - September 2008
[edit]The WikiProject Novels Newsletter
Issue XXVI - September 2008 | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||
This newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Please return to WikProject Media franchises
[edit]Dear Ragesoss...You are invited to come back to discuss WikiProject Media franchises. Since you participated in one or more discussions of the project, possibly when it was known as WikiProject Fictional series, I hope to see you return to it. The project needs your participation. Currently there is no activity on the project's talk page about the reorganization which is discouraging. I had great expectations for this project as it touches so many topics but am becoming discouraged. I hope to see you return. LA (If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page.) @ 19:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 62
[edit]Hey! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 62 has been released. It's the first episode since Wikimania and it packs a lot of content! You can listen and comment at the episode's page and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes at wikipediaweekly.org. WODUPbot 05:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.
My RfA
[edit]
|
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 02:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC) |
Wikis Take Manhattan
[edit]
|
Wikis Take Manhattan
|
WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City. The event is based on last year's Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, and has evolved to include StreetsWiki this year as well.
LAST YEAR'S EVENT
- Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Spring 2008 (a description of the results, and the uploading party)
- Commons:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Gallery (our cool gallery)
WINNINGS? Prizes include a dinner for three with Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales at Pure Food & Wine, gift certificates to Bicycle Habitiat and the LimeWire Store, and more!
WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, September 27th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.
WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!
REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.
WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's West Village office. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:
- 349 W. 12th St. #3
- Between Greenwich & Washington Streets
- By the 14th St./8th Ave. ACE/L stop
FOR UPDATES
Check out:
- Wikis Take Manhattan main website
This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.
Thanks,
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)a