User talk:Acabashi/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Jonah Lewie

Have you a citable source for the seemingly hear'say story concerning further Lewie's releases ? If not, I think it needs removing in its entirety. Best wishes,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Mary O'Malley (playwright)

apparantly User:PatGallacher has disentangled the mess, sorry about that. actually i tried to disentangle the poet from the plays, who knew there are three? if you want to edit, be bold, however, try and keep it to sourced material, that appears neutral, (i'll back up against COI spam). Pohick2 (talk) 15:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

the article is fine, i tend to be accommodating to interested parties that "shape articles" as long as it's neutral (the identity section is a little funky, normally that's handled by an aka the lead, or as at O. Henry, and yes a citation would be nice.) there are a whole series of tags, wp:coi, wp:or etc., as you see at Once a Catholic, that i'm afraid are used more in malice. article could use more citations, but i couldn't find in a google sweep; it needs a good local newspaper interview that we could all cite. (hint to the agent). Pohick2 (talk) 14:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Acabashi. You have new messages at N5iln's talk page.
Message added 13:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Alan (talk) 13:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Crowle Advertiser

Thanks for your comment. Sorry this is a bit of a rushed reply as I need to be out for most of today. Have you looked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Journalism? The talk page there may be a better place to raise your query, but it's not an area I've been involved in specifically and I don't know who is active there. The first thing you need to consider is WP:NOTABILITY - though I would have thought a local newspaper should be notable, especially if it is of historic interest - and then also WP:NOR. So, you will need to find independent reliable sources which refer to the newspaper, rather than you putting together an article by WP:SYNTHESIS drawing on the archives themselves. You will also need to consider WP:LENGTH - this article, for example, is on a notable newspaper, but is actually quite short. Happy to help further if needed, but old newspapers are not an area I've been specifically involved in. Regards, Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks for your advice Ghmyrtle; I shall take it. I think an article such as the Cambridge Chronicle would suffice; more research for me. As my Advertiser articles run to very large copy, I could if necessary build a simple web site for them and link to the Wiki article. Regards, Acabashi (talk) 10:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I Am the Media

Good catch. I had been building upon the original article after it got sent to AFD,[1] and am grateful for your edit. Thanks. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Cat Mandu

Cat Mando / Cat Mandu ?

I note that you've changed the Howling Laud Hope article, but there's still the Cat Mandu article (which would be a move too) and of course now the link between them is broken. Something needs to change, one way or the other.

Do you have any refs for this? Grauniad favours Cat Mandu, and that does seem the more obvious name, given its origin. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:49, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

reply re: scenic painting

Hi Acabashi,

I've responded to you on my talk page re: scenic painting. Unfortunately, I don't know of a good place this is covered, even two years later, but I do mention my understanding of the current state of related articles. --Delirium (talk) 02:21, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Dickin medals

Hey Acabashi, thanks for your note. I wasn't planning on starting those articles but there's no reason why you shouldn't. Let me know if you need some pointers. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Notice

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Roadmage, 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! Guoguo12--Talk--  16:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Peter Jonas (director)

Sure and it's my pleasure - happy to be of help. Excellent article; keep up the good work, and happy editing! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 22:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

London Wikimedia Fundraiser

Good evening! This is a friendly message from Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, inviting you to the London Wikimedia Fundraising party on 19th December 2010, in approximately one week. This party is being held at an artistic London venue with room for approximately 300 people, and is being funded by Ed Saperia, a non-Wikipedian who has a reputation for holding exclusive events all over London. This year, he wants to help Wikipedia, and is subsidising a charity event for us. We're keen to get as many Wikimedians coming as possible, and we already have approximately 200 guests, including members of the press, and some mystery guests! More details can be found at http://ten.wikipedia.org/wiki/London - expect an Eigenharp, a mulled wine hot tub, a free hog roast, a haybale amphitheatre and more. If you're interested in coming - and we'd love to have you - please go to the ten.wikipedia page and follow the link to the Facebook event. Signing up on Facebook will add you to the party guestlist. Entry fee is a heavily subsidised £5 and entry is restricted to over 18s. It promises to be a 10th birthday party to remember! If you have any questions, please email me at chasemewiki at gmail.com.

Hope we'll see you there, (and apologies for the talk page spam) - Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 17:57, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Advert Removed

Ok , good, I removed the Advert temp but you still need to improve the article by providing reliable sources for that, I suggest to search in BBC Persian and sources like that. Spada II ♪♫ (talk) 18:49, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Jochen

Looks good to me. Nice job. MBisanz ^talk 19:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Ingo Porges

Hi there, I've corrected your tagging of this article as it IS sourced. Thanks and regards, GiantSnowman 19:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 19:35, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011

Hello. When you patrol new pages, all articles that you have looked at should be marked patrolled, whether you marked them for deletion or deemed them acceptable, unless you are not sure. This saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thank you. Kudpung (talk) 22:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for clarifying that Kudpung. Acabashi (talk) 23:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

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

-Cntras (talk) 23:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Liberal education video

Hi Acabashi! I've just managed to find time to listen to the recording you posted on YouTube. All I can say is... "wow". :) I've already read a few books and journal articles on LE, and this recording only confirms my belief that liberal education has been the subject of a lengthy scholarly debate with no clear resolution. Indeed, although I've provided a "definition" of LE in the article, I'm not sure that I know exactly what it is, and perhaps you are right in calling my contributions "valiant" in the sense that the task so far hasn't been easy. If academia can't figure out what LE is, then providing a layman's overview of the topic is going to be much harder than I though, IMO.

Anyways... I just realized that I ended up rambling. My apologies. :) I'm hoping that you, as a university lecturer, could provide some insight into the sources I should be looking at, the kinds of information I should be looking for, etc etc. I plan to request a peer review when I feel that I've done all that I could, but I'd appreciate having your advice first. Edge3 (talk) 05:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

PS I just found this article! I find it to be quite informative, but I'm not sure if it complies with WP:NEWSORG. Thoughts? Edge3 (talk) 06:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

utiliVisor

Why is this article spam? I wrote a down the middle article, cited it with sources showing the company's software in action. The company is notable because of its unique software that enables engineers to look at energy efficiency in buildings. It's the first of its kind and a fortune 500 company licenses the software, in addition to others. Again why is this company/software not notable?

Thanks, ~~MLG~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcLouisG (talk • contribs) 13:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

This article reads like a company promotion brochure, particulary the intro sentence and the 'Continuous Energy Oversight' section. If other editors decide that the delete tag is not appropriate, please consider re-writing to a more neutral style... an example might be the article under 'Notable work': Hartz Mountain Industries. I have added this to the article's talk page - Thanks for contacting. Acabashi (talk) 14:30, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Be alert

As I expected, Be art and Be Boz Be Art have both cropped up. Please watch. Will probably need AfD. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 16:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

CSD notification

Please don't forget to notify the creator of an article when you nominate for CSD, e.g. Leroy Edwards III and Peter Snow (artist)--SPhilbrickT 22:23, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

And DigitalEmbossing and Gator Hook Lodge--SPhilbrickT 22:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for reminding me SPhilbrick - an oversight that I will try not to let happen again. Acabashi (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Berry-Wood A.O.W. Orchestrion

Hello Acabashi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Berry-Wood A.O.W. Orchestrion, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to objects. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:19, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure there is a specific speedy deletion criterion for objects. See if one of the other criteria applies. Does the article read like an advertisement? G11. Has the text been copied and pasted from another website? G12, even if the text has been slightly changed. If all else fails, you can PROD the article. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:35, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

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

The Contribution Team cordially invites you to Imperial College London

All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 13:35, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Attack

Hi. I'm very sorry, I accidentally undid your tagging of that attack article, just now. (Best if I don't bother naming it). My revert was just an error, caused by replication lag. I've reinstated the speedy template, and I'm sure it'll be gone very soon. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  22:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

No worries - these things happen when enthusiastic editors jump on the same nonsense simultaneously. Your tag was more appropriate anyway :) Acabashi (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Sayantani Ghosh CSD

Don't you think it's a little bit early to mark the article with a CSD ? If you have done some searching, it seems like the actress in question has notability, it's just that the author of the article is a novice Wikipedia editor and isn't familiar with general guidelines. --Ezhuks (talk) 18:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Fair point. Acabashi (talk) 09:07, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk back

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

*** in fact *** ( contact ) 11:18, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Saint-Michel-de-Maurienne derailment

I've added the {{hang on}} tag to Saint-Michel-de-Maurienne derailment, and started the page discussion, which says that the article was created as a result of a long discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#Fréjus/Mont Cenis Railway.

In short, following a correction of the naming of articles comprising the Fréjus Railway, the history of this derailment ended up in the wrong Turin–Modane railway section of the line. Following further discussion, the consensus there was that it should have its own article to be in line with both the French versions and compared with similar train wrecks.

I'd like to get on with pruning the information from the Turin–Modane railway and sorting out the various redirects, but I don't want to waste time and effort until this speedy deletion is resolved. Tim PF (talk) 11:58, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for explaining the situation Tim PF. I'm sure the speedy delete will be declined through what you indicate... I just hope I haven't slowed your article down too much. Best wishes, Acabashi (talk) 12:12, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I was hoping that you could actually remove your own speedy deletion tag, but I think that's enough for me to carry on (I'm currently Editing Turin–Modane railway). Tim PF (talk) 12:29, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

No probs there, I'll do it. Acabashi (talk) 12:31, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Should I remove my orphaned {{hang on}} tag (probably when I expand it a little later? I've done the Turin–Modane railway changes now (with a {{main|Saint-Michel-de-Maurienne derailment}} tag), so there's no duplication now. Still much work to do on it, however. Tim PF (talk) 12:57, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I note that it still has both "Contested candidates for speedy deletion" and "Candidates for speedy deletion" hidden categories, even on previewing an edit with the orphaned {{hang on}} tag excised, so I've left it there for the time being. Tim PF (talk) 13:04, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

With luck you should be all right. Good luck with the article, and sorry to have caused you such inconvenience. Best wishes, Acabashi (talk) 13:09, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

CSD issue

FYI, I think you made the right call in reversing your CSD on Saint-Michel-de-Maurienne derailment. However, removing the CSD and leaving the {{hangon}} still tags the article in the CSD category (I just learned this recently), so I've removed the {{hangon}} tag. --SPhilbrickT 13:20, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for that. Acabashi (talk) 13:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thankyou, SPhilbrick, I note that both hidden categories are now gone.

I just wonder, however, if it needs an administrator to remove either (or preferably both) tags to remove an article from the respective categories. In other words, should a non-administrator remove their own CSD tag, or is it better to contact an administrator to clear things up?

Alternatively, had I contacted Acabashi and they removed the {{db-a10}} tag before I added the {{hang-on}} tag, would that have cleared it up better? Tim PF (talk) 13:40, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Ate-u-tiv

Hello Acabashi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ate-u-tiv, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This seems to me descriptive, not promotional: it needs reliable sources, but I see no reason to speedy-delete. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 17:32, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I see your point, but it's one of those that seem to me to fall between two or three stools, making it difficult, (for me anyway,) to decide which temp to add. The thing is in part a how-to-do-it manual. I might have a go at improving it. Best wishes, Acabashi (talk) 17:43, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

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

JamesBWatson (talk) 20:01, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Sir samuel isidore salmon

Hello Acabashi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sir samuel isidore salmon, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: If Samuel was an MP that is enough notability for his own page. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 09:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I thought I speed deleted under CSD A10 because was is already the subject of an article, however he appears to be the son. Acabashi (talk) 16:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't know whether you thought he was the same man, or just thought he was adequately covered in his father's article. No matter. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 22:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

To be absolutely truthful, I thought that he was the same man - I must be more focussed in the future. I've made amends by tidying-up the article. Thanks for getting back. Acabashi (talk) 23:55, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Michael Rizzo

Hello Acabashi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Michael Rizzo, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Any prof is notable enough for A7. Needs to go to AfD if it needs to be evaluated against WP:PROF or the GNG. Thank you. GedUK  22:26, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ged UK. I can see your point of view, but I don't entirely agree with it.

I didn't take the decision shooting from the hip - I did ruminate and go to the 2 links offered: his own web page and his portal at the University of Rochester. Just because someone has a certain level of education or is at a any level in academia, doesn't automatically entitle them to be Wiki notable, and in this case there was nothing to show that this ("assistant" - not mentioned) professor had produced any worthy papers or research that had affected the world outside of his university domain. Now, if he was shown to have received national or significant local honours I would have let it slip for the meantime, but what I could find by googling, apart from his day job, was a couple of radio interviews, talks about his subject and his opinions, and the eponemous myspace, facebook and LinkedIn. Whether someone is one of the thousands of rappers or thousands of professors, I treat them equally - I don't, from what has been presented, and what I have found, believe Michael Rizzo to be notable. I shall ask the creator to provide a verifiable notability above and beyond his day job; if this is not proffered, I will consider adding it to AfD.

Best wishes, and many thanks for informing me of the deletion, Acabashi (talk) 01:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that he's notable for an article. However, the speedy deletion criteria is an intentionally lower threshold than WP:PROF or the general notability guideline. It's a standard consensus that being a professor is sufficient to pass through CSD-A7. I tried to boil that down into the first message, but it was obviously too concise! Hope this helps! GedUK  16:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Point understood - many thanks. You live and learn :) Cheers. Acabashi (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem. The CSD criteria v the GNG is one of those lightbulb moments!

Re: Michael Rizzo

I think the list of publications and the sentence "published a large number of articles..in popular newspapers" suffices for criterion #7 ("Frequently quoted in conventional media").

I'd suggest that he also satisfies criteria #1 and #3, but that is debatable. Educatedseacucumber (talk) 04:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Amherst High School (Wisconsin)

Hello Acabashi. I am just letting you know that I deleted Amherst High School (Wisconsin), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you.   -- Lear's Fool 02:44, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks Lear's Fool. Sometimes I find it difficult to know which one to choose, some seem to fall between two stools. Cheers Acabashi (talk) 02:50, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

As a general rule, I try to pick the most serious criterion, which means that if something meets G10, you tag it as G10. Administrators generally keep a closer eye on the attack pages category, which means pages tagged with G10 are usually deleted quite quickly. I should also mention that A7 (the tag you used) can only be used for real people, individual animals, organisations or web content, and that schools are explicitly exempt. My advice would be to keep Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion open in another tab while you're patrolling new pages, so you can check if you're unsure. I've been patrolling new pages for ages, and I still do it. Please feel free to let me know if you've got any more queries.  -- Lear's Fool 02:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for your advice. I do keep Criteria speedy delete in another tab, but sometimes I still find it selection-bemusing... greater experience on my part might solve this I suppose. I do keep open a word doc to add pages that I'm not sure of to check back later to see if anything has improved. Thanks for the offer of advice... I could well take you up on it :) In fact here's one in my word doc list that I'm pondering: Beardcore... any opinion? Cheers. Acabashi (talk) 03:09, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Ugh, you didn't pick an easy one :) The first thing to do when you see an article like this is to figure out whether it's eligible for A7. Musical genre's aren't, so we can't use A7 here. The content isn't a copyright violation, isn't unambiguously promotional or vandalism, so it's not eligible for speedy deletion. I've put it up for AfD, because I feel that the issues involved in ascertaining it's notability are too controversial for proposed deletion. That said, this is a tricky one, and I'll be interested to see how the AfD goes. I hope that helps.  -- Lear's Fool 04:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I have thrown this little beaut into the court of User:Derek R Bullamore who is very knowledgeable about music matters. Acabashi (talk) 05:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Good move (although I'm not sure I'm a "speedy deletion specialist" :).  -- Lear's Fool 05:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

talkback

Hello. You have a new message at ErikHaugen's talk page. Message added 19:50, 24 February 2011 (UTC).

Haywood and Mel By: Phillip Brown

After removing the unencyclopedic chat from this, I find to my surprise that it is not a hoax - it's a real book, though only 24 pp and from PublishAmerica. So I have PRODded it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I'm surprised too, however I've found the text is part copy vio from [2], probably itself copied from somewhere else, and the article title is not complete. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 18:40, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

John "Beatz" Holohan

How is this an attack page? I would consider it more as non-notable page. -Porchcrop ^{(talk|contributions)} 02:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

It appears to be attacking editor User:JamesBWatson... such comments do not in any way constitute a Wikipedia article. Acabashi (talk) 02:38, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I have replied to your comment on this at User talk:JamesBWatson#John "Beatz" Holohan. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Acabashi. You have new messages at Krashlandon's talk page.
Message added 04:29, 26 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Joy510

Maybe time for some salt then, huh? The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 07:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Really wild cans

Hello Acabashi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Really wild cans, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 17:57, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Googling produced nothing on this for me - perhaps I should have gone with notability. I will remember next time that if an article is added into a category, this would indicate a context. Acabashi (talk) 18:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Acabashi, If you've made a good faith attempt to source it and drawn a blank then I'd suggest prodding it. A1 didn't apply because I could work out that it was about a soft drink. Having a category indicates you are probably not dealing with a submission by a newbie. ϢereSpielChequers 18:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Copy edit drive

Hi, and thank you very much for joining the copy edit drive. It seems you have misunderstood how to do the word counts to get credit for the drive. What we do is list what the word count of the article was before the edit is started, not the difference between the start point and finish point. The word count is calculated using a script that you can install on your monobook.js or whatever skin you happen to be using. It's easy to install and use. Instructions to get started are Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives#Instructions for participants. I have used the history pages of the articles you have done so far and corrected your entries on the Drive page. If there are any questions, please let me know. --Diannaa ^(Talk) 19:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Your copyediting

Please take more care. You added a citation to Worldlingo,[3] which is a Wikipedia mirror: "The original article is from Wikipedia." Especially on BLPs, this kind of editing is far ideal. Fences&Windows 22:18, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

March copyediting drive

I have been looking through the articles you have copyedited for the March drive. I couldn't help but notice there was a consistent pattern in overlinking, and have removed some of the more obvious cases. Please note that there is usually little need to link words such as 'speech', 'passenger', 'illness', celebrities' and 'colleagues' because such words are in common everyday use and understood by most readers. I would refer you to WP:Linking for further details. Thank you for your attention. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I have been less enthusiastic since your previous observation on the drive talk. Acabashi (talk) 02:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry, I didn't mean to harrass. I only clicked it was you (again) after I posted the message above. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 04:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

No worries. It's nice to know someone's taking an interest :) Acabashi (talk) 04:23, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

William K. Boone

Thanks for pointing out some of the "missing links" in my unchained story. I elaborated some more on WKB's Legacy by creating a "Category: Colección Boone-Canovas" with a brief description on its merits. Also, I started gathering there some of the images and documents, and I also began uploading several other old photographs - but some will have to wait since my sister lent them as "inedited" to be published soon in a book by the Cultural Institute of Veracruz. --Wkboonec (talk) 23:29, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The Boone article that you have started for Wikipedia has been saved from deletion; I am pleased because to me the subject is notable.

I assume that when you say “my unchained story” you mean “my unlinked article”. But I think the “my” is part of the problem with the article. If we think that an article belongs to us we certainly have a conflict of interest. (I apologize if there is a linguistic nuance that allows me to misinterpret your comment.) Therefore, I have added a copyedit tag as an invitation to all editors to contribute to our (by that I mean Wikipedia and all its editors) article.

There are many parts of the article that need to be looked at. Please consider my comments on its Articles For Deletion Discussion Page to see if you can improve style and layout. The article, when the lists and headings are not counted, is only 428 words of body text. It is a short article that has been made to look longer than it is. Please look at removing many of the headings and condensing the text, and at removing some of the photographs – for the amount of text, 3 would be more than enough – a Wikipedia article is not a photograph gallery. Could you check the 10 sources from the inline citations please? I can find only 3 that support the claims in the text. If a citation does not support the text it is next to, it should be removed, and probably the text too.

I will copyedit the article myself soon. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 16:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

• Great, thanks. I got carried away in rushing to help the article improve on its survival expectations. I find that "Copyedit" request most welcome. I'll do my best to clean-up the article as you recommend, and let other contributors work on it. I will continue to add documents and photos to es:Colección Boone-Canovas and/or "Category:William K. Boone" and will continue to elaborate on the article in Spanish. Thanks for your help.--Wkboonec (talk) 19:40, 18 March 2011 (UTC)--Wkboonec (talk) 19:40, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comforting message

Sorry I didn't reply sooner. I left Mexico City on a trip to visit friends and now I'm in Cancún, sojourning with some of my children and grandchildren. I'll try to be brief:

1) WKB was acclaimed as "benefactor" of Xalapa: he did not contribute with money, but with his time, enthusiasm, efforts, ideas, projects, charisma, and his abilities to get a group of well meaning citizens to work for the common good. Without him, Xalapa would have no Twin Road up Macuiltépec nor a Stadium, to name just two grand achievements that contribuded the most to make Xalapa a special place in the early 1920s. More than a "philantropist", WKB was a leader and a driver for worthy causes. More than just playing the part of an engineer or a writer, he seems to have excelled in those areas as well as taking a prominent role in, for instance, diplomacy: negotiating with bandits and revolutionaries for the release of prominent citizens who had become kidnapped victims.

2) "On 3 January 1920, a strong earthquake affected the city, destroying several buildings. Years later in December 1923, Xalapa fell into the power of the huertístas, commanded by Guadalupe Sánchez." - quoting from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xalapa#History. WKB did not just do what he was supposed to do, but certainly played a key role in the recovery and blossoming of Xalapa.

3) As to the Stadium, WKB was recognized by his friends as the one individual who first came up with the idea, designed the project, organized the limited resources and lead the openning ceremonies. Civil authorities had been asked to attend but revolutionary turmoil got in the way. Three years afterwards, the revolutionary government of Heriberto Tejeda --quite understandably, because of political reasons-- ignored WKB's contribution and claimed the success story for "the cause".

4) WKB attended Case --I made that correction, as you point out; perhaps I should have abstained to do so, as you previously had sugested-- but left after two years without graduating. We do not know the circumstances. I also removed his "studying of electricity" - you're right, such generality does not serve any purpose.

5) I don't know what WKB's tittle was, in his early years, both in Jalapa as well as in California. Perhaps my sister does, but she is practically unavailable at this time, being involved and up-to-her-ears in another history project: salvaging a 17th century ex jesuit temple and school in Veracruz.

• In 1909, after the death of John B. Frisbee (the legal representative of the company in Mexico), WKB was put in charge, as general manager of the JRR&PC.
• In 1925 the JRR&PC was expropiated by the Mexican Government. WKB spent some years in Florida and, when things had settled a bit in Mexico, he returned to Xalapa in representation of the owners, to try to collect the indemnization settlement - which, as I understand, the government never paid. It is my sister who knows the story and has the documents and photographs.

6) For the collection of photos and documents I have recently added the article on The Boone-Canovas Collection.

7) Newspaper editorials: I plan on doing the Spanish translations today (March 24).

• I got most of the texts and translations. I need my sister's asssistance on a couple of items. --Wkboonec (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

8) The book I mentioned will be published by the official Institute of Culture (IVEC), a branch of the state government of Veracruz. I'll ask my sister for some more details. A new governor is now in office and public positions have been shuffled around; I don't know if IVEC has a title and a deadline for its publication.

• My sister explains that it is not a book but an article written by our father (1908-1988) with notes by her, that is supposed to appear in the magazine "Contrapunto", number 15, dated Sept thru Dec 2010, already way behind schedule. --Wkboonec (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

9) Princeton. I was accepted and entered with the class of 1964, in good measure because my father was an alumnus ('31). I joined Charter Club. I dropped out in Dec. 1962, as if following a family tradition (?!). Einstein had of course died a few years before: 1955, according to Wikipedia. I do not remember Oppenheimer dropping by Princeton in my time. The exciting projects that were being discussed around the campus back then, as I remember, were the Synchrotron at the James Forrestal Research Center, the programming of computers (a very primitive IBM-650 punched-card system), the news of the Watson and Crick 1962 Noble prize for their DNA model, and the "radical" ideas that I learned in a Geology course with a great teacher (I forget his name) who was cool enough to announce that he was an atheist.

• I had not heard of Anthony Grafton. Thanks for mentioning him. I see that there's a Wikipedia article on him. Also, a YouTube "Authors@Google" video. I gotta get the sound working on this borrowed computer, before I can watch it.
• Were you a grad student or teaching at Princeton in the late 1970s?

I greatly appreciate your assistance. Three cheers for ol' Nassau.--Wkboonec (talk) 05:44, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Revised:--Wkboonec (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Vigili del Fuoco

You are very accurate and patient: thank you for the useful advices I'll try to follow. I don't know a lot about the issue, and I compare the article with the Italian one to understand some confusing periods, since Italian is my mother tongue. Of course I'll be grateful if you can look again at the article and help a bit more! --Broletto (talk) 08:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

On your talk page I talked about "…moving parts of the sentence around a bit to make it more understandable in English, adjusting or altering a few words here and there…" - for an example look at this sentence in the Operational Staff section: "In each province a command coordinates the activities of the single detachments."

This sentence looks simple and reasonable doesn’t it? - but it’s not what it seems – the "command" must be a provincial centralized authority that coordinates detachment actions. But the word "command" also means a specific order to do something, and in this sentence could give the impression that an order to act "coordinates the activities of the single detachments" – to order someone to do something does not coordinate what is done; it’s just an order. Most people should get the intended meaning, but it might be confusing to some. I would add a word like "authority" or "body" after "command" for clarity, but even better would be to find out the name of the "command".

The words "the single" are superfluous - and in the context of this sentence I think that a word like "activities", although reasonable enough, is a little bit too non-specific. Does the "command" coordinate even the personal or trivial actions (activities) of a detachment too? My choice would be a more down-to-earth, less ambiguous and direct word: "work". This is a personal choice – others might think it a bit pedantic – how we edit can be personal judgment.

Better ways of writing the sentence might be:

• "In each province a command, the (add its name), coordinates the work of the Vigili del Fuoco detachments".
• "Detachments of the Vigili del Fuoco in each province are controlled by a coordinating command, the (add its name)" - "controlled" would imply "coordinates the activities of".
• "In each province a command authority/body coordinates the work of the Vigili del Fuoco detachments" – if no name found.
• "Detachments of the Vigili del Fuoco in each province are controlled by a coordinating command authority/body" – if no name found.

If I was editing this article, I would have removed the section 1*1*5 Fire Emergency number – it doesn’t add enough to need a special section and the citations to pdfs seem to be dead anyway. You will probably know what all the numbers mean but they don’t seem to add much. If we are in Italy and need to phone the emergency services we would be unlikely to consult Wikipedia to get the numbers. BTW - “ensure a rapid” are more weasel words. How about something like this but added somewhere else: "In response to emergency calls, Vigili del Fuoco local control centres (or operation rooms if you prefer) decide on the level of response and type of equipment needed, and liaise with local police and other emergency services".

Now that you have now decided that "advice" is right in "…technical assistance to industries and emergency fire advice", I would change it to "…technical assistance to industries and fire prevention advice" – seems more logical, and is probably what is meant.

Can I recommend a book: The Elements of Style, commonly called "Strunk". It is short, simple and understandable, with everything backed-up with examples. It is quite authoritarian: this is right - this is wrong; but perhaps that approach could be valuable to you at this stage. And you can get it very cheaply – here is a link.

Best wishes, Acabashi (talk) 05:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Beginning from the end: you have obviusly spotted my lack of practice in written English. The book you recommend will be in my next order from Amazon.

I agree about the section 1*1*5; in fact, I had some doubt about it. What about the long list of special groups?
The subtle observations about correct lexicon and phrasing remind me of my old job as a teacher, therefore I appreciate them and hope to use them in the right way. Thank you again for following my work.

Best wishes, --Broletto (talk) 11:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll not be able to work on the article for some days, but I hope to finish it before March 31. Thank you again for your kind help.--Broletto (talk) 17:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

March barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Acabashi for copy editing articles totalling 21,515 words during the March copy edit drive. Thank you for participating! Diannaa (Talk) 04:26, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. Congrats sir!  jorgenev (talk) 04:07, 6 April 2011

Thanks for helping with it. You are free to help more, it is a pleasure :) --Vinie007 20:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Rockstar Lincoln

If it has closed, there are a hell of a lot of outdated Linkedin profiles. - X201 (talk) 14:56, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

True - Rockstar Games (internationally) has 1832 followers and 408 listed employees on Linkedin; a very few of these located at Lincoln. Linkedin, like all unreliable social networking sites - this is what it is although it gives an appearance of something more substantial - can go out of date, with info not updated or removed. The Lincoln company's last accounts were filed in July 2010, there was a director change in Sept 2010, it advertised a job for a Japanese tester in Nov 2010, and a company head left in January 2011. So, if it is no more, this would be quite recent. I was a bit presumptive to change "is" to "was", but when I'm in Lincoln I'll check-out its Whisby Road building for any activity and ask around; I'll ring a couple of Lincoln game enthusiast friends too, to see if they have any info. All that would be irrelevant if there are no sources for closure, so thanks for the very reasonable revert and the interest. Acabashi (talk) 16:07, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Evelyn Shirley (1812–1882)

Oops. Thanks

Plucas58 (talk) 19:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Woodhall Spa, Lincolnshire

Seen you work on many articles this one is a bit of a mess can you help? Im new here myself and dont know enough for this one. Many thanks Panderoona (talk) 21:23, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Funnily enough this is one I intend to work on - I copied it to a word file some days ago for that purpose. But as you noticed I think, it's not a quick fix; it requires a lot of re-writing and re-shaping. There is also a possibly Woodhall Spa protective IP address/s that has over time added apparently good faith stuff that is confusing and not quite appropriate - which makes it a bit more problematic. How we tackle the para beginning "At Kirkstead Bridge the B1191 crosses the Witham..." under Geography beats me at the moment - it's a real headache; it's only meaningful to someone who knows the town anyway. The "The Archibald Wisteria" section, removed by the IP address that added it was a bit bizarre and you were right to draw attention to its lack of citations - and this probably did the trick. To the top of that article we could have added a sources template

and in this case even a

and/or or a section template

under a section header. Some editors think that doing this and adding (lots of) inline at the same time is a bit over-egging, but I think its fine in a seriously flawed article, and points out that serious editors are keeping an eye on it - it can also deter gratuitous and unnecessary additions. However, when I do this I make sure I do a little re-improving at the same time out of courtesy, even if it's only minor, and state fully what I've done and why in the edit summary (as you have done in this article), and invariably return to work on the page. This again shows that we are not just tag litterbugs. Some editors can look with distain on others who add tags expecting others to do the clean-up; the same distain that we might have for those who dump ill-formed stuff and expect others to knock it into shape. If what we've edited is major I usually add an edit breakdown in the article talk page, adding a "See Discussion page" in the edit summary as here downwards - this to a great length that is not always essential. This again can deter the frivolous addition in articles that attract such, and in this case seems to have stopped it.

Another deterent to gratuitous editing on pages we have edited might be this: there is often click-though to our user page, although I have no real evidence for this other than that I do it out of nosiness - if others see it reasonably developed they are more likely to treat us and our edits with courtesy and circumspection. Best wishes, Acabashi (talk) 15:41, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for full and frank reply, very useful. Its the first time I have actually gone and mucked about with "citation needed" stuff (because Im new) but when I saw that stuff about Wisteria, I actually went and looked on google for anything at all to back it up and found absolutely nothing, not even "wisteria" and "marriage". All very odd. Agree that the whole page needs a vast amount of help. Ive been sticking to small villages being new, I would hate to muck up a big page. I will have a nose on Woodhall Spa when I get a bit of time, over the next few days and see if I can come up with anything to help. Thanks again :) Panderoona (talk) 15:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC

Have rewritten and added citations for the bit about the Spa - feel free to rip it to shreds, thought it might help - I also found theres several mentions in medical journals on Google Books for this wonderful water ;) If I get time Ill keep adding - but in the main Im leaving this one to you, too scared of a great big page like this. Good luck with it and hope you dont mind my butting in Panderoona (talk) 19:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Have added a section on the churches - with citations - and added citations to the Tower On The Moor :) Panderoona (talk) 10:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

You have started to do what I would do in a big article like this – taking it section-by-section in easy bites – editing stuff and adding-in anything else that can be found. Then when everything looks OK, seeing if the article needs reconfiguring/restructuring in its entirety – a copyediting task. The word “Esquire” I wouldn’t use unless it’s part of a quote – it’s a bit archaic, as is “ascertained” (I would use "found"). Words like “in fact” are superfluous – perfectly OK in creative text but a bit unnecessary in an encyclopaedia.

I assume that what you have removed in the Spa section is not referenced anywhere? Very often editor additions can be pure personal knowledge, and indeed might be accurate even if uncited. Some reviewing editors might remove such uncited text, especially if it has been for a long time with no-one willing to add relevant proof, or if it appears to be blatant editor original research. These uncited Spa 'truths' might have been in the article for a considerable time and could remain wallowing there for years, and even worse could be permanently mirrored on other web sites as assumed truth. If the text is contentious it’s right to remove it. If the text appears good faith and not contentious or scurrilous I normally try to see if there is supporting evidence before I remove, and even if there is none I sometimes give the benefit of doubt and leave it and the in place and tidy-up the text for grammar/syntax if necessary - it’s a matter of judgement. A caveat – I tend to remove all uncited information on BLPs and music/bands/schools – these tend to attract ill-informed rubbish and can be a right nightmare to keep on top of, but I’m more generous with other types of articles.

One useful thing that I’ve added into the Woodhall Spa talk page is a Find sources tag which can help editors. If you want to develop a village, or any article, add this into the talk page to help you and others find sources. The info in link 7 to six parishes is confusing - not your fault - I added up the parishes in the link but there only appears to be five; I might be misreading it. If my blue link to Bucknall is the wrong village, please de-link.

BTW: your links to Kelly appear, from my end, not to work again. Best wishes, Acabashi (talk) 12:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Acabashi Im sorry I didnt see this earlier - thanks for the useful hints and info. I actually came here to ask you to look at the Haslet page - Im pretty sure its been vandalised regarding the Great Haslet Wars and I certainly cant imagine it nor see it on Google. Would trust your judgement :)

As for the Kellys links they seem to be more trouble than they are worth most of the time. I shall have to see if I cant come up with relevant info from other sources. Thanks Panderoona (talk) 20:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I've had a go at Haslet and left a message on the IP address talk page. It was obvious nonsense - quite creatively funny though :) Acabashi (talk) 22:52, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I must say we have had a few fights over the end bits of an Haslet in our house ;) very tasty! thanks as always Panderoona (talk) 07:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Haslet

Hi Panderoona, just a couple of points about our wonderful Haslet.

I didn’t split the article into major sections; I left it as the obvious stub that it is – having one sentence sections doesn’t look very effective and points out the paucity of an article. Again this is a matter of judgment – if an article is very short, and basically just a couple of introductory sentences or paras in itself, it’s best left without major sections if it doesn’t have any, or reduced to no sections if it has, unless you care to develop the thing. Also, having a section labeled “Haslet” when the article is called “Haslet” is a bit confusing.

I added a to the “In parts of the South” because it was not specific enough. My judgement would be to leave such statements as they are for the time being as they look like they could be in good faith, and the particular editor, or others, might be able to clarify it. If we change these words to “Elsewhere” it could leave it as our duty to sort it out, and “Elsewhere” might not be the “North”, wherever that might be – I could find no information for the particular recipe for any part of the UK, or the world(?)

If the pronunciation of hayzleht (with lower case “h”) needs to be there, it's best done following the Wikipedia mark-up – click the blue link. It’s useful to readers if we blue link to the appropriate and particular English pronunciation mark-up page for the part of the world the article describes – the previous pronunciation examples didn't make sense in this regard so I removed them.

When I was taught punctuation at school I was told that any bracketed information in a sentence was to be preceded by a comma, and had another comma, (or full stop,) just before the close of the brackets. This practice seems to have been superseded even to the point where no sentence punctuation is used inside or outside brackets if the sentence runs true grammatically without the brackets, as the brackets effectively stand-in for commas anyway. In (pronounced Hayslet locally), I wouldn't have added the comma at the end. In this case brackets are appropriate, but in other cases in body text I sometimes use the long dash – instead of the bracket – where I think I might get away with it, as visually this keeps the sentence flowing, but this usually only once in a sentence; brackets can be too much of a visual block to my mind... I do get pulled-up on this occasionally :)

The Welsh "Traditionally made from finely minced potatoes, pigs liver and onions." is best as a complete sentence.

I hope you don't mind me getting a bit anal over this :) Acabashi (talk) 14:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Not at all - I wouldnt have asked for your opinion and help if I didnt want it ;) Being a bit new I still feel a bit like Im feeling my way and there doesnt seem to be very much online to back up statements about haslet. I did make a couple of points in the article because in my own experience "hazzlet" is the stuff with the offal in it. I wouldnt touch it!! Lincolnshire "hayslet" is of course totally delicious but I think the non-use of offal is more or less restricted to the county? Id never heard of "Welsh hazzlet" until I saw the wiki article but it does appear to exist. I was trying to make the distinction that the pronounciation seems to go with the offal content - or not - as the case may be. In Surrey its called Hazlet and its absolutely offal ;) Thanks for your time and input its much appreciated. Panderoona (talk) 15:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Lincolnshire butchers don't use offal? You're very trusting :) In the mid-eighties I used to make sausages - with a feature in Woman magazine 1987 where I mention Dick Harlow, butcher in Boston Market Place - you might remember him?. Dick gave me tips on how to make the "Lincolnshire Sausage". He showed me round his sausage machine, but I didn't add all the stuff he did, and I'll not mention what here - mine was just coarse-chopped pork leg with fresh sage, bread crumbs, salt, white pepper and a little touch of lemon zest, wrapped in hog casings, and left to hang up in the winter-time garden shed for for two or three days for the "spices to grab hold of the meat" as Dick said. Unfortunately, after the article came out, Dick was about to be prosecuted for food-poisoning Boston civic worthies with his baron of beef. My Wyberton friend said "your names going to be mud". :) Acabashi (talk) 20:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

OMG we have more in common than I thought!! I love Lincs as its where my family came from but actually live in Surrey as my parents moved down here for proximity to London before I was born. I spent many happy hols there hence my enthusiasm for the place, and probably know more about it and love it more than some of the locals I used to fair drag my cousins bless them up the Stump every time I went there, and theyd never gone up it if it hadnt been for me cos when you live there, you just dont notice it. Anyway the point here is as a family we were extremely loyal to Bycrofts, formerly in Wormgate and now in Dolphin Lane - but even more important is before I found myself laid off due to rheumi arthritis (and my new hobby Wikipedia) I worked for a year in a local (Surrey) sausage factory. I have seen far more than I ever wanted to (not to mention smelled more) and nothing right now would induce me to eat a sausage. Ive never liked them cos I cant stand the skins, and working there didnt make me love them any more I can tell you ha! Have done a bit on that Woodhall Spa page but mostly re-arranging. I have moved certain bits as Im sure youll notice to other pages that are about the subject in question/merged the Pinewoods and Kinema/tried to put historical bits and modern bits together but it still needs a heck of a lot more work, and what to do with that "Geography" is anyones guess. Anyway best wishes as always Panderoona (talk) 21:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Woops sorry veered wildly off-course there for a moment. Just couldnt believe you knew the details of the workings of sausage factories. ::::Anyway, my understanding is, that Lincs Haslet does not include offal - but is made of pretty much the same stuff as their sausages - Minced pork, sage, onion, and rusk (aka breadcrumbs).

Whereas the average hazlet down here in Surrey is definatly offal. In more ways than one. Panderoona (talk) 21:17, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

The completely opaque Woodhall Spa “Geography” section was added by User:DinosaursLoveExistence on see 29 March 2011 under the guise of adding something about “Pinewoods”. My view is that this section should be removed in entirety as it adds nothing, but as DinosaursLoveExistence is a habitual adder of odd stuff, see: User talk:DinosaursLoveExistence, it might be wise to broach the subject of the confusion of information on his/her talk page first. This is the only addition to this article that this user has made, unless other additions have been made through IP addresses, which could be the case. If you feel that that this confusing stuff should be removed (and of course you might not) you could ask DinosaursLoveExistence to clarify what is written with intimation that it will be removed if it is not improved. I could do it – I’m quite good at it – but it might be an interesting learning experience for you :)

Well your cousins will remember Dick Harlow if they are from the Boston area. I wonder what Lincs butchers do with the offal if they don’t put it in haslet, chine and sausages? I think if it was pure pork flesh haslet they would mention it as such.

You might like my Lincs vids – a couple of Boston - http://www.youtube.com/user/VideoPostcards and http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=VideoDrives Acabashi (talk) 22:33, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok Ill be brave and ask him - I agree with you really, its not needed especially in an article of that size. Thanks for the vids link, Ill take a look :) Panderoona (talk) 07:04, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

CSD

Hello, I'm just reminding you again to leave the appropriate template message on the creators talk page which you did not do at Tipsy Finn.Please also complete edit summaries. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Will do. Acabashi (talk) 14:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Again at Discovery of slope. Please consider taking more time over your tagging - there's really no rush. You might also like to read WP:NPP to see the tasks that patrolling involves. If anything is not clear, please don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I will check through Wikipedia:New pages patrol again. I do notice that speedy temps say "please consider placing the template on the talk page of the editor". As there is no compulsion, I often think it a waste of time adding the template to a user that appears to have set themselves up to add a single piece of nonsense, (usually I suspect because they feel that with a user name their "article" is less likely to be challenged,) and who probably therefore won't read, or take notice of, a talkpage template anyway. When I see there is a bit of history (by checking "contributions" - which I always do) I'm inclined then, through courtesy, to be informative on the user's talk pages. Conversely I can be quite supportive of single-edit new editors whose article might appear to be in danger, such as today's The Electric Barbarellas / User talk:Electricbarbarellas - so I don't shoot from the hip however much it might appear so. Many thanks for getting back and for the offer of advice. Acabashi (talk) 15:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The wording of the CSD templates does indeed say 'condider', but this is currently under review. For a long time already, Twinkle aotomatically places the appropriate warnings on user talk pages. Placing the warnings also provides admins with an instant overview of a user's performance when considering a block. If you are confident with the accuracy of your patrolling, consider using Twinkle, it's loaded with features forpatrollers and it will make your work so much easier. If you need help with anything, as always, feel free to ask me on my talk page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid Twinkle looks too scary for me - from looking at the Twinkle page its seems that if things go wrong with the tool use, an editor can be in a lot of trouble. Your comment about Admins. being able to monitor user accounts' performance for appropriate decision is a convincing one, and something I didn't consider. Now I see the value in that and will heed your advice, though I'm sure there might be the very very odd time when I'm absent-minded; failure won't be through lack of concern. Acabashi (talk) 18:48, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Electric Barbarellas

Thanks for message. As you say, there was no way that they met the music criteria, and the deletion of refs confirms coi Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Jacques Pottier copyediting, thank you!

You did a brilliant job! I've attempted to keep that article under control in the past re the blatant advertising, bogus references etc., but the anonymous IPs kept creeping back. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 06:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks; my pleasure - at least there's two of us now keeping an eye on it. Acabashi (talk) 21:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive May 2011 - checks

Hi

I have been looking at a couple of your articles for checks and would like to give some pointers.

The copyedits were generally good, I thoroughly checked one and made general notes on two others - I realise that only 1 needed to be checked but, as they were all small, I did three:

The King's School, Macclesfield

• You appear to have removed pertinent information (That the school was first closed by Henry VIII) - I would suggest that, as the history page is vague, a cite needed would have perhaps been better. The school's own website does say it was re-founded - which implies that it stopped for some time, apparently five years. It is not clear if the sentence "survived..." is in reference to the buildings or the infrastructure, after all if the monks were dead perhaps the school closed its doors for a while?
• Changed a paragraph into a list.
• Dates and commas - "In 2009, this happened" (incorrect), "In 2009 this happened (correct)"

General

• Italics = try and ensure you follow Mos on italics (Irene Jarocka, and on boldface (Pauleen Luna). As an aside, the programs such as "Spotkanie z gwiazdą ("A Meeting with a Star")" would only normally be italicised under the "non-English name ("translation")" format - as individual episodes, which I do not know if they are, they would not be italicised.
• For a quick view of some of the more basic MoS guides you can check my page here

Thanks for your good work and I hope you continue to have fun copyediting! If you feel you need help, or have any questions, feel free to contact me. Chaosdruid (talk) 02:52, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

• FYI, I have just prodded Hampstead School of English‎, an article you worked on for the drive. The subject is a small establishment and does not appear to be notable. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 03:52, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I couldn't find much on it, and I always try. I just assumed that (and have been told that) secondary schools and upwards are by default considered notable unless proved otherwise, just as with my bee in the bonnet: professors - I don't agree with that, but there we are. Info on this one however is scanty and what there is, is apparently promotional. Acabashi (talk) 04:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC)