User talk:Lisatwo/Archive 1

DNFT

I'm not sure yet. She doesn't seem to be intentionally trolling. We'll find out in a little while. As it is, she seems more like an aggrieved and rather juvenile user, than an actual troll.

The Rhymesmith 08:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks, I've answered your question there. Giggy _U^CP 23:30, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi, Lisatwo, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy _U^CP 04:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Bill Jones (disambiguation)

Thank you for tidying up. Your edit summary mentioning MOS:DAB was very helpful. Thanks again. Conrad T. Pino 04:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Red links

Good work on Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Initialisation, have youself a - TB 08:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

The Trampformers

Thanks for the advice about The Trampformers' page. Suggested lead section now added. Grateful if you can please spare the time to have a look at it and see if it works ok. Think the Contents list needs to be after the lead section but haven't yet managed to do this, I will try to find out. 80.229.33.175 09:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit on the intro for The Trampformers's page, much appreciated. I see what you mean now. 195.195.236.106 12:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

External links by Frontierblog and Neuber hia

Hey. Thanks for dropping me a note. Frontierblog requested unblock by e-mail, but I declined due to the promotional username. I asked him to get a new account and start a discussion on whether the links could be added. He has that new account now, but continues adding the links as before. There is an unquestionable conflict of interest, but it seems that his edits haven't still been reverted by those who watch these pages, so I'm a bit hesitant to remove them all the links now. I'll keep an eye on this and this. Prolog 11:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

my reply

Sorry, I must have accidentally deleted the {{advert}} text while editing. It was not done intentionally. Feel free to delete the page if you deem that it may not be suitable for wikipedia or may be an advertisement of the company. Thanks.

Thank you for the welcome

Thank you for the welcome to Wikipedia -- it is new territory, but it is what the World Wide Web is all about!Wcrl1 14:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleted redirect

Hi Lisa. I deleted Wang Hao(Table Tennis) after it was listed under WP:CSD as an implausible typo - I doubt anyone would forget to type the space between Hao and the bracket. I also fixed the links on the only page that linked to it (Table tennis at the 2004 Summer Olympics - Men's singles‎). The other pages that linked there were CSD listings rather than articles. Hope this explains my rationale, Number 57 14:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

re: [changes to the warning format

Good afternoon and thanks for your question. I have to admit that I've not participated in that WikiProject (and probably don't have time to get deeply involved) but I'll be happy to explain my thinking. I made the changes I did for the following reasons:

1. The advice to always substitute in the warning templates is good advice but not something that we want the user to read or comply with. It did not seem appropriate on this page. If you really think that's critical, build it into the code of the warning template like the AFD notices do.
   • And I have to admit that this was the first place I'd ever seen that template on a user page. If it's the new standard, it is not at all well-known.
2. The template at the top did have links to the block log, et al which could be useful but seemed premature in this case. I prefer the layout and wording of the {{repeatvandal}}. But that template isn't appropriate until the vandal's been blocked at least twice. Really, until they've been blocked twice, I don't see the need for those links.
3. All the commented-out code in that top template makes this a very messy template to use/read when working on the edit view of the page. The same goes for all the fancy formatting and parameters. It makes the template look slightly more pretty but at the cost of badly clogging up the edit view. And since so many of us review pages via the diff function, that matters a lot. Pages should look clean in both views.
4. The endless repetion of the "If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't do it" warning made the page far harder to read. I was looking for a pattern of warnings to see whether or not a block was warranted yet. It took much longer because I had to mentally edit out the junk.
5. That particular disclaimer was also inappropriate in that particular case because a review of the user's contributions showed no recent valid edits. This is a vandal through and through. We ought not to be so deferrential when the edit history is clear. I know a bot can't make that call but it still bothers me.
6. The numbering of the warnings is non-standard in my experience. If that's the new standard, I strongly recommend abandoning it. It also made scanning the page to look for patterns harder.

I hope that helps a little. Thanks again for asking. Rossami (talk) 20:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for the warm welcome. --Abuk78 22:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello

I have a couple questions. How do you post photos in articles? I created the article T. C. Puck and wanted to post a photo of the dog. Also, someone posted a “tag” on my user page User:50Goals, I removed it but then they just reposted it. I then posted an additional “tag”. What is this?

Cheers 50Goals --50Goals 17:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I am fairly confident that 50Goals is a sock of User:VaughanWatch as he edited International Hockey Hall of Fame in his fifth edit (the page is a favourite target of that vandal - just check the article history) and then added extra info about the IHHOF to the Stanley Cup. This is how he operates - he pretends to have an innocent account and makes some constructive edits, and acts all outraged and innoncent when he's tagged. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello again

I looked through the history of article International Hockey Hall of Fame. It appears that every user that edits this article is accused of being a sock puppet of User:VaughanWatch. In fact from my perspective, the only vandalism to this article is that every positive edit gets reverted and then accused of being a sock puppet. By the way the only edit I made to this article was that it should be expanded because it is lacking many details and now I can see why. I’m not one to jump to conclusions and make accusations, but it appears to me that there is some personal vendetta against this either this article or the organisation the article is about. The edit to the Stanley Cup article was just correcting a statement in the amendment of the Stanley Cup trustees agreement. The statement was already in the article four lines above my edit! (#6 of the 1947 agreement with the NHL). Even in article T. C. Puck that I created, someone rightfully put a tag that it required references. I then proceeded to provide two references; this user then removes my references, re-posts the tag and accuses me of removing the template with out fixing it. By the way thanks for providing me the information on how to post photos, however I am still having some problems trying to figure that out. I have a great photo of T. C. Puck with Ballard and leaf players that I wanted to post.

Cheers 50Goals --50Goals 07:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Daito Islands

Hello Lisatwo, the historic material about the Daito Islands may have been copyrighted, but it is from my own article which was published in the 'Journal of Pacific History'. So I think I myself as the author should have the right to insert passages from my own work.

With kind regards, B. Welsch [I am sorry if this is not the correct way to use you talk page] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.2.166.15 (talk) 07:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

German military ranks?

Hi, Lisatwo, thank you for wellcoming me onboard.
How are the the commond way of solving this issue on enwiki: (example)

On dewiki you will find Großadmiral Dõnitz. How to give him rank on enwiki? Possible options:

• Grand Admiral Dönitz
• Grand Admiral (Großadmiral) Dönitz
• Großadmiral (Grand Admiral) Dönitz
• Großadmiral (Grand Admiral) Dönitz

Personally I like the two last the better, but I see a lot of confusion on enwiki on this matter. Any "rules" or opinions, regarding this? KjellG 22:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I was unclear Großadmiral (Grand Admiral) Dönitz was just an example. If he should be mensioned as Grand admiral Dönitz, why do enwiki then have an article: Kriegsmarine not "War Navy"? Another example: The article Munich, why not "München". Now Munich is the english word for München, ok, but the article has a number of german names in it, e.g. why not "German museum"? My feeling is that there is no clear answer to this question. Regards KjellG 22:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: forwading a question about German military ranks

I don't usually work with WWII-era articles all that much, so I'm not quite sure what the current practice is—you may want to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/German military history task force instead—but I'd think that "Grand Admiral Dönitz" would be the correct form of a first mention everywhere outside Dönitz's own article; compare the typical use of "Captain" instead of "Kapitän zur See", for example.

(Obviously, subsequent mentions do just fine with merely "Dönitz"; it's typically not necessary to give a rank more than once.) Kirill 02:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For taking care of the B-day Calendar! --User:Piotrus

For taking care of the B-day Calendar! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

thanks!

Thanks for the welcome! Happy Holidays! --UncleverOnion (talk) 02:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

RfD nomination of "Don Cartagena (song)

I have nominated "Don Cartagena (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Floaterfluss ^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Notary

There is no article on the Notary as it existed in English law in the 19th century. Civil law notary does not fit, because England is not a civil law country. However, the training and powers of the British notaries in the 19th century was legal training, and so Notary public, as we understand it in the US today, does not correctly describe the office. It might be better to de-link it in both The Grand Duke and The Sorcerer, or to link it to Solicitor instead. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Norms

Thanks for changing the link in the Rorschach inkblot test article. I agree that it should not go to a disambiguation page. Your change helped me realize that neither the dab link nor the link to Normative is really very accurate, because "norms" in the Rorschach article refers to a statistical concept. The normative article discussed the sociological concept of normative behavior, which really has little to do with statistics. The only article that I know of that discusses the statistics of norms is Psychometrics. So I pipe-linked the word to that article. If you disagree please let me know and we can discuss. If you agree and change other links to the word in articles related to psychological tests, I think psychometrics is the best link. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 21:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Motto of the day

Hello, I notice you're using one of the {{motd}} templates, run by Wikipedia:Motto of the day. You may have noticed that some of the mottos recently have been followed by a date from 2006, or on occasion simply "Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia". The reason for this is that Motto of the day is in some very serious need of help. Participation in the project, which has never been especially high, has dropped considerably over this past summer, to the point we have had several days where no motto was scheduled to appear at all. Over the past several weeks, I've been the only editor scheduling mottos at all, but there aren't enough comments on some of these mottos to justify their use. If we do not get some help - and soon - your daily mottos will stop. In order for us to continue updating these templates for you, we need your help.

When you get a chance between your normal editing, could you stop by our nominations page and leave a few comments on some of the mottos there, especially those that do not have any comments yet? This works very simply; you read a motto, decide whether or not you like it, and post your opinion just below the motto. That's it - no experience required, just an idea of what you personally like and what you feel reflects Wikipedia and its community. If you do have past experience with the project, then please close some of the older nominations once they've got a decent consensus going. There are directions on the nominations page on how to do this.

If you have any questions, please let me know, or post on the project's talk page. I'm looking forward to reading your comments on the suggested mottos, and any additional suggestions you'd like to make. Until then, happy editing! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Stubs

Hello Lisatwo,

I noticed you marked an article as a stub using the {{stub}} template. Did you know that there are thousands of stub types that you can use to clarify what type of stub the article is? Properly categorizing stubs is important to the Wikipedia community because it helps various WikiProjects to identify articles that need expansion.

You can view the full list of stub types at WP:STUBS.

If you have questions about stub sorting, don't hesitate to ask! There is a wealth of stub information on the stub sorting WikiProject, and hundreds of stub sorters. Thanks!

Ksbrown^talk 00:03, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Suggestions for disambiguation

Greetings. You've previously helped out at Wikipedia:Suggestions for name disambiguation, so I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know we have a brand new batch of 3,835 names to be checked! These include sports figures, federal judges, serial killers, librarians, and other assorted sundry folks. This batch also should be a little easier to update, with corrected templates and a handy search function. Enjoy! – Quadell ^(talk) 03:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem

Actually I tagged those redlinks because I was hoping someone would remove them, I just didn't want to do it myself because I might get criticized for it :) I figure like, it gets the ball rolling. Tyciol (talk) 11:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguating AFP

Hi. In your edit summary here you refer to recent experience disambiguating incoming links to AFP. I see over 100 links still remain to be disambiguated. Do you plan to finish the job? --Una Smith (talk) 02:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Motto of the Day

Hi there, Lisatwo! Thought you might be interested in Motto of the Day, a collaborative (and totally voluntary) effort by a group of Wikipedians to create original, inspirational mottos. Have a good motto idea? Share it here, comment on some of the mottos there or just pass this message onto your friends.

MOTD Needs Your Help!

Delivered By –pjoef (talk • contribs) 07:28, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Robert Wise (disambiguation) and Edward Ziegler (disambiguation)

Hello. Just to let you know that these have been nominated for speedy deletion, per {db-disambig}. Thanks, Boleyn3 (talk) 13:51, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Charles Grosvenor (disambiguation)

Hello. Just to let you know that this dab has been nominated for deletion using Template:db-disambig. If you have any questions about this, please let me know. Best wishes, Boleyn2 (talk) 21:35, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Coleman Young (disambiguation)

Hello. Just to let you know this dab has been nominated for deletion using Template:db-disambig. If you have any questions about this, please let me know. Best wishes, Boleyn3 (talk) 23:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to particpate in the December 2010 Wikification Drive

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 18:46, 30 November 2010 (UTC).

Please confirm your membership

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 19:59, 22 December 2010 (UTC).

U.S.A.) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect U.S.A.). Since you had some involvement with the U.S.A.) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 22:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link fixing one-day contest

I have decided to put on a mini-contest within the November 2013 monthly disambiguation contest, on Saturday, November 23 (UTC). I will personally give a $20 Amazon.com gift card to the disambiguator who fixes the most links on that server-day (see the project page for details on scoring points). Since we are not geared up to do an automated count for that day, at 00:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC) (which is 7:00 PM on November 22, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the project page leaderboard. I will presume that anyone who is not already listed on the leaderboard has precisely nine edits. At 01:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC) (8:00 PM on November 23, EST), I'll take a screenshot of the leaderboard at that time (the extra hour is to give the board time to update), and I will determine from that who our winner is. I will credit links fixed by turning a WP:DABCONCEPT page into an article, but you'll have to let me know me that you did so. Here's to a fun contest. Note that according to the Daily Disambig, we currently have under 256,000 disambiguation links to be fixed. If everyone in the disambiguation link fixers category were to fix 500 links, we would have them all done - so aim high! Cheers! bd2412 T 02:52, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Motto of the Day Help Request April 2014

Today's motto...

Other sites have bosses, we have janitors.

Nominate one today!

Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

This message has been sent by pjoef on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

"U.S.A.)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect U.S.A.). Since you had some involvement with the U.S.A.) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Hog Farm (talk) 20:23, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

"Terrace, Briitish Columbia" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Terrace, Briitish Columbia. Since you had some involvement with the Terrace, Briitish Columbia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 04:00, 3 April 2020 (UTC)