User talk:Ceranthor/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Re: Question

I wouldn't object; it's not an article I frequently edit anyway; my only question is whether you intend to focus on the asteroid belt or whether such a formation section would also apply to all asteroids including (perhaps) the centuars. Serendipodous 22:17, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

It is indeed. However, both Formation and evolution of the Solar System and asteroid belt have a section on asteroid belt formation, so if I were to consider adding a formation section to asteroid I'd make it more general. Serendipodous 22:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Right now I'm revising the maths on List of Solar System bodies in hydrostatic equilibrium, which is a suicidally boring task. Eventually, once major work on the Solar System lists is finished, I intend to go onto Jupiter Trojan, the last unfinished component of the Jupiter subtopic. Serendipodous 22:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Hoo boy. You do realise that now I'm counting on you to get Hills Cloud up to FA level? Because it will have to be included in the Solar System FT. Serendipodous 23:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Winter Solstice

ϢereSpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate the Winter or Summer Solstice, Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah or even the Saturnalia this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec08}} to your friends' talk pages.

Hi Ceran, hadn't realised you were also Sunday. This is to atone for the hard time I gave you at FAC. ϢereSpielChequers 13:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Margaret Thatcher

Hi, thanks for reviewing the article. I believe that I have addressed your concerns. Thanks, Happyme22 (talk) 18:21, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for 1975 Morris earthquake

Updated DYK query On 21 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1975 Morris earthquake, 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) 12:21, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiCup notice

The 2009 WikiCup will begin on January 1, 2009. The first round will run through March 31, 2009. For more information on this tournament, read the "about" section on the main WikiCup page.

This year, we have a different system in calculating points. At User:Garden/WikiCup/Submissions, you will find information about submitting your article (and other) work to earn points. Each contestant will have their own individual subpage for submitting completed work to us.

This year, User:ST47 will also be running one of his bots to calculate mainspace edits and read your submission subpages to calculate the point values you receive based on our scoring chart.

Questions or comment? Ask at the talk page or go directly to Garden or IMatthew's talk page. Good luck and Happy Holidays! -- ayematthew ✡ and Garden. 14:08, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For the copyedit. :) –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 14:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done with the review of your volcano article. Yeah, that would be cool to collaborate on an article. In fact, there have been cases where hurricanes trigger earthquakes... –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 15:23, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
No worries, I'm just very strict with prose. Good work with that article. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 15:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Sure, I'll take a look. Just so I know, which sections of the article have you finished? –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 15:28, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
I copyedited about half the article (since simply listing prose issues would have been to easy :)). I'll finish it up in a few minutes. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 15:45, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

unitarian greetings

Nevado del Ruiz

I am afraid, but the article has a serious problem and is unlikely to pass now. The problem is the use of copy-pasted lightly paraphrased text from the cited sources. I want to say that it was a bad idea from the beginning. I suggest you to withdraw the nomination, than rewrite offending text in your own words and renominate after that. If you want I can help you. I should have raised this issue before, because I noticed several such examples in the past. Meanwhile, Happy new year! Ruslik (talk) 08:32, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Feel better!

ayematthew @ 21:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: PR

No problem,  Done. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Nope, looks pretty good now that my comments have been addressed. Good luck with the article! –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey, could you come on IRC for a sec? Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I am quite busy in reaql life at the moment - I can make some comments, but iot will likely take me several days. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:08, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

1970 Tonghai

I'm not sure if 1970 Tonghai is long enough to become an FA. I guess it's worth a shot, but it's pretty hard to bring it up unless it is >15 kb. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 13:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but most of them are on storms that generally stayed out to sea and didn't kill anyone. 1970 Tonghai killed 15,000 people. See the difference? ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 13:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I guess so. I'm currently working on Dahomeyan politicians and coups like Hubert Maga and Maurice Kouandete. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 15:09, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

FPC

Thanks for your note, but I have left FPC (at least for a while) - my reasons are on the FPC talk page, "Signing off". Wishing you a Happy 2009! --Janke | Talk 14:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiCup

Delivered by neuro(talk) for Garden and ayematthew at 20:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


Hell's Gate National Park

Hell's Gate National Park has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.

While looking at some Good Articles by a nominator I am currently reviewing, I noticed that another editor had raised concerns about this article which you had passed as a GA. I share those concerns. I am opening up a review. SilkTork *YES! 20:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear Ceranthor,

Wishing you a happy new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.

Kind regards,

Majorly talk 21:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

New project suggestion

Hey. I'm just wondering if you are interested in making a new project on seamounts. Seamounts are not within the scope of the Mountains WikiProject and there's an overlap with the Volcanoes WikiProject. But I don't know how to create a new wikiproject so that's why I'm asking you if you're interested or not. Contact me on my talk page if you have any suggestions. Black Tusk (talk) 02:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Apocalypse

Meh, even if it does happen, the East Coast will be fine. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 23:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Review

Happy "late" New Year's to you too. Hope 2009 is starting to be a good year for ya. :) Did I review an article of yours? I don't remember. Sure, I'll review your article, but the review won't be done today, cause I'm busy working on other stuff right now, if that's cool with you. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:50, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. :P Alright, cool just wanted to make sure all was cool. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:58, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pamukkale

Hi Ceranthor,

Just wondering if you had an opinion about Edit 2 (processing from original file) to confirm this as the leading FPC? Thanks. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 13:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Nevado del Ruiz

Are you going to finish this article? Two things need to be done. 1) I think, the giant quote should be moved to the Armero tragedy article. You can replace it with a short summary. 2) Try to find all places where the text follows sources too closely and try to rewrite it in your own words. I have just expanded parts about geology of the eruption on the basis of the Science article. Ruslik (talk) 17:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

The first paragraph in the 'Geology' section too closely follows this website (ref 13). Ruslik (talk) 16:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I think the article should provide more information about flora, fauna, social and environmental value of of Nevado del Ruiz. There is a good source (ref 8). Ruslik (talk) 09:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Typhoon Tip

Ping. :) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pamukkale
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Hot springs of Pamukkale edit cropped.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. Wronkiew (talk) 02:00, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! ₪Ceran →(cheer→chime →carol) 02:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

1918 Vancouver Island earthquake

Thought you would like to know I created another article about an earthquake on Vancouver Island in 1918. Black Tusk (talk) 14:00, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Electron GA review

Hi,

I look forward to reading your GA review of the Electron article. Thank you.—RJH (talk) 20:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I've finished reviewing the article. Here is the review. ₪Ceran →(cheer→chime →carol) 12:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. I think I have addressed your concerns. Could you take another look?—RJH (talk) 17:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello again. Thank you for listing the article as GA. Please could you clarify why you moved it from Physics to Chemistry? On the WP:VA page, electron is categorized under Physics, and I think that is a more logical place. Chemistry tends to deal with the atomic and molecular level, rather than sub-atomic physics.—RJH (talk) 22:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:56, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Ursula Franklin

As requested, here is a note reminding you to go to the Ursula Franklin entry which is a featured article candidate and give it a complete read through. Thanks. Bwark (talk) 21:28, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

Delivered by The Helpful One for Garden and iMatthew at 00:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: WikiCup error

Have you put it on User:Garden/WikiCup/Submissions/Ceranthor? Use the instructions on User:Garden/WikiCup/Submissions. Thanks! Garden. 21:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Mount Baker

The first copy-editing pass is done—be sure to address the comments; I will probably come back for a second pass and reread. I recommend asking somebody else to look at the article, maybe Ruslik? Dabomb87 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm done with RFA...*note to self*

Just in case anyone cares, I've decided that RFA is totally over-rated, and I will now rarely !vote in discussion. It's full of people who just support without actually evaluating the candidate. This doesn't apply to you if you previously knew the user, but it's really not fair to just support based on other people's opinions. Have your own mind, people.

The same can be said for the oppose side - too many "per X", "not enough edits in z namespace" and well, you know how it goes. It's really not fair to oppose based on other people's opinion. Opposing good candidates is far more damaging than supporting bad ones. Majorly talk 22:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Yup, exactly my feelings. All just contributing to my opinion—people don't think for themselves! ₪Ceran →(slip→sled →snow) 22:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. I've also found an overwhelming presence of the bandwagon effect at RfA. Meh. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
The reason I vote "per x" - I simply don't have the time to do a full evaluation of RFA candidates. It takes time away from editing. For this reason I usually skip people who are at < 60 or > 85 unless I have something to say or want to make a point. As for those on or near the bubble, I usually rely on the research done by those who nominated or discussed the candidate before me. I'll rely on spot-checks of their claims and their wiki-reputations. I do this out of efficiency. This isn't always the case. It's not common but sometimes I'll be so impressed with a nom that after spot-checking it I'll !vote early in an RFA "per nom" specifically to boost the numbers, hoping for a pile-on. Experienced editors with no negatives who are admins on other projects or nominations that make me think "what, this guy's not an admin already?" fall into this category. I'll also vote "NOTNOW" early on in obvious cases, with an explanation and encouragement. If I have time or I have a particular interest in the candidate, I'll do my own research and bring my findings to the discussion. If I'm very interested in the candidate I've probably already been eying them for nomination so I've probably already done the research. That's rare. My one nomination was a spectacular success, with 66 supports, zero opposes, and one neutral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidwr (talk • contribs) 03:14, 15 January 2009

I had to delete your post from User talk:Jeffpw/Memoriam

I'm sorry, really, but we can't allow a copyright violation like that to be posted here. I'm sorry about this, but laws are laws and lawyers are lawyers. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I restored the part that wasn't a copyright violation. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kanonkas

Thank you Ceranthor for voting in my successfully closed RfA! I'm glad that you trust me. Ping me if you need anything! Best regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  19:27, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

NDR

it is believed that fauna exists on the mountain Strange statement. Nevado del Ruiz is not a mountain on Mars, about which little is known. I would also prefer slightly longer section. Well, you can nominate now, the problems can be fixed during FAC. Ruslik (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Ursula Franklin edits

Many thanks for your comments on the career section of the article on Ursula Franklin. I have tried to make the revisions you suggested. Bwark (talk) 23:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Seamounts

I've been going around, and I think it should become a task force under WikiProject Geology. 24.185.37.213 (talk) 23:58, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

Eco

I don't. Anyone who thinks it is OK to stalk people because they opposed his RFA is not the kind of person I want to associate with. Good riddance to bad rubbish. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 00:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh sure. I've gotta attend to Maga now, though. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 00:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps tomorrow. I'm very busy at the moment, as I've mentioned. ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 00:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: You deserve this...

Thanks! --Burntnickel (talk) 01:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ceranthor/Archive_11&oldid=1143366979"