User talk:Maury Markowitz/Archives/2011

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

Happy, happy

Happy New Year, and all the best to you and yours! (from warm Cuba) Bzuk (talk) 15:41, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Pages I Would Like You To Took At

Wikipedia is strictly buisness (mostly) so I am sending you this message for Wikipages in need.

Plain White T's, Edward Wong, David Turnbull, Columbia Revolt, Year of the Lash ,David Garrow,Nell Irvin Painter and Jheri Curls Have improved, but still needs a lot of help. --RayqayzaDialgaWeird2210    16:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC) PHASE 2 Thomas Latimer Matt Bai are better articles now, because of wikipedians like you who have improved articles. -Stubs- Hans Raastad-- an article I created Ryan Belal Pea enation mosaic virus The Grays (band) Gingivectomy Tom Karsch I have revised this list again. We need to edit and spread the word about these articles to make Wikipedia better. Even edd to this list all the articles you think need help (don't forget to timestamp). Adding references, information, and correcting grammar all really help.--RayqayzaDialgaWeird2210Please respond on my talkpage, i will respond on your talkpage.    19:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

These stubs is getting better, but needs more work. Professor Mike Donovan Michael Curtis (TV producer)

--RayqayzaDialgaWeird2210    16:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Spread the word!--RayqayzaDialgaWeird2210    14:14, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Nitrofullerenes

I noticed your deletion tag removal and thought you might add one of those easily accessible articles you mentioned in the edit summary. Frankly, I haven't looked at this topic, but my gut feeling is that C60(NO2)60 does not exist and is merely a theoretical model system (other nitrofullerenes with much less nitrogen could be possible though). Materialscientist (talk) 13:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Quick answer is thanks, and all of your links (very useful) are not about C60(NO2)60, except for one, which is a theoretical calculation. Materialscientist (talk) 21:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The title and topic are absolutely valid, but the content is focused on a non-existing variety, which is misleading (infobox, images, text). I was going to rewrite it from scratch, but would wait for the AFD decision. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 21:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

As you requested on this article's talk page, this is now listed at AFD for discussion. The {{hangon}} tag is only used for challenging speedy deletion rather than WP:PROD, and if you see an article proposed for deletion that you believe requires further discussion I would suggest simply removing the prod tag and taking it to AFD. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 19:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello there. Just FYI, I undid your edit of adding a {{holdon}} tag to the article, as speedy deletion has not been requested for it. Since it has been proposed for deletion, the PROD tag may be removed to contest deletion if that is what you desire. Jujutacular talk 19:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Yeah. I'm kinda surprised... someone who's been here since the site was in its infancy is still misusing {{hangon}}... memory lapse? WikiSenior moment? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm misusing it? Or is the whole damb world misusing it?! Are you really sure?! Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Also, not one of the sites you dug up looks like a RS. In particular, the second site is another wiki, and the first doesn't have any author credits, so there's no way to determine its usefulness. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Hangon is only for speedy deletion. You used it for three different prods. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 22:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

you objected to my prodding this page, saying I failed to clean it up. it has now been deleted. The article was purely a promotional tool - someone using wikipedia to make a profit - did you not see that? MarkDask 11:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi again - ty for your reply on my page. The reason Michael W. Allen was deleted prior to the prod expiring was because, being an advertisement, it qualified under CSD:A7 for speedy deletion. you can see for yourself if you click on the red link, (scroll to top of page). MarkDask 07:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Actually, that would be CSD:G11 "Unambiguous advertising or promotion".--Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, but if you peruse the article, it is anything by unambigous. This is an article in need of cleanup, AfD for N, but definitely not PROD or CSD. That's my concern -- PROD is too easily used and defaults to delete. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Oops did I say A7? Of course I meant G11 - apols for any confusion. MarkDask 19:16, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Comment on Prod

I agree with your sentiment at WT:PROD. I too have noticed quite a few lazy AfD nominations that do not even attempt to assess independently whether a subject deserves an article. I'm glad someone is patrolling the prods with an eye to abuse. Best, Sławomir Biały (talk) 11:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

After sampling some of the proposed deletions at Category:Proposed deletion, it looks as though there is insufficient oversight of the process. For instance, the article Feebate had been listed for seven days, but the topic is obviously notable to anyone that takes the time to run a Google search: there were thousands of hits in Google scholar and Google books. This is most troubling. Sławomir Biały (talk) 19:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Also it seems like certain editors definitely abuse the {{prod}}. In particular, I notice that User:Jrtayloriv appears to propose several articles for deletion each day. Almost all of these are then contested, wind up at AfD, and are kept as a result of the deletion discussion. I have left a message on that user's talk page, but maybe it's worth an administrator looking at his deleted contributions. Sławomir Biały (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletionist Vs Inclusionist

Hey Maury - you contested my proposal for deletion of Michael W. Allen. I understand you believe that deletion of an article means the loss of 5 new articles, but I disagree. A bad article means the loss of respect of Wikipedia of so many prospective new editors. I am a deletionist - kill all advertising, and any self-promotion that creeps under the skin of this August body. But I aint just about deletion - the article entitled Southern Cherokee Nation of Kentucky was about to be deleted and I, alone, voted to keep. I worked on it for a few days until 2 Cherokee experts moved in and took it over. I am proud that I spoke up for an historically significant article when it was about to vanish. I work in biographies mostly, and will ruthlessly nominate any article that does not meet notability criteria. - You are an inclusionist so I guess you will want to follow my edit history and contest every Deletion I propose. That is no bad thing - I just hope you take the time, along the way, to recognise my strength when I oppose deletion. MarkDask 20:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually this is a slightly different case: I contested the PROD which is not quite exactly the same thing. I contested the PROD because there are two articles on the same topic, and I believe the proper solution is to merge them and then fix it.
But I'd also like to comment on the argument you present above. It is well written and I think it expresses a serious concern. However, there's one problem where it seems the inclusionist argument will always have the preponderance of evidence -- it's very hard to estimate how many people didn't join the wiki due to credibility concerns. However, it's rather easier to calculate how many leave due to deletions and similar issue. That might be an interesting avenue of exploration. Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I was bad tempered in the above Maury - please excuse my manner - its just so frustrating when I put a lot of effort into electing to prod an article, only to have someone overturn it. Hope you don't take my crass manner personally. MarkDask 20:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Wow, if that's you upset, you must be extremely well written when you're not! Maury Markowitz (talk) 00:33, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Derek Robinson (physicist)

Hello! Your submission of Derek Robinson (physicist) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:24, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

J35 engine pics

Yes, your right, I may have mistakenly uploaded the wrong one, or may be another engine, I'll recheck my photos and notes, and either upload the correct pic or move the second pic to the correct engine article. Thank you for this catch. LanceBarber (talk) 07:11, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I checked the engine in person. Yep, mislabeled my photo, its a J46-WE-8, so I moved the pic to Westinghouse J46 and edited the photo description, but the File name should be renamed. LanceBarber (talk) 03:01, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Derek Robinson (physicist)

The DYK project (nominate) 12:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Trent Affair

Thanks for your comments, however I generally avoid getting involved with promoting articles. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 23:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Michael W. Allen

Hi - are you watching Michael W. Allen? I prodded it for deletion - you constructively opposed - I conceded after your willingness to work on it and now it has been relisted. Should have been my original prod was declined I think.MarkDask 18:15, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy 10th Anniversary of Wikipedia!

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:11, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Maury Markowitz. You have new messages at Jeepday's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

V for Victory

I have no idea why I created the redirect... I got all the information with which I started that article from the Dragon magazine review, so maybe that name was used there? Or maybe I saw it on the internet somewhere else? Anyway, if you want to see the review from Dragon as you work on the article, I can definitely supply you with a copy.  :) BOZ (talk) 23:57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure the video game workgroup would have a good idea where to find more refs. A lot of old video game magazine reviews are available online. I'll try to get you a copy of the Dragon review when I get home. BOZ (talk) 00:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Not very fleshy.

Indeed, you are correct sir! I totally forgot about that one... Maury Markowitz (talk) 00:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE.

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 02:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

It basically works like this: an ambassador signs up as an available mentor, and students start coming by to ask them to be their mentor. Then you'd be expected to periodically check in on them over the course of the next few months, as they progress through their Wikipedia assignment, and give feedback when they get into the nitty-gritty of creating content. I can't say the administrative burden is zero--there's a bit of housekeeping like adding some key links to mentees' userpages, updating the mentors list to note who you're mentoring, marking students' articles with a template indicating that it's the subject of an assignment, etc.--but we're trying to make it as little of a burden as possible. The students are all assigned fairly substantial Wikipedia projects, so there hopefully will be very little wasting of ambassadors' time with people who don't contribute. One of my the main goals I've had between the first term of this program and now (the second term) is to streamline the process and get rid of most of the stuff that's not as fun as actually helping newcomers.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 02:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Spherical tokamak

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Quantum dot solar cell

Bad news is that the article and its hook are not ready for DYK, good news is I can help (not with sourcing though, and I'll have limited internet access next 3 days). I've left some comments at T:TDYK but they are abrupt and we can discuss them anywhere you prefer. Materialscientist (talk) 06:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I gave it green light, but see T:TDYK. Materialscientist (talk) 05:40, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
OK thanks for all the work! I was shepherding ST and let this one go in the meantime. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Semi-pro football discussions need feedback

Hello! You have participated in WP:AFD disucssions involving semi-pro football teams in the past. The following two AFD discussions could use additional weigh-in as they appear to be stuck in "relisting" mode:

I am placing this notice on talk pages of users who have shown interest in the past, regardless of how they !voted in the discussion. If you do participate, please mention that you were asked to participate in the discussion.--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:39, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Maury Markowitz. You have new messages at Sitush's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Maury Markowitz. You have new messages at Sitush's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nomination of Saurashtra Lions Cricket Club for deletion

The article Saurashtra Lions Cricket Club is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saurashtra Lions Cricket Club until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

It's good practice to add sources when you deprod an article, especially if it's an unsourced stub. I dug deeper as I was about to take it to AfD and found some further coverage, so it probably scrapes notability and I've rewritten it. Fences&Windows 00:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Stationary High Altitude Relay Platform

Hey there! I reviewed your nomination at DYK. Everything with the article checks out, but you didn't indicate if you have reviewed another nomination. Jujutacular talk 21:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Please see Template talk:Did you know#How to review a nomination. You need to assess whether the article meets all of the DYK criteria: WP:DYK#DYK rules. Jujutacular talk 22:05, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Maury, could you please tell me, what article you meant in this post? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:38, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I liked the article, the Pinochio one. Maury Markowitz (talk) 01:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Then maybe you could be so kind and actually promote it here, if you reviewed it anyway. There's a user, who seem do not understand it, and he/she holds the nomination. Thank you. --Mbz1 (talk) 02:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Your writing is about to get some attention

Hi Maury. Just noticed you'd been heavily editing the Television Interface Adaptor page... as it happens, that article is about to feature in a DYK hook for Up'n Down, which I just expanded. Small world, eh? Anyway, one of my first edits to Wikipedia many years ago was to add the Atari 2600's color palette (the palette's since been moved to the TIA page.) Always nice to find another 2600 aficionado. Take care, 28bytes (talk) 03:16, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it is a little like Bump 'n Jump. Sort of a hybrid of that and Rally-X. It was my favorite arcade game back in the mid-80s; I spent a lot of quarters on it. 28bytes (talk) 17:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:50, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I really don't think this article belongs on WP. You removed my prod and suggested it be transwikied to Wiktionary. I agree. I looked into transwiki-ing but couldn't find any directions to tell me how to do it. Could you help with that if you agree? Thanks. Kitfoxxe (talk) 15:47, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Ohh, I totally forgot about that one. I'm on it! Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:42, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of shadow mask

Hello! Your submission of shadow mask at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 00:59, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Joe Baugher

The issue of whether or not Joe Baugher is a WP:RS has been raised again at WP:RSN#Joe Baugher. As you contributed to the original discussion at WP:RSN, now archived at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 21#Joe Baugher, I am informing you of the re-opening of this issue. You are welcome to comment in this discussion. Mjroots (talk) 09:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Tag, but for what?

Ummm, I thought that the tag was clear. The article contains numerous unreferenced sentences (and a para or two). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:21, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

While referencing each sentence is not required for DYK, it is for higher quality articles, and is recommended/required by the rules. See WP:CITE, WP:V. I could tag with {{fact}} every unreferenced sentence in the article, but it will look ugly, and DYKs shouldn't. Please do us a favor, take two minutes, add inline cites to all articles, and I won't have to uglyfy it :> --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:38, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I've actually removed the text pending the discussion from WP:CITE. But if you want to play by the written rules, per WP:V one can remove all unreferenced sentences... again, I ask you in good faith and collobartive spirit to improve your article, instead of spending time arguing why it shouldn't be improved. PS. See also this discussion at DYKs: Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know/Archive_63#Inline_referencing_in_DYKs. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:02, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for nuclear vs chemical

Thank you thank you thank you for this edit. I learned something today.

Not sourced though! Should I tag it? Delete it? Not in encyclopedic style, either. I should chop out all the bits that make it coherent and easy to read, shouldn't I? What do you think? You're a senior admin now. Have you met your template quota this month? Surely this edit wasn't - gasp - original research. Well no, it's not research, just some number crunching. Please cite the model and serial number of the calculator you used. I mean, come on, there isn't a single tag on this page. I must be hallucinating. Nuclear thermal rockets aren't very important, are they? Do they really deserve an entry of this length? Perhaps we should hold a discussion on this. Maybe merge with the entry for Project Orion. Yes, that's the ticket. beefman (talk) 23:45, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Stationary High Altitude Relay Platform

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:02, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for David Nowakowsky

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Shadow mask

Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Beta (plasma physics)

Hello! Your submission of Beta (plasma physics) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 01:22, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Microinverter tech

You can email me via WP (at least I've set up my prefs to allow it, but I can't find the UI to do so myself...). ChrisEich (talk) 18:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Firestreak Missile

There have been a series of moves for the article on this; you were responsible for the last one. But the movers neglected to move the talk page, giving us:

Please sort this out. My personal view is that the correct name is de Havilland Firestreak.--Toddy1 (talk) 13:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note! I've made many such moves but this is the first time I've seen something like this. I think I've sorted it, take a look? Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:34, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks--Toddy1 (talk) 18:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

iPad in use

No, it's not, but it was actually mono who added the template. That was an hour and a half ago, so I removed it. Edit away. Just be aware that whether we add the iPad 2 info to the existing article or its own is not a settled question. HereToHelp (talk to me) 22:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Thunderbolt (interface)

Hello! Your submission of Thunderbolt (interface) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 15:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

The byte count in the history seems to go up and down. Could you pinpoint for me the diff on which you did the 5x expansion? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 15:31, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Crash Position Indicator

Gatoclass (talk) 10:02, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ford Ecostar

Hello! Your submission of Ford Ecostar at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Schwede66 07:44, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion

I just learned of the depths of this insanity. I first read about the one reference rule for BLPs at Help Desk and posted this. Not receiving much of an answer - e.g., yes, if you add a reliable source reference to support the assertion that this person is male ("he") that meets the one reference rule for BLPs bright line rule - I checked out what was listed in Category:Proposed_deletion_as_of_28_February_2011. Articles 4-5 years old that no one is watching are listed merely because "I can't find sources; isn't notable." That is AfD criteria. As I looked at one prod after another, the whole thing eventually left me floored and it clearly is the unraveling of the mechanism that made Wikipedia. I then came across your comments at Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion, and I was glad to see that someone else recognized the serious problem. I proposed a revision to the Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion page lead as a first step to provide transparency to the process. The reasons for prod deletion need to be standardized and ported to new, more detailed categories. Additional categories need to be created in Category:Proposed deletion to list prod deletion articles by particular basis for deletion (e.g., doesn't meet a particular subject notability criteria) and month/year the article was created. While there is PRODED pages that have deletion logs, a bot needs to be developed/expanded (request at Wikipedia:Bot requests to create Wikipedia:Database reports (also see Category:Wikipedia statistics) that will allow the community to keep track of what is going on with proposed deletion, including answering your questions (e.g., Log of declined PRODs?) at Wikipedia talk:Proposed deletion. I agree that "every deletion is another five articles never written, as potential contributors flee the project".[1] We rapidly are losing our farm team of editors, leaving only those who long ago learned how to write Wikipedia articles (a dwindling number) and those who come here to publicize their website topic by piggybacking onto Wikipedia's hard developed reputation without concern on meeting article content requirements. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:30, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

DYK for Ford Ecostar

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:21, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Books in userspace

Have you read this policy first before making this edit? It seems that in your ignorance you've made some highly inappropriate actions before reading. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 11:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, great, make some irrelevant comments about your position on Wikipedia and the large green editnotice and other Wiki-filler I've put up on my userpages instead of responding to my question. Where have I attacked you for stating an opinion on some talkpage? Where is this talkpage that you speak of? Have you also read the section on WP:BPROD that says "This process applies for both user books (usually located at User:USERNAME/Books/Booktitle) [as well as] community books (those found in the Book namespace)"? Yes or no? :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 04:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Michael W. Allen

AFD - Michael W. Allen, Hi, as per your statement there, do you still have any intention to improve this article? Off2riorob (talk) 14:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, they are talking about AFD again, as its so bad I will redirect it to Macromedia Authorware and you can get back to it when you like to improve it, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 15:03, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Cool, best wishes for your real world busy-ness, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 15:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Sheboygan, Wisconsin

Why the "See also" redirect in the Sheboygan article? I don't see any relationship between Sheboygan and Cheboygan other than a similarity in the sound of the names. Wkharrisjr (talk) 18:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Should the present contents of Power optimizer go into Solar micro-inverter? It seems this term could have many usess other than this context. The present article spends a lot of effort discussing peak power tracking and nmicroinverters; seems to me to be a better presentation if it is a section in Solar micro-inverter instead of giving a lot of redundant context. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:00, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:56, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 06:19, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Triniscope

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for J-CATCH

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Douglas 2229

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I apologize for not responding to your comment, earlier.

Anyway, the File:Project.monterey.jpg photograph is indeed of a t-shirt. I got the shirt while I was doing an internship at IBM and was doing testing on Project Monterey. TerraFrost (talk) 15:53, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

DYK nomination of Nava System

Hello! Your submission of Nava System at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! OCNative (talk) 02:12, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Nava System

The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Spademan binding

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for George Edmund Butler‎

Thanks for this article Victuallers (talk) 18:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

The Corridor Map

Hi. I created the non-vector map several years ago. Someone else used my map to create the SVG version. I have no idea why there is so much white space indeed. You might want to ask the SVG creator instead. AirOdyssey (Talk) 00:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

DYK nomination of Head Standard

Hello! Your submission of Head Standard at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:47, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

DYK nomination of Article

Hello! Your submission of Article at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Drmies (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2011 (UTC) Drmies (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

DYK nomination of Islanding

Hello! Your submission of Islanding at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

I think that you need to fill in which of the other articles was authored by Verhoeven so that whomever is looking through the page can go and find the reference more easily. Cheers. -danjel (talk to me) 14:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Cable binding

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

A request to resolve dispute issue

Dear Maury,

I kindly ask you to help us to resolve a dispute with user Lvivske whose allegations seem to insinuate reputation of Rinat Akhmetov, who is a living public person; thus, his statements are contravening Wikipedia’s policies as for neutral point of view, sources verifiability and biographies of the living persons. The mentioned user is constantly creating negative image of a public person by adding unproved allegations on his crime ties, unbacked by any official reliable verifiable source. Sources provided by this user are either unofficial or seem to belong to original research materials or are impossible to check due to dead links, which is contradicting Wiki’s rules about verifiability; such, the statement re alleged crime activities and frauds, referring to the Ministry of Internal Affairs report, contains the link to some pdf-file, belonging to some foreign investigating journalism program.

Offensive attributions, such as “thug” are used, taken from non-English or/and non-verified sources, which is as well is interfering the policy about dispassionate tone and verifiability. Allegations about belonging of the discussed person to criminal world are presented as facts and mainly referred to a non-English self-investigation of a Donetsk journalist that was officially declared a plagiarism by Region Court of Appeal. So, I just put into practice Jimbo Wales’ advice: I can NOT emphasize this enough.There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative "I heard it somewhere" pseudo information is to be tagged with a "needs a cite" tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons. --Orekhova (talk) 08:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Islanding

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

The Signpost: 20 June 2011


hello

can you remove wizard191 ability to use twinkle? he uses it for edit warring and has been warned repeatedly. --Tck350 (talk) 18:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

The above request was also posted to ANI. —DoRD (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I'll leave it to ANI, I'm not much of a tech! Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:54, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Never mind, anyway. The above user turned out, unsurprisingly, to be a sock of a blocked user that has been reverted a number of times by wizard191. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 21:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

CANDU

Hello, Maury Markowitz. You have new messages at Dabbler's talk page.
Message added 17:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

Michael W. Allen

He is baaack. I ran across User:Ajpahl/Michael W. Allen on the requests for feedback page. Still too promotional, but has a couple sources. Probably thing to do is start over from bare-bones and then slowly build up as sources are found. Thanks for any ideas. W Nowicki (talk) 23:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

I had some time today so I did as proposed: started an attempt to be neutral with sources. Still needs more work, but hopefully less likey to be challenged. W Nowicki (talk) 21:12, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Hyper Engine Mk II

Maury, I am looking at the hyper engine article edits made in 2006-2008 and found your edits very interesting. Can you provide any sources for your edits? I see that almost all of the work done by yourself and others were deleted, which I think is a shame, as I found it to be very informative. I am collecting sources to put back what was deleted, but with sources. Please reply back on my talk page. Regards, Buster40004 Talk 17:19, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I know of Kimble and the AEHS. Yes, I have watched that engine run, and I am very impressed, to say the least. I have Kimble's presentation about the big engines and pretty much what was posted back in '06. I also have a Smithsonian book that pretty much sources what was deleted. Would you like to collaborate on restoring it, and even extending it again? Regards, Buster40004 Talk 00:20, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes, it does. I also have an SAE publication about combustion and engine efficiency. I can email both pubs to you. I can rebuild the article without much trouble in my sandbox and then, if you want to, edit it and add the citations. The Smithsonian pub is from GPO, so I would think it has no copyright. The SAE pub is copywriten, so we can cite from it, but can't cut and paste any text or images. Supply an email address and they are on the way. Regards, Buster40004 Talk 19:06, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
I found almost word for word of the deleted material printed in American Secret Pusher Fighters of World War II. I would like to revise the article to be about the theory and original work done up to the full size engine, with a small section for each of the engines that were built or under design at that time, with links to the full article for each engine listed. The list would include all high performance engines for all nations. I am working in my sandbox right now sortinf it all out. Regards, Buster40004 Talk 15:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Maury, I have completed the re-write of the Hyper engine article. Please take a look when you have a moment and let me know what needs to be done to refine it even more. Thanks, Buster40004 Talk 15:32, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

Space debris

Hey. Sorry about the thing getting closed. I really don't like our directors doing that and not giving a summary (that would never be done with a submission to a real journal for instance.) And I get the impression Karen is not even reading the articles, but just whipping down the FAC page. Tthis is part of the downfall of the way they have the whole thing set up, with the single page and the not farming out amongst the three of them...real journals have figured this out a long time ago...but Wiki would never learn from the real world.

The other thing is, you actually have a very important topic there. High hit count and important in the Dewey Decimal sense. Better than some of our micro-topics. Also, I think FA needs new people. Thing is getting very small-group.

That said, it was probably not going to make it and they don't want to do the months of work hacking at it. (And despite their counterclaims, FA is A LOT about format and prose, stuff that a paid copyeditor would handle at a journal while people debated substance instead.) I would at least use the processes that exist (GOCE request, GA, peer review) for pre-screening and also search out some people that have done FAs and get them to copyedit and review. It's a worthy topic and I hope you can progress it.

Good luck, man.

TCO (reviews needed) 13:38, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

You might try contacting user Colds7ream, who successfully took International Space Station through FAC a year ago -- they may be both knowledgeable and willing to help with FAC. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:58, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
OK thanks! Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:38, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

Hi,

thanks for the work you've done on the Hawker SRAAM article. Much appreciated. Zounds011 (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Maury Markowitz. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight.
Message added 12:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Colds7ream (talk) 12:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Pennywhistle modem

Gatoclass (talk) 16:03, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Solar max

I wouldn't be suprised I added 10, but given the atmosphere attenuates insolation by around 90% (IIRC...), I have to think the SPS advantage is more than 4:1. (And no, I can't cite offhand, tho I think Pournelle's A Step Farther Out mentions the 90% figure.) TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 16:54, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll bet that's what I was thinking. I still think that's low, all considered. However... TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 17:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
That accounts for 2 terrestrial sites. The order of magnitude is the difference between terrestrial & not, since, if the atmosphere attenuates 90% (or even 50%), you're up by 2:1 on that alone. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 18:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
No, I misread yours. (Trying to recover a hung browser & reopen tabs & answer all at once is a very bad idea. :( :( :( ) If the attenuation is 10%, that might also explain my misunderstanding of how much is lost... Ah, well. It appears a cite for 2.5-3x, as opposed to 144%, is needed, so this hasn't been a total loss. :) TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 20:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

Hyper engine Part III

Maury, Thanks for your comment on my revision. What would it take to bring it up to "GA"?

I have added a few new engines this month (Nakajima Ha-5, Nakajima Mamoru, Lycoming O-1230, Packard X-2775, Hyper engine), and if you have a few moments, I would like to hear what I need to do to improve them. Regards, Buster40004 Talk 22:52, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

@Nageh:

Non-notable places

Hi. In answer to your one-liner, I'm no expert in these matters, but the best that I can do is Wikipedia:Notability (geography), which seems to be written from a U.S. POV and isn't a WP guideline. The See also stuff at the bottom of that essay might also help. Is this something to do with the hamlets in the City of Leeds which I PRODded the other day, or what? I'm just a bit baffled as to why you contacted me. Best. --GuillaumeTell 16:44, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, the GEO NOTE guidelines are just guidelines, so it's rather a moot point. However, perhaps you haven't noticed that all my PRODs have now been deprodded and replaced by redirects. I'm quite happy with that - if anyone wants to make anything of the stub areas, they can add extra stuff to the notable articles to which the redirects point. --GuillaumeTell 14:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

AppleInsider PROD

If the website has been "mentioned in many other publications (even Conde Nast)", there ought to be sources we can cite. Those mentions mean exactly nothing if we don't link to them to establish notability and verifiability. HereToHelp (talk to me) 19:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Type "appleinsider" into Google. Look for links that aren't on AI itself. Note many, many inbound links. Note that one of them is from Arstechnica, a Conde Nast publication. Quote any one of them you wish. A lack of refs is not evidence for a lack of cites, and PROD is not a lazy CLEANUP. Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:23, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Mad Capsule Markets/Berrie merge denial

You denied the deletion of Berrie on the grounds that there was unique information not represented in The Mad Capsule Markets article. I see no significant information that is not represented in the first paragraph of the Biography section. The one demo tape mentioned in the Berrie article is represented at The Mad Capsule Markets discography. Everything else seems to be just repeated information. I initially set up a merge discussion months ago but nobody voted for or against. So what now? NJZombie (talk) 03:42, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Concerning the album art, it seems a bit unusual to save it. I don't know of too many other demo cassette recordings notable enough to warrant their own article. The ones I do know of feature actual cover art and not the inner artwork and liner notes as this article does. There's only one song unique to this recording as two of them were later re-released and that's noted in the main article as well as the article for the album featuring the re-released songs. So what exactly are we saving? If there's nothing else, I'm going to suggest you, I, or somebody just merge/redirect it to The Mad Capsule Markets article. NJZombie (talk) 13:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Nautilus in-game.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Nautilus in-game.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:22, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Lotus Improv Financials example.PNG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lotus Improv Financials example.PNG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of HP 2000 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article HP 2000 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HP 2000 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. LES 953 (talk) 14:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:09, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Fairey Stooge

Hello! Your submission of Fairey Stooge at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! bamse (talk) 22:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Space debrids

We are supposed to write what in other sources is written, whether we like it or not and the sentence is copied almost verbatim from the BBC's article. I guess BBC is a reliable source. By the way, every article has a talk page discuss this sort of issues. --Dia^ (talk) 12:08, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Than please indicate me where in WP policies is written that we should pick'n'choose what is written in the sources we use.
Moreover, after have read your comment one more time, I think you should read the article one more time.
Here the pertinent part with bolding from me:
"The proximity operations and manoeuvring talked about here is not easy, but the technology is getting there for that; the idea that you go and attach yourself to something in orbit is becoming more credible," said Stuart Eves, principal engineer for Surrey Satellite Technology.
"People have come up with all sorts of daft ideas... that are really science fiction at the moment. Something like this is a lot more practical."
Nevertheless, the greater problem may be political, as any proposal struggles to be seen as a purely aimed at space junk, Dr Castronuovo said.
"This kind of approach could be seen as a threat to operative systems; if you have the power to go to an object in space and pull it down, nothing prevents you from going to an operative satellite and pulling it down, so it's really a delicate matter."

As I read it, sentence #1 and #2 are from mr Eves, sentence #3 and #4 from Mr Castelnuovo.
....and I still think that this discussion should take place on the talk page where other editors can take place in the discussion.--Dia^ (talk) 12:34, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

@Dia^:

DYK for Fairey Stooge

Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 08:29, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:15, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Process technology listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Process technology. Since you had some involvement with the Process technology redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Quest for Truth (talk) 08:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Numbers (software)

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:02, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Let's compare notes

Mr. Markowitz, we seem to both have a strong interest in the same subject. I am a retired Rocketdyne engineer but am fairly new at editing Wikis. I believe there may be much to gain by sharing sources. What do say. My e-mail address is [email protected]. Dean Black (Magneticlifeform)'Magneticlifeform (talk) 20:25, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:58, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Four Award
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Toronto Magnetic and Meteorological Observatory. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:29, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:29, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Peer review request

Hi Maury, I've seen your name on the peer review request page and had a look at the space debris article. It seems to be very good quality to me and worthy of a FAC in my view. The reading flows a lot better than the article that I have nominated for peer review, that being Sahaja Yoga. I hope I'm not out of line approaching you directly since the quality of our nominated articles differs so much but I would greatly appreciate any feedback that I can get right now. Freelion (talk) 03:57, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Britains Wonderful Airforce

Yes, I do have the book to hand. As the title suggests, it's aimed at fourteen year old aircraft nerds but it's a pretty decent book, at the book's author would lead you to expect. There's not much in the way of text on bomb aiming (careless talk costs lives), but some nice pics which I imagine (no credits ar given) are all Crown Copyright& therefore (I think) in the public domain. I'll scan 'em & email them soon (ish).149.254.56.61 (talk) 17:36, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Chickamauga Campaign Davis's Cross Roads.png

I'm traveling this week--will look at your suggestion next week. Hal Jespersen (talk) 12:37, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:05, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Maury Markowitz. You have new messages at Surajt88's talk page.
Message added 07:46, 21 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Suraj T 07:46, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Necromancer (computer game)

Hello Maury Markowitz, I just wanted to let you know that I took a look at your recently created article Necromancer (computer game)--You did an excellent job uploading an image to the article. It's always nice to see users contributing to make Wikipedia better!Amy Z (talk) 05:02, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Interview with Wikimedia Foundation

Hi Maury, I hope you're well. My name is Aaron and I'm one of the Storytellers working on the 2011 fundraiser for the Wikimedia Foundation. For this year's campaign, we're interviewing as many of the very active and productive Wikipedians as we can to broaden the range of appeals we run come November. I wonder if you would want to tell me more about your experiences editing and writing here? If so, I'll ask you your personal story and I'll ask you some general questions about Wikipedia. Please let me know if you're interesting by emailing amuszalski@wikimedia.org. Thanks! Aaron (WMF) (talk) 22:40, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

NeWS edits

Hi Maury! I wrote something on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:NeWS about your change that was reverted. I dunno if you monitor that so I'm dropping you a note! You might want to un-revert your change. Xardox (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I see that you have removed the merge request involving the above article, giving as the reason that this and the Aeronautical Research Committee were unrelated. This puzzles me, since this article mentions the committees and states the renaming sequence of these bodies. I think that there may even be a reference! If you have sources to show that this is not the case, I'd be interested to see them. Thanks. --TraceyR (talk) 16:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

This report shows clearly that the Advisory Committee for Aeronautics was the direct predecessor of the Aeronautical Research Committee (which became the Aeronautical Research Council):

"The last report of the Aeronautical Research Committee which was published dealt with the year 1938. During the war a very brief secret report was submitted to the Secretary of State for Air early in 1940 ; since that time, with the approval of the responsible Ministers, no report has been written. An attempt is now made to bridge the intervening gap—in so far as this is now possible—so as to give continuity to the reviews on the progress of aeronautical research which have been published since the first Committee, then the Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, reported to the Prime Minister in 1910."

Since these were all the same body, even though name and the ministry responsible changed down the years, it would seem sensible to merge them into one article. The 'distinguish' tag is therefore incorrect and misleading. What do you think? --TraceyR (talk) 22:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I have ordered a round tuit from Amazon but I never seem to get it! --TraceyR (talk) 13:59, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Have a cup of joe

Good work on Norden bombsight!   Will Beback  talk  22:48, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

305th Air Mobility Wing

The 305th AMW dates back to 1950 when it was formed by SAC; the 305th OG dates back to 1942 when it was formed as a B-17 Flying Fortress group by the Army Air Forces. The AFHRA does not consider them as the same unit, and they carry separate lineages, assignments, stations and unit histories.

There has been quite a lot of work separating the World War II groups which were re-activated as Operations Groups as part of the implantation of the Objective Wing organization in the early 1990s. Please don't merge back. They deserve separate articles, and they reference each other within their history sections Bwmoll3 (talk) 20:39, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

And if you also notice, they have distinctly different lineages, assignments and histories. In addition, they are carried as two separate units by the Air Force Historical Research Agency.

Bwmoll3 (talk) 22:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

The AFHRA is the gold standard. They don't get confused; it exists to take care of confusion. There is no further evidence requited other than the official USAF unit records which it maintains and publishes. The fact is that the 305th are separate units, one activated in 1940, the other in 1950. The Air Force activated the World War II combat groups in 1991 as part of the wing organizational into the current Objective Wing organization now in use. They were never consolidated together. The Operations Group was simply re-activated and assigned to the Wing as part of the re-oganization, just as the individual squadrons were assigned to the group from the Wing. They were never consolidated together. Please examine the links I provided.
Here is an example of a wing which was consolidated: 355th Fighter Wing. In this case, the 355th Fighter Group was activated in 1942, and inactivated in 1958. The 355th Tactical Fighter Wing was activated in 1962, and consolidated by AFHRA with the group in 1984. Those are one and the same unit and their page reflects that history. Now, the 355th Operations Group, formed in 1992 is a new organization, with no lineage or history related to the wartime unit, and is assigned to the 355th Wing. However, it carries a separate lineage and history by the AFHRA.

Bwmoll3 (talk) 01:00, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:32, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:A-10 Cuba, hog over McCalla.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:A-10 Cuba, hog over McCalla.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:12, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:52, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

NIF article edits

Maury, thanks for your comment and I agree with your suggestion to remove the section in question. Since it's been more than a week and no one has objected, seems like the coast is clear to make the edit. Will you take care of that or would you like me to do it?JacksIrving (talk) 00:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

305th Air Mobility Wing and 305th Operations Group

You should go to the AFHRA web site for the official details on this, but in summary:

A. The 305th Operations Group is the WW II 305th Bombardment Group.
B. The 305th Air Mobility Wing is the 305th Bombardment Wing first activated in 1951.
C. The McGuire site isn't quite accurate.
Wing historians (and to a greater extent, Wing public affairs officers) frequently cannot keep this straight. One reason is that since the middle 1950s, USAF has declared that combat wings are entitled to the honors and history of like numbered combat groups by Temporary bestowal. The wings get to do this if 1) the like numbered group is assigned to the wing (as the 305th Ops Gp is assigned to the 305th AMW), or 2) the like numbered combat group is inactive. The wing is not entitled to this bestowal if the group is active and assigned elsewhere (a very rare occurrence, but it has happenned one or two times in the past).

Lineagegeek (talk) 16:55, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

NIF Mirror Page

Changes have been accepted on the NIF regular page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility) but there seems to be a mirror page that hasn't accepted the changes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_ignition_facility. Note the difference is the mirror page link has a lower case "i" and lower case "f". This is causing confusion. Can the mirror page be taken down? JacksIrving (talk) 18:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Astron (fusion reactor)

Hello! Your submission of Astron (fusion reactor) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SpinningSpark 08:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: Done

I primarily write on sports, baseball in particular, so over here pretty much everything has an article except for teams or players who popped up for a year and left, which I can't consider close to a major topic. I'd consider a major topic to be something that a person would look up either for a school project or someone or something relatively well-known. In the case of milhist, that would be significant battles or generals, most of which I would presume are in very good shape. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:22, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK nom

Hi. I saw your edit summary and fixed your nomination template. The image code had gone below the "Do not edit above this line" bit. (I compared it with one of my noms – that was the only difference I could see!) Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:32, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

For the image parameter, you just have to put the filename without the "File:" extension: so |image=Example.jpg. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:44, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
At the |image= parameter you put File: without putting an image name. That is the only thing that could cause this error. Putting File: with a full image name won't cause an error. In the future use an image name, per the instructions. rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:04, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
I still can't figure out how I managed to do that. I opened the article in a second window, clicked edit, and copy and pasted the entire File:the name here into the other editor. Odd. Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mark XIV bomb sight

Hello! Your submission of Mark XIV bomb sight at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! The Bushranger One ping only 06:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Maury Markowitz. You have new messages at The Bushranger's talk page.
Message added 18:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bushranger One ping only 18:05, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Course Setting Bomb Sight

Hello! Your submission of Course Setting Bomb Sight at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Harrias talk 10:47, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Non-free use of File:Prograph database operation.PNG

Thank you for uploading File:Prograph database operation.PNG. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Moe ε 13:54, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Ditto for File:Prograph object types.PNGMoe ε 13:57, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
And File:Prograph operators and controls.PNGMoe ε 13:59, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
I've replied at my talk page, thanks. — Moe ε 22:31, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Binding images at Commons

Just for Info: I undeleted the five images at your request and tagged them with no permission. Please forward permission to OTRS. --Denniss (talk) 17:46, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 November2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:44, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Course Setting Bomb Sight

The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Astron (fusion reactor)

Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:52, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

GEE (navigation) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
was linked to H2S

Any suggestions for improving this automated tool are welcome. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:52, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Mark XIV bomb sight

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 16:04, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:15, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In Bombsight, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Fighter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

Length of plot synopsis in Dr. Strangelove

I posted a comment to the Dr. Strangelove Talk page, discussing the length of the plot synopsis. The upshot is that the synopsis in the article is awkwardly long and needs to be edited down, not expanded (see WP:FILMPLOT). You seem to be interested in the article; would you be willing to help out? Please discuss on the article's Talk page. Thanks! — UncleBubba T @ C ) 03:08, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

HEY! If you continue to add unneeded detail to the Dr. Strangelove page, you will be working against WP guidelines and the good of the article. PLEASE STOP and come to the article Talk page to discuss it. — UncleBubba T @ C ) 13:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

Orphaned non-free image File:Fairchild channel-f system 2.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fairchild channel-f system 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:56, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Dragonriders of Pern (video game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wargame (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Maury, i just saw that you want to help with the above article. Thanks for that. I want to get the article to GA status but the grammar is an issue, if you can help out then it will be great. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 14:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Grand Palace

Dear Maury,

Thanks for your kind words and interest in the DYK nomination. I am planning to submit the article for GA status after the new year, do you have any general recommendations? style/layout/etc.-wise, not content of course! (unless you want too). Best regards, Sodacan (talk) 19:02, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Season's tidings!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC).

DYK nomination of Dragonriders of Pern (video game)

Hello! Your submission of Dragonriders of Pern (video game) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 11:18, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited List of ski brands, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Olin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 29 December 2011 (UTC)