add site
services
publishers
database
health videos
toolbar
stats
live show
health store
more stuff
JOIN/LOGIN
| advertise add site services publishers database health videos
| | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Talking Watch, Talking Watches, Talking Clock, Talking Bible, Talking... independentliving.com | Herb Talk Herbal Remedies User Discussion Forum herbalremediesinfo.com |
New content moved to end See also:
[edit] |
 | On August 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ernest Brooks (photographer), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Wikiproject: Did you know? 02:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
THANKS! That's brilliant. I played round for ages trying to figure out how to do it, but I'm a bit inept when it comes to computers. Thanks for taking the time to help me out. I just need to finish the article now... Gwinva (talk) 22:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
: 17 August 2009Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Summary: Our Initiatives are starting to be developed - please get involved! In this newsletter, we also announce the results and prizes for Wikipedia Loves Art, and we bring you the latest on our Charity status application, in addition to our regular features on Other Chapters' Activities, recent Press Coverage and recent and upcoming Meet-ups.
In this month's newsletter:
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 08:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of John Heriot (journalist) 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! NW (Talk) 00:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
What do we do with that? As I remember it only needed a little more work. Sooner or later I'll be pushed to decide. Materialscientist (talk) 05:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I was thinking about putting it up for FA, because it does seem to exhaust the sources on the subject. I'll take another look through it, and if there's too much work still to do for FA, perhaps you could consider GA? SlimVirgin talk|contribs 01:48, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
| On August 25, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John Heriot (journalist), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Wikiproject: Did you know? 03:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
| On August 26, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Empty Dwelling Management Orders, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Wikiproject: Did you know? 17:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Greetings Shimgray. Don't know where we may have crossed swords our paths may have crossed, but I've just seen a weird movement on my watchlist which has your signature on it. Although I'm not quite sure what it entails, I shall try to bear it with dignity - as long as it doesn't mean wearing one of those daft barnstars... Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 17:59, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I've added it to the data list. Hut 8.5 08:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Mercury-Atlas 8 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! NW (Talk) 02:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
: 24 August 2009Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:15, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
| On September 1, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mercury-Atlas 8, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Jake Wartenberg 11:14, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
File:LST-314 loading.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:LST-314 loading.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:LST-314 loading.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello my name is Steve Stange, aka Zt692 who posted on the site for the 18th Volksgrenadier Division. I am new to this so my understanding of Wikipedia editing is rudimentary. All Volksgrendier Divisions in WWII were tactically attached and detached to Heer units, and directly subordinated to the Reichsfuhrer SS Heinrich Himmler. I am in the process of writing the unit history of the 18th and included in that work will be quite a lot of general material on the Volksgrenadier divisions. I appreciate any feedback you may feel free to give me.
This is exactly one of the very subjects I will tackle in my book, the desire to create a 'Heer' divisional unit based upon much of the selection criteria and leadership subordination used for the SS, and the actual reality on the ground and why this effort fell short in the final months of the war.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Zt692 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 5 September 2009 (UTC) Hi there. I noticed that you had proposed this article for deletion recently. I agree that he's non-notable, but I have already proposed it for deletion in the past, and been rejected (see [1]), and an article cannot be proposed for deletion more than once. I have instead taken it to Articles for deletion; your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Eyre. Robofish (talk) 22:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Greetings Shimgray - sorry to hassle you but you mentioned that if I had any doubts re. marking as patrolled you'd be happy to respond, so here goes: I recently created a new article (Edward Malefakis) and while over at New pages saw that it was marked as unpatrolled. Out of curiosity I clicked it and saw that it got marked as patrolled. That is when a doubt set in and I headed off to read through the guidelines again. And yes, there it clearly states that an editor cannot mark etc., etc. What's my next step? Will I get struck off for trying to game the system? Is there a bot that will revert my marking? On tenterhooks. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 14:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Battle of San Marino 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! doncram (talk) 09:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
I just reverted your recent change to the STS-8 article, and I figured that I should actually come here to your talk page and mention something about doing so, rather then simply leaving an edit summary about it. The primary reason that I've reverted is simply based on the fact that all (well, all that I've really looked at) of the STS pages include the wake up calls (actually, I just looked and STS-7 doesn't have a section, but STS-41-B does). The songs that are used, as well as the fact that NASA has this tradition, is widely reported by third party sources, and has been going back to the Gemini program. Those are the policy/fact reasons I can give for the revert, but on a more er... personal level(?) I wouldn't have even looked at the edit because I recognize your user name, and I know that you know all of the above. The edit summary: "this section is really quite trivial - I don't think it adds anything at all to the article or provides any information for the reader" just grabbed at my attention though, and made me say "huh? what's going on here?". I'll give you this much, the wake up calls section on that page needs (at least formatting) work. Most of the others I've seen are fairly well developed, but this one is decidedly underdeveloped. I don't see that as a good reason to simply remove the whole section though. Anyway... I'm willing to be talked into this being a good idea, I think that some explaination is warranted though.
— V = I * R (talk to Ω) 00:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
| On September 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of San Marino, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Wikiproject: Did you know? 00:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
"remove [sic] spuriously accurate [an oxymoron?] inflation-adjusted figure, make [sic] round number". (Shimgray's edit comment)
Why did you think this will help, and why did you not discuss it on the talk page?--andreasegde (talk) 00:54, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Is this no longer needed now? No hits since August 22. Prodego talk 01:01, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
interesting page you created in your userspace. As the gnome who's been tending to WP:Citation needed for the last few weeks, I was initially skeptical, but this is actually some nice content.
I have long wanted to move WP:Citation needed to Help:Citation needed. Maybe we could move the current page to Help: , and put your content into WP:. Then you could get your content into the WP: space without it conflicting with the purpose of the Citation needed page, which is to be brief and direct. (Of course the [citation needed] template would be redirected to point to Help:.)
Thoughts? Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 05:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Discussion here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Automobiles#Renaming_articles_with_.22car.22_in_their_title_to_.22automobile.22 --Typ932 T·C 19:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Summary: This month, our Initiatives Director explains our Initiatives, we update you on our Membership (including some new benefits for members!), keep you informed on our Charity Status application, and update you with our regular sections regarding Other Chapters' Activities, Press Coverage, and UK Meet-ups!
In this month's newsletter:
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.
Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 12:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Greetings again, Shimgray - a month back you kindly thoughtfully granted me autoreviewer rights and I reckon I've pretty much lived up to the high responsibility, i.e. no List of names of bartenders appearing in B movies so far :) .
There's another editor, User talk:Cosprings, I often meet up with on articles I frequent who I know would be of great assistance to Wikpedia if he also had autoreviewer status. S/he's beaten me to the draw on more than one occasion by creating an article that I'd been meaning to create but never got round to doing. I was going to propose this editor directly but thought it better to ask him/her first if s/he were interested, and the answer has just come back in the affirmative, so if you have a moment to spare to have a butcher's, I'm sure you'll agree. Cheers!--Technopat (talk) 16:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Greetings Shimgray - you kindly followed up my proposal to grant autoreviewer rights to an editor I proposed recently and I was wondering if you would care to do the same for another editor I reckon could make good use of same. The editor in question, Mikenorton, points out that the Wikipedia guidelines suggest 75 articles while
I'm a bit shy of that (54 disregarding redirects to date).
and far be it for me to dictate Wikipedia policy, but I reckon the track record speaks for itself. Cheers, --Technopat (talk) 21:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Greetings Shimgray - ever since you brought the New pages link to my attention (!) I keep coming across editors who I reckon could make good use of the autoreviewer function. The latest is User:Johnlp, whose impressive track record is at:[2]. Hope that these nominees don't create too much extra work for you - look on the bright side: in the long run it will probably leave you with more time for other stuff :) Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 18:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Greetings Shimgray - thanks for taking the time for those. I'll try to exercise a bit of self-control and not hassle you over the next coupla days with new requests. Unless, of course... nah! Cheers!--Technopat (talk) 21:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Inner German border as a featured article candidate. Thank you for your earlier feedback on the article - please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Inner German border/archive1 on its suitability as a potential featured article. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Shimgray,
I've been a wikignome at wp:citation needed for the last few months, and it interests me that you've created User:Shimgray/Citation needed, which contains material which gives historical/cultural background on the topic. Although I'm not a big fan of having the material on the page, I have seen a lot of people express interest in it, and I don't think I could rally a vocal majority on my side.
The thing that does trouble me, though, is the idea of a wp: page containing a reference to the userspace -- since the former has an official tone, and the latter is more casual. It just seems a little awkward.
In an ideal world, your userspace article would appear in the articlespace under citation needed. I would fully support that, actually. Of course I expect you'd meet a lot of resistance from people who believe strongly in wp:self, and unfortunately, I don't have the time to take part in that debate.
But here is a compromise you might like. What if the current material in the wikipedia space is moved to the helpspace, and your userpage is moved to the wikipedia space. (This would require re-writing the code for {{citation needed}} to point to help:citation needed). Then the hyperlink at the bottom of help:citation needed would point to wp:citation needed rather than to User:Shimgray/Citation needed, and my whole hangup about tone would be resolved.
This is just an idea for you to chew over, and if you like it, you can act on it yourself. I suppose if you were looking to rally support for the idea, you'd look to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy). If you're looking for points to make in defense of the proposal, I think the text at wp:citation needed really does fit better in the help:space, since it's written for newbies -- it's more tutorial material than policy material. The wp:space could then have the liberty to describe {{citation needed}} in exhaustive detail, ranging from usage to policy to the historical material on your userspace page.
Yours to consider. Peace!
Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 21:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
It may interest you to know that the wreck of the sub has been found. As you seem to have done a lot of work on the article, are you in a position to improve the referencing? Many paragraphs are unreferenced. Mjroots (talk) 07:09, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Shimgray. This is not an attempt to rush you, but I wondered if you have any idea how long it's likely to take you to track down the last couple of points on the GA review? I'm wary of letting it drag on too long...
Should I have a look for sources to support "it was beginning to seem as though the two sides were roughly equal" or the follow-up to that I suggested in the 'broad' section? You probably have better ideas of where to search than I, but I'm willing to lend a hand if you think it'd be helpful. Olaf Davis (talk) 15:30, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 | Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 06:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC) |
As I see you've noticed, I've passed the article. I had a lot of fun working on it. Any plans for anything similar in the near future? Feel free to let me know if you'd like a hand with anything.
Happy editing! Olaf Davis (talk) 19:54, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Now the RFA is live if you want to punch in that !vote again. I jumped the gun there the first time around, as I should have waited until he answered the questions and accepted the nomination. MuZemike 22:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
1. Consider reinstating the Launch Attempt Table. Reasons; Although succeeded, first attempt is still an attempt!. It is rare that a shuttle liftoffs on its initial attempt. Most importantly, the Table reported weather forecast information on launch date. Hence, if the Table is kept as deleted, the weather information must be added some where in the page.
2. Deletion of Tweetup information. This is the first time that NASA had arranged such an event. Hence, (though it was not added by me) I think this will be interesting to the Wikipedia readers.
152.226.7.201 (talk) 07:25, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
--NavyBlue84 13:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I once suggested to an administrator about writing a "how to"/rulebook for Wikipedia and he essentially told me to fuck off. I later found out that a Wikipedia trustee had exactly the same idea and is/was working on putting all the rules in one place, particularly for newbies.
About the problem of the target of the merge not wanting it, perhaps we can develop a simple flow chart. AFD keep means keep, delete means delete. If merged then the arrow goes to the merge box. If partial merge is the desired, then the arrow directs the reader to the talk page. If none of the merged information is acceptable then the arrow goes to either deletion review or a 2nd AFD is submitted (if we want this).
What do you think? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 00:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Problem: If an AFD is to merge, the editors in the receiving article may not want the merged text (might want 0% of it, not just some of it)
After thinking it over, I think the best way is for the adminstrator to "ask" the object/target of the proposed merged if they are willing to take it. If they take some of it, then merge is ok. If they don't want any of it, then the administrator can take that into account about whether to keep or delete. The administrator can "ask" the receiving talk page maybe 2 days before closing. This doesn't have to be policy but just common courtesy. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:00, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi you just edited a page I created for our lab and I had an image I wanted to add but it isn't letting me. I'm new to editing and creating pages so I was hoping you could help. It's the Infectious Disease Pharmacokinetics Laboratory (IDPL) at the University of Florida page. Thanks Bmahjoub —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmahjoub (talk • contribs) 21:25, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Shimgray. Are you still in a position to find articles from The Times? I'm looking for a couple in 1959 (January 7, p.9) and 1974 (March 19, p.7). Best wishes for Christmas anyway. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 03:00, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
At Talk:List of wars 1945-1989, I'm suggesting to merge List of wars 1945-1989 with List of wars 1900-1944, and then add 1990-1999 wars. I'm suggesting this so it could include all 20th century conflicts and not be broken up. Your input (hopefully in my favor) would be appreciated. B-Machine (talk) 17:31, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
| On December 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frederick Stovin, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist (talk) 11:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I assume this edit summary was deliberate? :P. Ironholds (talk) 16:33, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello Shimgray! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 52,863 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |
