This user may have left Wikipedia. Komusou has not edited Wikipedia since 2007. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|Komusou}} on your talk.
Most of that paragraph explains why you wouldn't categorize redirects, and it's all sound. My opinion: The purpose of the categories is not to get a complete list of things. The purpose of categories is to categorize articles. And there is no article on Market Blandings; if there were it would be in that category. So unless the category demands that redirects be directed to it, I think such categorizations should all be removed. Your mileage may vary.--Mike Selinker23:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
re:vandalism
thanks for catching that for me. Ironically I've noticed similar half vandalism reverts in the past by others and pointed it out to the editors in question, so I'm annoyed I've fallen for it myself. I'll attempt to be more vigilant in future. --Krsont18:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Irish
I see you created a northern Irish template, can I ask you why, their is no such nationality, anyone from Northern Ireland is either Irish or British or both.--padraig13:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On 30 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Yansımalar , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On 31 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hasan Saltık, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hello, Komusou, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! DenizTC22:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merhaba, sizin VikiProje Türkiye'ye katılabileceğinizi düşündük. Ayrıca yalnız başınıza ya da diğer kullanıcılarla birlikte Türkiye ile ilgili maddeleri düzenleyip geliştirebilirsiniz. Eğer projemize katılmak istiyorsanız lütfen katılımcılar sayfasını ziyaret edin ve adınızı yazın ya da projenin tartışma sayfasına tıklayın. Eğer herhangi bir sorunuz varsa benimle ya da bir başka VikiProje Türkiye üyesi ile bağlantı kurabilirsiniz.
On 1 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kalan Müzik, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
No problem. That was the only instance I had ever found of such a comment, and I'm just obsessive-compulsive about spelling & punctuation. If you revert that change, I wholly agree with you. Cheers, Her Pegship (tis herself)03:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Template:Nocaps
The simplest way to keep this template is to find a legitimate use for it. Once there's a transclusion of it, it's ineligible for WP:DOT. If it's not possible to find a legitimate use for the template, then it probably should be deleted. By the way, a similar template, Template:blink, had the exact same arguments for keep as this one and it was deleted through WP:TFD. Cheers. --MZMcBride05:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Infobox record label/doc
Regarding this, having comments inline with the templates example means the user has to select all of the comments one by one and delete them when they are going to use the template on an article. This inconvenience is why none of the other music templates (see for example Template:Infobox Album#Code, Template:Infobox Single#Code, Template:Infobox Song#Code and Template:Infobox musical artist#Code) use such comments. Other than that, it's redundant and confusing to have two sets of instructions, especially when they are subtly different. I also made some other whitespace changes (other than fixing the BR trick, which I assumed was an oversight) to bring this template more in line with the other templates. --PEJL14:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well we still have the problem of having two sets of subtly different instructions. I also don't think "qualified" and "concise" are appropriate terms to describe the two examples. Both URLs are qualified. --PEJL16:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
PMAnderson did a 3RR first, I unwisely followed him. PMAnderson reported me by hiding his first revert, I provided a log showing his own 3RR. If I am blocked, then the other party should be too. It has not been explained why the other party could 3RR before me and get away with it: even if there is a fault in my own report, I should at least be explained what it is, so as to understand this 3RR. Judges' decisions are always justified with their rationales. 3RR report and counter-report are both here.
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
It just a general note since I have already changed the article. But here is the diff. I am just spreading a little information since the Oct 2007 category is manageable to look through right now with only two days of edits, it not meant to offend you. The backlog is on June 2006, and I don't think we will ever make any headway with 83,256 articles in the master category without a little bit of an education campaign.
I will have to look into the archive. I am not very technical and I can't figure out to do it without screwing up the history. Until last month I had just left the page as it was naturally. But I will watch here if you have a reply to not inconvenience you.
If you are mad actually about the tag, don't worry I am not going to edit war over it or anything if you change it back. I don't mean to offend you, but everyone takes these things differently and you can't please everyone. Otherwise I hope you have a nice day--BirgitteSB18:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Bot en:User:AlleborgoBot suspended for breaking templates
Hi. My bot has no bug. The problem affect every bot in the world which uses pywikipedia framework. This problem is very well known by the developer team but still has no solution. Anyway, the method that everyone uses till now is: never run the bot over templates. I've always done that, but, recently I've run a particular script with the option "-namespace:0" (to run only on pages in namespace 0) but that options work only in the replace.py script and not in interwiki.py script. Probably those last two lines are obscure for you, so, don't warry: the problem there will not be again. Bye. --Alleborgo18:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(This refers to an Italian bot being suspended [2] and a bug report on it.Wikipedia [3])
The last two lines are indeed a bit esoteric to me, but as long as you know what you're doing that's OK ;-) Finding a workaround so as to interwikify at least the easy templates would be useful, though. — Komusoutalk @ 18:37, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Jose Alvarez
From here: [4] (Pdf document). Scroll down to page 3, this entry is after Correctons/additions.
Obituaries: Deceased Olympic Medallists
Ove Karlsson, Journal of Olympic History (formerly Citius, Altius, Fortius), Summer, 1998, Vol. 6, No. 2, p. 34 - 37. (pdf)
On 14 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mundo Nuevo, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Konnichiwa; re your query about sources for Ona; i have them somehwere. i am scheduled for kidney surgery on friday, october 26. after i recover i will attend to your query. domo arigato. 216.107.224.20115:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)joe[reply]
Awarded by this editor for a Did You Know contribution that appeared on the main page, a hook that was well written, referenced, and displayed irony, a fact related to a distinguishing characteristic of the subject of the article, or other notable property. AwardBot22:40, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
DYK hook - Cyclura rileyi cristata
Did you know? was updated. On 25 October, 2007, a fact from the article Cyclura rileyi cristata, which you recently nominated wrote an alternative hook for, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Er, thanks, but this DYK rightly belongs to User:Mike Searson who is the author of the article, as well as the original nominator; I just provided an alt hook for it when I saw it on the Suggestions page. I suppose the attribution info got mixed up when the various hooks were moved from Suggestions to the Next Update and reduced to a single hook, or something. You're prolly not reading this so I'm going to notify you directly ;-) — Komusoutalk @ 07:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You get a a DYK banner for writing the hook. The template I gave you was not for writing the article, but nominating the hook for the main page. I already left Mike Searson a DYK banner for writing the article. Hope these clears things up. Keep up the good work! -Andrew c[talk]15:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I see it now that I compare the two boxes, they're very similar. I don't want to sound ungrateful, and thanks for the notice, but I don't think that alt-hookers (oy!) should get a box saying they nominated the article: writing an article is hard work, nominating one is prolly hard too (since it means reading and evaluating a lot of new articles in order to find a DYK-worthy one), but doing an alt hook is comparatively just quick fun. For good form, I'm editing the notice's text to strike out "nominated" ;-) — Komusoutalk @ 18:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Schwartzbard trial
(DYK banner removed)
Er, there must be something in the Kool-Aid today, because this DYK isn't mine either, it belongs to author and nominator User:Bandurist – I had only provided an alt hook for it ;-) I'm contacting you directly. — Komusoutalk @ 15:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was the only DYK I didn't select myself. So I blame the other one ;) I'll make sure the template gets to the right person. Thanks for letting me know- Mgm|(talk)16:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in email contact with him now. Although I haven't broached the subject, I just have a feeling he may not be as supportive of his country developing nuclear weapons now as he was then - while the subject's will should never override neutral, sourced article content, I do not want him featured on the main page for his connection to this proposal when we can probably find something better. Could you please help me think of a hook that doesn't have to do with nukes? Picaroon(t)00:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another hook? Sure, what about: "He is very fond of jazz, especially Nuke Ellington" — kidding! kidding! ;-)
Seriously, note that my alt hook was careful to have "in 1987", which was true and factual, whichever position he could have had nowadays. Also, from his article, the "Black Bomb" thing was clearly the money shot, hook-wise. (Besides, that was also the basis for your own hook.)
With respect to my re-nominating an article you had withdrawn, I don't think there was a lack of courtesy: Wikipedia is not censored, and our first courtesy should be to readers, i.e. bringing interesting facts leading to good articles.
Theoretically, yes, it's like on Wiktionary since some years: common nouns are supposed to have the page title lowercase to reflect their nature, and to allow linking via a direct copy-paste – see also rationales at {{Lowercase}}.
In practice, I have seen people who seem to believe that the Wikipedia developers have programmed the new DISPLAYTITLE magic word (wrapped by Lowercase) solely for the purpose of enforcing eBay and iPod's trademarks on Wikipedia, and as a result they delete the template.
I suppose that to have peace would require to find back the archives of the old discussions that led to requesting DISPLAYTITLE from the developers, plus the Bugzilla entry where developers commented about it, and to work more instructions into one of the MOS page... Sigh. — Komusoutalk @ 20:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Categories on redirects
In case you were unaware, per WP:CAT-R, I have removed trivial categories on Roderick Spode redirects and any others I can find. The guideline only allows very specific categories and ones such as "Fiction characters by occupation" should not be placed in redirects. Any questions, ask me. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The protected edit went quickly and I restored your work with {{ambox}} look at 04:29, November 16, 2007. Unfortunatly the edit was reverted and I'm appealing the revert. The discussion seems headed towards a new look different than the {{ambox}} look. Anyway the talk page has the story. – Conrad T. Pino (talk) 07:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Crosby
Thank you, and I appreciate it. You made some very good edits to it. I did scale back an overreliance on, and special treatment of, the Nash article, which is still used for several footnotes. I gave a detailed rationale on the Crosby talk page. Thank you again for letting me know about the DYK. --Tenebrae15:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, neat; I'll have to keep an eye on DYK to see if my articles get picked. And thanks for cleaning up those articles; I'll carry those same changes over to the other Sam Sheepdog articles at some point. --Skrapion (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to point out that it is generally considered very rude to utilize generic newbie-oriented templates when bringing something to the attention of established editors. Regarding the edit in question, an average reader may, of course, not know the precise location of Omsk Oblast, but considering that the article is titled "2007 Siberian orange snow" and that "Omsk Oblast" is a blue link which can be followed to get more information, specifying "Siberia" in the lead is indeed redundant. What's more, if you take time to actually read the Siberia article, you will see that the definition of this general area is too vague and broad to be of much help to an average reader.
Komusou, regarding this, perhaps you would you care to explain us your interpretation of WP:OBVIOUS in more details? I am particularly interested to hear your opinion as to how it is not obvious that "2007 Siberian orange snow" fell, well, in Siberia. Also, location-wise, if you believe that identifying an area by federal subject is insufficient, how would you propose to clarify locations of, say, Nalchik, Tolyatti, or Petrozavodsk? Somehow I sincerely doubt that saying that "Nalchik is located in Kabardino-Balkaria, Southern Federal District", "Tambov is located in Samara Oblast, Volga Federal District", and "Petrozavodsk is located in Karelia, Northwestern Federal District" is going to clarify much for an average reader who, according to your interpretation of the guideline, is incapable of following a link to an article about a federal subject in order to find out just where in Russia it is located anyway.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some answers:
The article is supposed to be self-sufficient, and its MediaWiki page header isn't part of it. That's why the article title is usually namechecked in bold at the start of the lead. Similarly, an article's main redirects are usually added in bold in the lead, even though the page header says "Redirected from redirectname".
"Omsk Oblast" is self-sufficient enough (and I am saying this based on the fact that yours is the first complaint regarding this I've heard in three years I've been with Wikipedia). Of course, there will always be people who have no idea where it is, but it does not mean that every subnational entity of every country that happens to be mentioned in the lead of some article must be clarified to the point of absurdity. For example, there are many English-speaking people who would have no idea where Wisconsin is located. It does not mean that every time Wisconsin is mentioned in the lead we should refer to it as "Wisconsin, Midwest, United States". This is not what "self-sufficient" means at all. Lines must be drawn somewhere, and in case of Russia, it is drawn on the level of federal subjects in 99% of cases.
The WP:LEAD too is supposed to by a standalone summary of the article, not counting the title. One of the projects of Wikipedia is to make a concise CD-ROM with only the leads of the articles.
Pretty much the same as above. The CD-ROM version will retain the links, so a reader will always be able to check just where Omsk Oblast is. Plus, even if you see this as a problem, it would still be a problem with the examples I outlined above (with Nalchik, Tolyatti, and Petrozavodsk)—those need a lot more clarification that simply specifying the federal district, as there would not be a convenient lazy term such as "Siberia" available. Over-clarification in those cases, however, would be against WP:LEAD, as the lead must also be consise.
Articles are supposed to be reasonably independant, readers are not supposed to have to click on every blue word just to get the most basic facts (where/when/what is the word). That's why it's common to write something such as "...during the Third Crusade (1189–1192)..." because the reader shouldn't have to click just to know when this fact happens in the biography he is reading.
Again, how is adding a federal district solves this problem for Nalchik, Tolyatti, and Petrozavodsk? You'll need a lot more than an additional clause to specify their locations.
Wikipedia is intended to be mirrored on tons of other sites, that do not necessarily display the page header, or not as prominently, or do it only way up in the browser's titlebar. The content of the article is the wikisource, not the page header.
That is not our problem; that is the problem of the sites that mirror Wikipedia.
Many people print or download articles for later reading and don't have hyperlinks available. Many people copy-paste parts of an article to email to friends or post on their blog, and our prose should be reasonably self-sufficient. Many people consult Wikipedia on handheld devices with small bandwith and don't have the luxury of clicking and loading everything for every word.
As someone who regularly peruses Wikipedia on a handheld device, I assure you there are many more problems with this means of access than a simple hesitation to follow an extra link. The title of the article, however, shows without any problems both in print and on a handheld device. As for copypasting parts of articles, it is impossible to make sure that any random part of any article is self-sufficient and unambigous. All in all, a very weak argument.
Many people won't notice the title or won't make the link or may even see the title and think that "Siberian orange snow" means a snow coming from Siberia but fallen out of Siberia in that Omsk Oblast place. Wikipedia isn't elitist and is also for kids, senior folks, and plain dumb people.
Again, a line must be drawn somewhere. Just because dumb people read Wikipedia does not mean that we have to dumb down our content to their level. I see "Omsk Oblast, Siberia" as nothing more as dumbing down, because "Siberia", according to some definitions, covers pretty much most of the territory of Russia. "Siberian Federal District" is more specific and accurate, but the approach is flawed due to the reasons I outlined in above responses.
(Actually even Omsk Oblast is an ultra-lame name for the English-speaking wiki, it should be "Omsk State" (as most English documents on .ru sites) or "Omsk Province" or at least "the state of Omsk Oblast". Most reader will think there the snow has fallen in a town named "Omsk Oblast", and why shouldn't they think that? They have no reason to know what an oblast is, and not even a reason to click the link. WP:OBVIOUS is about these things, too.)
Omsk Oblast is not a state, it's a federal subject (constituent member of the Federation) with a status of an oblast. A republic would be a rough equivalent of a state, if you insist on dumbing down the terminology. If you are proposing that we should abolish serious terminology in favor of laymen terms and English terms used by Russian (!) websites, you very much disappoint me as an editor. "Oblast", "krai", "okrug" are the terms used in the English-language research papers on the subject of Russian subdivisions. Saying a "state of Omsk Oblast" is just as ignorant as calling an assignment statement "a math equation". Terminology is terminology is terminology. We are writing an encyclopedia here, not a "Compendum of Simplified, Dumbed-Down, and Occasionally Inaccurate (but Only for the Sake of Simplicity!) Facts for Dumb People".
And last but not least, the district is not for all Russian articles but only this one, because this article needs to namecheck "Siberia" somehow. All articles in the Reference section are about the "Siberian snow", too, that's the common name in the English-speaking world. The article's lead has to namecheck Siberia. Since you and your friend deleted it twice, I had to use the clumsier district instead.
Goudzovski is not my friend; he is a fellow editor who made a decision to revert your edit on his own. "Siberia" is just too vague of a term to be of much help; you might as well just use "Russia". There is no need to overexplain every unfamiliar term (such as oblast) to readers; that's why we have links in the first place. The article is about a phenomenon (orange snow), not about where Omsk Oblast is located in relation to the rest of Russia. It is titled "Siberian" orange snow, the precise location is given (Omsk Oblast) and clarified even further (near Kazakhstan). That, in addition to availability of links (Omsk Oblast, Tomsk Oblast, Tyumen Oblast, Kazakhstan, Russia), is more than sufficient for a reader to get an idea of the location without us having to resort to vague but "familiar" terms such as "Siberia".—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 22:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Komusou! Thanks for your nomination; however, the article is hardly eligible for DYK as it has already been included in the ITN for some days. Best regards, --Camptown (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for informing me about its WP:ITN, I've removed it from DYK then. Between its "20 November" actuality, and your string of DYK, I guess I shoulda smelled it ;-) Regards, — Komusoutalk @ 19:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Virgil Ross DYK nomination
Wow! I sure didn't expect that. Thanks very much, Komusou; I'm most grateful. (And, by the way, in spite of my user name, I have no connection with Virgil Ross. :-) Tim Ross·talk20:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nom - Pancha Carrasco + George E. Kimball + Virgil Walter Ross
Did you know? was updated. On 22 November, 2007, a fact from the article Wien-Film, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Did you know? was updated. On 22 November, 2007, a fact from the article Terry Robbins, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hello, I replied to your previous comments about "Did you know" on my talk page, but I was just curious as to what will happen with the template containing the article. Will it be on the Wikipedia main page or has it already appeared. Cheers_Ad@m.J.W.C. (talk) 10:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are in fact correct. My internet connection crashed while the comment was being posted and I was unable to check if it went through, and then subsequently remembered I may have been incorrect anyway. Yourself and the DYK admin are most likely correct, you can ignore my comment. Thanks for the nomination! SGGHspeak!22:35, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Komusou, I admonished Southern Texas for his personal attack and "internationals". I'm going to do the same with you. Your response to him was not very civil.Balloonman (talk) 23:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All right, but could you please point to me which word or sentence wasn't civil enough? I don't mean to contest or argue, I'd just like to understand what not to say again and why. I looked back at my comments and am unsure what's the rub vs. what's okay: is it the crack with smiley? Or the quoted "international users"? — Komusoutalk @ 16:03, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is the quote that I am pointing to... I know that you are responding to a personal attack, but sarcasm is not the appropriate response. If I hadn't already intervened with STX, then your response could have resulted in a flame war.Balloonman (talk) 16:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Er, sorry for being thick, but I still don't know if you meant (1) the fake DYK with smiley, (2) the "international users", (3) both, or (4) the whole comment? — Komusoutalk @ 16:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The whole comment: DYK ...that "international" is a put-down in Texas, USA? ;-) The other stuff that went on I didn't really have any concerns about. But here you are making a personal attack and attacking the entire state of Texas.Balloonman (talk) 19:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NP I probably wouldn't have said anything if I hadn't already admonished STX for his incivility, but since I had, I felt that I had to warn both sides.Balloonman (talk) 14:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just as a note, I wasn't "a side", since it was an argument between STX and a DYK admin – I had butted in precisely to provide a "3rd opinion" from an uninvolved fellow nominator. Of course, I now realize it was foolish to also feature a joke in the middle of an argument. — Komusoutalk @ 16:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nom - Francis Bryan
Did you know? was updated. On 24 November, 2007, a fact from the article Francis Bryan, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Did you know? was updated. On 25 November, 2007, a fact from the article stone run, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Did you know? was updated. On 25 November, 2007, a fact from the article Kit Bakke , which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Only 124 chars of non-list prose, DYK requires 1500, and it's unreferenced. Also, 286 chars hook, max is 200. (It's okay, I'm not from Texas ;-) ) — Komusoutalk @ 14:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!
Hi Komusou. Thanks for your help with the article Entrance Hall (White House). I have been away for several days. I will atempt to get more exact reference. CApitol3 (talk) 19:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did you know? was updated. On November 26, 2007, a fact from the article Entrance Hall, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
DYK nom - Roger Wilmut
Did you know? was updated. On November 26, 2007, a fact from the article Roger Wilmut, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Please note that my "one hook at a time" draft was about passing editors currently invited by WP:DYK rules to upload hooks too if they wish so. For DYK admins salvaging expired hooks, I've often seen them do it 2 or 3 at a time to clean up the expired sections from good hooks that didn't have definitive problems. (Developed at Wikipedia talk:Did you know.) — Komusoutalk @ 18:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did you know? was updated. On 27 November, 2007, a fact from the article June Bride, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Question regarding Terry Robbins end notes sections
First off thanks for fixing the broken reference tag on my end notes. I could not figure it out and appreciate your help. Anyhow, I was wondering if it was possible to consolidate the notes without losing the page number references? Is that really a big deal to have the page numbers in my end notes or should I just leave it as the last edits have done?Tjcjaj (talk) 00:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Talkback Template
Hey, I was wondering if there was a similar template to the talkback template for more than just the User_talk: namespace. If not I was wondering if it would be possible to expand the template to include a variable to allow to set the page for different namespaces. For example instead of it saying:
Hello UserA you have new messages at UserX's talk page.
Observing that you put in a great many references to the Jeeves article, I trespass on your time to ask whether you can find a citation in the stories for Jeeves's taking a size nine in hats? Grateful if you have this information to hand, but please don't trouble if not. Tim riley (talk) 11:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Template:BORN-DIED-SORT, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click hereCSDWarnBot (talk) 00:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations! Here's a medal for you in appreciation of your hardwork in creating, expanding and nominating 25+ articles for DYK. Keep up the good work, Komusou, there are more notable articles, particularly if you are as varied in your contributions. Well done! --17:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:KAJII, Motojiro (1901-1932) Japanese short-story writer.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:KAJII, Motojiro (1901-1932) Japanese short-story writer.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Komusou! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 10 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
I just added a reference to the Oumou Sy article, but I'm not sure about the citation format. I used Chicago. If you know the name of the style you used I'd be glad to look it up & change my cite to fit it. Cloveapple (talk) 07:53, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Works derived from P. G. Wodehouse
What was the result of the question you asked entitled "Policies about non-sovereign sub-nationalities?" in 2007?
I have just wondered the same thing myself, and so went looking for the answer in the FAQ, the archives, the help desk, etc. I found your question, and a link to an admin discussion area, but I could not find the answer.
I notice that the nationality in biographies still says British or English, and I'm thinking it doesn't feel right. Is there no rigid policy?
Completely unsourced. WP:BEFORE shows no reliable third-party sources to establish notability for this topic. Almost all entries are simply a name and a profession. They have all been tagged for expansion since 2008 and safe to say that expansion isn't coming.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor Mulliner characters until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drones Club until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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 notice from the top of the article.
_Japanese_short-story_writer.jpg){kind=link}