User talk:Maveric149/archive 29

You're number one!

Quite literally. Read this carefully. Hesperian 23:38, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - I didn't know I was cited in that. Thanks for the link. :) --mav

You're welcome. Once that study gets a bit of air, there will be a thousand or so content-oriented 'pedians who desperately want to know their PWV ranking. So long as the full rankings remain unpublished I'm going to assume I'm number two. ;-) Hesperian 23:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you are. :) --mav

Indeed. Mav, I'm the lead author of that study, and I have a question for you. I am presenting this work at the GROUP conference in a couple of weeks, and it would add some very nice color/human interest to show your photo during this presentation as "this man is the number-one value contributor at Wikipedia". So, I was wondering, (a) is this OK? and (b) if so, I wonder if you have a higher-resolution photo I might use. The audience will be a few dozen or a few hundred HCI nerds (not sure at this point), and the presentation files won't ever be distributed publically, though some parts may be reused for future presentations. Feel free to email me privately if you prefer: [e-mail] --R27182818 21:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! It will really improve the presentation. --R27182818 17:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania 2008/Conference of the Americas

Hello, As you may or may not know, Alexandria, Egypt was selected to host Wikimania 2008 [1]. So as to prevent the hard work of the many Wikimedians involved in the Atlanta bid from going to waste, we have decided to host a conference for the Americas. This is in no way an attempt to compete with Wikimania or make a statement against Wikimania.

As one of the people signed up to help with the Wikimania Atlanta bid, we hope you will join us at the Wikimedia Conference of the Americas. We will be having a meeting tonight in IRC tonight (Oct 15) at 9:30PM in #cota-atlanta on irc.freenode.org to discuss the conference. For more information about IRC see [2].

For more information about the Wikimedia Conference of the Americas see http://www.cota-atlanta.org and our wiki http://www.cota-atlanta.org/wiki.

If you do not wish to receive further notices about the COTA please remove your name from our notify list. --Cspurrier 18:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protecting of User:Maveric149 page

Dear User:Maveric149/archive 29,

1. How do you think about it is appropriate here to protect the user page User:Maveric149?
2. How do you think about it may be the overuse of such sysop right?

Best regards, --Ans 10:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that has been protected long enough. Unprotected. --mav

Mattrox90

Hi Mav. I was just behind you in attempting to block this user. Named accounts (as opposed to IPs) can safely be indef-blocked if all their contributions are vandalism, as in this case. Do you mind if I lengthen the block? --John 04:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, go ahead. --mav

Thank you. --John 04:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

Congratulations! Your image Image:Oklahoma Capitol building with oil derrick.JPG was the random picture of the day for November 8, 2007. It looked like this:

Random picture of the day

The Oklahoma State Capitol

Image credit: Maveric149 (talk · contribs)

. Again, Congratulations! - Presidentman (talk) Random Picture of the Day 11:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) --mav

List of FAs

I noticed on your userpage that you are planning to work on oxygen and Antoine Lavoisier. As someone who just finished up Joseph Priestley, might I recommend Carl Wilhelm Scheele as well, to complete the set? :) Awadewit | talk 11:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I'll work on that after Lavoisier (I'm working on oxygen right now). Would you like to work on any of the three together and submit them to FAC as co-noms? --mav

I would love to work on Lavoisier (especially after having done Priestley), but I have a long list of collaborations going at the moment and my own dissertation to write. I don't know how you are at long-term planning. How does the summer or next fall sound? I won't have time to do much research until then, I'm afraid. It looks as if there is a fair bit of material written on Lavoisier. Awadewit | talk 21:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Summer of 2008 sounds good to me. :) I will mark my list accordingly. This also gives me more time to find good references on scientists. -- mav

I will add the project to my list as well. By the way, thank you for having written so many quality articles for wikipedia. I noticed your username on the list of wikipedians by FA nomination a while back when I was egotistically checking my own status on the list. :) Awadewit | talk 22:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool and thanks. :) --mav

I have a dissertation to finish by Christmas, once that is out of the way, I'm happy to help on Oxygen (if its not finished by then) and Phosphorus. I was dabbling on oxygen to alleviate the tedium. Pyrotec (talk) 19:24, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool - I'll plan to start phosphorus around that time then. Oxygen will hopefully be done and at FAC before then. --mav

Swinging in to say hi

Hey mav, saw your name on a comment somewhere and thought I'd drop by to say Hi. I still pop in every now and then to flex the old fingers. Cheers Manning :) Manning (talk) 08:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey old timer! Nice to see you are still around. :) --mav

fear of cats

when you see this cat dont you get the shivers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.252.228.3 (talk) 02:35, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only when she thinks she isn't getting enough attention. :) --mav

Prehistoric dragonflies (and other odonates)

Hi, I saw the remark you made at Dragonfly talk. I guess you already know http://www.bernstein.naturkundemuseum-bw.de/odonata/system.htm - what is your opinion of it? It looks good to me, but I am not an entomologist. I might check whether I have some molecular phylogeny papers that could be used to check how robust it is (two character sets - molecular and morphological - are always better than one, and if Bechly cites such papers, I think he's a good source; otherwise there might be a little literature research to figure out a few points). And if it looks good (Mikko's Phylogeny Archive uses it, which is usually a good sign) one could make the Odonatoptera article to give the "griffinflies" a home and clarify the modern view on odonate evolution by adding the missing taxa. Even if they'll remain redlinks for a while. Because you're right - there is a whole bunch of them missing. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 02:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that I don't really have the time to look into that... --mav

If you'd like to be a hero...

...you might look at Wikipedia:Featured article review/National parks of England and Wales. It's one of ALoan's FAs, and it would be nice to honour his contrib's. It's a British subject, but you were the only person I thought of who might be able to keep it. I only have a barnstar to offer, if you can get it in line with current standards. Cheers, Marskell (talk) 19:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, that will take effort from somebody who has access to very good references on the subject since what is on the web appears to be inadequate. --mav

Year page formatting of multiple events

Hello, I'm sending you this message since you were involved in the August 2005 survey on year pages. As I don't know if you've gathered, somebody has been fighting for a change to the house style on how to notate multiple events on the same date. A discussion is currently in progress - your contribution (including whether you still favour the style you voted for or have changed your mind) would be appreciated! -- Smjg (talk) 15:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done --mav

re:? oxygen

Why did you remove my statements in the oxygen article about the original units that are given in the cited reference? This is a serious data integrity issue since the inline figures given are calculated conversions and not the original units. Also, my inline notes were just that, notes, not quotations from the reference. Please slow down or I'll have to do a mass revert. --mav (talk) 17:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Also - the specific page references to NBB and other items were removed and replaced with one reference with a page range. This makes it harder for people to check the veracity of the statements and will need to be fixed back to the way things were. --mav (talk) 17:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

1. I don't know what you mean by the original units? I remember removing 2 or 3 footnotes that were something like: the speed was x km/h<footnote>; footnote= in the original material, data is in non-SI units, i.e. x/1.6 mph. I think this is a type of information that does not require an explicit footnote. if it was a more 'exotic' unit than mph, then it would have made sense to add a footnote.
2. I really believe you are exagerating with having one reference to a specific page. I replaced 10 pages with a single one, and I believe now it is LESS confusing to what the reference means. There is absolutely no reason to have one reference for each distinct page. The reason the citebook template uses pages instead of page is exactly this. You can refer to more than one page per reference. Nergaal (talk) 17:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was actially thinking about that style when I realized later that the (two) books were referenced again in the book section. The problem is that I realized that at the end and I was too tired to go back to redo the references. Sorry for the problems. Ah, one more thing: the ECE reference seemed wrong. I tried to find the book on googlebooks and I found something that had different autors. In fact it has onlye one, Hampel. Am I wrong? Nergaal (talk) 17:49, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• about the cited book Cook: are you sure you do not want to use:

{ {citebook|title=The Encyclopedia of the Chemical Elements|pages=499-511|isbn=0278916430|author=Clifford A. Hampel|year=1968|publisher=Thomson Learning (EMEA) Ltd} }

instead of: Cook, Gerhard A.; Lauer, Carol M. (1968). "Oxygen", in Clifford A. Hampel: The Encyclopedia of the Chemical Elements. New York: Reinhold Book Corporation, 499-512. LCCN 68-29938

In other words are you sure the (main) author is Cook? I am asking because in the citations section you use his name. Nergaal (talk) 20:15, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm sure because Cook is the author but Hampel is the editor. If that causes problems with looking up a book, then I think that is something that should be discussed at the citebook template talk page. --mav

Franz Josef Strauß

Might I ask you to take a look at the new discussion going on at Franz Josef Strauß? Yes, it is an ancient topic (the use of ß on en-wiki), but this is one of the most prominent articles in which this issue is of significance. Given your immense experience, your input would be very much appreciated. Unschool (talk) 01:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done --mav

Oxygen FAC

I do believe that FAC may be a bit premature because I'm not done expanding the article yet. About half the prose was written by me and I already stated a want to bring this to FAC myself. With your permission, I'd like to make this a co-nom between you, me and WikiProject Elements. I'll then work on addressing the final expansion and clean-up to make sure this FAC succeeds. --mav (talk) 19:19, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really care about who nominates or who gets to be recognized as a nominator of the article. Go ahead and nominate or change the nomination whatever way you think is fair (since I believe you contributed by far the most). From my point of view, FAC is the best way to get good feedback to make the article truly high quality. In fact I hoped I would get that feedback from the GA nomination, and since I didn't, I nominated it for FA. Nergaal (talk) 02:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool - will do. --mav

Another feather for your cap

In 2002, you made the 10th edit to the Boeing 747 article. The editors who made the first 9 edits have no recent edits. Yesterday, the article became a featured article. The FA star isn't shown yet but it's listed among the promoted articles for December 31.

Congratulations! Archtransit (talk) 19:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool :) --mav

references

Thanks for the reminder - sometimes my enthusiasm to add stuff runs ahead of the sources. Maybe you know how it is... I'll try to catch up with myself. Plantsurfer (talk) 22:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - I know. At first adding in-line cites was a real chore that did slow me down. But I got used to it and they don't slow me down as much anymore. --mav

Ununoctium

Ununoctium has been nominated for FA (see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ununoctium). Perhaps you'll have some comments since you have contributed to this article. I noticed that the figure in the infobox doesn't have the number of neutrons corresponding to the isotope that was discovered "the second time" (after the first claim of discovery was retracted), and I think you created that figure. I was wondering if you could update the figure? I can try to do it myself, but I'm pretty sure it would end up looking inconsistent. Cheers, Itub (talk) 09:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request help

Hello, there have been many anon edits to Template:Infobox copper, and I'm not smart enough to know what's a good faith edit or not. Could you take a quick look and make sure it's still accurate? Thanks! -- penubag  05:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for seeing that; it annoys me that we allow anons to edit data tables like that (which are not really watched by many people). --mav

Thanks for fixing it, I only came accross that by mere chance, who knows which other infoboxes are screwed? I say we should semiprotect special:unwatchedpages, but, that'll never pass. -- penubag  18:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Oxygen and FAC

From my experience, the regular peer review is barely anything than automatic bots going through some argorithms about style - so not quite useful. The only real use I found for it is as a formality for being more persuasive for future nominations. That's why in the past I nominated it for FAC because that usually ends up being a very decent peer review. I know it is really not orthodox, but it tends to work fairly well. On the other hand, I was completely unaware of the chem peer review. That should at least in theory be a muuuuch more useful tool.

As for the trimming down, I was trying to do that myself for the past day(s) on the biological role section; but I realized I am really not good at chopping information out of the article.

ps: Also, what do you think of WP:Featured topics for noble gases? Nergaal (talk) 06:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've had rather good experience with PRs - so long as they are advertised on relevant WikiProject pages. But I admit that I haven't gone through one in some time and PR is rather clogged right now. Either way, this is a last chance for anybody interested to comment. As for the featured topic - yeah, once we get all the nobles featured. --mav

I thought that for a featured topic you don't need all of them as a FA. I might be wrong but FA&GA are acceptable, the only problem being that the main article should also be GA/FA.Nergaal (talk) 04:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually don't know what the featured topic criteria are. :) --mav

Congrats on Main Page Lassen

As one northern Californian to another (former) northern Californian - thanks for your work on the Lassen FA, and congrats on its Main Page status! NorCalHistory (talk) 07:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh darn - I forgot that was today and didn't even look at the main page. Oh well... Thanks for the compliment. My next cali project will be to make Geology of the Yosemite area FA quality. --mav

Compounds of oxygen

On 26 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Compounds of oxygen, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:42, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yellowstone Fall delist nom

Hi Mav, I've nominated a current featured picture that you uploaded to be delisted as an FP. I think standards have Dissent/discussion/retouching welcome.—DMCer™ 04:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having some problems getting the image right..., and NOW: internal link problems

Hello, thanks for your friendly invitation to help me! I'm new to Wikipedia, just created a page on Alonzo King's Lines Ballet, kept editing until it seemed "non-advertising," and then tried to upload this image (Laurel & Brett) that the photographer says I can use, as long as she is credited on it. Not sure what I'm doing wrong, but the image gets marked for deletion, and on top of that, I can't figure out how to link it to the page! I did read several help/FAQ lists, but just don't seem to understand how it all works. Help would be much appreciated... Thanks! BecchianaBecchinamia (talk) 00:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, haven't heard back about my first question but am hoping for help sometime! In the meantime, I can't figure out what's wrong with an internal link I wanted to create between "Alonzo King's Lines Ballet" listed on the Fall for Dance page, and the actual "Alonzo King's Lines Ballet" page. It says, when I try to create, that no such page exists, and do I want to search for one--at which point, of course, I find the page (which exists). Why is this? And can you help me to understand a bit more clearly?

Thanks so much, Becchina Becchinamia (talk) 22:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Referral from FAC process

SandyGeorgia referred me to you to get Everglades National Park "over the hump" in the FAC process. I have some small punctuation and grammar issues and Sandy said the article would benefit by your taking a look at it. I appreciate anything you can do. --Moni3 (talk) 21:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. --mav

I added more information about geology and a section on global warming to this article. I would appreciate your review once more. --Moni3 (talk) 22:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxygen

when you are done editing replace the first paragraph with:

Oxygen (/ˈɒksɪdʒən/) is the chemical element represented by the symbol O and an atomic number 8. It is a member of the chalcogen group on the periodic table, and is a highly reactive nonmetallic period 2 element that readily forms compounds (notably oxides) with almost all other elements. At standard temperature and pressure two atoms of the element bind to form a colorless, odorless, tastless diatomic gas with the formula O
₂. Oxygen is the third most abundant element in the universe by mass after hydrogen and helium[1] and the most abundant element by mass in the Earth's crust.[2] Oxygen constitutes 88.8% the mass of water and 20.9% of the volume of air.[3]

I don't want to screw up any of your edits. Nergaal (talk) 04:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice wording - will do, thanks :) --mav

FA: Oxygen

Now that it is done I want to thank you for the collaboration on oxygen. It was an article that drained a lot of time to get it to FA-quality, but I think it was a positive experience. Good job, and hope that the real life will allow for more of these "little pleasures" on wikipedia. Nergaal (talk) 11:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome and thank you too! Getting Oxygen to FA class was a hell of a lot more work than I thought it would be. --mav

The iodine demarkated periodic table in commons

It's here [3]. I'm not sure if you modified it or what, but it needs fixing. It says iodine has 53P and 76N when the only isotope which is stable has 74N. Somebody has just pointed this out. I can't fix the figure. Thanks! SBHarris 01:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to fix a lot of those. I'll see what I can do. -- mav

Preventing an FA from appearing

These requests really complicate my job. Put it on your watchlist. If you see someone add "this article has been scheduled to appear on the main page on _____" to the talk page FA box, drop me a note asking me to take it off. Raul654 (talk) 18:30, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:September 10

Hi, I know you're an administrator and all, but I guess this happened about four years ago. Apparently, you put your signature on this talk page, but I reverted it. Just wanted to notify you. Cheers! — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 07:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Helena of the United Kingdom Peer review

Hi Mav. You've expressed an interest in reviewing articles relating to British monarchs. Could you possibly (when you have a moment) review Princess Helena against the FA criteria? I've requested a few others to look at it so don't worry if you're too busy :) Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 14:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! I'll wait for one more review maybe and then nominate it as a FAC. Best, PeterSymonds | talk 21:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, I'm an IP user seeking an answer that I cannot find anywhere on wikipedia regarding wikipedia. This is the question: " If someone cheats by posting the answers to an exam on an article, how can the material be properly deleted since it can still be ascessed in the article's history section?" I hope that you can point me in the right direction if you cannot answer. Thanks. 211.25.200.66 (talk) 08:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly enough, I have come to ask exactly the same question, but for a completely different reason. I need to delete something out of an article history (my own talk page). Can this be done, and if so, how? Deb (talk) 12:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on Oxygen

Hi Mav Oxygen has experienced a lot of vandalism today, which appears to be ongoing. Time for temporary protection?? Plantsurfer (talk) 13:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We can’t because of an idiotic policy that TFAs can’t even be soft protected so we can allow any moron the ability to ‘improve’ that article. It is a stupid policy. --mav (talk) 13:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll second that. Thanks anyway. Now, where's that Gatling gun...Plantsurfer (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A favor

Hey, Mav, I need to ask you a favor. Per Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-03-03/Dispatches, and Ima Hogg, can I entice you to stub out Varner–Hogg Plantation State Historical Site? Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And if I can really abuse of you, there's this as well. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look at my cut at Varner–Hogg Plantation State Historical Site? Thanks. Corvus cornix_talk 02:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your stab at it looks fine to me. Nice work! --mav

Peer review idea

Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog.

There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).

If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:17, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of Alices Adventures in Wonderland/Lory

I have nominated Alices Adventures in Wonderland/Lory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Snowman (talk) 11:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Award

User:ComputerGuy890100/Jimbo Edit

I would like to present to you the I Edited Jimbo Wales' Userpage Barnstar! — ComputerGuy890100^Talk to me_{What I've done to help Wikipedia} 23:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient history

It seems many, many moons ago, you used to create new empty user pages for other users. E.g., User:Fhimpe. This left me rather confused. Did these users want user pages? Did they request them? Did you just do it so that they'd have blue links instead of red ones? Should they continue to have user pages? Any clarification would be most appreciated. Cheers! --MZMcBride (talk) 23:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the time, it was necessary to force MediaWiki to show a link to their user talk pages. I wouldn't worry about it. --mav

Reference section names

The standard name in Wikipedia for a section with mixed inline citation refs and notes is ==Notes and citations== and the standard name for an alphabetical list of sourced uses is ==References==. --mav (talk) 02:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, do you have a reference for using these section names? WinterSpw (talk) 04:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Adam Faith.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Adam Faith.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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) 12:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello, I just created a page that was put for speedy deletion. When I was doing the hangon and reason the page desappeared (was deleted). How can I get it back up or at least contest this deletion? Thanks a lot! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Limajulianaa (talk • contribs) 22:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

U-Drop Inn Peer Review

Hi. On the peer review volunteer list, you expressed a willingness to review articles on national monuments. I was wondering if you might have time to offer some comments on the peer review for the U-Drop Inn, which is not an actual monument, but it is listed in the National Register of Historic Places and along the historic Route 66. Thanks in either case :) Collectonian (talk) 04:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for visiting the peer review. Unfortunately, the article had been vandalized a few hours before you viewed it. It has been restored (and protection requested because the IP vandalizing it has some serious issues and continues to revandalize it). Please take another look at the true version now that he can't mess it up. Collectonian (talk) 15:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Main page nomination for Manzanar

With the 39th Annual Manzanar Pilgrimage coming up on April 26, I have nominated Manzanar to be on Wikipedia's main page on that date. Please add your support for that at Today's featured article requests. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 20:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination was removed intially because there can only be five nominations on that page, but it's back, so if you are so incllined, please offer your support. Thanks! -- Gmatsuda (talk) 21:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review request

Hi Mav, If you are interested and have a chance, would you mind looking at the peer review for Black Moshannon State Park? It is a state park in Pennsylvania (not Utah), but I saw you were intersted in protected areas from the Peer Reviews Volunteer list, so thought I would ask. Thanks in advance for any help, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ROXANNE FONTANA

a fan of mine recently put a page about me on the wikipedia and it was cancelled out. it said that there was not indicated a significance for the page. but the page states i have over 100 songs in copyright. please review and re-instate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.231.146.140 (talk) 15:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License for Image:Historic Old Faithful Inn at Yellowstone-190px.JPG

Thanks! --Ipoellet (talk) 00:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've copied the image over to Commons now. Ipoellet (talk) 00:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect copyvio notice on Long Valley Caldera

Hi, Mav. User:Bob the Wikipedian slapped a copyvio notice on a section of Long Valley Caldera, because it was copied from a USGS web site. Clearly, this is wrong: USGS is PD. Can you remove the copyvio tag? I'm not an admin, and it says only an admin should remove it. Thanks! hike395 (talk) 23:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like everything is now worked out. Thanks for the beads up. :) --mav

Request for Peer Review help

Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of guidebooks about the Sierra Nevada listed at AFD

If you wish, please contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of guidebooks about the Sierra Nevada. Thanks! hike395 (talk) 04:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, are you done with wiki?

Nergaal (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope - just spending most of my free time planning a trip to Egypt. --mav

In case you can still find a bit of free time, please try to review some of the stuff listed on the WP:Elements announcements. Otherwise have fun in Egypt! Nergaal (talk) 18:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Deleting images

Sorry about that, if you look at my edit history, you will actually see that I do check and fix the images before I delete them. Right now I have missed 2 images out of about 2000, so I feel like I am doing pretty good. Also, jpeg -> jpg - that's a pretty easy one to miss :P Thanks for the note though! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 18:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problemo. All is well now. :) --mav

Geology of the Zion and Kolob canyons area

Geology of the Zion and Kolob canyons area has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 15:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested

Hey, Mav, Sandy suggested at WT:FCDW that we interview you about your longstanding contributions to quality articles as well as your saves at FAR. If you're interested, just ping me at my talk page; the interview can take place here or on whatever venue you prefer. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 12:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. If you want to do it on Wikipedia, I'll just create a subpage and post some openers there. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've posed some openers here. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the great answers so far... as a relative newbie it's quite the interesting read! I've posed a few more on the userpage. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 02:46, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

<bump!> -Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 22:46, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for answering the rest of them... I guess that's all I need or can think of, so thanks again! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mav, the interview has been moved in to Wikipedia:FCDW/August 25, 2008, where Tony1 will probably begin tweaking it over the next few days. You might want to watch that page now. Tony likes to exercise his editorial abilities, so if you want everything left intact, be sure to let him know, and if you disagree with any changes he makes, he's usually fine with that. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

huh?

Mav, did you mean to put this post here? No idea what you are responding to, or how it relates to our pending Dispatches? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image query at Wikipedia talk:FCDW/August 25, 2008. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

Hey mav. I woldn't be able to nominate you, but why don't you run for bureaucratship? You play such a huge role in the community, I mean 20 featured articles is huge. Most users are proud if they have one. If you don't wish to run, please ignore this, but, I think you would easily pass. Cheers, --Meldshal42? 13:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the vote of confidence. :) However, I already deal with as much bureaucracy as I can handle just making sure articles I work on follow the MoS. ;) --mav

FT:British monarchs

I read your page and I got the idea to give this to you:

Main page	Articles
(4) List of British monarchs	Anne · George I · George II · George III  · George IV · William IV · Victoria · Edward VII · George V · Edward VIII · George VI · Elizabeth II

The list is easily FL-able, while the remaining 3 kings are not far away from becoming GAs. Whenever I have time I will try to work on the topic, but for now I am stuck in other projects. I assume this might mean you taking some time away from the element articles, but I guess you will also enjoy to have something different to work on. Enjoy, Nergaal (talk) 22:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should have wrote 'English' instead of 'British' since I'm primarily interested in English kings and queens up through up the House of Stuart. Tudor dynasty would be the first area I'd like to contribute to. --mav

Yttrium -> on hold? Nergaal (talk) 03:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I have two FARs I'm dealing with right now. --mav

The article is basically ready for FAC but before submitting it I would prefer to have a second opinion from you if you have the time (I've left the comments on talk:Yttrium). Nergaal (talk) 01:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do this weekend. Would be nice to start the FAC before the start of September. --mav

I wanted to start it today, but I am only 99.9% sure. Nergaal (talk) 01:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can take a break from FAR work for a day and look at Yttrium again after work tomorrow. Please wait. :) --mav

Image question

I moved this image to the commons as suggested by the FAR of Irish Houses of Parliament but I am confused by the info about who actually took the photo. Perhaps it was you or was it Jtdirl? I can't tell and the commons helper took what was on the original page. Can you confirm whose image it actually is, so I can fix the commons source info because Jtdirl is not around these days, or fix it there for me. TIA Cheers ww2censor (talk) 03:42, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jtdirl was the photographer. --mav

Thanks. Perhaps you can also assist in determining the status of Image:College-green-aerial-thumbnail.jpg that you uploaded years ago. Do you recall this statement "owner of shot emailed full permission to Jtdirl". TIA ww2censor (talk) 04:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is what Jt told me. --mav

NowCommons: Image:Woolsack-crop.jpg

Image:Woolsack-crop.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Woolsack IHOL.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: [[Image:Woolsack IHOL.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 04:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elements Report

Hey man, I've been working on a semi-secret project: My elements report. The report, which focuses on analyzing page views and article quality, should help us figure out the most efficient way to focus our efforts. As of right now, the report is far from complete, but I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look at it and tell me if it's the kind of thing you, as leader of WP:ELEMENTS, would be interested in. If it doesn't seem like a useful tool, I'd rather know that now so I don't have to continue to waste my time on it. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 15:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great job! Response on your talk page. --mav

Death Valley National Park FAR

Death Valley National Park has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Longhair\^talk 23:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons user name change request

Note to prove that I'm commons:user:Maveric149 on Commons and validly can request to usurp commons:user:Mav, which is really part of my global account. --mav (talk) 06:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Lochnessmonster.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Lochnessmonster.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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) 05:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of male film actors (A-K)

I have nominated List of male film actors (A-K), an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of male film actors (A-K) (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. — TAnthony^Talk 02:40, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FAC noms

Hey, take a look here and feel free to undo it. I don't known what you think of it, but personally I don't mind about multiple nominators. In addition, I think it makes contributors care, and come back and help in the future. Again, feel free to reduce the list if you mind, but I think that in the long run this helps WP:Elements. Nergaal (talk) 01:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I won't undue that since it would make me look like the bad guy. But I don't agree that people who have not indicated a want to be a nominator be listed as one. --mav

That makes sense! Nergaal (talk) 01:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mav!

Glad to see I was missed around here :-) Did you notice the sudden clearup of trivia that announced my return? :P - Tbsdy lives (talk) 09:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Lying somewhat low for now... I don't want wikistress causing another wikideparture... Though I did flirt the flames with an ill-fated FAC nomination, silly me. Tbsdy lives (talk) 09:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA/A

Sorry I was slow to reply. This feature has already been implemented in the alpha version of the Second Generation WP1.0 bot, see feature 12 in this table. I think the plan was to roll out this new version of the bot in October, but it will depend somewhat on CBM's workload and the Version 0.7 work. Once implemented, the "by quality" tables will have a column that indicates things like FA or GA automatically, using the FA/GA tag rather than needing the project to tag for that. Walkerma (talk) 15:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a favor to ask

Please award/give/consider awarding a barnstar to user:Stone for his wonderful and quick work on niobium and hafnium. Just take a look at his edits and you will understand why. I wanted to do it myself, but (1) I have not done it before, (2) I don't think I am the most 'qualified' to do this. Nergaal (talk) 00:34, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've never given out a barnstar either. I think the best thing to do is simply say "Great work!" on his talk page. You can include a barnstar if you want. I'm no more qualified to do this than any other person. :) --mav

Hi mav, I have also a favor to ask, could you have a quick look on hafnium and give a good advice what improve to get it to B-Class. Thanks!--Stone (talk) 21:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh goodness - that's one of my de-stubs. To give advice on what is needed will require me to read up on that element; and I tend to go all the way once I've read up on an element. I'll see if I have time for that in the coming weekend. --mav

Death Valley

Mav, I'll stop for now because those converts just about wore me out (I'm halfway thru Climate, will do more tomorrow). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I'll pull out my first reference and give it a go. --mav

Virus

Hi Mav, thanks again for your very helpful review. I have made changes to the article, I can see that you're busy, but do you have time to revisit the FAC? Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 21:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iridium

Hi Mav, I noticed that you created the first substantial version of iridium back in 2002! I've been working with Stone and Cryptic C62 on expanding and referencing the article, with the aim of turning it into a good article and eventually into a featured article. I thought that you might be interested as a "founding father" of the article. Any help is welcome! Cheers, Itub (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I see you have some expertise in geology. That would be helpful, because I think the geology is one of the weak parts of the article at the moment.--Itub (talk) 16:18, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You two have done a great job so far. Yes, I'd love to collaborate on this to get it to FA. I'll be reading up on iridium (and hafnium per Stone above) today and I'll see what I can add after that. --mav

Thanks

		Thank You!
		for your assistance in helping Virus to become a Featured Article today. It's much appreciated, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 13:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Sweet - cool deal. :) --mav

Cite formats

I'm in a minority. I like using RP format for book citations as that avoids the repetition umpteen times in the ref section of book's author info. I know most hate RP but I like it as it only requires one line in the ref section whereas with harvard you have a separate line every time. SandyGeorgia says you know of a hybrid of these two systems that takes the pluses of each system together, but she asked you to tell me about it. Tks. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what the "RP" cite format is, but I prefer using the {{harvnb}} template and <cite></cite> tags along with the the name param for the ref tags. So, I'll put the full reference info in a ==Bibliography== section at the bottom of an article (with cite tags), use the harvnb template inline with ref tags and group the refs via the name param. See yttrium for examples. --mav (talk) 23:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: I use the name param like this <ref name="Smith2008p56">{{harvnb|Smith|2008|p=56}}</ref> and thereafter use <ref name="Smith2008p56"/>. I'd prefer a single template that would not require repeating things such as {{refharvnb|Smith|2008|p=56}} but I can't get that to work. --mav

See FA William Hanna for a sample of RP. It puts the page numbers after the footnote numbers. RE Yttrium, that's one way but not quite what I was hoping for. It still requires a separate line for each book cite (like the three Greenwood lines all in sequence-so when you have 30 book cites from one book, it takes 30 lines instead of one with RP). — Rlevse • Talk • 00:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. If one is going to leave the ref detail in the body of an article (something I don't care for b/c it makes it more difficult to edit the prose), then that seems like a logical solution. But I can certainly see why many people don't like it b/c of how it tends to break-up the reading flow. What we really need is a page param for the ref tags. Something like <ref name="Smith2008" page="56">{{cite book | ...}}</ref> and thereafter <ref name="Smith2008" page="56"/>, <ref name="Smith2008" page="82"/>, <ref name="Smith2008" page="145"/>, ect. Clicking on a ref number would highlight the reference info and the page number. One can dream. Heck, we might as well replace the cite templates by having all the ref info in the ref tags and refer back to that by giving it unique names. Example <ref name="Smith2008" type="book" last="Smith" first="John" year="2008" title="Book o things" publisher="Acme Press" location="New York" page="82"/> and thereafer <ref name="Smith2008" page="56"/>, <ref name="Smith2008" page="82"/>, <ref name="Smith2008" page="145"/>, ect. --mav

That's a good idea. Can you propose it somewhere? — Rlevse • Talk • 00:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page number part is already listed as a criticism and possible future extension to Cite.php. Once that is implemented, I'm sure we will eventually get to put everything in the ref tag. Doing that would allow for MediaWiki to create a references database for each wiki. Now that would be cool. --mav

Interesting, so basically we're in a holding pattern and have to pick the lesser of two evils. I imagine we'll be in this mode for quite awhile. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. Emsley 2001, p.297
2. Cite error: The named reference lanl was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
3. Cite error: The named reference ECE500 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).