User talk:Salix alba/Archive 7

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

St Blazey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Par and Tin mining

St Blazey Gate (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Turnpike and Par

Bodelva (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to St Blaise

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet bread (disambiguation) at RFD

Hi Salix,

I noticed that you closed the Sweet bread discussion at RFD (Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 January 23). Since you did not remove the RFD tag from Sweet bread (disambiguation), I'm thinking you may have missed that it was included in the discussion. While it was unanimous to keep the Sweet bread redirect, there was disagreement over whether to keep the Sweet bread (disambiguation) redirect. If you could provide add a closing rationale to the RFD just for the Sweet bread (disambiguation) redirect, I would appreciate it. Calathan (talk) 13:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I hadn't noticed the Sweet bread (disambiguation). Now closed with disambig page deleted.--Salix (talk): 14:08, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced

Hi there. Go strategy and tactics has a solitary reference - not good - but it's been tagged as "This article does not cite any references or sources. ...".

The 'any' bit's not correct, is it, so would you mind if I alter the tag to {{more footnotes}}: "article has some references, but insufficient in-text citations"? Trafford09 (talk) 14:31, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thats fine.--Salix (talk): 15:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks. Trafford09 (talk) 16:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Salix alba. You have new messages at WillNess's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

MSU Interview

Dear Salix alba,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at [e-mail] (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at [e-mail]. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 04:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hum, firstly i think a course on becoming an admin is fundamentally misguided, its an off wiki process for an on wiki activity. Its a course without an achievable end result, that of becoming an admin. How to become an admin: edit wikipedia well for at least a year. You also seem to have spammed a lot of talk pages, which is not a good wiki usage.--Salix (talk): 07:36, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks

Many thanks for what you have done for regarding my nomination of St Paul's Day as a Redirect for Discussion. I think that your advice could well fix the problem! Again, thank you for your help here, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 09:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

F♭

Can you add info to E (musical note) revealing when F♭ is used?? Check the talk page for info. Georgia guy (talk) 14:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Frothy mixture close

re Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 February 14#Frothy mixture, I see you have extensive experience in closing RFDs, and are located outside the US, so clearly there isn't any COI. So I'm interested why you didn't address the option of retargetting Frothy mixture in your close, or creation of a dab page. My perception is that delete and salt is an over-reaction, even with BLP concerns. I'm sure you have good reasons, but you didn't explain them. Josh Parris 21:28, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not really enough support in the discussion for a dab page to close with that result. Salting might be a bit of an over reaction, i won't object if another admin or DRV wants to remove that.--Salix (talk): 22:17, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it does draw a line under it. Perhaps I'll revisit after the republican nominations close, and there's a lot less energy attached to it. Josh Parris 22:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ROC -> Taiwan move

Hi; I saw your oppose vote, and I didn't quite understand your justification.. I hope you weren't opposing the proposal on the grounds that the "Taiwan (disambiguation)" move request was closed as no consensus? We were well aware of that (somewhat misguided, in my opinion) proposal and discussion when we made this proposal. Thanks for your time, Mlm42 (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Family (mathematics)

In thinking over this issue, I wonder if it is really the best solution for the family links in those mathematics articles to point to a disambiguation page. Perhaps there is a better solution. What do you think about the idea that Family (mathematics), rather than being a redirect or a dab, should be a general concept article explaining the meaning of family in the context of mathematics? Would it be possible to produce a substantive article on that topic, one that tied together the various types of mathematical families with a cohesive overview? Or are the different meanings too disparate to be discussed together? I ask as a non-expert--certainly not well informed enough to produce such an article myself. Any thoughts?--ShelfSkewed Talk 17:05, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I've been thinking the same thing. The three concepts are very closely linked, with Family of sets the most general, Indexed family a special case of that and Parametric family a particular type of indexed family. Normal family defines a particular type of family. --Salix (talk): 18:06, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So I suppose we need to find a way to get the article written. As I said, I am in no way qualified for the job. Is this something you'd like to take a crack at? Or should we drop a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics and get some feedback and maybe a volunteer to write the article?--ShelfSkewed Talk 22:26, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 5Rhythms

A tag has been placed on 5Rhythms, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Famousdog (talk) 14:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 5Rhythms for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 5Rhythms is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/5Rhythms until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 15:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My personal gaming wiki reference...

Random delete i read the rules but can you at least send me a copy of that information that was on my wiki i had it there for reference... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tusamie (talk • contribs) 15:40, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Email sent with last version of your page. --Salix (talk): 15:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Searl Effect Generator deletion

Why did you deleted that article? You dont have the right! Undo it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkmlk (talk • contribs) 12:26, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because there just were not enough good sources about the Searl Effect Generator. If you can find more good sources then I would support you at Wikipedia:Deletion review.--Salix (talk): 12:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And now with your deletion there are even fewer sources. UNDO IT! Thats not an excuse! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkmlk (talk • contribs) 12:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry can't undo it. I can send you a copy of the articles if that will be of help.--Salix (talk): 12:54, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SadDoLLs page undelition

• Hello,i would like to know the reasons why SADDOLLS page was deleted by you.All sources were reliable,please concider an undelition.--Fantazma1234 (talk) 21:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I Suggest you should GOOGLE it closely.This IS a notbale band.Their second album has featurings from many notable bands such as TO/DIE/FOR,HIM,Scar Symmetry and Mandragora Scream.

Also the band's first single was included in Sonic Seducer magazine,in the compilation CD "Cold Hands Seduction Vol.128" (evidence of these statements were provided with links as "External Links".Please,undo.--Fantazma1234 (talk) 21:24, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Also explain in this page WHY this band's profile exists and SadDollS profile is deleted Sorrowful Angels .This is notable by your standards and SadDoLLs profile was not?--Fantazma1234 (talk) 22:32, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did any of the singles/albums chart? Or meet any of the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (music)?--Salix (talk): 02:20, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Salix alba. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2012_March_11#Music_for_the_Hard_of_Thinking.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Argolin (talk) 21:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This decade

I was wondering if Current decade/this decade should be reformatted like how you did This century and This year after the RFD? 70.24.251.71 (talk) 05:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

unwrapped script

Have a look at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Mathematics/2012_March_6#unwrapped_script. Bo Jacoby (talk) 14:30, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Lerryn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Mary Tudor, St Columb and William Godolphin

St Veep (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Mary Tudor, St Columb and William Godolphin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Burchard Kranich (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to St Columb and William Godolphin

Osman Haji (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Somali

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• Account activation codes have been emailed.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi^t | c 04:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Plants used in Traditional Chinese medicine

Category:Plants used in Traditional Chinese medicine, which you created, has been nominated for renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 20:42, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Masanobu Fukuoka

Just a 'heads up' as you've taken interest before, Macropneuma is back at Masanobu Fukuoka. Thanks. --Iyo-farm (talk) 16:24, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

first order

This link to first order doesn't make a lot of sense. Obviously, first order or first-order is a long disambiguation page. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes none of them quite fitted. Feel free to replace with something more appropriate or replace.--Salix (talk): 22:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Great American Novel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beloved (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to comment at Monty Hall problem RfC

You are invited to comment on the following probability-related RfC:

Talk:Monty Hall problem#Conditional or Simple solutions for the Monty Hall problem?

--Guy Macon (talk) 17:11, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 1, Proposal 2 or Niether?

Hi! On the [[[Talk:Monty Hall problem]] RfC, would you be so kind as to put Proposal 1', Proposal 2 or Neither at the start of your comments? We want to make things easy for the closing admin to count. Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 15:14, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CFDs for English/Scottish LGBT

Hi, did you intend to CFD Category:LGBT actors from Scotland or not? See the revision history. The linked CFD refers to LGBT comedians, but you didn't put a CFD on Category:LGBT comedians from Scotland. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whoopse ment to CFD Category:LGBT comedians from Scotland not Category:LGBT actors from Scotland.--Salix (talk): 18:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Action for Children, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Milton, Waterloo and Ramsey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other copies

Other editors tried to dodge the deletion of the userpage by copying the article from the userpage themselves to their own User:SamuelTheGhost/Marcel_Leroux User:Jaunjaun/sandbox (they were mentioned during the course of the MfD). The rather extensive DRV associated with the original AfD has endorsed the original deletion of Marcel Leroux. IRWolfie- (talk) 09:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've listed both at MfD.--Salix (talk): 10:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I got User:Jaunjaun/sandbox undeleted because it had been deleted under G4, which I don't think is appropriate for something that may have been good faith userfied. I think that's the question to consider at the MfDs, whether the userfication was in good faith or not. Gigs (talk) 13:52, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW we can histmerge, and attribution isn't totally lost on any copy/pasted userfied page, so we don't usually consider that as a particularly compelling argument at MfD. It's more of a technical issue that can be resolved by any admin. Gigs (talk) 13:53, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

over/underlinking

Could you take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Linking#What_generally_should_not_be_linked_--_can_we_bring_this_to_closure.3F

The "one link" rule/enforcement has gotten out of hand, I'm trying to get something closer to rationality. You seem to be one of the people with a "middle ground" view, and I'd appreciate any refinements to the proposal. If the proposed replacement language at the top of the section is something you'd support, I'd appreciate it if you could note that. Thanks Boundlessly (talk) 21:45, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Horus

Thanks for the help on the Eye of Horus page. Paul B (talk) 14:16, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Phyllotaxy Towers

Dear Sir, "Phyllotaxy Towers" are kind of "Phyllotactic Architecture" which is part of Phyllotaxis article on Wikipedia. Also there are lots of web pages on the internet about "Phyllotactic Architecture". Sincerely,

If you could provide a reference to any existing building which uses Phyllotaxis that would be a start. I've yet to find any reliable sources about the topic.--Salix (talk): 12:27, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at this link and this link please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saleh Masoumi (talk • contribs) 13:40, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

in addition you've got mail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saleh Masoumi (talk • contribs) 14:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update, congratulations on getting accepted by the conference, I do not need to see the document. You should read WP:N, WP:RS, WP:V and WP:OR these will give indication of the level of sources needed to support an article. While getting a conference paper is great, its not enough to base a wikipedia articles. Ideally a well cited review paper discussing the topic is the sort of level we are looking for. What might be an idea is considering a broder topic, like biomimetic architecture which would have enough sources.--Salix (talk): 14:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "Phyllotaxy Towers" are kind of "Biomimetic Architecture". You are not supposed to delete an article unless you can prove it contains wrong information. does this article contain wrong and false information? if yes, how did some great professors (juries) accept it? Are you going to delete the article yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saleh Masoumi (talk • contribs) 20:33, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

for example professor "Leslie Keith Norford" from school of Architecture at MIT university has confirmed and approved the validity and correctness of this article. Here is his email address: [e-mail]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saleh Masoumi (talk • contribs) 11:17, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The key guideline for what we have article on is Notability just because an article is correct does not mean it should be on wikipedia. Everyday 100 of articles are delete see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/Today for todays listing. `You can remove the prod template and we will then take it to AFD where others can comment.--Salix (talk): 12:31, 6 November 2012 (UTC) I think it would be a better solution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saleh Masoumi (talk • contribs) 14:18, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the prod template and now waiting for others to comment on. --2.187.98.165 (talk) 14:40, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What will happen if others do not comment on the article? --Saleh Masoumi (talk) 08:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They already have, the discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phyllotaxy towers. BTW the signature go at the end of a comment.--Salix (talk): 09:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you deleting PHYLLOTAXY TOWERS that I put as a case study on phyllotaxis talk page? What is the difference between it and Mangal City ?--Saleh Masoumi (talk) 16:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've not done anything about Phyllotaxy Towers recently. Another user did delete comments you made on Talk:Phyllotaxis as they were not about improving that article, until the idea reaches a suficient level of notability there will not be a place in wikipedia for the idea. It is likely that any further edits you make on the subject will be deleted. Its not that it isn't an interesting idea, just that its too early for wikipedia, when there is a significant construstion and not just a proposal then that will be the time to return.--Salix (talk): 21:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference between this and this? both of them are on the same website but the second one is deleting by a user!!!--Saleh Masoumi (talk) 07:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it is possible, Please add the PHYLLOTAXY TOWERs to the case studies at phyllotaxis talk page. tanx.--Saleh Masoumi (talk) 07:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You really have to stop adding links. Adding links were relevant while there was an AFD discussion going on. Now the discussion has finished posting links on the talk page is considered spamming and they will be reverted. Further action like this will involve administrative actions such as blocking your user name or locking the talk page. You need to try a completly different site to promote your ideas.--Salix (talk): 11:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, you are deleting my links permanently and why?
What's the difference between this and this? both of them are on the same website but the second one is deleting constantly by a user (Salix)--Saleh Masoumi (talk) 00:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

---

Hi Salix alba, this discussion has become very confused, but I think that what has been added to my talk page indicates that User:Saleh Masoumi wishes to have access to a copy of the page that was deleted. Could you please make a copy of it in that user's space? Thanks. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK now done at User:Saleh Masoumi/Phyllotaxy towers. Not convinced its not a attempt to get round AFD but I give him a chance.--Salix (talk): 19:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. We can only wait and see. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 20:17, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The notoriuos wiki troll ( Iaaasi) returned

Hello!

The well known chauvinist romanian wiki-troll User:Iaaasi returned (with a new croatian fake identity) He is now active alias user: Irji2012 He is often active in Hungarian-related aricles, he enjoy edit-warring deleting good sources and sentences from important articles, and he like to break the rules of wiki even 3 revert rule. Can you arrange about this notorious wiki-troll? Thank you! Peter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.49.97 (talk) 11:16, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Comedy Circus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Anita, Rajiv, Suri, Preeti and Suraj

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They talked, you acted

The difference is that you built the encyclopaedia, they discussed building it. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Timtrent (talk • contribs)

Curiously, if they hadn't talked I couldn't have acted!--Salix (talk): 13:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am still curious about why folk talk without acting. The wisdom of crowds amuses me every time. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 13:27, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Acronyms and Initialisms

Hi! Over at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Deprecation of disproportionate usage of "initialism" on Wikipedia a move request that you closed (Talk:Acronym#Proposed move to Acronym)is being used as justification for a proposed deprecation of the term "initialism" in all Wikipedia articles. Would you care to comment at the Village pump and/or review the closing? Given how much is being made of this I am considering a Wikipedia:Move review as a way to get a clearer consensus on this. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll consider commenting at the village pump. I had a look at my closure and I don't wish to change that. There was strong argument for it and only one brief comment against. The closure was also in accordance with wikipedia policy Wikipedia:COMMONNAME. In the UK at least I've only ever heard the term acronym, initialism is never used.--Salix (talk): 21:14, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I appreciate you taking a second look at it. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:55, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks on work for title change of Public choice theory

Thank you indeed, S. a., for recent work pertaining to Talk:Public choice#Proposed title change from "Public choice theory" to "Public choice". I think that all parties there would acknowledge that wp Due process was served in your decision. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 14:56, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

Since you closed the notability template discussion, can you make the edit I requested at the template talk page? Thanks. Ryan Vesey 06:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure which edit you are referring to?--Salix (talk): 06:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Found it now, it was on Template talk:Find sources rather than Template talk:Notability.--Salix (talk): 07:21, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Salix alba. You have new messages at Template talk:Notability#Find sources link.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Phil Bridger (talk) 08:00, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Awkward segment

At this site, there is an awkward segment "the is a case for creation of an article on the family". You may wish to correct this. --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:11, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please place "Template:Seals family" in my User Space?

Can you please place "Template:Seals family" in my User Space? --Jax 0677 (talk) 08:46, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK done at User:Jax 0677/Seals Family. Just the latest version sans tfd tag, if you need full revision history let me know.--Salix (talk): 08:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Template category

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Template_category&curid=6753862&diff=542775365&oldid=542211045

Just to say thanks for fixing the above – something I'd overlooked. CsDix (talk) 23:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

comments welcomed

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Can_someone_check_something.3F -- since you made the last edit to MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-codespill I'm thinking you might be able to help. NE Ent 23:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Raions_of_Ukraine#Closing_contested

Talk:Raions_of_Ukraine#Closing_contested Aleksandr Krymsky (talk) 01:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Premature close

Why on earth did you close the discussion at Talk:Aquila (Roman) just as new participants entered it? I hadn't even had a chance to read yesterday's posts, and I don't see a clear consensus for any one title. The move was premature given that the discussion was ongoing. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:41, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It had been open three weeks and RM can be closed after 7 days.--Salix (talk): 18:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but it was active (it had been open a while before interested parties learned of it), and I don't see how you managed to find a consensus for a title. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Salix. Another user started another RM at the article; I reverted it as being too soon to start one without discussing with you first. At any rate there appears to be quite a bit of disagreement over the close.--Cúchullain ^t/c 02:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk back

Hello, Salix alba. You have new messages at Talk:Erotica_(Madonna_album)#Requested_move.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 06:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fonts uploaded by MathJax

Hello!

When I edited Wikipedia from a system lacking locally-installed MathJax fonts, I noticed that my class="texthtml" appearance switched to MathJax fonts immediately after MathJax was activated. Could you reproduce this effect? I used Firefox. If it works for most modern browsers, then it shed a new light to the problem of default site-wide font-family for class="texthtml". If a reader uses the low-quality PNG renderer, then it is not particularly preoccupated with typesetting quality and a good-looking class="texthtml" is not required. If a reader enables MathJax (one of MathJaxes), but the page s/he reads does not contain any <math>, then it is not important to mimic the MathJax appearance with {{math}}: it may use whatever serif font. It is exactly the case when both MathJax and class="texthtml" are used on one page which requires them to have similar (and good) appearance, and we can get it for almost no cost. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 22:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

douglas fir

You might want to take a look at Talk:Douglas_fir#Post-move_discussion. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Holistic management

The holistic management page was deleted right in the middle of me editing it to help make it meet wikipedia guidelines. I was hoping for some advise as to how to either get wikipedia reconsider or to retrieve the work I already did to help in writing a new page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redddbaron (talk • contribs) 14:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can try and take it to Wikipedia:Deletion review but I'm not particularly optimistic about success there. I would suggest effort goes into the Allan Savory page as that still needs a lot of work. I see you already have a userspace draft of the old article. If a substantially better article draft is created then there may be a case for recreation. Contribution to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holistic Management International‎ and edits to Holistic Management International‎ are also useful at this stage.--Salix (talk): 16:35, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am more interested in the method than the people promoting the method. The method in a "proof of concept" won the Buckminster Fuller award. So for me, that settles the issue of whether the method deserves a spot on wiki or not. I have no ties at all to the Savory Inst or the holistic management international. Those organizations could fall off the earth and it wouldn't matter to me as long as the management method survives. (and it will since many people like Joel Salatin and Dan Dagget and the USDA-NRCS are also teaching and advocating its use.) When I first saw the article it had NO references at all. I started editing it even before I had a wiki account adding 4 or 5 references. Now that I have a wiki account I have added 16 references and nearly completely rewritten the entire article. Less than one paragraph from the original article exists and even that I changed to a more neutral wording. The problem is I am a noob and I am having issues citing the references properly.Redddbaron (talk) 20:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For references is fine just to start doing plain text inside a pair of <ref> tags. You can move onto using {{cite book}} {{cite news}} {{cite web}} or {{cite journal}} later.--Salix (talk): 21:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Systems theory

Frankly, I think the mathematical project does a poor job of keeping track of articles, since several relevant articles are untagged and haven't had many edits in years. The Systems Project has a wider scope because, by its nature, it covers Dynamical systems theory and areas involving multiple scientific disciplines. "Untagged" is equivalent to "invisible" for several categories which could use more attention. Dimadick (talk) 16:18, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperlinking "popularity"... in popular mathematics then?

“	/* Points in Euclidean geometry */Reversed Ph.D. Salix alba correction. This time I have hyperlinked "popularly" with the "Popular mathematics" article... I hope this sounds better... :O/ Differences between last page you reverted and current version	”
— "Point (geometry)" article

Hallo there Dr. R. Morris,
In the "Point (geometry)" article I have hyperlinked "popularly" with the "Popular mathematics" article... I hope this helps. Thanks for the patience you have shown in the past for reviewing mathematics and computer science articles. Cheers.
  M aurice   Carbonaro  06:58, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NO! Its not about popularity. Most geometry is 3D Euclidean geometry this is what you do in school, what is used in engineering and classical physics. There are other exotic forms of geometry, say hyperbolic geometry and noncommutative geometry where you also have points but these are more uncommon. Linking Popular mathematics is badly wrong, Euclidean geometry is a bit too technical for that. "Popularity is a social phenomena that dictates who or what is best liked" we should not be making value judgments about what type of mathematics people do or do not like, but we can mention the most frequent usage of a concept.--Salix (talk): 07:23, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whateva...! Anyway you are definitely right about "Popularity bias": is a social phenomena that dictates who or what is best liked... I apologize then... it must be that I have been spoiled by the political environment that we had here in Italy for the past 20 years. Sorry for bothering you and thanks again for your patience... :O/   M aurice   Carbonaro  10:54, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Euclidean vector

Yes, of course the history of a topic is important in an encyclopedia, and it's always nice to see historical information in math articles. But we have here a history section that is the history of a different topic than the subject of the article: there were 4 out of 5 or 6 paragraphs written to emphasize quaternions, with vectors an afterthought at best. (I've now re-removed one of these paragraphs, a comparison of quaternion and complex multiplication.) Three such paragraphs remain. If you'd like to keep them, please rewrite them so that they are about vectors, not quaternions. (Or move content over to the quaternion article as appropriate.) Right now the section is extremely misfocused and misleading. --JBL (talk) 14:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll respond to this at Talk:Euclidean vector#History.--Salix (talk): 22:09, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Holistic Management International

HI! Stalwart111 is helping me to rewrite the HMI page which I got relisted. It is already much better IMHO. Could you please go look and give me your opinion? You helped so much on the last one, (HM) that I was hoping you could help on this one too. Thanks in advance. Redddbaron (talk) 05:04, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Salix you removed this. In 2010, USAID awarded a further $4.8m to expand HMI's work in Africa.[1]http://www.conservationmagazine.org/2011/06/greener-pastures[2]http://naturalcapitaleastafrica.com/about-us/our-associates/

I have confirmed that HMI did actually receive that grant. Yes Savory split from HMI but the grant was to HMI the non profit, not Savory's for profit Savory Institute. That's why I included the additional link "our associates". Showing that the work in Africa is now being supported by BOTH HMI and Savory after the split. So while the organizations may have split, the government USAID GRANT went to HMI.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Redddbaron (talk • contribs)

Do you have any evidence for this? All I can show is the In Practice magazines. The last issue of 2009 list ACFHM as an associate, but the the Jan 2010 issue does not. The conservation magazine article mentions ACFHM but not HMI and natural capital link shows nothing.--Salix (talk): 20:33, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I went digging and found this correction in the 2010 records. http://www.fedspending.org/faads/faads.php?fiscal_year=2010&recip_id=429443&agency_code=7200&sum_expand=C&sortp=t&datype=T&reptype=r&database=faads&detail=4&submit=GO — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redddbaron (talk • contribs) 22:16, 21 April 2013 (UTC) Sorry about earlier. But while rounding up links I ran across something that may prove you correct. Originally it seemed as if the grant to ACHM went through HMI. But I found this: http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/994C762DF3C2A972492577B500070D09-Full_Report.pdf and according to this that may have split exactly at 2010? I am going to look to see if I can find something else.Redddbaron (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now I am confused. Someone else added "This is now a regional office of HMI."Holistic Management of Rangelands in Dimbangombe, Zimbabwe" (PDF). Ecoagriculture Snapshots. Retrieved 10 April 2013. If that statement and reference are true, then the part you edited off needs put back on. You can have it both on, or both off, but not one on and one off. Personally either way is fine for me. I am only interested in the truth of the matter. Whatever is the truth should be what we go with.Redddbaron (talk) 17:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the date at the bottom of the article. March 2009. So its basically out of date information.--Salix (talk): 21:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed and it has been edited to show that. Thanks! Redddbaron (talk) 00:23, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Terence Rattigan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ratigan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WT:WPM

Thank you for restoring my comment about Jordan-admissible algebra. Unfortunately another editor has chosen to delete for reasons he refuses to specify. I will not bother to repeat the question if he chooses to behave like this. One cubed loop (talk) 11:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Initially looking at your edit history it has the hallmarks of a sockpuppet with the only edits to contentious discussion on a project space. The actual content was a reasonable though. There is rather to much drama about this for my liking. I'd like to encourage good behavior and discourage bad. So more constructive edits and less drama. --Salix (talk): 16:26, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting how the atmosphere on this page has suddenly become so toxic. As you say, reasonable comments, uncontroversial in themselves, can generate drama from other users. I wonder why that is? One cubed loop (talk) 16:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not much to say. Good things = constructive edits to articles. Fixing some of the issues at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Current activity would be a good start.--Salix (talk): 17:13, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One cubed loop is a sockpuppet of a banned user. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Echigo mole. There is an arbcom motion about restoring edits by this particular editor. Please see this motion here. The recent socks of this community banned user that have trolled on WT:WikiProject Mathematics and been CU-blocked include Algebraic Jordanian, Boodlepounce, Scrim in sin and Castello Orsini-Odescalchi. One cubed loop is the latest sock and will be indefinitely blocked fairly shortly. Here's the list of confirmed sockpupppets Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Echigo mole. It's a long list and this a case of WP:LTA. His modus operandi has been to create disputes by trolling. Mathsci (talk) 19:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Salix: indeed, improving articles and building the encyclopedia is what it is all about. A good example is this edit [1] to Jordan operator algebra in response to an IP attempting constructive edits. One cubed loop (talk) 20:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now blocked indefinitely as Echigo mole sock by a checkuser. The IP was also an ipsock of Echigo mole. Mathsci (talk) 20:47, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Standard offer discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Standard offer for User:A.K.Nole--Salix (talk): 20:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Comedy Circus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arbaaz Khan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:30, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Expert-maths

Hi, I came across Template:Expert-maths while cleaning up links to Expert-subject-multiple and saw it is duplicative in nature to {{Expert-subject}}. It's only being used on two articles right now, so could you replace them with Expert-subject and delete Expert-maths? Thanks, — Bility (talk) 17:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done now. It was only a draft/test.--Salix (talk): 08:52, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, Salix alba. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 19:54, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Air France Flight 447

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Air France Flight 447. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

KW talk page

Please undo [2] ... no harm will occur to the encyclopedic because of some rhetoric on a user talk page. NE Ent 23:34, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with NE Ent, you ought not to have "protected" KW's talk page. It just seems like you're trying to censure honest discussion that you happen to disagree with. Eric Corbett 00:05, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AN close

Not bad. However, I did respond to errors by Horologium, and my response was just reverted. Would you please restore my response. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:02, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your close did not mention the length of time, which was discussed. Drmies suggested 3-4 months (I believe) as no skin off his nose. Any administrator is free to remove the restriction, I think. Did the AN discussion have consensus on indefinite, or was there no consensus, or was it 3-4? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My close tried to represent the general view of the AN discussion. The issue of the ban duration was not really discussed so I can't really draw conclusion. The block statement did not mention a ban duration but it was logged as Indefinite. In the lack of any explicit discussion of length it really defaults to indefinite, which is reflected in the length given at Wikipedia:Editing restrictions by Drmies. Note indefinite really means indeterminate so it can be changed or lifted at a later date - if the problematic behaviour has not reoccured. I would suggest waiting 3-4 mouths and if you have managed to keep out of protracted disputes asking then. --Salix (talk): 06:28, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you were a mathematician.

As an administrator, Drmies does not have the authority to impose a community restriction. Only Arbcom and AN do. You need to base the community restriction on the AN discussion. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 06:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Now for RMs on Nuxalk people and Sto:lo people "back" to undiacritical versions of Nuxalk and Sto:lo. Hope they're not as long or arduous.....Thanks again. BTW your username in the Chinook Jargon, usually spelled solleks, means "angry" ;-).Skookum1 (talk) 11:39, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Needless to say subcategories named "people from the FOO people" or "FOO people people" are not workable. I'm going to survey the related categories for other articles names of this kind, and maybe do a bulk RM...ideally speedied, since other than Skwxwu7mesh/Squamish people they were not RMd...the CfD on that one may be harder to sort out because of the RM on the main article, but Category:Squamish is a very bad mistake.`Skookum1 (talk) 11:41, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please note also the similarly hamstrung Category:Cree nations CfD, and sorry it's such a slog. I never expected such determined opposition.....re "FOO governments" categories elsewhere for band governments.Skookum1 (talk) 11:45, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, while being happy of course with your closure of the BC CfDs, I'm more than a bit dismayed by your "no consensus" ruling on Category:Cree nations. Small-case "nations" has so many vague and differing meanings in Canada, and not just in relation to First Nations peoples and their governments, it was a very bad call. Did you not look at its parent Category:First Nations governments?? Did you not take into account there are no other "FOO nations" categories, and that this one is completely anomalous? The other editor's justifications and analysis were all original research and personal opinion, especially about equating "First Nation" with "nation". There is ONE Cree nation, but many bands, and many bands are not just Cree but also Chipewyan and Dene and Metis. Very bad call. I gather if I went and just made Category:Cree governments to match all the other "FOO governments" categories that exist, I'd be accused of a POV fork huh and acting in defiance of your closure's conclusion, huh?Skookum1 (talk) 02:44, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When closing I have to assess if there is was a consensus of the editors there. There were two oppose votes and two support, and a couple of alternative suggestions. One very forceful and passionate contributor does not make for consensus.

Also compare

Nation may refer to a community of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, or history. However, it can also refer to people who share a common territory and government (for example the inhabitants of a sovereign state) irrespective of their ethnic make-up; that is, a nation state.[1][2] The word nation can more specifically refer to people of North American Indians.

A government is the system by which a state or community is governed.

A First Nations government aka a band government (the latter is a redirect to the former) is a government established by the Indian Act....in politicized native parlance, "nation" is used to refer to everything from a single band to a people entire. It has various loaded meanings in Canada, partly because of the "Two Nations" concept (Anglo-Saxon/French foundation of Canada), which is where the "First Nation" term came from, to put the lie to the notion that there were only two founding nations. It's used for everything from an individual to a people to a band government to a tribal council and has both adjectival and noun contexts; emerging practice is to use lower case when adjectival in nature. Wikipedia conventions dating back, oh, five years or so, have been to use e.g. "FOO First Nation" for a band government, not for the people; "FOO Nation" is a common band-name structure, though "FOO Indian Band" is also still used, and "First Nations in FOO [province or territory]" for the peoples and "First Nations governments in FOO" for the Indian Act governments and/or for tribal councils, which are their own category, not for traditional governance in all its many forms and variations. The issue of native sovereignty is a hot-button issue in all parts of native Canada, even those areas where sovereignty was surrendered by treaty (which most of BC wasn't). The plural of "First Nations governments" is not "nations"....it has loaded political connotations and is highly POV, and as I explained in this CfD and the Squamish one, but was ignored in this CfD by somebody with obviously POV attachments to his OR and uncited sources/opinions that "nations" was proper, when it's really highly POV when used like that and also extremely vague and ambiguous, with many more meanings than "band governments". That's not the consensus in WP:IPNA established a long time ago, or invoked by the aboriginal editors of my acquaintance and who I worked with to help build the article/category structure in times past, now under attack by the uninformed in many ways, with little regard either to established Wiki conventions or to the complications of aboriginal political language.Skookum1 (talk) 08:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which of those two describes the content of the articles in the category?--Salix (talk): 07:53, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Band governments, as I've said over and over and over again in the CfD. Each one of those is an Indian Act-mandated government, and many of them are also Chipewyan/Denesuline, Dene (of which the Denesuline are a part), Metis and other groups, each of which also may be described as a whole by small-case 'n' "nations"....there are no individual people articles, partly because of the mixed-"ethnicity" of many of them, though I've been looking around to see if any of them are Cree-only and have Cree names for themselves. The Indian Act and its system of governance is not the same as the peoples ("nations") themselves....if someone uses the expression "when I lived on the First Nation" as they often do in Ontario and in the Prairies, they mean the reserve. "First Nation" is vague in many cases like "nation" is, i.e. when somebody says "I'm from the FOO First Nation" meaning the ethnicity or location, they mean the community, or that the belong to a particular band, i.e. registered as such; in some contexts it may mean someone from the band council office or some other official capacity. What's in that category, again, are only Indian Act-mandated band governments. I'll see if I can find Wab Kinew's video where he explains "the great Cree nation" - one nation, not many.Skookum1 (talk) 08:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:List of Unix daemons

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Unix daemons. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of COBOL compiler page

Hi Salix,

I answered your comment both on the RainCode COBOL page and on my (talk)

Thank you Fontignie (talk) 06:34, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:BP

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:BP. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1. http://www.conservationmagazine.org/2011/06/greener-pastures/
2. Natural Capital East Africa. "Our associates". Retrieved 11 April 2013.