User talk:Truthanado/archive3

ARCHIVE: December 2007 – July 2008

Colonel Wright (sternwheeler)

On 3 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Colonel Wright (sternwheeler), 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) 16:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Ant on a rubber rope

I've now expanded the article as originally planned and added categories and references. There's more that can be done (as ever), but I felt it was appropriate to remove your expand/references/categorise tags. I hope you agree. Comments/contributions welcome of course. The page is Ant on a rubber rope. Mooncow (talk) 04:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

2008 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament

Hopefully this cleared things up a little. Is there a better way to put that fact? BlueAg09 (Talk) 03:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The first sentence of the article cited states "Neither coach has won a national title. Neither conference has won one either." Kansas may have won a national title as a member of the Big 8, but not as a member of the Big 12. It's like saying under the conference's current name (Big 12) it has not won a national championship. If you're still not fine with that, then I will go ahead and revert it. BlueAg09 (Talk) 03:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability (schools) edit

What happened here? Did you walk away from a logged-in browser and someone posted junk on your behalf? RossPatterson (talk) 19:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate user page

Hey Truthanado, thanks for your note, I've provided the user in question with a warning and if nothing is done within a couple of days, I'll happily delete his user page. Keep me up to speed should anything develop. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 15:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced village

I use IE 7 and it looks OK on my monitor (on land, seems right position). I also checked the coordinates to make sure they were correct (and not actually for a point in the water), and they are correct. My original guess is that the calibration of the map is off slightly - not noticed if a dot is 3 pixels too high on land, but obvious on water. I see Appraiser has tried this, so not sure what else to suggest. User:VerruckteDan may have some idea - he has calibrated many locator maps. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

• PS Sometimes the simplest is best - I assume you have tried bypassing your cache? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
• Yes, I cleared cache in Firefox and even tried MS Internet Explorer 7. Both show the same thing. If you see it okay and I don't, I'll assume it's a problem with me and my browsers, or maybe my monitor resolution. It is curious though that it does the same thing for me in both browsers on two different PCs. Truthanado (talk) 23:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I tried it on another computer with IE and it looked fine there too - has the problem been resolved? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
    • Problem solved. The latitude was 10 seconds too far north in the infobox and also in the coord template in the article text. Epodunk and Google Earth helped find the error. We can sleep tonight. Truthanado (talk) 01:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
      • Great news - thanks for letting me know. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

you kinda deleted my pages!!!

me and my organization were making wikipedia pages for ourselves... they were currently under construction and you deleted them... ya, kinda made me a bit mad —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emolove792 (talk • contribs) 19:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Robert Levett

I just wanted to knock out the piece and get it up. As always, I am refining as I go. It'll get quite a bit of additional copy editing. Thanks for noticing. Regards,MarmadukePercy (talk) 00:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, the correct spelling is, in fact, Levet, not Levett (although it sometimes varied). Another user created the title, but I agree with Levet.MarmadukePercy (talk) 00:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

You're welcome. RobertLunaIII (talk) 01:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Vilnius declaration AfD

A quick google, ProQuest, and Ebsco search turns up a vast amount of sources for the subject. What method did you use to approach the subject when performing a pre-AfD search? I ask because I'd like to help you to improve your searching methods to help prevent other unnecessary AfDs in the future. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 02:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

• I closed the AfD as a Keep. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes - I forgot to, sorry (I did add the old afd tag on the article's talk page). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Bob the Wikipedian/Zoobox/doc

Thanks. You can speedy delete it. I keep doing this for some reason...leaving off the User: part. I've already created the page I need where it should be, so I won't be losing anything. Thanks a ton! It's people like you who keep people like me in line...:) Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon (talk) 02:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Chaitén (volcano)

The See also section is for articles that have not been previously linked in the main article. ☆ CieloEstrellado 15:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Greg Gall (football fan)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Greg Gall (football fan), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? KenWalker | Talk 02:18, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

autodudding is not mandatory

Hi—It's quite clear in MOSNUM that there's nothing at all mandatory about the autodudding of full dates. I strongly discourage the practice wherever I can, for a whole bunch of reasons that have been aired countless times. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Autoformatting_and_linking Tony (talk) 16:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk:List of countries by GDP (nominal)#Informal mediation

Hi - you're invited to join in a discussion on the inclusion of the EU in the List of countries by GDP (nominal) article. Regards SilkTork *^YES! 23:13, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk:List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)#Conclusion

The Mediation discussion regarding the inclusion of the EU in List of countries by GDP (nominal) has come to a conclusion with the following result:

• The EU to remain in List of countries by GDP (nominal).
• The EU to be positioned according to GDP rank between World and USA.
• No consensus on the EU appearing in all three charts. By convention this means the situation would remain as current - that is the EU remains on all three charts.
• Data for the EU on each chart to only be given if sourced, otherwise a dash to replace the data.
• Explanation to be placed in the lead section for the appearance of the EU and other non-countries. Possible wording: "Several economies which are not normally considered to be countries are included in the list because they appear in the sources. These economies are not ranked in the charts here, but are listed in sequence by GDP for comparison."
• The List retains the current name.
• A suggestion by Tomeasy that I feel should be carried out is that the sister articles are given the same treatment as agreed above.

Unless there are significant disagreements within the next 48 hours I will be closing the Mediation. Any questions, please get in touch. Regards SilkTork *^YES! 10:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Achill Javea

I was asked by Edgar to put a Wikipedia article on here. I am sorry if it looks as though I have made it as if it is simply advertising, but this is not the case whatsoever. Achill is a popular nightclub which we simply have put on Wikipedia so people can read about it, not for advertising at all. If there is anything that is compulsary is changed, please tell me somehow.. until then, I don't see why this article should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Its-kris-maytee (talk • contribs) 00:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay.. Fedde Le Grand bit has been changed. Is there anything else? Sorry about this btw, didn't think for one second this would look like an advert. It's purely here for ex-visitors to just take a look at. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Its-kris-maytee (talk • contribs) 01:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

WARNING:If using Firefox 3 with Vista

There is a serious bug if you use FF 3 with Vista. Please see this link - Talk:Mozilla_Firefox#WARNING:Vista_users_and Firefox_3 Kathleen.wright5 09:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Alan Kulwicki

I have changed your edit on the Sprint Cup disambiguation. I altered it to the same format that it had been under before your change because the series was called the Winston Cup Series at the time and that's how the article needs to be written. The article needs to state the current name of the series so that current NASCAR fans can relate that series to the current series. I notice that you have userboxes that say that you are good with spelling and grammar. Would you review that article at the Featured Article level? It is already a Good Article, and it recently didn't pass Featured Article Candidate (FAC) because there was a lack of people commenting to support it. All reasons for opposing it were addressed. No one would stick out their neck to support it. Anyhow, it could use a thorough review for grammar, sentence structure, and spelling since it went through major alterations while listed under FAC. I had to rewrite a lot of text because I had switch from decent to extremely reliable sources. Please be careful to only make changes that are found in the Manual of Style since that is the standard that the article will be compared against. Royalbroil 02:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, you left the edit as I was writing a comment back. The article needs to state that it was the Winston Cup Series because that was the name that the series was called at that time. It needs to refer to the current name of the series so that people can relate the Winston Cup Series to its current name so that they can understand the context. I find the statement "xxx (now yyy)" to be most concise way to accomplish this. Royalbroil 02:25, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I have seen many articles done the way that I have indicated. This article has been peer reviewed by dozens of contributors at GA & FA level, and you're the first to bring up this comment. I do agree to respectfully disagree with you. Cheers! Royalbroil 14:52, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

MOS

I think such basic instruction is minimised at MOS: it's not a grammar textbook. Sure, there's a little in "Usage", but only where desperately needed. A conjunction can begin a clause—even a sentence. I wouldn't insert such a prescription to that effect. Are people doing it on WP in a dysfunctional way? TONY (talk) 15:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

David Owen Dodd and DOD

Hi!,
I was wondering why you added "David Owen Dodd" to the "DOD" page.
His surname isn't "Dod", and I haven't seen any evidence of him being referred to as "DOD".
I'm interested to read your reply.
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the question on my talk page. His initials are DOD. If you think that's not appropriate, feel free to revert it. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 13:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank for the reply. I'm undecided on the appropriateness. It would depend upon whether he is/was known as or referred to as "DOD". As I said, "I haven't seen any evidence of him being referred to as 'DOD'.", but that may simply be because I haven't looked in the right places. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 01:26, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Metropolin

In case you didn't realize, there hadn't been an AfD discussion on the article, so G4 doesn't apply. I removed the speedy and tagged it for notability and references instead. Cheers. BradV 21:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

R. Thomas Flynn

On 5 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article R. Thomas Flynn, 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) 07:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Howard Schwartz

Dear Truthanado, Howard Schwartz is the primarily collector of Jewish folklore in the U.S. ond virtually the only expert on interprentation of certain narratives of Jewish classical literature (such as Midrash) in later medieval period.

I strongly suggest undeleting the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxim Leyenson (talk • contribs) 09:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Gini Graham Scott

I see you added a tag needing additional citations within minutes of the creation of the article. You didn't, as far as I can see, specify any facts that you need citation for. Did you read the article? Is this something you or a bot just automatically do? Rosencomet (talk) 01:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Nat Williams

Hey Truth, I noticed the prod you placed on the Nat Williams article. I have added some additional information to the article since your assessment. Would you mind taking a look at it again and determine if it is improved enough to meet wiki notability standards? Thanks --..BlackThor^{Talk • Contribs} 17:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments in response to mine....but you see.....the thing is...eh...I wanted to so DYK this and ..eh...that tag is just such a downer. :)--..BlackThor^{Talk • Contribs} 00:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC) (You know there are dozens of articles about local sheriffs, at least mine is well referenced.)

Thanks for the advice.--..BlackThor^{Talk • Contribs} 00:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Grand Lodge of West Virginia

Thank you for stepping in constructively on the Grand Lodge of West Virginia article. I have responded to your request to add more information by searching further in the official website of the organization, which shows nothing of its history, and searching otherwise on the web. Google searching finds many mentions of the lawsuit. I also obtained and added financial information on the organization from Guidestar, a service which is the primary source for U.S. nonprofits' financial data. Given the substantial development of this article, and the factual, every-point-sourced nature, I ask that you judge the neutrality and time-slant charges are now invalid. It is not Bedford's right to continue to tag and attack a DYK nomination. I have the feeling he is not sincere in his opposition, that he is opposing the article now because I am supporting it (given that he has accused me of the opposite). The difference is that i have positively contributed to the article, while he has responded only trivially on the article Talk page and he has not identified any news, any story, any source that is not being reflected in the article. I am afraid that it is only his projection that the factual information in the article is negative about the organization, or his weird personal response to me. And, even if it was a negative story about the organization, then so what? The nature of a new article is that it puts forth information that is accessible, and the news of the lawsuit is what is available and what is news. If the news was so bad then the organization would itself be responding publicly, which it is not. The article topic and content is encyclopedic, as the first commenter in opposition to Bedford's removal of content stated at the Talk page. doncram (talk) 08:01, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I went and re-edited the whole article as an uninvolved yet knowledgeable editor, and left comments on the Talk page. I expect that there shouldn't be any further issues, but keep an eye out anyway. MSJapan (talk) 06:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

CSD templates

Hi there, thanks for your page patrol work. I noticed that you are occasionally putting two templates on a single page, like you did here. Just wanted to let you know that this is unnecessary; even if two different criteria apply, a single template is sufficient. Thanks! Tan ǀ 39 00:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Lee High School (Huntsville, Alabama)

Thanks for cleaning up the article. I discovered that most of the other information was copied from Huntsville High School. I suspect that the point of creating the article was to add all of the negative information, not to have correct information. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

DYK issues

Please see T:TDYK for comments on your submission of Viktor Nogin. Renata (talk) 23:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

1. Nationmaster Encyclopedia is clearly a mirror of Wikipedia. Just check any other article and you will see that it is a copy of an article in Wikipedia.

2. Plagiarism - you copied & pasted the text from the Moscow City Government website, slightly rephrased, and passed it as your own. It is either plagiarism or copyright violation. Either way, totally unacceptable. For an article to be truly your own work you need to re-write the source material in such a way that a reader having read both articles would not be able to tell they came from the same place. Renata (talk) 01:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

If a thief steals a car from Bob and them properly attributes that the car really belongs to Bob, it does not change the fact that the car was stolen and it is still a crime. If you included source it does not mean that everything is ok. By writing an article on Wikipedia and then submitting it to DYK as self-nom you claim that it was your work - when in fact it is not true. I believe that you have no intentions to plagiarize - but it happens when articles are written based on a single source, esp when the source is a short summary article. I suggest you should should rewrite it and remove ref#1. Renata (talk) 02:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Viktor Nogin DYK

On 26 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Victor Nogin, 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.

--Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 00:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

apologies from removing the persondata. It got lost when I was fiddling about with the Mayor of Moscow boxHarrypotter (talk) 15:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)