Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:10, 5 December 2006

• Archive (3 Feb - 16 Feb, 2006)
• Archive (20 Feb - 23 May, 2006)
• Archive (27 May - 28 July, 2006)
• Archive (20 July - 29 Sept, 2006)
• Archive (30 Sept - 14 Oct, 2006)
• Archive (14 Oct - 27 Nov, 2006)

Cladistics and vandalism

I'm afraid cladistics is out of my area of expertise, User:Opabinia regalis is better qualified on this than I am. As to the vandalism, it is only a few per day so seems pretty normal for a FA. Have a look at the Misplaced Pages:Most vandalized pages to see how comparatively lucky we are! TimVickers 16:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I've semi-protected influenza. Let me know when tuberculosis gets worse. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 16:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me know when you nominate cladistics. I have half a handful of books knocking around about this somewhere. Someone translated the Willi Hennig bio a while ago. As for helping with issues on my talk, things seem to have calmed down, but you can take a look at this AfD if you've got time. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 17:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

FA nomination for Bacteria

Hi there Sandy. I've nominated this page for FA. Your comments or corrections on its nomination page would be very welcome. TimVickers 17:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes, I was running through my list of editors who have expertise in this area and didn't notice you'd already contributed! Thanks for semi-protecting influenza, I suspect it's getting vandalised simply because it is a FA high up in the alphabet and near the top of the list in the biology section. TimVickers 17:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

An editor has made some major changes to this article, could you please return to the FAC and provide some feedback on whether or not these are an improvement? TimVickers 21:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Tazzie

If you aren't busy (which I'm sure you won't be after the holidays - ha), could you have a quick glance over Thylacine. I've rewritten it more or less from scratch over the past week, and I'm sure there wil be a few glaring mistakes to which I'm now blind (having rewritten and reorganized everything about 20 times). Any little improvements greatly appreciated. Cheers, Yomangani 18:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I really appreciate your time. I thought exactly the same about the footprint pic, but haven't been able to find one yet. The capitalisation is a bit of a nightmare, as we use uppercase for the specific species references and lowercase for the more general groups; therefore "foxes" but "Red Fox", "Dingo" but "possums", "Hyena" but "kangaroos" etc. Add to that the different conventions for different areas (fishes are all sentence case) and it does look confusing, but I think I have them all right. Yomangani 23:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

That helping hand

I will try to finish the work, but I do need to focus on school first and for most. During the last few weeks of school I view Misplaced Pages time as my reward for studying really, really hard; I typically take an hour or two to work on the articles and other things that I like if I feel I have learned something from my self-enforced study confinement. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

One other thing: Since you commented that the reference citations were incorrectly done I wonder if you wouldn't mind checking out the page Misplaced Pages:Inline citation to ensure that all information presented on the page is accurate and up to date. I would apreciate it. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Tuberculosis check

Re:Tim, please check this edit - while reverting a bunch of vandalism and unsourced edits, I accidentally deleted this (and later re-added it), but I'm not sure if it's correct. Sandy (Talk) 15:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The information is correct. TimVickers 17:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

FAR templates

I won't get into a revert war with you, but please see the discussion at Talk:Super Mario 64 and Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article review, as well as User talk:Joelr31. Andre (talk) 20:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Oh, the humanity! I had my doubts about a second RfA, but even I couldn't have predicted the way it caught fire and inexorably drifted to the ground in flames, causing quite a stir on its way down. Still, it was encouraging to see the level of support and confidence. Thank you for yours, and I hope I'll still have it the next time around. Kafziel 14:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Sad note

I didn't have a clue he had left - indeed it is most unfortunate. I hope he returns soon. Wiki users seem to be fast leaving, and it's hard to recognise any familiar faces these days. That can get rather lonely at times. LuciferMorgan 23:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear you feel he'll be back soon. I wish him a speedy recovery. LuciferMorgan 23:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Sandy. SlimVirgin 01:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Damn. Joelito (talk) 02:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Featured: London Underground

London Underground has been a featured article for over two years now! Unisouth 09:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Chess

I prefer Fanorona - I'll have a look, but I don't think I have much that will be useful for references. Cheers, Yomangani 16:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Spyware FAR

Thanks for seconding my concerns. Amazing what doing this sort of thing can do ... I didn't even know there was a malware project. I think it would have helped to have had the project banner on the talk page all this time. Daniel Case 17:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

"horrible, unreliable web site with a huge bias"

All fixed now. Jayjg 22:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, he's right, it's a terrible website. Jayjg 22:51, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

If I nominated you for admin

Would you accept? It seems you would be able to put the tools to good use. --Tbeatty 23:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

No - never - not my cup of tea. Thanks for asking. Sandy (Talk) 23:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

No worries. Let me know if you ever change your mind. --Tbeatty 23:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't expect to :-) Again, thanks for asking. Sandy (Talk) 23:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to say, I would have supported, even co-nominated, but I think you made the right decision. Being an admin is not as much fun as people think - especially if you want to be an editor at the same time. And you've got Opabinia, myself and others to ask for special admin favours if you ever have any. Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 01:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind thoughts and wise words, Samsara. Sandy (Talk) 02:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

That was quick!

I'd barely hit "submit". By the way, do you want to be an admin? Reading your edit summary I can't be sure. Arf. Yomangani 00:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

LOL :-)) Sandy (Talk) 00:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the footnotes fixes at Central Coast Mariners FC. If I may ask, did you do it by hand, or do you use a semi-automated bot (AWB etc.)? Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 01:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

It's a bot from User:Gimmetrow. Regards, Sandy (Talk) 01:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

More info here. Sandy (Talk) 01:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

V for Vendetta

He appears to have turned up now, but I weighed in anyway. Yomangani 15:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Bodyline unreferenced section

Hi, I noticed you've re-added the unreferenced section tag to the Bodyline article. I'm not quite sure what you want - there are multiple references listed at the bottom of the article. Everything written in that section (and every single other fact that currently has a citation needed tag stuck on it) comes from the book Bodyline Autopsy, which is listed in the references section for the article. Is it really necessary to add explicit citation tags for the exact same book to every statement in the article? It seems redundant and silly to state multiple paragraphs of facts and have a citation tag for the exact same reference stuck on to every single paragraph or sentence. If you have a good way to satisfy your desire for citations without making the article look stupid, please edit the article to add it, as I don't know what will satisfy you. -dmmaus 21:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Since I don't have the book, I can't add the references, as I don't have the page numbers. One cite per paragraph should suffice, but opinions attributed to various persons should definitely be cited. Sandy (Talk) 21:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, page numbers. Okay, I can add those. I'll do it when I have time. Thanks. -dmmaus 21:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Chavez

Have left a comment on your other ID about the Chavez article.--Zleitzen 07:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

FA nomination for California Gold Rush

The California Gold Rush article has been nominated for Featured article status. If you would like to comment on this nomination, please go here to leave your comment. To leave a comment on that page, click the link to the right of the title California Gold Rush.NorCalHistory 20:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Will read it soon, but the first thing I noticed is that a lot of the image placement is messing up formatting on section headings, etc., and that if you'll reduce the first image from 500px to 400, the layout will be much nicer with respect to the Table of Contents and the large white space left. With your permission, can I move around some of the images, and then if you don't like it, I'll revert it back ? Sandy (Talk) 22:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure, Sandy - give it a try. I know that it's different on each person's computer monitor. The current placement looks great on mine, but if you've got better, go for it! thx!NorCalHistory 22:17, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, wondering why all biblio, footnote entries correctly have author last name, first name listed first, except the Google buys Youtube entry, which doesn't list author first? Can you put author last name first on all for consistency? Sandy (Talk) 22:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Sandy - I fixed using a WP:CITE template.NorCalHistory 23:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Posting your list (gulp), on my talk page first, would be easiest for me, Sandy. After that, if there are things left undo, then a post on the FAC page would be in order. Thanks for your continuing assistance!NorCalHistory 23:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

(Bigger gulp!) - Thanks! Interestingly, many of your suggestions are actually reactions to other editors' changes where I said, "Well, what the heck" (like that question mark in the section title), and left in. Let me read through this list carefully, with all the same (much appreciated) attention you put into it.NorCalHistory 00:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Looking through your very good suggestions makes me think that almost all of this can be done pretty easily this evening and tomorrow. Anything that I don't do by in the next twelve hours or so (or perhaps don't agree with!), feel free to post on the FAC page - but if I could have a chance to clean this up a bit more before you do so, that would be appreciated!NorCalHistory 01:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Your thoughts: Of course, I love it. These are some ideas to make it even better:

Table of Contents: I don't like the section headings with question marks. Special characters should be avoided in section headings, and they aren't "encyclopedic". I also don't understand why "Path of the gold" is a sub-section of the Forty-Niners - not entirely related, shouldn't be a sub-section. I also have a problem that some of numbers that should be discussed in the Path of the gold are included later under Development of gold recovery techniques - a better discussion of those overall numbers would be included in Path of the gold, *after* the techniques for extraction/mining are discussed. I also have a problem with some of the repeated words in some of the sections (you should avoid repeating words in TOC). So ... I suggest the following order of sections: Overview Forty-Niners Legal Rights Development of gold recovery methods Profits Path of the gold Effects (on California and elsewhere is redundant - that's everywhere) Immediate Longer-term Modern-day (missing section - to be discussed) ??? Geology etcetera By doing this, you can discuss the methods, and then move the numbers that are currently (mis) listed under Techniques to Profits, where they are a better fit. I'd like to see the profits section expanded to give a better overview of all of the money/gold taken out of CA.

Done

Modern-day - not sure what to do with this. The article tells us when the Gold Rush began, but it never defines or explains when it ended. Did it end? Gold is mined today in California with increasingly aggressive methods. Where should/does the article end? Either 1) deal with current gold mining, or 2) define the scope of the article by detailing when the Gold Rush petered out. Remember, there are contemporary events such as the Ironstone Vineyards in Murphy's (the very successful conversion of a gold mine to a tourist trap), and the fact that the largest piece of gold ever was taken out of Jamestown in the last decade -- do you want to cover modern-day "gold rush" in CA, or better define the scope of the article?

Done

Now, line by line ...

This sentence is awkward: "The Gold Rush laid the foundation of the “California Dream” as a place to begin again, a place where untold wealth was just waiting to be found." The "dream" isn't the place to begin again - California is. You handled this well in the text - can you do the same in the lead? Also, you repeated the same twice in the text: the California Dream is first mentioned in Effects, and then the text is repeated in Longer-term effects - need to say it only once.

Done

Tailrace needs to be defined or wiki-linked the first time it's used - it's here in the lead: "found shiny pieces of metal in the tailrace of a sawmill he was building; ..."

Done

I'm not comfortable with "Stories of the fabulous "Golden State" and shiploads of California gold spread to every corner of the world," shiploads: were the entire ships really loaded with gold ? Or was gold spread by ship ...

Done

Something wrong here with punctuation, not sure how to fix: As Sutter had feared, he was ruined as his workers left in search of gold and squatters invaded his land and stole his crops and cattle.[ Short, choppy sentence should be better merged into surrounding text: The then-tiny settlement of San Francisco at first became a ghost town of abandoned ships and businesses whose owners joined the Gold Rush. Then, it boomed as merchants and new people arrived. infrastructure ... was (not were)? Like many boom towns, the infrastructure of San Francisco and other towns near the fields were strained

Done

Something wrong here with change in tense: An alternative route was to sail to the Isthmus of Panama, take canoes and mules for a week through the jungle, and then on the Pacific side, wait for a ship sailing for San Francisco.

Done

Towards the end of overview, when you begin to talk about Southern California (blick), you should start a new paragraph. "Gold was also discovered in Southern California ... "

Done

Caption: Native Americans strike back at miners

Done

Expand the entire Path of the gold section by 1) including some of the numbers later given in the Development section, and 2) giving a better summary of the overall numbers. There are terms throughout that need to be defined or wiki-linked: I suggest starting the wiki link articles on each. "However, panning cannot be done on a large scale, and industrious miners and groups of miners graduated to "cradles," "rockers," and "long-toms" to process larger volumes of gravel ... Development section - move numbers out (they aren't "development"), and include them in the Profits/Path sections

Addressed by moving order of sections; will add a few more links

"Eventually, hard-rock mining wound up being the single largest source of gold produced in the Gold Country." I think (not sure?) this sentence is what brings you into contemporary mining, as this is the method used now - this is the sentence that leads me to feel the scope (time) of the article isn't well-defined and needs to be better dealt with.

Done

In Effects, this needs to be sourced: "In addition, the environment suffered as gravel, silt and toxic chemicals from prospecting operations killed fish and destroyed habitats." Without a source, it reads like POV and OR.

Done

Awkward grammar, not sure how to fix: "Within a few years thereafter, in 1863, the groundbreaking ceremony for the western leg of the First Transcontinental Railroad was held in Sacramento." Don't know what "within a few years thereafter" means.

Done

Don't know what he is referring to here with "more benevolent" - needs better explanation or expansion: "or at least been born to a "more benevolent group of founding fathers."

Done (and moved entire thought to footnote).

This sentence is unencylopedic - I think it could be completely eliminated, if not completely reworded: How the gold came to be uniquely in California, and not elsewhere, so that the "first world-class gold rush" could take place there, is a story involving global forces.

Done (on second try!)

Still awkward, but I don't really know how to fix it - "Why the gold was in California involves global forces, and hundreds of millions of years. " I'm not a great grammarian, but maybe something like, "Global forces operating over millions of years resulted in the large concentration of gold in California. Sandy (Talk) 02:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Done

Thanks, Sandy, I think that these made it a better article! Much appreciated! NorCalHistory 02:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Punk Rock

Thanks for the request on my talk page, and sorry for the late reply. The main problem with the article is that to give it justice you'd have to own relevant literature on the topic, and I don't own as such. By right, this article should be a flagship article of the Punk Wikiproject and the main contributors there should be able to help with it - who helped with the Sex Pistols awhile back? They might be interested. I'm more of a Metal guy myself, but most of my time is focused on preparing for interviews with minor groups. LuciferMorgan 00:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe we could see if the Punk Wikiproject is interested? Even if an article is improved it's better than nothing. LuciferMorgan 00:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

|I'll just put it up for FAR and hope they come along. I have bit of a reputation as a grouchy so and so, so I'm not bothered about ruffling a few feathers. I'm surprised the Beatles Wikiproject hasn't swung for me yet! LuciferMorgan 00:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Image questions

Hi! I think you had been sorta mentoring User:Jamesshin92, I just wanted to let you know I updated a question he had asked you, and then cross-posted to my talk page. No big deal, but those images are probably going to be deleted. :( Anyway, If you or s/he have any other questions let me know, or ask at WP:MCQ. - cohesion 18:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to tag them as copyvios etc on the off chance that he is actually the photographer, rather than deleting them right away. This way he can see that process too I guess :) - cohesion 18:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Military brat

Hi Sandy, I responded to your questions/concerns. But I did have a question about the "There is a large number of references that need cleanup of the blue links" what do you mean by that? I'm not sure how to fix it, so could you let me know. I'll watch this page and the FAC for a response. AS for the "Useem" and "Deployment Center" those are websites/studies that are reported in the references. There are no page numbers/dates, but if you look at the references, you will see them listed as names.Balloonman 21:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

It's easier to do a few as samples than to explain: I'll go edit a couple on the article now. Sandy (Talk)

Thanks, I'll look at it probably tomorrow... I have a book due tomorrow that I want to finish rereading before I have to turn it in...Balloonman 05:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sandy, you have really impressed me with your perfectionism (it's a trait my wife has, but she hates to review my work for some strange reason ;-) )Anyway, I know that you are opposing the Military Brat article for FA, but I was wondering how close you thought it was? I know you said it needed to be copy edited and had concerns about the references, but beyond that anything else?Balloonman 09:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

superscripted punctuation separating refs

Added a line to handle superscripted commas, semicolons or dashes (-) between refs. HTML comments would still interfere. Gimmetrow 00:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

California Gold Rush FAC map

Sandy, after reading through all the other stuff that you were doing at the same time (above), I'm triply impressed that you found the time to lend a hand on this little California Gold Rush FAC project! If you do have another 35 seconds to spare . . .

Following up on the suggestion to include a map in the article, two maps are available. If you get a chance to go to my talk page, both maps are posted there for your review, and any comment you might have would be appreciated (unfortunately, neither map has Highway 49 (which would be a squeeze to fit in!) NorCalHistory 07:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

That Highway 49 map reference is appreciated! Thanks!NorCalHistory 21:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Confused by your comment

What did you mean by "refer to peer review" in your comment about Parâkramabâhu I? Did you mean it should be peer reviewed before it is nominated as a FA? I am the one who assessed it as a GA, and pointed Doc to either a Biography project peer review or FA nomination as options. Could you elaborate? I should add I have no emotional stake in what happens to the article. Though the subject holds no interest to me, I am very impressed at how Doc managed to expand a stub to what I consider FA quality. Thanks for your time. Jeffpw 23:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I got crossed up with you in attempting to correct the nom; we were doing the same work at the same time in trying to get it correctly listed, so some of my edits weren't recorded, as you were slightly ahead of me on correcting the faulty nom. It means that, rather than list everything that needs to be done still, it would be better to list it at peer review to better prepare the article for FAC, since it still needs work in many areas. Sandy (Talk) 23:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll pass that on to Doc. Jeffpw 23:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, I've been unable to find a WP:GA or WP:GAC listing - can you please let me know which section it is in at WP:GA? Sandy (Talk) 23:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Copied from the article talk page: *Doc originally asked me to assess this as part of the biography project (I have assessed several articles there). I originally gave it a B rating, then after he wrote to me that he had completed it, I reread it and assessed it as GA. If I did not follow protocol, please accept my apologies. I wasn't aware that it needed to be nominated for GA. I thought it could be assessed that way. Hope this clears up any confusion. Jeffpw 23:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

A friendly question

Sandy, are you the same person as User:SandyDancer??? I'm just curious. I owe you a reply to your post of last June in my talk page, which I have postponed (rather: procrastinated) until now. Sí, debemos tener amigos en común, me interesa tener trato epistolar contigo (I'd like us to become pen pals). Regards, AVM 00:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

No, that's not me, but it's curious that there's another Spanish-speaking Sandy on Wiki. Saludos, Sandy (Talk) 00:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

ah, sorry, just checked your talk page, and I did leave you a message once, and it does sound like we may have friend in common - but I'm not SandyDancer. Feel free to e-mail me anytime, Saludos, Sandy (Talk) 00:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks

Sandy, I'm honored you included me in your list of recommended cawpy-editors at User talk:Balloonman. Thanks. –Outriggr § 05:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I really do appreciate the effort both of you have made to this article. I'm trying to take your thoughts/concerns into affect and getting this up to the point where both of you can support the FAC.