Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:47, 31 July 2011

Please leave your message at the bottom of this page. I shall reply wherever you prefer (my usual habit is to reply here if the answer is short). If I replied on your talk page it means I am watching it, and there is no need to add {{talkback}} template or quote the previous message.

Request for an article draft

I notice that you have lots of little icons for your work on materials. Could you take a look at User:Σ/Coal ball and give me some feedback on it? I would greatly appreciate it. --Σ _contribs 03:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. Distribution needs work. I would also elaborate individual sections, put the lead into the article and only when the article is more or less finished write the lead as its summary. Materialscientist (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I've done some more. Could I have a bit of feedback and what you would grade it on the article quality scale? --Σ _contribs 07:58, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

It is getting better but I won't rate it until major sections are completed. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 08:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK reform

I'm glad you removed the Ghumdan Palace article as I was thinking its time for DYK reform and has presented me with an opportunity to do so. This quality issue happens all too frequently and some of the articles going through are rather embarrasing. I've addressed it here. As you know I am not at all phased by the DYK process but for the fact I enjoy collaborating with the others, like having a bank of half decent articles i can refer to and that some of the articles are looked over by yourself which is a positive thing as issues may be identified. I must admit that I personally ignore DYK on the front page unless I see an article which looks particularly interesting.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Most related discussions are localized at WT:DYK. My own attitude to DYK has changed over time and I'm spending time on other fronts (photoshopping images is a recent hobby). What saddens me though it hostility, which is spreading from FAC to DYK - instead of working together and improve, more editors are enjoying scolding each other for any mistake they find instead of fixing it. The collaborative atmosphere of the old DYK is what is worth restoring. Materialscientist (talk) 12:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Strong support! I didn't even engage in the latest discussion, other than say the more concise the better. If you want to improve another pic, I didn't get the one on top of Messiah Part III straight. (The article is now on the Main page, but with the other pic.) - As for DYK, I reviewed more than 80 articles in 2011, and found all but 4 fine, at least after discussions. One even made it to GA, the one with the longest discussion. I don't see the overall lament justified, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I lament more about the loss of valuable helpers, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:24, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I've done something with File:Unionskirche Idstein Revelation.jpg, but don't see how to put it into the hook on the main page. Materialscientist (talk) 12:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Don't misunderstand me, it shouldn't go to the hook, the other one is better, Handel's own writing. Thanks for the great improvement! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:53, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I agree. But something needs to change. If articles by the most active contributors frequently have problems then the likelihoods of new contributors getting it right is slim. The only value I place on DYK now is collaboration with the others and to just have a bank of articles I can refer to as half decent. Personally I would support scrapping the whole DYK scheme as as you say its not like it used to be, I think it could be replaced with some not too disimilar but much better. Anyway the did you know itself has become redundant as practically nobody is going to know (or care) about most of the hooks going through. If we don't change it we are increasingly going to get complaints and demoralising comments about it to the point that it will have to stop anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:03, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Look at the pictured hook right now (mentioned above): for some people the fact will be all too common, but for others good to know. (The wording was changed, though, I wonder why, to "from text in " instead of "on text from". How can a chorus be "from text"? I am used to "opera on a libretto".) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Looking at it again, Ghumdan Palace does have a lot of problems so that was an appropriate yank. As to the shifting wind at dyk in general... The bitey tone of some bugs me. The "dull hook" comments bug me, too, as dullness is quite subjective. But a very positive side of dyk, for the writer, is the relatively fast feedback from a fresh set of eyes... the whole collaborative thing that turns me on. Unfortunately, there is burn out amongst the heavy-lifters. And we lack a mechanism of watching out for and mentoring the newbies. At one time, giving out cookies was a way to say thank you to dyk contributors, certainly a counter-weight to some of the demoralizing statements. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:51, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

You deserve a cookie for that! As said above, I reviewed more than 80 articles and found it an uplifting experience in very diverse fields of interest, some of which I never entered before, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

dashes

What was wrong with the dashes at printing press? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 17:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I routinely run this script before saving an edit correcting something else. This script is useful but has its glitches and sometimes even breaks something. In this case, I guess it corrected some hyphens to dashes where it was not required (e.g. because the Harvard citation template does that anyway), but there were a few correct MOS changes for date ranges in titles. Most "dashes" in the previous version were minus signs (not that I care much, just to understand what happened). Materialscientist (talk) 23:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

174.124.233.29

174.124.233.29 (talk · contribs) needs a reblock. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:37, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Ralph Ineson

He appeared in the film Sex and drugs and rock and roll, a documentary film about the life of Ian Dury. I should have put proper grammar in sorry about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.210.225.19 (talk) 02:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Kathy Chitty

Good afternoon! Some time ago you amemded the article on Kathy Chitty. It has been nominated for deletion. If youy have the time could you have a look at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kathy Chitty (3rd nomination) and add any comment you might have. Thanks. Regards Rickedmo (talk) 18:16, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Lenin

Why did you restore my edit? When he was born it was the 10 April. I mentioned that according to N.S he was born the 22nd. Karbuncle (talk) 00:01, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

It was mentioned before as well. As I recall, the wikipedia convention is to keep dates in the new style, mentioning the old one, which is why the date templates (see, e.g. Joseph Stalin and other articles). Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Stalins birth date has never been in two dates. The date was changed from the 21st to the 18th because documents showed that his true birth date was the 18 December but that had nothing to do with old/new style. The article about Charles XII of Sweden, however, the dates are written in Old Style. Karbuncle (talk) 00:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The dates are given in the style more appropriate to the era they lived in (not by the number of years but by the notable events of their lives). Thus Old Style for Charles XII of Sweden and New Style for Stalin. Lenin lived "in between", but is likely more remembered by the October Revolution and after. Thus New Style is probably more appropriate. Materialscientist (talk) 00:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me but

Tarkenton is coming out as a gay man in the current issue of Sports Illustrated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.0.113.146 (talk) 07:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

we do not place sexuality/race in the first line of an article. See WP:NPOV, WP:BLP. Materialscientist (talk) 08:07, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

SPAM

• Hey MS, thank you for blocking ChanBrosTravel earlier on, could you please delete User:ChanBrosTravel/Chan Brothers Travel which was used to promote the company. --Dave 08:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

• Wow! That was fast... slow day? I take that back, just saw you busy at work on WP. Thanks again! --Dave 08:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

IP

Hi I noticed that you took action against disruptive IP , could you please investigate another one , which has identical pattern of disruptive behavior as the last one. Thanks, M.K. (talk) 10:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Could you please provide a fuller explanation of the Powder in Tube wire making process? Or please post a link to a website that details the process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.250.22.5 (talk) 18:29, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

THE EMPEROR OF MARS

If you had read the material at the link in question, at all then you would read the UN Law That allows claims be made by individuals to celestial bodies specifically in this case MARS to be claimed LEGALLY by ME Jason Walters. I AM THE EMPEROR OF MARS AND IT'S LEGAL AND TRUE AS NO ONE ELSE HAS ASSERTED ANY OTHER TRACEABLE CLAIM. My change was therefore completely relevant to the Mars Wiki The fact that you've insisted on denying such an important detail has left me with no other course of action then declaring that your website and my planet are no longer on friendly diplomatic terms.

The UN Space Treaty says: The Outer Space Treaty was considered by the Legal Subcommittee in 1966 and agreement was reached in the General Assembly in the same year ( resolution 2222 (XXI). The Treaty was largely based on the Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, which had been adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 1962 (XVIII) in 1963, but added a few new provisions. The Treaty was opened for signature by the three depository Governments (the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States of America) in January 1967, and it entered into force in October 1967. The Outer Space Treaty provides the basic framework on international space law, including the following principles:

the Important part here is: outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means; ... this means that as I am not a sovereignty, I can make claim. I have made claim. As I own the domain stating such, and I have publically announced it on facebook at a date prior to anyone else doing so. My claim is FIRST. My claim is LEGAL. and UN LAW RATIFIED BY THE US CONGRESS AS WELL AS THE UNSC, SUPPORTS IT!

Posterity requires that such a claim be noted as the law supports it. I, Jason Walters, AM The Emperor Of Mars. Regardless your thought on the matter it's legal. It's true. And you're hiding fact from the world if you deny it. So PLEASE, allow this or, continue your horrid job as a virtual book burner forging from ashes the truth you wish it to be with your newspeak. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumguynamedj (talk • contribs) 03:49, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

A thank you

	Hawaiian Lei
	A lei for all the help you have given me in cleaning up and improving images. :-) KAVEBEAR (talk) 06:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for doing this. Sorry I had not warned them before but I thought they were off on a spree (that same graphic has been introduced several times there by other editors on a similar mission) and I hoped to stop it promptly. However, they do indeed to appear to have heeded your warning so it's a good outcome anyway! Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 09:12, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

AlicePAD - spray drying

Dear Materialscientist, The company I am working for is specialized in spray drying technologies that is why I added some information on this article and also why I added the link of my company as users could have more details about the aim of these technologies. Could you explain me why you deleted this link? Thanks for your feedback AlicePAD —Preceding undated comment added 13:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC).

See WP:ELNO and WP:SOAP. That link had no educational value but promoted your company, and promotion of commercial activities is frowned upon here. Materialscientist (talk) 13:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the inlines

Eyes are hurting me to look at wiki text and cites are teh worst. Was dawdling...TCO (reviews needed) 15:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

New vandalisms

Please, check contributions this IP and three blocks have not solved. 187.91.17.44 (talk) 03:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you very much. 187.91.17.44 (talk) 03:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Toxinology entry

Dear Materialscientist, the "Toxinology" entry has, for some years, requested expert input. Some years ago I added to this page but now find I am blocked, apparently by you. Could you please explain this action? I am User:toxinoz and I can assure you (and provide proof if required) that I am eminently qualified to comment on toxinology. I believe further amendments to the "Toxinology" entry should be permitted and it should not be listed as requiring expert input. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toxinoz (talk • contribs) 04:26, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Please clarify the problem. I have not edited toxinology article and your account is neither blocked nor autoblocked. Materialscientist (talk) 04:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Invitation

You are invited to take part in a discussion for the deletion of a template(s). Misplaced Pages:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 July 26#July 26#Template: Element compounds Plasmic Physics (talk) 10:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup of image

I have an unusual request for you: I don't need to you to clean up an image - but just to tell me how you'd do it. I'm picking on you since I'm continually impressed by your wizardry at Graphics Lab.

This is the original image, off my blog. It's got all sorts of problems, but the worst are the perspective, the glare, and the wayward grandma.

I made an attempt at fixing it up in GIMP, and it turned out okay, but not great. Perspective is still wonky, I can't get rid of glare, and my ability to patch over the lady is very limited. (I also didn't do a great job on the upper-left corner.) Also, the text on the lower-right is copied from the upper-right and it didn't end well.

I'm not a very skilled GIMP user; I rely very heavily on copy-pasting small sections and blurring them together to make it halfway decent. My heritage is Paint and Picasa, not Photoshop.

So, if you don't mind taking a few minutes to tell me, what would you do? How would you repair the missing areas? What would you do about the text? Is there any way to convincingly mute the glare?

You don't have to actually do any of it, though if you want to improve on my kludge you're more than welcome to.

Feel free to respond here; I'll watch your talk page.

Regards,

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I am learning myself (from editors like Quibik) and am confident in very few GIMP techniques (which are hardly helpful in this particular case). Here, the best cure is to reshoot the image, and I could give trivial advice on that. Is it possible? I also heavily use copy/pasting image parts, combined with healing by the resynthesizer plugin (my most powerful tool after FFT filtering and frequency (wavelets) decomposition). Materialscientist (talk) 03:35, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I do plan to reshoot it; this is just a placeholder. Next time will be with a 12MP camera and an empty station.

Resolution is not an issue in this case. Important is to have more light with less reflections and people around. Using a timer combined with a tripod or just anything to hold a camera will help. A DLSR camera would allow faster shooting (and thus less blurring and people around) because it is more sensitive than point-and-shoot cameras and allows to "manually" increase ISO (sensitivity) and open the aperture. Materialscientist (talk) 04:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I was more just curious on your technique. You claim to still by learning, but you're miles ahead of me. How do you use FFT filtering and frequency decomposition? (I've done FFT in calculus, but not in image processing...) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:01, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

There is no general technique - when you see an image you first evaluate what and how can you improve there. I often make mistakes even at this step and start "improving" what I can't :). Materialscientist (talk) 04:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Alright, that makes sense. The resolution issue is mainly to make small details on the sign visible, as I'll have twice the resolution, so with a steadier camera I can take full advantage of those 12 megapixels.

A tripod is unfortunately out of the question; the MBTA allows no-tripod pictures but a tripod requires a special permit.

Thanks for your advice. I'll see you around GL! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User talk:2bobburns

User talk:2bobburns, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:2bobburns and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:2bobburns during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. VQuakr (talk) 04:29, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Question open

Thanks for your comments, the prep q is still open, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Gerda, I've read it, but frankly did not understand which hook should go when. Materialscientist (talk) 08:50, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bach cantata BWV 88, linked, asap, possibly replacing Messiah Part II (now prep4) which could go anytime, pictured if possible. Btw Messiah (Handel) is going for FA, in case you are interested, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:14, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Understood. BWV 88 can go as a lead to any prep or queue, thus what is your preference? Prep4 will be overnight in Europe. Materialscientist (talk) 09:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Queues 6 to 3 all fine, if possible, overnight in this case no problem (fact for other parts of the world, as you said), but prep 4 rather late. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Placed in Q2. Materialscientist (talk) 11:19, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I had to add a bit to the hook to link it to the image. If tweaks are needed, please tell me. Materialscientist (talk) 11:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Inventive! Fischer is fishermen, but it would be tricky to place pictured in the middle of the title. The lake is the very one where the scene of movement 4 took place, but it would probably require 100 additional characters to explain that. So fine! Readers will find out, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Blunder at Photodiode

Ooops. Sorry. I don't know why I started with a 4 week old version of the page. Thanks for fixing it. --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:51, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Messiah pics to Commons

At the Messiah FAC a request ("Media") was raised to move some pics to Commons, could you imagine to do that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Revoke talk page access please

• 96.244.254.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• Hello MS, could you revoke the guy's ability to edit her/his talk page? Reason being that he/she keeps removing IP templates. --Dave 01:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK landmark

Hi! MS. With Rabotnitsa I have crossed the 500 DYK milestone. I appreciate all the support you have patiently provided to me in my achieving this target.--Nvvchar. 01:32, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the award. Twenty four 24 of my DYKs have already been upgraded to GA. My effort now is more to upgrade many of my DYKs to GA rather than any further DYKs. --Nvvchar. 02:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

One more sad reason to give Messiah Part II more prominence, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:52, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Really MS your comment in the 500 award was a major kick in the teeth to NVV as if his contributions have all been poor. You may think it but saying this in his hard earned medal was uncalled for. Hardly surprising you've upset him and he claims to have left. I really hope he sticks around and develops many of them to GA. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:31, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the comment was "a major kick in the teeth" at all. It was congratulatory, and offered a very mild criticism. I certainly hope NVV returns, but the decision to leave was made by NVV and no one else. – Quadell 17:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Actinide a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated, and for that I award you this thorium crystal uranium glass dish. Shiny! In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell

Oops! Can't believe I made the rookie mistake of not checking the copyright status! I hope this green glowing table centerpiece will be an appropriate substitute. – Quadell 12:20, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK criteria

Would you mind reviewing this and this, and clarifying for me whether this assessment is fair comment in the context of DYK. I was under the impression that some time was allowed to fix problems. --Epipelagic (talk) 20:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Scattered thoughts: I have much respect to Rjanag. He is a very well-meaning and constructive editor, and might just be a bit too harsh in this case. I believe any DYK nom can be fixed within a day and should not be removed for this reason - I think we set a timer at 7 days from the reviewer assessment. If you make steps in this direction, I will re-evaluate, with no obligations, as I can only offer my vote, and am keen to keep long-term harmony among editors (this is more important than one DYK nom). The major concern is self-published sources. They may be used for neutral facts (e.g. where there is no COI in boosting up own achievements). Try to find secondary sources wherever possible. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 01:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Well you can see he has left me no room at all to negotiate. He says he's just waiting for someone to remove the nomination. Must I now just eat dirt and go away? --Epipelagic (talk) 02:25, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

He placed his vote, and might not actually mean to be that harsh (speaking of myself, I never put the orange cross in such cases). If you can improve referencing - do it, I'll add my vote if appropriate, and he or/and others will reconsider. In any case, take it philosophically (if you can't fix that) - I dashed many of my article expansion attempts because I realized I can't bring them up to referencing standards (some topics are hard to source from the web). Materialscientist (talk) 02:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I was tied up doing other things at the time. It was very hard to source initially, and I nearly abandoned it myself. But I feel it is adequately sourced now, and I do not believe the reviewer even looked at the sources. Anyway, I will carry on and source it a bit further. I notice, looking at his reviews, that he often takes this preemptive and non-negotiable approach, and must be leaving a wreckage of discouraged editors in his wake. --Epipelagic (talk) 02:45, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I believe the recent unpleasant talks at WT:DYK made most involved editors more terse than they usually are. It might sound unfair that with so many references the article is still stamped as poorly sourced, but the question of self-published sources is tricky - some companies/organization keep very high standards for their web sites, and some not, and it is often hard to distinguish without seeing the original sources they used. (e.g. I saw some Asian government websites being plain wrong on recent history of their own country). Materialscientist (talk) 02:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Well there we go! The article has been removed as failed. Clearly the admin who did this didn't even look at it. You said you would "re-evaluate", and you didn't. No doubt there is no review process. I suppose I will be one of a series of casualties as Rjanag shows how harshly he can scapegoat editors. Misplaced Pages is truly fucked when it comes to this. --Epipelagic (talk) 13:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Restored. Some editors react on orange (red) colors too easily. Don't worry about that. (I have also removed a couple of noms in my time, which could and were rescued soon after :-). Materialscientist (talk) 13:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Um... well many thanks for that. I was busy giving up on Misplaced Pages. I think it should be okay for DYK as it stands, but really, now, I have no idea what standard is expected in the current climate. Would you mind checking it? Unfortunately, after a gap writing DYKs, I wrote over about eight days a series of eight minor background articles I needed, and then everything blew up. I would have never submitted background articles like these if I had known that was going to happen. Now I have to sit through the wild Rjanags, and see if the rest survive! --Epipelagic (talk) 13:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space

Hey there Materialscientist, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User talk:Materialscientist. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.
• Shut off the bot here.
• Report errors here.
• If you have any questions, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:00, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

My fault, sorry! – Quadell 12:24, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For your tireless contributions to vandalism fighting. Keep up your good work. Suraj T 07:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Apologies for misunderstanding

I had no intention whatsoever of vandalizing the Misplaced Pages page. I just don't understand why an unwed pregnancy could possibly be worse than an abortion or the death of a sibling or child. Abortion is far more stressful as far as most sensible people are concerned, and I felt this should have been updated to reflect society which has changed dramatically in the past 50 years, and I included abortion because abortion is extremely stressful and in fact I think it would rank a score of 100 regardless of the person's age. People don't need to be unwed to experience an unplanned pregnancy or it's consequences, it's just as stressful regardless of their marital status or their age. I hope you can understand. Sincere apologies. 121.220.111.218 (talk) 10:43, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

userfication request

Hi, I saw you were active. I am thinking about using the article history that relates Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_deaths_related_to_Scientology to this AFD in RFArbitration evidence. Although its been deleted could you userfy it for me for the duration of the case so I can add diffs to the edit history? I need the edit history as well as the article, to show article creation and contributions to the article and dates etc. Off2riorob (talk) 13:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Here. Materialscientist (talk) 13:54, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks - Off2riorob (talk) 14:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		Thanks for your work improving File:Sebuku Island.jpg. You've done a great job, and I am impressed that you were able to fix it while being so diligent in DYK and other parts of the Wiki. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

MP post

Sorry, phone rang (local chapter) immediately I posted that, and I'd intended to alert you to it. Did I misquote you, and do I need to clarify anything? If so, please let me know. Tony (talk) 06:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I am curious too about reaction. My concern was mostly about the assumption that MP is used as a testing ground - surely it has some truth in it, but obviously many MP items are selected by criteria which are not compatible with testing. Materialscientist (talk) 06:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, I think I understand what you're saying. I'll watch it and try to correct any misinterpretations of the quote. Tony (talk) 06:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, my thoughts are still in an unshaped state, but if you think how items are selected for each MP section, you'll get to a conclusion that it is showing, exposing rather than testing, and that those who actually aim at testing could be tagged as freaks :-). Materialscientist (talk) 06:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

not the same DYK is it?

I just wanted to stop by and give my gratitude for for some of the points you have given at the discussion board of DYK. Preparing the queues isn't as fun and easy as many may believe. For all the "hey the queues are running close to empty", it take more than the simple task of copy paste moving the prep to queues. The double checking of all the hooks, random verification of sources in addition to the hook, relying on those preparing the preps to have hopefully have done a double check on verifying the nomination also, copy editing both hooks and articles, searching through the history for the nomination discussion for possible problems, adherence to rules, etc, etc, etc. and then taking a beating for being human and missing something occasionally. I just want you to know I really appreciate your continued dedication to the project. I really keep trying to get back that joy I used to have working there, but it seems to be getting more and more bureaucratic and away from what purpose initially had been; to attract and retain new editors, encourage new material, bring that material to others' attention to help improve that material further, and bring diversity of subject matter to readers' attention. I will get back into the swing of it again in eventually (I hope :-) ) I see valid points raised by Sandy, Tony, and others; and believe they need addressed, but it seems things are coming to a loggerhead. Anyways, thank you MS for all you do. Oh, and on the anti-vandalism front, all I can say is WOW. Take care and best wishes. Kindly Calmer Waters 07:05, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Very warm message. I see things and thoughts as being very unshaped now, and believe that it all started when the core DYK editors (remember Chamal, SoWhy, NuclearWarfare, and others) got busy with other tasks. I believe the solution is to return and restore the constructive collaboration atmosphere. There are many new editors who keep the friendly collaboration style. So, let us not disappear (by no means take it as any hint at you - I myself almost abandoned DYK in the past months). Materialscientist (talk) 07:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I shudder to think about if you left, but would indeed understand. I remember Gatoclass once stating that the average burnout period/turnover rate at DYK was about four months for new contributors. I thought, that won't be me. Fast forward six months later and... It appeared at first there was not as much to do with the QPQ running; however, I wonder if some that reach that threshold are still not ready to perform the in-depth review that is currently needed. It took me awhile till I felt comfortable with reviewing nominations against the various policies and guidelines, thru I wouldn't place myself as any kind of benchmark :) There appears to be always be room for the added double checking of previous verified nominations and assembled preps in addition to the queues, so I don't see myself ever leaving completely. Calmer Waters 08:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Barca

You will remember taking BWV 88 to the DYK queue, pictured. It was changed while on the main page to something not supported by the source and without pic. I feel it should not remain like that in the archive, but hesitate to change it myself. What do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I saw that and took it philosophically, as my stretch to unite the hook with the picture was questionable (well, there is no word barca in English; but it stood pictured for a few hours :-). I could not check the factual accuracy of the hook change, and this is more serious - do change it according to the sources. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 07:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. My preference would be to put "pictured" behind the title, because the topic of the cantata, Peter called to service from being a fisherman on that Lake, is pictured, but that of course is not what ever was on the Main page. So I will restore to what was there first. (I didn't find a record of the change, who when why.) - Thanks for your sermon, appreciated highly!!! I posted as an invitation to contact those who left on their talk, and it worked already, - collaboration in a direction I hope for, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Es ist das Heil uns kommen her

My sermon is now on the Main page, smile. I forgot that "the chorale" could now be linked to the chorale, only linked, not highlighted, the new one is nominated for a different hook, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Great. Do you want me to relink something? Materialscientist (talk) 11:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, please: the chorale. - I admire what you reaped from my short list "sown in tears", and what others responded, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:04, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Forgive my stupidity, the current link chorale cantata explain the musical term whereas Es ist das Heil uns kommen her is a specific piece, which will be featured on the main page later. Why is it better to relink it like this: chorale cantata? Materialscientist (talk) 11:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Forgive me not being precise: ... that in Bach's late chorale cantata Es ist das Heil uns kommen her, BWV 9, three bass recitatives deliver a Lutheran sermon on salvation, based on twelve stanzas of the chorale? - or the chorale of the same name, you name it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, that chorale. I knew I'm missing something trivial :-) Materialscientist (talk) 11:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Ping; you have email. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Unilateral removal from Q6

Nikkimaria unilaterally removed Nels Running from Q6 with no discussion though there's a whole day til it would hit the main page. She posts on the talk page at least but does not put it back into the noms page though it'd made it through the noms and prep reviews. Two users, Gerda and Sharkto have already helped with the copyediting. I request it be put back into the queue. And people wonder why users leave DYK and wiki so often. PumpkinSky talk 14:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)