Revision as of 23:32, 17 November 2014 editTrouver (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,040 edits →A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove messageTag: WikiLove← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:32, 17 November 2014 edit undoTrouver (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,040 edits →A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove messageTag: WikiLoveNext edit → | ||
Line 312: | Line 312: | ||
Hi, can you make a comment about my new project ]? | Hi, can you make a comment about my new project ]? | ||
:Interesting idea. Good luck with it. – ] (]) 19:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC) | :Interesting idea. Good luck with it. – ] (]) 19:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
== A barnstar for you! == | |||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar''' | |||
|- | |||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for your help with my citations on the entry for Eli Siegel. It's been a while since I did any editing. Thanks for cleaning up. | |||
] (]) 23:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
|} | |||
== A barnstar for you! == | == A barnstar for you! == |
Revision as of 23:32, 17 November 2014
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 100 days will be automatically archived to User talk:Jonesey95/Archive3. Archives prior to 2014 were compiled manually; search them via the box at the right. |
Archives |
2009–2012 · 2013 · 2014 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
GOCE February blitz wrapup
Guild of Copy Editors Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2014 wrap-up
Participation: Out of seven people who signed up for this blitz, all copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 16 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by |
Wiki Loves Pride
You are invited! Wiki Loves Pride | |
---|---|
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride, a global campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Misplaced Pages during the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. The project is being spearheaded by two organizers with roots in the Pacific Northwest. Meetups are being organized in some cities, or you can participate remotely. Wikimedia Commons will also be hosting an LGBT-related photo challenge. In Portland, there are two ways to contribute. One is a photography campaign called "Pride PDX", for pictures related to LGBT culture and history. The Wiki Loves Pride edit-a-thon will be held on Saturday, June 21 from noon–4pm at Smith Memorial Student Union, Room 236 at Portland State University. Prior Misplaced Pages editing is not required; assistance will be available the day of the event. Attendees should bring their own laptops and cords. Feel free to showcase your work here!
If you have any questions, please leave a message here. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Oregon-related events and projects by removing your name from this list. |
Merge discussion for Wagon-wheel effect
An article that you have been involved in editing, Wagon-wheel effect, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. 128.211.168.1 (talk) 00:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
August 2014 blitz
Hey Jonesey! The last week of August is approaching. Is that when the August blitz will be, or has the blitz been cancelled? Cheers! Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 18:23, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, next week. Real life has prevented me from setting it up. Maybe today. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:16, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
GOCE July drive and August blitz
Guild of Copy Editors July 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Participation: Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the 40 people who signed up this drive, 22 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2400 articles to 2199 articles in July. This is a new month-end record low for the backlog. Nice work, everyone! Blitz: The August blitz will run from August 24–30. The blitz will focus on articles from the GOCE's Requests page. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. The blitz will run from August 24–30. Sign up here! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2014 (UTC) |
Template:Citation Style documentation/editor
The error message for four editors shows only if you have .citation-comment {display: inline !important;} /* show all Citation Style 1 error messages */
set in your CSS. It also adds the page to a hidden maintenance category. Not sure if /how to document that. -- Gadget850 22:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
- So it does. I forgot that one was still hidden. I will comment out the note about the error. Exactly four editors still shows "et al.", as you can see if you log out and look at my Sandbox. We may be able to get rid of that holdover feature once the error category is cleaned out. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
August GOCE blitz
The Modest Barnstar | ||
Thanks for copyediting a total of 3,385 words during the Guild of Copy Editors August blitz! Miniapolis 16:56, 31 August 2014 (UTC) |
A barnstar for you!
The Minor barnstar | |
Thanks for fixing my error on abacus. I normally view the page after I edit to be sure there are no problems...I guess I did not this time. Thanks again. speednat (talk) 18:42, 2 September 2014 (UTC) |
- You're welcome! It's nice to be noticed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:09, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
An Odd Issue with Copernicus
I reverted your edit on the Copernicus page because it caused (or seemed to cause) some weird issue where it vanished the images. Don't know the tool you used, but maybe it needs tweaking? -- Veggies (talk) 23:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Veggies, I did not see anything wrong with the page after I edited it, and I still do not see anything wrong when I look at my edited version in the history. Nor do I see anything in my simple edit that could have caused image problems. Did you try to reload the page or WP:PURGE it before reverting? (I recommend one of the purge-related Gadgets.) I find that purging, in particular, fixes many odd display problems. I will redo my edit manually and I will check it again. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:50, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Very strange. Seems to look fine, now. I'll purge before resetting in the future. What a weird issue. Thanks. -- Veggies (talk) 07:39, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Correcting DOI error
Could you explain how you fixed this? I see that the DOI error is gone, but I'm not seeing any differences in the dif, just "jeb" highlighted in the previous and current page. Thanks.AioftheStorm (talk) 03:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- There was a hidden character of some sort before the "j" in "jeb". I couldn't see it, but I copied the whole DOI to a text editor on my computer and told it to replace all hidden characters with "zzz", and "zzz" popped up in front of the "j". I removed the junk, copied the remaining DOI value, and pasted it back into the article.
- I don't see that problem very often, but I do see it often enough in my gnome work that I knew what was wrong when the DOI looked fine to the naked eye. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:33, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- How interesting, thanks for letting me know :) AioftheStorm (talk) 04:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
A VERY THANKFUL barnstar for you!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thanks for your help in editing the new article - Monarch butterfly migration. It needed your touch and I was really stuck in getting it finished off. Thank you! bpage (talk) 20:35, 11 September 2014 (UTC) |
- You're welcome. Good work on the hard work of writing the article! Expect to see BattyBot stop by the article in the next day or so to clean up some date formatting and do a bit of helpful tidying. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- I just don't seem to grasp the intricacies of referencing. I APPRECIATE your work on this article very much. I want to maintain the consistency of referencing. So should I list sources in the bibliography if I refer to them a multitude of times? Do you know how to reference books on a Kindle? There are no page numbers, just funky location nos. Isn't there a bot or something that can set up a reference system for a whole article?
- You are my hero,
- Bfpage |leave a message 22:19, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
- For the Kindle book, I've never referenced one, but I would use "type=Kindle e-book|at=location ###" or something similar.
- You are my hero,
- If you list the source in full in the Bibliography, like the Pyle and Oberhauser sources, you can use the short footnote (sfn) template, as you have done, to refer to them. You do not need to list the full details of a source in multiple places. Overall, the references in this article are better and more consistent than those in most articles I come across. You have done well. And no, there is no bot to do most of the work for you. There are a few that can tidy up a few things in an existing article, but the real work needs to be done by human editors – it's just like real life. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:19, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
LCCN vs. Library of Congress Classification numbers
Hi. Regarding this recent edit at Georgian numerals — I understand there is a difference between LCCNs and the Library of Congress Classification, and the value you deleted was not in fact an LCCN as intended by the lccn= parameter. However, it seems a shame to discard this piece of information entirely. To the best of your knowledge, is there any legitimate way to include a source's Library of Congress Classification identifier in a {{cite book}} template? And if there is not, should there be? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 06:40, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- You could put it in
|id=
, I suppose. Something like|id=LCC PK9106.H48 1995
. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:30, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
GOCE September 2014 bling
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
Thanks for copyediting a total of 10,085 words during the Guild of Copy Editors September drive! All the best, Miniapolis 17:10, 5 October 2014 (UTC) |
GOCE drive rollover count.
Greetings, Jonesey95! Since you were the leader of the September GOCE Backlog Drive, I figured you'd be the best one to consult on this matter. In the totals for the participants, I haven't been given a 50% bonus for the August 2013 article I copyedited, even though I specified the month it was from. As a result, my rollover count for the next drive is out by 200. "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" (talk) 17:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- Wilhelmina Will, corrected. Thanks for the note. In the future, remember to add "*O" for old articles and "*R" for requests (see the drive instructions at the top of every drive page). The drive statistics are produced by a semi-automated script that depends on these standard notations. Happy editing! – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Thanks! :) "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" (talk) 17:30, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Translation issues
Please stop fixing trans_title= issues by misusing chapter= as you have done in two articles. See, for example, history on Polynomial interpolation. A title= should usually be matched with trans_title=. Glrx (talk) 04:02, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- That's a case of garbage in, garbage out. I had no way of knowing if the original editor intended to insert an English chapter title, or if a foreign-language chapter title was deleted at some point, or if the editor inserted
|trans-chapter=
instead of|trans-title=
. I try to make changes that reflect what appear to be the original editor's intent, unless there is a clear error. In the cases you found, my choice was incorrect. Thanks for catching it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
GOCE October 2014 newsletter
Guild of Copy Editors October 2014 newsletter is now ready for review. Highlights:
– Your project coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978 and Miniapolis. |
Help on Loboc Church
I hope you could do some CE on the article. I already wrote a request on WP:GOCE. Thanks.--Carlojoseph14 (talk) 18:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- I don't work on a lot of articles from the GOCE Requests page, but I will take a look if I have time. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:43, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 02:52, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar | |
Thanks for the tech edit :) JuliaRobertson (talk) 04:23, 26 October 2014 (UTC) |
- You're welcome. I'm just blowing the dust out and trying to keep things tidy around here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
GOCE October Blitz award
The Minor Barnstar | ||
Hi Jonesey95, thank you for copy editing 1,836 words in 1 article during the Guild of Copy Editors’ October Blitz. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:15, 28 October 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks for correcting my mistakes
Thank you for correcting most of my citation mistakes at Alfa Romeo 8C and pointing out the one you couldn't correct. I have no idea why I put 1972 in the Vorderman citations; the Hull & Moore citations to another article in the same issue were correct. Thanks again! Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 03:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
- You're welcome. It takes a community to build an encyclopedia. Have fun editing that Alfa article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:14, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Happy Halloween!!!
Wilhelmina Will has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!
'"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple.
If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message! |
Cheers! "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Sherlock Holmes
I've finished the GAN preparation, and you mentioned that you wanted to take a look. All the best, Miniapolis 21:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
- Miniapolis: It looks much improved from the skim reading I did a few weeks ago. I will go through it and tweak a bit over the next few days, section by section. You may find that I make some of the same edits and comments I made before; if so, sorry for the redundancy, but if I find the same problem twice, it might be an actual problem (or I might have an actual problem, which is likely). – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:21, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
- A few notes on my copy edits, to be added to as I go along. Consider this a pre-GA prose review.
- 1. "Attitudes towards women" is a title that doesn't seem to fit the section. Perhaps "Relationships with women"or something else would be more appropriate.
- Trouble is, Holmes doesn't really have "relationships with women" :-). Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- 2. The "Other women" section needs reorganization. The first sentence is out of place. The second sentence of the second paragraph is somewhat redundant with much of the first paragraph.
- Reorganized. Keep in mind, though, that this is GA and not FA. 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- 3. There are a few places in the article where there is a jump from the fictional world to the real world, jumping from Watson and Holmes's descriptions of events and people to Doyle's descriptions or those of Klinger etc. It is a bit jarring.
- 4. The section on deduction says that he uses abductive reasoning. The article contrasts abductive reasoning with deductive reasonin, but the Holmes article conflates the two.
- The way I read it, he uses both forms of reasoning for different purposes. Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- 5. Is "sergeant of Marines" proper British English? I have never seen this usage in American English.
- 6. What does "NCO" stand for?
- Changed "sergeant of Marines" (probably a direct canonical reference) to "Marine sergeant" and "NCO" (common in American English) to "non-commissioned officer". Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- 7.Replace "his chronicler" with "Watson"? The word "chronicler" appears at least twice; I would replace it with the straightforward "Watson" in all cases.
- I judiciously used "his chronicler" (as I did "the detective") to minimize repetition. Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- 8. The "Pistols" section is just a laundry list. Summarize or choose notable instances.
- There may be too much detail for you (or me), but it's reliably sourced. Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- 9. I found one dead link in the Pistols section. Check for others. I think I was admonished once that dead links do not disqualify an article from being a GA, but dead links should be avoided in general.
- Dead links should not be removed (although I'll check the refs and tag any I find), to preserve the possibility of repair. Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- 10. Misplaced Pages articles are used as references, in violation of WP:CIRCULAR.
- The stories themselves, wikilinked, are primary sources. Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- 11. Reference formatting is inconsistent (scan the author names, for example). This is not a GA criterion, but it could be cleaned up.
- 6. What does "NCO" stand for?
- 12. The long quotation in the "Knowledge" section does not match the text given at http://www.gutenberg.org/files/244/244-h/244-h.htm. This sort of problem is why I requested citations for each of the quoted sections of text. One could reasonably say "It's from the story, why should I cite it?" There are often differences in published versions of written works, however.
- 13. The "Knowledge" section contains a bunch of apparent OR. I tagged the ones that stood out to me most vividly.
- 14. The last paragraph of the Knowledge section should probably be removed or drastically revised. It's all OR claiming to be about Holmes's knowledge of psychology, but the incidents described are just knowledge of human nature.
- 15. The author is sometimes referred to as "Doyle" and sometimes as "Conan Doyle".
- 16. "Holmes helped marry forensic science ... and literature." This lead sentence refers to literature, but literature is not mentioned until much later in the section. The first sentence could be left out. In any event, this section also needs more citations, otherwise it appears to be OR that suffers from the post hoc fallacy, e.g. "Holmes frequently laments the contamination of a crime scene, and crime-scene integrity has become standard investigative procedure."
- 17. I find this whole Influence section frustrating without citations. It repeatedly says "Holmes (or Conan Doyle) did this, and now it's popular", implying that Holmes was the cause, but not stating it explicitly or citing sources. I did not copy-edit this section because it needs major cleanup first.
- 18. The "Scientific literature" section might fit better in the "Knowledge" section or in a new section of the article that contains out-of-fictional-universe information about the stories and the author. It is again jarring to be pulled back and forth between the real and fictional worlds. This section also uses a different citation style from other sections.
- 19. "Finances" section is unreferenced. It feels like OR.
- It's referenced, albeit with primary sources (the stories). Miniapolis 00:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- 19. "Finances" section is unreferenced. It feels like OR.
- 20: What does "provided Doyle with a link" mean? Does it mean he gave him the idea, or taught him something about it, or exemplified it somehow?
- The preceding sentence explains its meaning. Miniapolis 00:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- 20: What does "provided Doyle with a link" mean? Does it mean he gave him the idea, or taught him something about it, or exemplified it somehow?
- I'm not going to do the GA review, but I think the article is weak only on the criteria relating to original research and unnecessary detail. I have noted places where I had significant concerns. It passes criteria 1, 3a, 4, 5, and 6 with no trouble.
- I'm done. Let me know if you have any questions, dear Miniapolis. Feel free to reject any of my edits, criticisms, or questions. I will not take it personally. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- Well, with all the tags I don't know if it will be quick-failed but I'm going to nominate it anyway. Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- I tried to be sparing with the tags (by my count, I added seven tags to this 8,000-word article), preferring to list comments here, because I wanted to give you a chance to rebuild the article your way as a complete piece. The article is well on its way to being wonderful after your work. Good luck with the GA nomination. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- I can't see it not being quick-failed with the tags on it now, and I've already put as much time as I could (a lot) into its improvement. Since you didn't intend to review it, I don't understand why you didn't let the GAN process run its course instead of making it un-nominatable in the first place. Miniapolis 23:28, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- The tags I added would only change the GA review if the reviewer were not competent enough to notice the items that I tagged. As I said above, four and a half of the six criteria have been met with ease, which means the article is much better than it was before your extensive editing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:58, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- I can't see it not being quick-failed with the tags on it now, and I've already put as much time as I could (a lot) into its improvement. Since you didn't intend to review it, I don't understand why you didn't let the GAN process run its course instead of making it un-nominatable in the first place. Miniapolis 23:28, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- I tried to be sparing with the tags (by my count, I added seven tags to this 8,000-word article), preferring to list comments here, because I wanted to give you a chance to rebuild the article your way as a complete piece. The article is well on its way to being wonderful after your work. Good luck with the GA nomination. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- Well, with all the tags I don't know if it will be quick-failed but I'm going to nominate it anyway. Miniapolis 21:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- I'm done. Let me know if you have any questions, dear Miniapolis. Feel free to reject any of my edits, criticisms, or questions. I will not take it personally. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
(←) See my reply on the article talk page. After almost a month of hard work on this article, I've gone as far as I can. Tagging is a lot easier than fixing. Tant pis—it could've been a GA. Miniapolis 14:38, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for removing the tags; I'll nominate it soon, and do my bit by reviewing a nomination or two. Miniapolis 00:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
format oddness
Hi - thanks for but it was odd to me - when I had "date" in there originally it gave me date errors. That's the only reason I tried month/year. Seems to me some odd invisible syntax is going on. I have the same problem with the hyphens. I'm a Mac user and some quality of the - or – does not manage the same syntax. Anyway, just pointing out that there are some challenges I've not found a solution to. And the absolute insistance on a particular syntax tends to be a platform dependent formulation in case you weren't aware. --Smkolins (talk) 01:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I don't know which of the dozens of fixes you had trouble applying yourself. If you give a specific example of a citation you tried to type, I may be able to help. If you get date errors, you should be able to follow the Help link for an explanation. If the Help doesn't help, I'll be happy to assist.
- As for your last few sentences, I don't know what you are referring to. I use a Mac too. For a hyphen, just type the minus sign, to the right of the zero on your keyboard. For an en dash (to separate ranges, like 1894–1899), type option-minus. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:08, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Puzzling! I've done hyphen and option-minus as you say and still have people come up behind and change them somehow. Here's a question - I used the "US Extended" keyboard setting most of the time. I wonder if that changes things. As for the former is the "date" entry have illegal entries? For example distinguishing Jun, June and Jun.? Maybe it is something like that?? --Smkolins (talk) 01:20, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- Follow the Help link in the date error or go to WP:BADDATEFORMAT and WP:MONTH to see acceptable and unacceptable date formats in citation templates. I fixed "March/April" by changing it to "March–April", "Sept" by changing it to "Sep", and more.
- Puzzling! I've done hyphen and option-minus as you say and still have people come up behind and change them somehow. Here's a question - I used the "US Extended" keyboard setting most of the time. I wonder if that changes things. As for the former is the "date" entry have illegal entries? For example distinguishing Jun, June and Jun.? Maybe it is something like that?? --Smkolins (talk) 01:20, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- In short, don't worry about it unless you're obsessive about it like me. Someone will come in behind you and fix these little things. It's more important to fill the encyclopedia with accurate content than to worry about minor formatting issues. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- that sounds good … thanks. --Smkolins (talk) 19:49, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- In short, don't worry about it unless you're obsessive about it like me. Someone will come in behind you and fix these little things. It's more important to fill the encyclopedia with accurate content than to worry about minor formatting issues. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank You :)
I really appreciate that you took the time to fix my Peoples of the Caucasus template, I hadn't noticed that template breaking error, thank you for fixing it. Abrahamic Faiths (talk) 01:47, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- You're welcome. This sort of error was very difficult to notice until a couple of weeks ago, when the Wikimedia developers added new code that checks for duplicate parameters. A few of us gnomes have been fixing the templates and articles with this error. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi, can you make a comment about my new project Encyclopine.org
hi, Hi, can you make a comment about my new project Encyclopine.org?
- Interesting idea. Good luck with it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thanks for your help with my citations on the entry for Eli Siegel. It's been a while since I did any editing. Thanks for cleaning up.
Trouver (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC) |
A barnstar for you!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thanks for your help with my citations on the entry for Eli Siegel. It's been a while since I did any editing. Thanks for cleaning up.
Trouver (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC) |