Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:21, 10 December 2008

Wadewitz is suffering from physical health issues. This may affect their ability to work on Misplaced Pages. Consequently, they may not be able to respond to talk-page messages or e-mails in a timely manner. Your patience is greatly appreciated.

Archives

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36 · 37 · 38 · 39 · 40

Re: Justice

Give me a few days to think about it (and to wrap up my grading, etc.). Where do I show up in the Chronicle? (Oh, right. The blog post about length and featured articles.) Here are the two pieces of Misplaced Pages boosterism I wrote: "We Cannot Allow a Misplaced Pages Gap!" in Spontaneous Generations and "Misplaced Pages and the History of Science" in the January 2008 History of Science Society Newsletter.--ragesoss (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Joseph Priestley

Recent personal research into the Writings of Thomas Jefferson caused more than a passing personal curiousity regarding Joseph Priestley. The Priestley Misplaced Pages stub greatly exceeded my expectations when arriving there from a Google search. It's breadth and scholarship are of outstanding quality, and is deserving of especial éclat.

Presently, another area of personal fascination and curiousity for is Google Books. It's search functionality still leaves much to be desired though, and locating complete collections often involves abstruse methods. Yesterday, I located the complete four volume collection of a Joseph Priestley work, referenced in footnote 143, sans online URLs, and thought you might appreciate the data. Hopefully, the Chicago style citation is agreeable to you.

Priestley, Joseph. 1803. A general history of the Christian church from the fall of the western empire to the present time. Northumberland : Printed for the author, by Andrew Kennedy.

• Volume I
• Volume II
• Volume III
• Volume IV

Also, from a present project of mine; here are a few links to transcriptions of letters Thomas Jefferson wrote to Priestley marked up to XHTML. Again, this is just a presonal pet project (the ability to directly reference citations with online links pointing to specific paragraphs amuses...). Feel free to copy any or all of it, if you have any use for it. It is not necessary to provide citations to the site. There were some letter exchanges between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson regarding Priestley, which I've not provided links to. Adams at times expressed incredulity about Priestley's opinions, but Jefferson, as far as I've read up to this point was strongly supportive of his worldview.

• Letter To Dr. Joseph Priestley; Philadelphia, January 18, 1800
• Letter To Dr. Joseph Priestley; Philadelphia, January 27, 1800
• Letter To Dr. Joseph Priestley; Washington, March 21, 1801
• Letter To Dr. Joseph Priestley; Washington, June 19, 1802
• Letter To Dr. Joseph Priestley; Washington, April 9, 1803
• Letter To Doctor Joseph Priestley; Washington, January 29, 1804

If you're interested, I'm more than happy to share any more links to Priestley's authorship pulled from Google Books. Just leave a note on this page, and I'll return at some future date to check.

cheers 76.0.225.57 (talk) 00:23, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you so much! I've added the online version of the General History to List of works by Joseph Priestley. Do you know if the first volume (which is from a three-volume set) is from a different edition than volumes 2-4 (which are from a four-volume set)? Priestley's works are often difficult to decipher, as you will see from the list of works. Some of the letter links weren't working above, so I wasn't sure if you have already edited the letters between the two in which they discuss what an ideal university would look like. I would love to link to those from the Priestley article. Whatever we can add to the Priestley pages to improve them would be wonderful. By the way, do you know about Wikisource? They would probably be very interested in your work on Jefferson's letters. Again, thanks so much for your kind works and assistance. Awadewit (talk) 01:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

• • I believe the Letter links in the above post have been fixed. (extra spaces between the URL and anchor text, oops) I've pulled the links to many Priestley books from a second stage search in Google Books, which is still very incomplete. He was a prolific writer on several subjects. I'm not real keen on reading texts printed in England; 17th century or earlier. The older spelling variants slow me down tremendously, and unless it relates to subject matter that directly piques my curiosity, I tend to avoid it. Blackstone is where I've spent the most time, BTW. There was something about a four volume collection, becoming a three volume collection, or vice versa, in this last Google Books Priestley search. It should not be difficult to reproduce, and dig it up. I'll let you know. The Priestley bibliography with Google Books URLs will be posted on the liberatedtext.org forum board, after sorting through them a bit (at least a couple of days more). I'll message you here with the URL for it when it's been published.
    
    The stated time for publishing this is not definite. Presently I'm chasing down what I believe to be an apocryphal Jefferson quotation: “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” I've not located an original source for the quote, and it seems very un-Jeffersonian in content as well as form. I've issued a couple of challenges, where it has been cited as his quotation, and will probably be issuing a few more soon. cheers 76.0.225.57 (talk) 07:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Priestley's History of Christian Church

This wasn't the collection with 3 and 4 volumes, depending on the edition, that I saw earlier. It was a two part series, with the 1st part 2 volumes, and the 2nd part 4 volumes. Note: The Google Books records have been filtered to show "Full View" texts only. That is a personal preference, and there may well be more records if the filter is removed.

• A general history of the Christian church, to the fall of the western empire - 1790 - 2 volumes - (World Cat - Google Books: 5 entries)
• A general history of the Christian church from the fall of the western empire to the present time - 1802 - 4 volumes - (World Cat - Google Books: 8 entries)

(TinyURLs get blacklisted as spam on a talk page?) cheers 76.0.225.57 (talk) 23:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Possibly related to your studies

After reading your Wiki bio page last night, I thought you might be interested in an excerpt from a Jefferson letter to Thomas Cooper. Hopefully, it won't offend. It is one of the finest "girlieboy" style derogations I've seen from an American Founder. Jefferson intimates that Trinitarian fanaticism in Richmond, VA, is chiefly due to lustful women who go to night prayer meetings, but some henpecked husbands are dragged along with them:

"In our Richmond there is much fanaticism, but chiefly among the women. They have their night meetings and praying parties, where, attended by their priests, and sometimes by a henpecked husband, they pour forth the effusions of their love to Jesus, in terms as amatory and carnal, as their modesty would permit them to use to a mere earthly lover." - Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, November 2, 1822

mirthfully yours, 76.0.225.57 (talk) 23:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

update

I dumped some Google Books data onto Talk:List of works by Joseph Priestley. Unexpected circumstances have suddenly appeared (work and personal) making it unlikely that I'll be digging much deeper soon.

Are you familiar with Maria Cosway?

Randolph, Sarah Nicholas. 1858. The domestic life of Thomas Jefferson comp. from family letters and reminiscences, by his great-granddaughter. New York: Harper & Brothers. Google Books - Specifically: pp 84-92, and pp 372-377, but search the whole book, as there are a few more references.

Also, I was right about the errant Jefferson quote.

until the future; cheers 76.0.225.57 (talk) 23:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Augie March

Hi Awadewit, I was hoping you'd be able to take another look at Augie March, especially in light of this recent edit. Obviously, the article needs a bit more spit and polish before it's ready for another go at FAC, but since you were the one that gave us the most useful feedback last time around, I thought I'd check with you to see if there were any further outstanding issues you can see that would make you Oppose again. Thanks, Lankiveil 11:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC).

• I left a comment at Talk:Augie March#Re-review. Awadewit (talk) 01:39, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

• Many thanks, your insight is very much appreciated! Lankiveil 03:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Gustave Rolin-Jaequemyns

Hi. I found your name on the list of peer review volunteers. The article in question allready has FA status on the dutch and german wikis, and seems to be in your range of interests. I would very much appreciate you taking a look at it and saying what you think. Since i'm aiming at FA status on en.wikipedia.org, too, i urge you to set your standards high, should you decide to review the article. Tjuus, Kleuske (talk) 19:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• Dropped a line at the peer review. Awadewit (talk) 01:17, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Pride and podcasting

I'm flattered by your kind comment in the Signpost interview. I don't know if I can claim that title, but it's interesting that Saintsbury's introduction to the works of Balzac begins with the quote: "Sans génie, je suis flambé!" As always, it's an "if I grow, the harvest is your own" sort of thing; I learned from the champ.

Thanks too for sending out podcast reminders – I was going to do that tomorrow, but you beat me to it. Also, I've been thinking about the moderation task, and I'm forever opposed to playing the stereotypical role of the dominant male voice, taking charge of discussions by virtue of the Y chromosome. Do you want to take the helm on this one? I think it could be healthy to move the gavel around. Either way is fine with me. Scartol • Tok 09:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

• Duel of the English teachers! Who gets to lead the discussion?! (Wait, that's a phallic reference! Ah!) I'll be happy to lead this one. :) Awadewit (talk) 21:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The Muppets' Wizard of Oz

I was kind of angry at the comments you left at the article's FAC. I have brought the article up as high as possible, and almost nothing else can be done, so please don't ask anymore of me. Lastly, could you please look at the comments I left you? I hope they say something. Limetolime 17:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

• Please note that the FA instructions say "nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism". I spent over an hour reviewing this article - carefully looking at its structure, thinking about what should be included, and analyzing its prose. I had hoped that this kind of attention would be appreciated. Awadewit (talk) 18:32, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Skype

Hi Awadewit, thanks for the reminder. I have an account on Skype now with username user:NancyHeise. I sent you a message when I added you to my Skype account. I think I did everything correctly, let me know if you don't see a message for me. Thanks. NancyHeise 17:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

• I've added you to my Skype contact list. Awadewit (talk) 21:52, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Logging in as well. I've added you as a contact. Do you have a webcam? I just discovered my wife has added one to our computer. Tim Vickers (talk) 02:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Glad to see this addition, which may need some additional reinforcement? Calling out specific editors by name doesn't seem to be the best path forward. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

• I agree - that restriction has already been included. Awadewit (talk) 03:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I've signed into Skype and I'll be in all day. Hopefully I'll be near the computer when you log in; just holler at me. Scartol • Tok 14:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Images

Hi, following on from the discussion re. Richard Williams, you mentioned a more knowledgable colleague - perhaps you could put me in touch to run past a couple more scenarios re. images for similar articles I'm working on - or happy to discuss with you as well, just let me know. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

• You are welcome to ask me or the person I consulted, Durova. She is an admin at Commons. Awadewit (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks, Awadewit. Since we know each other now, let me start with you...! Recapping, once we established that Defence’s Misplaced Pages-only permission for the official portrait of Richard Williams was not sufficient, we were left with a fair use claim that was, as you said, weak due to there being public domain images of him available – at least one of which was a perfectly good portrait, albeit not one that showed him at an advanced age and in full regalia. This is where your guidance would be useful, since the question in my mind revolves around what is considered a free "equivalent" image. Take an article I’ve recently expanded, Colin Hannah. The two pics there now are PD. However I’ve found no portrait of Hannah (not simply an RAAF Chief but a Governor) suitable for the infobox, where a portrait is the norm – not even pre-1955, the usual PD-Australia cutoff point. On the other hand, the Defence site that supplied the Williams portrait has a very usable study of Hannah. So the question is, when we say no free equivalent, do we mean no reasonable portrait or no image at all? If the former, I’d expect to be able to use the RAAF’s official portrait of Hannah under fair use; if the latter then I’d have to try and get Defence to release it free. Your thoughts? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

• We mean no image at all. Let me give three examples, one hypothetical and two real. In my conversation with Durova, she explained it this way: If we had a glamorous headshot of a celebrity taken by professional photographers that was fair use versus a terrible photo taken by a fan while desperately trying to get an autograph that was freely licensed, we would have to take the free image. For Félix Houphouët-Boigny, for example, we had to crop him out of a larger portrait for the infobox photo. The picture of Mario Vargas Llosa is of him autographing a book. These are clearly not the best images of these people available, but they are free. Since there are free alternatives, there is no justification to use a fair use image. We only use fair use when there is absolutely no free alternative. Does this make sense? Awadewit (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.

Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:20, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Nun with ruler

LOL ... you have to have been to Catholic school to appreciate that ! But I'm worried about how much you can do. We need your prose reviews, now we need your image reviews more than ever ... I hope the entire community will consider this issue, and that it won't fall to any given person. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:04, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

• An FAC constable? Awadewit (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

• You'll never pass RfA :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

• But if you ever want to try, say the word. I'd be happy to nominate you, and I bet half a dozen others would be fighting over who gets to be the co-nominator :) Karanacs (talk) 17:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Friedrich

Hey Awadewit, long time no talk. I am happy now for you to revisit this article, and thanks to giveing it a look. Ceoil (talk) 22:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

O and by the way, would you mind if I asked you to to look at The Lucy poems when I am ready. I feel in some ways out of my dept on this one, so will need as much informed feedback as possible. I am extreamly fond of Wordsworth, but my knowledge is to be fair, relatively limited (I'm an accountant, and no scholar!). I think the page has potential, though it will be at least christmass before we realise anything like that. The reason I mention it in advance is because if I invest a lot of time in it, it would be good to know that strong and diligent reviews will follow. Ceoil (talk) 23:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

And here is a very plesant song about Lucy while you consider. Best. Ceoil (talk) 00:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I would be more than happy to pour my reviewing soul into it. Awadewit (talk) 03:33, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

By the way, should I look at the Friedrich images now? Awadewit (talk) 03:37, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that would be great. Ceoil (talk) 00:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Awadewit, I'm not sure if you're done with Caspar David Friedrich? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:36, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

No, I haven't rechecked the images or reread the article. I'll try to get to that today, but I have a publication deadline for something IRL, so it might not happen. Awadewit (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time; all completed now. Ceoil (talk) 00:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Images on major depressive disorder

I think we are good to go on images, I don't think the Lincoln one was there and if you have concerns please you are more than welcome to remove it. The circadian rhythm is the other new one AFAICT. I would have loved to put Freidreich's Monk by the Sea in but I really didn't want to add more controversy as it is not clinical/core material within the article. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Checked. Awadewit (talk) 04:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Pong

Just sent you a good news e-mail. Ceoil (talk) 00:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

• I have no email. Awadewit (talk) 01:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

No news is good news? –Outriggr § 03:33, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

This is all very mysterious. Awadewit (talk) 03:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Eeek. Sorry Awadewit, I had several windows open at the time and that was meant for Sandy. <sigh> Ceoil (talk) 00:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Aww. Awadewit (talk) 00:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't feel too bad, I was only letting her know about a new oppurtunity some mysterious stranger had mailed me about earlier. Its quite exciting and can't fail, but probably not your thing. Ceoil (talk) 01:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Happy Wadewitz's Day!

User:Wadewitz has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Wadewitz's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Wadewitz! Peace, Rlevse ~ A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:EVula/Userboxes/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:36, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Every day is Awadewit day. I'll have the podcast up tomorrow. Sorry for the delay! Scartol • Tok 02:39, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Fleance GA

I think we've about got this one licked. Have a look. Wrad (talk) 02:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Milton

I thought this was important - is his birthday (9 December) OS or NS? If it is OS, then his actual birthday would be 19 December 1608, which would give us 10 more days. I cannot find any mention of the date because his life was contained before the transition, so people rarely point it out. I will talk to my Miltonist friend about it. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I wanted to note that I added a set of books that I have access to dealing with the generalities. I only focused on a few issues to see what the response would be. However, I think my idea could be a compromise between two competing philosophies. If you can provide any of the competing "novel development" theory sources, i.e. books with a short summary of what they emphasize, then that could help filling out the Ian Watts section, which should be updated with at least a handful more critics. I decided that I wanted to stem off the FAR politics spats that are going on currently by actually working on one. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Image check request

When you have time, could you take a look at List of premiers of British Columbia and do an image check? I've cleaned it up as much as I can and I'd like an image check before the list goes to FLC, so that there's no rush with the images. There are seven images in total; I'd appreciate it if you could post the status of the images on the article's talk page. Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 18:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

13th ABN

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks for updating the article images on 13th Airborne Division (United States), very kind of you! Skinny87 (talk) 21:20, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

"gang rape" dispute

Hi. The FAC talk page is already rather overheated (and bloated). Can I please request that if you want to continue discussing the "gang rape" comparison, you do it on user talk pages? Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 10:41, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Church

Actually, I have been thinking of ways to go about this and I have not really made a decision yet. Sandy asked me to go over the opposes again to see what can be gleaned from them to improve the article and I think I have already done that as much as I can. But just in case I am blind to something, I was hoping to get help from others to look at those opposes and offer advice to me about what should be considered that I have not already incorporated. Would you be willing to do that? The opposes were summarized on the last FAC's talk page by Sandy. Most comments were answered and incorporated. We are also trying to make sure the wordings are in a form that is the most NPOV. Some of my wordings were noted as sounding too POVish and this was not clear to me, especially when I was trying to soften the way it was worded by the scholars whose versions would definitely have sounded POV to FAC reviewers. I placed a lot of quotes on the FAC talk page under Geometry Guys section so others could see how the various scholars worded the information and it is plain that I have made them less NPOV sounding in the article text - however, we were still asked to consider different wordings. Thanks for any help you can give. I know you are a busy person and I appreciate any amount of time you can offer this article. Thanks. NancyHeise 15:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

The summaries are at Misplaced Pages:FAC/Roman Catholic Church/summary5 and User:Marskell/RCC. The summary is only meant to reflect what was not struck, no statement about validity or actionability, just a summary to help sort, since the page became so long. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Many of those unstruck were answered and incorporated into the article but were not struck by opposers. I was not sure if they were either unsatisfied with our attempts to incorporate their comments or just did not come back to see what we did. Some opposes we could not act upon because consensus of editors agreed on the talk page that the comments were not OK such as Soidi's oppose. NancyHeise 19:06, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Core contest

I know that it didn't work with the reward for the core contest and I'm willing to sponsor it by sending a package of quality lebkuchen. All I need is an adress. My email is kurt.scholzgmx.de. In case you have reservations, sending me your adress User:Proteins has agreed to handle the distribution. Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 20:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

• Awadewit: Are you interested enough in lebkuchen to follow up on this? Just curious. I guess it's nice to know that some people feel bad about the judges' inverse Solomonic decision - the baby remains whole, while the parent is split in two. ;) Simmaren (talk) 22:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

• I usually don't accept food from strange people on the internet. :) Awadewit (talk) 03:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Kannada literature in the Western Chalukya Empire

Thank you for supporting this FAC.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 00:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Imaging issues for Misplaced Pages:Featured_article_candidates/Croatia_national_football_team

I suppose I, at least, will have to learn the hard way, per this example. I'm asking for your assistance, however. I did the image review, and found one problem according to my own experience, which is limited. After reading this thread on SG's talk page, I got this list on mine of things I missed or didn't know to check for. I'm going to go ahead and post these, but think I may need some backup. --Moni3 (talk) 17:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

We are all learning together. Perhaps we should check each other's work? I sometimes wish I had another person's opinion on the images. :) Awadewit (talk) 17:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Priestley's gravesite

Regarding the comments you left on my page, I'm interested in graves, and I've never known Find-A-Grave to err. If you know of an example, please let me know. In this particular case, the Find-A-Grave site is 100% accurate and even includes a photo of Priestley's marker showing the epitaph. After Thanksgiving I can check for a printed source at work, although words alone won't do much for me since I've seen Priestley's grave in Northumberland for myself. I may even be able to dig out a picture I took. By the way, the marker shown at Find-A-Grave isn't the original one. I may have pictures of both the old and new ones. The old one is, as I recall, hard to read and almost hidden by the newer marker. - Astrochemist (talk) 04:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Just readded the gravesite material, but this time with two other references, each containing a picture. - Astrochemist (talk) 04:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Amitriptyline

I think about every second general textbook in psychiatry has a diagram of amitriptyline in it....I stuck two sources on the commons page. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:09, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: That thing called the dissertation

Hmm, I'm not terribly familiar with them, but I'll try take a closer look tonight. Thank you for pointing that out. –Juliancolton 15:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixing up image source info

Hi Awadewit. I need some advice on what to do about fixing up an image description page. The image of interest has no info whatsover (source, date, author, etc.). Previously when I had this problem with Cranmer, one would consult the NPG database (very useful for English portraits). Is there a comparable database of portraits of Continental characters? Oh, also I wanted to mention about the peer review, if you have some time to spare of course! --RelHistBuff (talk) 17:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

The first place I would check would be the Calvin biographies you have. Do they have any information about this portrait? (I will try to get to the peer review this weekend.) Awadewit (talk) 20:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

There were none in the books I have currently checked out (I returned a few of them but I will be checking them out again). Yomangan gave me a starting point though. --RelHistBuff (talk) 00:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Glad to hear that you are out of the hospital! Please ignore my request; I will look for help from others. Wishing you the best in your recovery. --RelHistBuff (talk) 07:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Gobble gobble

And what better Thanksgiving gift could anyone ask for than a completed podcast posting? (Okay, I can think of several dozen. But the point is valid.) Yes, it's live. Thanks for all your work on it; when shall we aim for part two? (I'll need at least a week off, so hopefully we can wait til after the 5th?) Scartol • Tok 02:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article candidates/Reception history of Jane Austen

Sorry for taking so long, but I formatted out what I wanted. My main issue with inline on the main FAC page is I can't easily strike out all my comments and it gets lost in the sea of text; I've added some italics and bolding so my comments stick out (for me at least) and pasted your comments in between them, I've gotten to a couple. I'm going to go through this weekend and get another set of comments, which I'll just add as another level heading. Sorry for being such a pain :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 22:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Images

Thanks for doing an image review of Bart Simpson. If you don't mind, could you please do an image review for List of Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine (which is a FLC) or List of Nobel Peace Prize Laureates (which will be heading to FLC soon)? I was much more careful when I was adding images for those lists, but I'm sure some bad ones slipped through (because I'm not really an image expert). Thanks, Scorpion 20:49, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

• I am slowly going through the physiology and medicine list right now, but I can tell you that it is not looking good. I think that what happened was that you trusted the information added by uploaders rather than checking it yourself. Shockingly, people do not always know what they are doing when they attach license tags and whatnot! Awadewit (talk) 01:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot for your review so far, I have removed or addressed every image listed. -- Scorpion 23:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Milton Regained

This Friday, I will start producing a series of pages for DYK. I will try to get people to place them on his birthday and have as many possible displayed. This is a list of those I will work on: Milton's early life. Milton's religious views. Milton's political views. L'Allegro and Il Penseroso. Milton's epic style. Milton's legacy/reception history. Paradise Regained. All of the political works not yet there. The individual pages for the divorce tracts. Milton and Hobbes page. The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates. Eikonoklastes. and Milton's 1645 Poems (including pages for those not yet there). I hope to build five sets of DYK (based around politics, early life and early poems, his epics verse, his divorce tracts, and his religious views). I will return about 45 books this week and I will empty out the various libraries with Milton books. If you can help, try to find works by Stanley Fish and Thomas Corns on Milton. I plan on creating about 20 pages, expanding around 10. The idea will be to expand the pages to size, then double back and work on them. I figure that I was able to build 12 pages for Johnson in a day, so with help that this could be achieved over a weekend. Credit should be dispersed to everyone that contributes, even if its just editing and formatting. Perhaps we should start a list so people will know? Outside help (with formatting and editing) would probably be best Saturday, after the initial push. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Primate at FAC

Hello! As a previous reviewer of Primate at FAC it would be great if you could have another look at the article. The FAC has been restarted, and any comments would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Jack (talk) 17:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Teeming masses

• How do you feel about "whom they saw as the teeming masses"? Simmaren (talk) 19:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

• Please take a look on the Talk page at my suggestion for an edit in response to Fuchs' point 22 and let me know what you think. Thanks. Simmaren (talk) 22:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey there...

Can you take a look at the sourcing queries on Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Ralph Bakshi and tell me if I'm out of line here? It appears that the editors are using citations to sources they did not actually consult, but that were sources for works they did consult. When questioned, I'm getting "I've done this before and it's fine", which I do not consider fine, but I'd like a second opinion. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Isn't that specifically prohibited by some guideline? (checking...) WP:CITE#SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT is pretty clear. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 13:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thank you David. I could not find that earlier... (Now why do I not have YOUR page on my watchlist? Maybe because I got tired of discussions of video games....) Ealdgyth - Talk 13:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

There's stuff besides video games, it's just boring either way :) -Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 16:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

FAR

I know it isn't your period, but as an expert on women writers could you cast an eye over H.D. and comment at Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/H.D.? Thanks, DrKiernan (talk) 14:04, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I can't right now, as I have just gotten out of the hospital. Awadewit (talk) 03:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I was unaware that you were ill. My best wishes for a speedy recovery, DrKiernan (talk) 12:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Reception History of JA

It appears that the article has been designated as a FA. Congratulations. It has been and continues to be a pleasure to work with you. Thanks for living with my limitations. Simmaren (talk) 02:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Yay and congrats! You guys rock. I'm glad everything worked out in the end. What's next on the table? María (habla conmigo) 02:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

• Getting better is next on the table. Sorry to see that you are ill. Hope it passes quickly. Simmaren (talk) 01:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Weekly Episode 66

Hey! Misplaced Pages Weekly Episode 66: Searching High and Low has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes at wikipediaweekly.org. WODUPbot 07:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

You're receiving this because you're listed on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.

Wishing you better

Sorry to hear you're not well. I hope it's not serious or long-lasting.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Garden/WikiCup

Ohai Awadewit, I see that you are listed towards the top of this page, which means you have experience with article writing and expanding articles -- getting them featured. I'd like you to check out the WikiCup, beginning in January for the fourth cup. ayematthew ✡ 23:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Reception history of Jane Austen

Delighted to see this is now a featured article. I hope to see it soon as Today's. I also hope you get well soon. Brianboulton (talk) 23:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Picture Dispatch

Misplaced Pages:FCDW/TempFPreview was listed at the Newsroom for publication with no communication at WT:FCDW; it needs loads of attention in case you have time to pitch in. It needs to be a much clearer tutorial, it needs copyediting, it may repeat some of Elcobbola's Dispatches, and I can't follow a lot of it since I've never uploaded or worked on images. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Harold Washington image

No idea where you could get an image description page on the .mil site, but the image description (including author = military employee) is in the EXIF data. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Milton project started

See my talk page for all of the pages I plan on working on. I worked on seven tonight. I didn't finish them. However, I will go through and rough out the other missing political works before working on expanding the 9 pages. This should end around 3ish, and I will spend the rest of the night working on the major "unity" and biographical pages. I want to have at least two sets of DYK (I need 6 sets total) by tomorrow night, and to get spacing for the rest. Hopefully, these 38 pages will mostly be finished along with the related Blake depictions of Milton's page by Sunday night/Monday morning so everything can go off starting Monday night. I didn't list articles on JStor, and I figured anyone who wanted to drop by and add content is welcome (and encouraged). The list is there, and my bibliographical list is there, so people will know what I am going to be adding to each of the pages. Its going to be fun! Ottava Rima (talk) 06:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I listed a group of pages that could use some copyedit and some other work. If you can look over any, the help would be appreciated. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I just got out of the hospital. I'm really sorry, but I can't do much of anything right now. Awadewit (talk) 21:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

25 pages so far without you. Think about what could have happened if you were around! Mwah ha ha ha! Ottava Rima (talk) 03:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

So, about 19 made it onto the main page during Milton's birthday, and it lasted about half of the day. The other two sets were derailed by someone wishing he was an admin and who doesn't have a clue about the DYK standards. But yeah, lots of attention on Milton from quite a few reviewers. Also, there will be a lot of stuff up to build the Milton page. I'll have to try and bring that to FA. Then back to Wordsworth and Byron. Then, hopefully, onto Keats. Ottava Rima (talk) 04:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

"The other two sets were derailed by someone wishing he was an admin and who doesn't have a clue about the DYK standards." You rang? —Politizer /_contribs 05:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

You do know that following contributions over multiple pages falls under WP:HARASS, right? And you already demonstrated that you do not understand DYK size standards, and you are also not an admin but you are acting like you have the right to select items for DYK, which only admin have the authority to because only admin have the authority to add items to the main page. So, neither falls under a "personal" attack. Ottava Rima (talk) 05:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

For your information, I never stopped any of your hooks, and I never selected or rejected any of them. I placed some cleanup tags on a couple of the articles in the first hook and said that the hooks could be reviewed when the issues were addressed; the issues were promptly addressed and then those hooks went to the queue. I didn't even comment on any of your other hooks until the 5th batch this morning, so I don't know where you got the idea that I "derailed" two sets. —Politizer /_contribs 05:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

As for DYK size standards, I have not responded to your latest attacks because I'm waiting for ArtLaPella or another reviewer to weigh in. I know what they'll say, so there's no need for me to comment anymore.

As for who has the right to approve or reject hooks...take a look at the page. Who do you see doing most of the approving and rejecting? Most of those people are not admins. Admins make the official move of the hook from the page into the queue, but most of the reviewing is done by non-admins. —Politizer /_contribs 05:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Its comments like that which prove that you really should be banned from contributing to DYK. Not only have you derailed the process, you turned it into a fight page. Admin are the only one who approve it, and putting a check mark next to it means nothing. This really should go to village pump so people can be made aware of the decline in the process that has resulted as of late. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Niobium

Thanks for your help to get the article featured. I never focused on the images I used for the article, but next time I will try to get all the points which are important. --Stone (talk) 00:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Who Would Have Thought It? GA review

Because this review has been placed on hold an abnormal length of time (+15 days), I was hoping you could finalize your judgement in order to help with the backlog at GAN. I understand the review process is time consuming and have noted your health codition, I appreciate your efforts in improving the encyclopedia, and have asked for a consensus on the talk page in lieu of an immediate response from you. Cheers :) -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 19:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

the same goes for Carmen Rodríguez (+13 days). -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 19:59, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Awadewit. I guess I don't need to advise you to ignore this! Geometry guy 20:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

isn't it up to Awadewit to decide what he does? you don't need to wikistalk my notes to prove your point... I supose then that a friendly reminder that William Blake has been up for review for 25 days is out of line? My only suggestion is that if you feel you don't have the time right now, to remove your name from the under the nomination so that others might be more inclined to adopt it. Again, these are only meant to be helpful notices for editors in order to expedite the GA review process. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 21:34, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I have been in the hospital. I will deal with this when I am able to - hopefully that will be next week. Awadewit (talk) 21:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

as i said before, i understand, and hope that you are doing better - i don't want to stress you over something that's supposed to be a voluntary effort -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 22:17, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Get well soon

I saw the note at the top of your talk page. I hope you are feeling better soon. Cheers. --Aude (talk) 03:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I second that. I just saw a note on a talk page saying you've just got out of hospital; I'm glad to hear you're getting out, not going in, and I hope that whatever it was your recovery is quick and comfortable. Mike Christie (talk) 04:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Thirded. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Fourthed. We don't seem to have run into each other much recently, but I look at your work in mostly silent admiration. -- Hoary (talk) 12:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Fifthd? Get well soon, and take care of yourself! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Dear Awadewit, I hope you are healing well and have good care during your recovery. Thank you for your offer to help with RCC. Since we are not in any great hurry, please know that you are always welcome to come give helpful comments. I hope you don't mind if I wish you God's blessings - I am a religious person so if you are not - just take it as an act of love. God bless you. NancyHeise 16:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, do get better with all speed. Take an extra day even when you're back to 100%. You deserve some time to relax and not have to review images or work on FAC stuff. Scartol • Tok 19:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

All the best for your recovery ,and the dissertation. Johnbod (talk) 11:56, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! Awadewit (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Take care and rest up! YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom concerns

I just wanted to make you aware that I have clarified my position regarding devolution at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2008/Vote/Vassyana#Devolution. The second point is particularly relevant to your concerns. Please look it over and let me know if there are any points that can be further clarified. If you still have remaining concerns, be aware that I appreciate your opinion and reasonable opposition. I understand you are not feeling well and may not be able to respond quickly. I hope you feel better soon. Be well! Vassyana (talk) 04:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Image review for List of monarchs of the Muhammad Ali Dynasty

Hi, Awadewit! The List of monarchs of the Muhammad Ali Dynasty, which I worked on a lot, is currently a featured list candidate. Dabomb87 has requested that I ask you to check that all images are properly tagged/licensed. As I'm sure you receive many such requests, I took the time to do the checking myself. I updated the main license tag used by these images after doing some research on copyright laws in Egypt, and replaced images with dubious information with new versions. I did this so as to facilitate your task. If you can just take a quick look at the images now (there are only 19 of them), I'd be tremendously grateful as this would help the list in its FLC. It shouldn't take you much time, since I really made sure that all the images are properly licensed/tagged. BomBom (talk) 11:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I am not doing any image reviews right now because I am unwell (see banner at the top of my userpage). Awadewit (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Photon, Acid dissociation constant

Thanks for your messages. I did manage to add some references to Photon (and am still hoping to get to a library over the next few days to get something suitable for the Einstein constants – all my books that go into detail about this are in German), but didn't find time to contribute to the Acid dissociation constant. Get well soon! Markus Poessel (talk) 14:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

• I'm sure they greatly appreciate your help! Awadewit (talk) 01:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Can I help?

It's good to see that you're around a bit, if not fully in harness, and I hope your recovery continues. If it would help you, I will be happy to finish off the GA (NRG) reviews in your name which are presently on hold. Just say the word. Brianboulton (talk) 09:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)