Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:51, 13 April 2015

24 December 2024 News and notes: Responsibilities and liabilities as a "Very Large Online Platform" Op-ed: Beeblebrox on Wikipediocracy, the Committee, and everything Opinion: Graham87 on being the first-ever administrator recall subject In the media: Delhi High Court considers Caravan and Ken for evaluating the ANI vs. WMF case From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting? Recent research: "Misplaced Pages editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality Humour: Backlash over Santa Claus' Misplaced Pages article intensifies Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols Traffic report: Was a long and dark December Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

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 This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

This talkpage is decorated by Hafspajen

Nice to meet you

I wanted to reach out and say thank you for your comments. Don't be sad, I am not going away, and I am not going to discontinue to nominate photos I take in FP. It can be frustrating sometimes, from a creative standpoint I tend to lean towards the creative aspects of my contributions and it requires a thick skin at times to just overlook some of the random comments my photos often provoke. Frankly speaking it is exceptionally complicated to manage, as I do, the cumulative assets and skill sets that are required to contribute much of what I have placed here. IMHO it would be far more balanced if the voters were, in some way vetted and had some photographic background. You are welcome to also nominate my photos any time. I truly enjoy the art of photography, and appreciate your kind words and support. Cheers!talk→ WPPilot  03:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

WPPilot Thanks for your note! I agree with you that those who vote on photos should have a basic, or more than basic, knowledge of photography. Have you proposed that somewhere? If you haven't, and if you decide to do that, I would have a list of criteria and a suggested selection process to propose right at the start. It would give the others something to think about and give direction to the discussion. I would be glad to nomination some of your photos but don't know if I have a sufficient knowledge of photography. I can only judge a photo as to composition, clarity (to the inexpert eye), and interest, not the finer points. If you think that is sufficient, can you tell me where to look for your photos, so I can choose one? CorinneSD (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

@@CorinneSD: I keep a selection of them on my user page, so just click on WPPilot and take a gander. Note that the first few are just over the last few days, and will not qualify until next weeks FP (photos need to be on a project page for at least a week before consideration), so what I suggest is that you find 3 you like, and lets work it through and nominate them together. I would be more then happy to give you my objective consideration, as well look forward to having your thoughts considered, prior to a actual nomination. I am willing to bet that Hafy would be more then happy to join us..talk→ WPPilot  19:59, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

WPPilot I enjoyed looking at the photos on your user page. I love the pictures of the orchids. I hope you will take and post more photos of them. I prefer a natural background, in focus or not, to a stark white background; I think it gives the image some depth and provides clues as to the size of the flower(s). As you suggested, I chose three images that I think are exceptional:

• ]
• I personally like this one for nomination by us
• I think this photo is perfect really, The angle of attack the space, the background everything seems perfect and it did not get one vote: ]

Here are three others I liked:

• ]
• Not sure the fog that I see is going to garnish enough votes
• ]

I wanted to ask you about a caption:

• In the middle of the photos of Newport Beach there is a photo with the caption "Balboa Pier". However, all I see is an expanse of green grass and a row of tall palm trees. Is the pier behind the palm trees? I don't see the pier. Also, all the image files say D Ramey Logan. Is that you? CorinneSD (talk) 00:24, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Well I am flattered. The photo that I perhaps have miss labeled is the park that is in the photo of the Balboa Pier of the park and palm trees is next to the pier. I am doing video work right now, but lets explore the pics over the next few days, ok. Some of them have already been nominated and were not promoted, and I will show you now how to look at the history of each to do some research before we nominate one of them ok. Here in the EN Misplaced Pages we only see a short summary, under the photo when you enlarge it. Click on the button under the photo and review more information first, then we need to notate the pics that have been nominated, and figure out why those did not receive enough votes before (perhaps it is something that can be changed/fixed) and narrow the list down some. I am going to let you make the final nomination btw, so perhaps you might want to also include a caption for the reasons you see each qualifies as a Featured Photo (one of the best images on the "English Misplaced Pages project". BTW, yes I am: - ℅ ✰D Ramey Logan a.k.a. WPPilot✰

What are your thoughts on that photo? talk→ WPPilot  17:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

WPPilot Wow, I can see why you said you have to have a thick skin on FP. They have pretty high standards for photos. When I saw the comments that the Avery Fisher Hall photo is not completely in focus, I thought, how can you get a photo of such a large building completely in focus at night? I guess they're looking for an urban Ansel Adams. When I saw the comments regarding the space ship plane, (oversaturated, out of focus) I wondered what they meant. I don't know what "oversaturated" means. Does it mean too much color, or too dark, or both? I really like that photo. I like the colors, and it looks in focus enough, to me. Is the oversaturation something that could be fixed using software? When I saw the comments regarding the sakura flowers, I was just puzzled. The flowers looked in focus to me, and I didn't see anything wrong with the background (the comment said, "What's with that stripe in the background?"). A lot of these were nominated before I got involved in Featured pictures, or I would have voted for some or all of them. Regarding the sailboat, I like the angle of the mast and sail, and the background. The only things I can think of that editors might have objected to are (a) the fact that the clouds are almost the same color as the sail, so the sail doesn't stand out as much as I might have; (b) there is a white reflection (probably from the sea foam just under the bow) on the side of the boat and the lower part of the sail, and, since it looks like a partly cloudy day, the white there, and even the yellow higher up on the sail, is puzzling. Regarding the last image, the regatta, (Star boats), I think it's all right, but I have a feeling it will not be successful. I think it is partly that it is such an overcast day, and partly because it is not clear which is the point of interest, the sailing boats/race or the red buoy. But you can always try. Of course I'll be glad to nominate the Lido photo. It's nice and clear. (I can't believe how many houses are jammed into such a small space, the little island and the surrounding land.) I will take some time to look at the background of some of the other photos, as you suggested. It sounds like you are busy right now, so no need to reply. Whenever you have time. CorinneSD (talk) 20:01, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

@CorinneSD: I have not forgot about you :) just been busy. I suggest that you write a caption for the Lido Island photo above and lets submit it. If you do not already read the signpost I suggest you review it and the featured section that I contribute to. The current edition has one of my photos, on the cover: Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost. That launch of SpaceShipOne was one of the most remarkable events that I covered and many of the related photos, IMHO are well qualified to be FP on the site. Please go ahead and nominate the Lido photo, LMK if you need any help or direction with the nomination. Cheers! talk→ WPPilot  15:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

WPPilot You will have seen that I have nominated the Lido Isle photo. How did I do? I was just glancing at your latest edit to your user page (I only looked at the last one), and I saw an error that you might like to fix. It's in this:

• I am a editor on the weekly publication Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost.

Since "editor" begins with a vowel sound, the article just before it should be "an", not "a". CorinneSD (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

WPPilot I didn't tell you before, but my father was a pilot in WWII, and he kept up his flying after the war; he owned a Stearman biplane for a while. CorinneSD (talk) 23:11, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

• @CorinneSD: The Stearman is a fantastic aircraft. It was invented by Lloyd Stearman, I was best man in his great granddaughters wedding (Daughter of Dr Ronald Stearman from Texas).. Did you ever get to fly in the plane? If so you were a lucky girl! talk→ WPPilot  03:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Thomas Corsan Morton

Hafspajen Hafs, there is no painting in the articles for these artists of the Glasgow School: Thomas Corsan Morton, Harrington Mann, Jessie Newbery, or Ann Macbeth, or Eleanor Allen Moore, Christian Jane Fergusson, James Nairn, George Pirie (artist), Hannah Frank. CorinneSD (talk) 00:41, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Are you sure they are free? I mean you know we can't use pictures that have copyright. Hafspajen (talk) 00:44, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

• Hm, Morton is free. Hafspajen (talk) 00:45, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

OK, I am done with Eilif Petterssen. Go on, copy-edit it. The other guy can't be fixed,: Ludwig des Coudres, cos he has no other pics on commons. But Morton yes. Hafspajen (talk) 00:47, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

I mean NOW I am ready. Hafspajen (talk) 00:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I will go over the Petterssen article tomorrow. I'm too tired now. Did you see my comment above about the image in John Lavery? CorinneSD (talk) 00:56, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Fixed, it was ROSE and gray. Hafspajen (talk) 01:01, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Nobody is perfect. And I don't wanted more trouble, that's why. Hafspajen (talk) 15:34, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Maine

Rwood128 and Rothorpe I've been reading the articles about the New England states, and I just finished reading the article on Maine. I have two questions for you:

1) About two-thirds of the way through the section Maine#Geography is a verse from a poem by Edna St. Vincent Millay. I noticed that there is no punctuation at all in this verse, and I'm wondering if there is any in the original that should be there;

2) toward the end of the first (long) paragraph in Maine#Etymology, the same phrase is used twice. The phrase is:

• where his ancestral roots first took hold on English soil".

I don't know if that was deliberate, but if not, perhaps another phrase (such as "put down roots" or "settled") should be used for one of them. I think overall, the sentences are fine. It's just that repetition that I don't think is needed. Any thoughts or suggestions? CorinneSD (talk) 23:59, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

1. Yes, the original does have punctuation, so it should be included. I'll put it in.

2. I'm inclined to think the second sentence is an accidental repetition and could just be removed. Rothorpe (talk) 00:12, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

A project for us

Hi Corinne. First off thank you for your support, as you are learning the politics here are difficult at times. You are correct in that I should have better tempered my words, and I have settled everything down so as to get back into a productive mode, sorry you were dragged into my frustrations. When I come under fire, so to speak I tend to regress and just go out and enjoy the many things that life has to enjoy, it always helps. As you saw there are all types here, and you just have to take some things with a grain of salt. I am also btw experiencing some serious medical issues that can cause me to get a little more frustrated then normal as I am facing a serious surgery in the near future, so often acquiring the content I get is also a painful process, literally speaking. I suggest that we redo the photo placement on the Reno Air Racing page. As you may have noticed in the other comments, I had loaded it up with some photos I took last year, and others had issues with the quantity of photos I was using. Perhaps we can work with @Ahunt: and get that page up to snuff, I would love to submit a section as a featured page, and perhaps that one, with the collaboration of the three of us might be the first one. Before I came to that page it was really really bad, frankly speaking as it was only about the crashes that have sadly taken the lives of the brave men that fly in that race. I did strip some of the photos out, but it is really stale now without them. LMK. talk→ WPPilot  17:36, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

WPPilot Thank you for the invitation to work on another project and your nice comment. I couldn't respond for almost a week due to problems with my computer. I got back onto WP yesterday afternoon and spent the evening catching up on both e-mail and my WP watchlist. Today, I didn't do as much work as I usually do. I just wanted to let you know so you don't think I was ignoring you. Tomorrow I will look at that article and respond to your suggestions. Best regards, CorinneSD (talk) 02:17, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Jihadi John

Hi, Corinne. Do you think my last edit is OK? Rothorpe (talk) 01:17, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, of course! Your edit is a definite improvement. CorinneSD (talk) 00:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, and welcome back for real! Rothorpe (talk) 00:42, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

same

Hi, Corinne. Do you think my last edit is OK? Hafspajen (talk) 21:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Alas, no edits from Corinne since the early hours of the 15th. I fear a computer malfunction. Come back soon/Welcome back, Corinne! Rothorpe (talk) 02:58, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

• Sigh, I blame myself. It is so much shit arround me always, that sometimes I wonder if I am cursed ot what. --Hafspajen (talk) 13:55, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't think you have driven her away if that is what you mean. Rothorpe (talk) 20:11, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Hope not. Hafspajen (talk) 23:07, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen, Rothorpe I'm back! No, Hafspajen, it had nothing to do with you. Rothorpe was right. I had a problem with my computer. It started around the 15th, and I decided not to use it at all until it was checked out at a computer store. I got it back today, all fixed. It was some kind of malware. It was a difficult week not being able to get on Misplaced Pages. I missed all of you. Now I will look at your edits as you asked me to, above, and then catch up on my watchlist. Thank you for your messages. CorinneSD (talk) 00:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC) P.S. Thank you for the gooey pumpkin cake. Yum! CorinneSD (talk) 00:17, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, I thought you don't wanted to nominate that van Gogh any more ... or Sca - antipathy was contagious. so I nominated everything among earth and heaven just to make time pass... When I was not messing arround with celibacy. Hafspajen (talk) 00:25, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I saw your note about a week ago that you thought the article on Houses at Auvers was ready to be nominated as a co-nomination (you didn't say who the co-nominators would be, but I assumed you meant yourself, me and 7 and 6 equals 13). However, I thought, since 7 and 6 had been doing more work on the article than I had been, s/he ought to have the option of nominating it first; then I would add my name. Also, it kind of looked like you and s/he were still working on the article. So, I was just waiting, and then my computer got the problems. CorinneSD (talk) 00:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Morus (plant)

Hafspajen Does this edit to Morus (plant) look right? The first part, especially, does not look right to me. CorinneSD (talk) 00:53, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Loren Eiseley

Vsmith and Rothorpe What do you think of these edits to Loren Eiseley? . There are quite a few. Be sure to scroll down. CorinneSD (talk) 03:17, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

The first group are no improvement. Rothorpe (talk) 03:39, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Archiving

Joshua Jonathan I just saw your edit summary, "Archivated", which accompanied your archiving of some material on your talk page. I just thought I would point out that the correct form is "Archived" (or "Archiving"). Here is the link to the Wiktionary entry for the word archive. Look at the forms for the verb. The past tense, archived, and the past participle are the same.

• Past tense: I just archived some material from my talk page.

• Past participle: I have just archived some material from my talk page. / That's archived material.

• Present participle: In this edit, I was archiving some material from my talk page.

CorinneSD (talk) 16:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Great, thanks! In Dutch, we say "gearchiveerd". So, I guess it's a "Dutchianism" (from "Germanism"). Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:37, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Swallows and Amazons

Hafspajen I was looking at the infobox and book cover of Swallows and Amazons that User:Rwood128 added to a comment at Talk:Great Expectations#Series and Serial and then I looked at the article on the author Steven Spurrier (artist) and it wasn't there. I wonder what you think of adding the book cover to the article on Spurrier. CorinneSD (talk) 21:56, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

I did looked, but know for little about the issue. Hafspajen (talk) 23:02, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

WHAT issue? I just wanted to know if we could add the image of the book cover to the article on the artist who painted the book cover. CorinneSD (talk) 23:09, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

.

• Oh, I am just involved in the next scandal. ‎ Halleluja. Hafspajen (talk) 22:32, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Hafs, I read the discussion. It was interesting. I was sorry you got upset. I don't think you needed to get so upset. There is a difference between, "You are (or were) sexist" and "This statement is sexist." I don't believe at all they were calling you sexist. Also, (a) people have different perceptions of what is sexist (and that can certainly be discussed), and (b) people might inadvertently say or write something that might be perceived as sexist by some readers (so the editors – in a time pinch – made an editorial decision not to use it in order to avoid problems. All your questions are valid ones, but I think you should calm down and try not to take their editorial decision personally, and ask your questions in a calm manner, even if it is after the Signpost was published. Everyone can learn something from a rational discussion so perhaps a better decision is made the next time. If you were upset that they didn't discuss it with you, that's another issue. Perhaps you should enable e-mail, perhaps a special e-mail account that is just for Misplaced Pages. You wouldn't even have to reveal your real name. Maybe I take the time to write all this to you because in some ways you remind me of myself. I sometimes find it hard not to take little slights (such as being ignored, or getting brusque responses) personally. I just think you will get farther – that is, gain more respect, be consulted more, learn more, get more done – if you stay calm. There is nothing wrong with asking questions or asking for explanations, just do it as calmly as you can. Adding a bit of humor (as you do) won't hurt.

By the way, I tried to find the article or paragraph in the Signpost where that statement would have been, but couldn't find it. Where is it? CorinneSD (talk) 23:08, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

..And some shades of blue in fact are green. Shall we nominate that van Gogh? Feel like doing something else for a while. Hafspajen (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't know if I should be a co-nominator on the van Gogh painting since I don't think I did much editing on the article, but if you think I should, of course I would be glad to. I think either your name or seven and six's name should go first, though. CorinneSD (talk) 00:16, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

? . Hafspajen (talk) 00:59, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I guess I'm not clear on something. I thought that the co-nominators should be the same editors who worked on the article that contains the painting. A while ago, at your suggestion/request, I started editing Houses at Auvers. Then I saw 7&6 working on it all the time, so I stopped working on it, which was fine. Overall, I think 7&6 and you did more work on the article than I did, but if that is not important, then I'd be glad to co-nominate the painting/image. Just say the word. Do you want me to co-nominate first? If so, just tell me and I will. CorinneSD (talk) 01:07, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

• This section is about. Hafspajen (talk) 23:43, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

And I will try to comunicate a bit and see if I can make myself understood. Editorial decision, you say. Yesterday, I was spending my Saturday that in fact I intended to spend a very diffent way, by editing the Singpost. Circa eight- nine-ten something hours. Chech here the section marked Article status. Featured. I did it because Xanthomelanoussprog was working all alone and I got pinged. Adam said go take a break, and than he got the flu, or the cat was sitting on him or whatever but he never bothered to say a word that he can't do nothing on this issue. So I was sitting up to dawn fixing the Featured section, puting up the next issue and when finally ready .. and the next thing I am met with s like YOU sexist this* and * that* removed your filthy comment. Try to feel it, and tell me how you feel. Hafspajen (talk) 23:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hmm. So you are saying that you were actively editing on WP all night and the others say that no one could reach you? Hmm. You didn't mention that in that discussion I read. I looked at all the links you provided me, and even went back a few edits in each one that was a link to a revision history, and I didn't see anything like, "YOU sexist *** removed your filthy comment." Where was that? I'd like to see it. You didn't mention that in the discussion, either, Hafs. I was going only by what I read in the discussion. My comment here would have been different, and I might have joined the discussion (in support of you) if you had said these things before. CorinneSD (talk) 00:13, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

• The part "YOU sexist *** removed your filthy comment." - is a poetic exaggeration. Hyperbole, if you so wish. But it felt like this. It was on my talk page this afternoon. First message I got. It said: In my view, and the view of a woman I asked for comment, the last sentence is pretty sexist. I was rather expecting a hey we did it, it was good of us - note. Hafspajen (talk) 00:20, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

And I did ASKED how come that they did this decision among them and they said they discussed it but they couldn't afford to discuss it with me. I could most of the time accept the decisions Adam made because he had the courtesy talking them through with me. I think if you are asked to work in a team than people shouldn't treat you if you were inferiour to them. I don't treat my employees like this. If they worked with me and for me and worked hard - I let them take their own decisions and if I want to I question it or I want to make any changes in the work they did to me, I discuss. Otherwise they will not work well next time. Hafspajen (talk) 00:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

It is all about to administrate others, and how to manage them. Making things like this doesn't pay off. It is elementary leadership. Hafspajen (talk) 00:51, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, but who was the leader? It wasn't clear to me. Even an editor who is selected as leader may not have good leadership skills. Hafs, you don't need to defend yourself so much with me, and you don't have to correct every last spelling error, either. I pretty much understand what you're saying even with the mistakes. Did you see the comment I left there? I think you should try to keep your comments shorter and more to the point:

The "leaders" are the ones who removed comment. Editors-in-chief Gamaliel and Go Phightins. They are the new editors-in-chief, instead the older ones, came as editors-in-chief like amoth ago. The others never interfered like this. Hafspajen (talk) 01:57, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

There. Do you see? Then the burden is on them to respond. CorinneSD (talk) 00:57, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Arr. I belive it is a mistake of me editing Signpost. I will not do it any more. They can cope. I don't exacly feel that anyone from the FP team has expressed any support or even responded in any constructive ways in the latest issue, a week ago. This, the newest - they just keep away. I am happy to work with people but I want them to back me up to, at least. Probably old fashioned values. Maybe they think we just let this pass, Hafspajen will be back anyway. Hafspajen always does that ... but then those times when I did changed my mind it was because so many people were standing by, supporting me. Probably I came from an old fashioned environment where they treat things differently, and ignoring others is considered rude. Hafspajen (talk) 01:17, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Yeah. I want you to co-nom, we found the picture, we made an article, 6+713 made the DYK. Nominate, yes. me made nomination. Me added, me put you as co nom, you sign, me Indian chief big Bear. How (greeting) Good night. Hafspajen (talk) 02:34, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Check Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates. Hafspajen (talk) 09

34, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

More

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/File:Vincent van Gogh - Houses at Auvers - Google Art Project.jpg

• Sign and add, we waited enough. Hafspajen (talk) 01:16, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination ready. Check, sigh and add. 7+6=13 made a DYK of it. He plans going even for a GA, we nominate, come on. Hafspajen (talk) 02:36, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Holy Mother of God, I am tired and start getting grumpy.

Corinne, I add nomination it as it is, I have to have some rest. I add it as it is, you go and sign when you are back with the dog, or from shopping. Hafspajen (talk) 02:39, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Hafspajen. Last night I was tired so logged off. I just signed at FP. CorinneSD (talk) 16:53, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Hafspajen (talk) 17:48, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Why MEDRS?

Jytdog I saw your comment on Paine Ellsworth's talk page, so out of curiosity I looked at your essay, "Why MEDRS?" I read the first half carefully and skimmed the second half. I just wanted to tell you that I thought it was brilliant. It is clear, well-written, and logically organized, and it has a good tone and is generally at the right level for non-experts in science or medicine. I don't know if you want any feedback from me. Though I have an interest in science, I am not an expert by any means. I have, however, copy-edited Epacris impressa, Radiocarbon dating, and Oil shale in Estonia as they were, or are, being prepared for FA status (see the peer review or article talk pages, including archives of those pages). I would not change much at all in your essay. It is really quite good as it is. I just have a few suggestions, including a few minor changes in wording, phrasing, or punctuation, if you're interested. If you are, please tell me where to make my suggestions:

• on the as-yet-uncreated talk page for your essay;

• here; or

• in the actual text -- I could use the "small" template for my comments/questions so you can easily see them -- and remove them.

Let me know. CorinneSD (talk) 18:43, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

that is super-nice of you! you can feel free to edit it directly or leave comments on its talk page. thanks again. ( i apologize for it being so rambling....it is very draft-y) Jytdog (talk) 18:55, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Just writing link here for convenience. User:Jytdog/Why MEDRS? CorinneSD (talk) 00:47, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Marsh

MeegsC I was looking at the latest edits to Marsh and I wondered about them. I thought "habitat" was used correctly as an uncountable noun before it was changed to a countable noun ("a habitat" and "habitats"). I asked Apokryltaros at User talk:Apokryltaros#Marsh. He thinks the edits are fine, but I don't. I wondered what you thought. CorinneSD (talk) 22:04, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Corinne: I think they're okay too; in fact, I would probably change the first instance of "Marshes provide a habitat" to "Marshes provide habitats" as well. We biologists refer to "habitats" regularly! (Of course, perhaps we're just using the language incorrectly...) Re: the prairie pothole section, I think "these" is probably appropriate, as there are several types of prairie in the prairie pothole region (including both shortgrass and tallgrass prairies, for example). MeegsC (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

MeegsC Thanks for your reply. Of course I have to defer to you since you're a biologist. I just thought the uncountable use was more common, but I guess not. Here is the paragraph containing the "landscapes" item:

• Prairie potholes are found in the northern parts of North America. These landscapes were once covered by glaciers, and as a result shallow depressions were formed in great numbers. These depressions fill with water in the spring. They provide important breeding habitats for many species of waterfowl. Some pools only occur seasonally while others retain enough water to be present all year.

Regarding "these landscapes", because the phrase is plural, it would normally refer to a plural noun or to several different landscapes previously mentioned. There are two plural nouns in the previous sentence ("prairie potholes" and "northern parts"), so one would think "these landscapes" refers to one of them (but since there are two plural noun phrases, that creates ambiguity). That's why I asked Apokryltaros whether a prairie pothole could be considered a landscape. I didn't think so. To me, the landscape is prairie, or a prairie, and the prairie is distinguished from other prairies by containing potholes. I don't think "northern parts of North America" is specific enough to be referred to as a landscape, or landscapes. So, to me, "these landscapes" is unclear. Perhaps if a few words were added to it, it would be clearer, something like:

• These prairie landscapes..., or

• These prairie pothole landscapes...

I am really puzzled by the use of "habitat" as a countable noun, particularly using it as a plural noun, "Marshes provide habitats for..." To me, a marsh is a habitat, just as a desert is, or a forest. You're saying that, in a marsh, there are more than one type of habitat. Do you mean (a) in the tall grass, (b) in the mud, and (c) in the water? CorinneSD (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

There are different types of marshes (and forests and deserts): for example, in your paragraph above, some of those prairie potholes are vernal (i.e. temporary) while others are not. For a biologist (and anything that lives in them) these would not provide the same type of habitat! MeegsC (talk) 00:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh... Well, how about my other suggestion just above? CorinneSD (talk) 00:44, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, I agree with your objections. This is a copy edit, as well as a biological, matter, and if there are a variety of landscapes within the Prairie Pothole Region the biologists should fully explain this. The plural "landscapes" is confusing. Likewise, "habitats", as used here, is equally confusing to a non-specialist. One of the biologists in fact admits that they may use language incorrectly. And why was Yellow-headed Blackbird changed? Rwood128 (talk) 13:37, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

"Habitat" is certainly a count noun to a biologist. See the lead section of Habitat which correctly says that the human body provides a large number of habitats for different organisms. The whole of a marsh might be a habitat to a large mobile animal. A plant might only grow where the water is less than a certain depth, there is little shade, and the pH is within a certain range, so its habitat would be smaller than the whole marsh. Another plant might grow only on bare mud. A spider might only be found where there is vegetation of certain height. And so on. Peter coxhead (talk) 23:04, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but in this sentence: "Marshes provide a habitat for many types of plants and animals that have adapted to living in flooded conditions", the plural "marshes" indicates that it is marshes in general, and the word "habitat" used in its uncountable sense ("Marshes provide habitat...") would also be general. If you say that in a marsh there can be a number of small habitats, then "Marshes provide a habitat" is wrong. It would have to be "Marshes provide habitats", as MeegsC suggested. But I still think that there is a use for the word "habitat" used as an uncountable noun – habitat in general, a place to live and flourish. "Marshes (in general) provide habitat (general) for many types of plants and animals that have adapted to living in flooded conditions." The various mini-habitats can be explained after that. CorinneSD (talk) 01:21, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

We don't disagree, I think, but the similarity of meaning is between "habitat" (mass noun) and "habitats" (plural count noun): "marshes provide habitat ..." ≃ "marshes provide habitats ..." (c.f. "I like cake" and "I like cakes" versus "I like a cake "). I read "marshes provide a habitat for many types of plants and animals that have adapted to living in flooded conditions" as meaning that this is one of the habitats that marshes provide, since the "a" here shows it's being used as a count noun. So you could write "marshes provide habitats for many types of plants and animals, including those that have adapted to living in flooded conditions and those that require exposed mud". Equally you could write "marshes provide habitat for many types of plants and animals that have adapted to living in flooded conditions or on exposed mud". Peter coxhead (talk) 09:38, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Peter coxhead Thank you for your reply. Of the last two sentences, the second one is more concise. I'm wondering, though, whether "or on exposed mud" is really necessary. I would think that in any flooded area, there must be areas of mud along the edges of the water. "A flooded area" necessarily includes wet, muddy land along the periphery. I think "or on exposed mud" adds a detail that is unnecessary at this point. Couldn't the detailed information of which organisms live entirely in the water and which live along the edges be given later? CorinneSD (talk) 16:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I didn't mean these sentences as replacements for any existing text – sorry if that wasn't clear. I was just trying to clarify how biologists might use "habitat" as either a count or a mass noun, using marshes purely as an example. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Peter coxhead Oh. I saw "habitats" in the first sentence and "habitat" in the second, but I guess I might have focused on the wrong part of each sentence (the end) in my reply. At the risk of annoying you, I still wonder: if "habitat" and "habitats" can be used interchangeably in this type of sentence, why not use "habitat" in the article? I don't understand the choice of the plural over the uncountable. CorinneSD (talk) 17:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

As I wrote, I don't see much difference in meaning between the mass noun "habitat" and the plural count noun "habitats", so I personally would be quite happy with either. The odd one out is "a habitat". Peter coxhead (talk) 22:57, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Houses at Auvers

On 24 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Houses at Auvers, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Vincent van Gogh's Houses at Auvers (pictured) is an oil painting featuring a peasant cottage, as did many of his works? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Houses at Auvers. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

FYI

I am removing the Dickens articles from my watchlist so I wont see any response to previous posts there. I am going to miss seeing your improvements to articles outside of that area. I did need to point out that your misconstruing my posts were hostile was out of line IMO. If you take a look at this Talk:Laurence Olivier#Protected you will see what hostility actually is. I never even came close to to reacting like the posts there. I know coming here is petty of me so my apologies and please feel free to remove this - even unread if you wish. MarnetteD|Talk 14:21, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

MarnetteD Right from the beginning of your comments at Talk:Great Expectations, your tone was mildly belligerent and accusatory in tone instead of emotionally neutral and collegial (that is, the way colleagues –equals – talk with each other). I would be glad to get to know you better and engage in discussions with you on any topic, but I think it would a good idea to take my criticism as an opportunity for reflection and self-examination. The best way to persuade others to your point of view is to offer reasons, logical arguments, and pertinent supporting information in a courteous tone, assume that others are not doing what they are doing from any negative intent, and respond to others' specific arguments and concerns. Rwood128 is, in my experience, one of the nicest, politest and most careful of editors; he also responds carefully and thoughtfully to others' comments and concerns. I suggest that you turn over a new leaf. Forget the past and start fresh today. Best regards, CorinneSD (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Santiago Atitlán

Vsmith I was just looking at the latest edit to Santiago Atitlán: I was just wondering if "Tropical savanna climate" could apply to a highly mountainous, high-altitude area such as Lake Atitlán and the surrounding volcanoes. (And on another minor issue, why is "savanna" spelled without the final "h"? It's usually "savannah".) CorinneSD (talk) 17:58, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Tropical savanna seems like it could fit at that low latitude and high altitude, I'm no climate expert though. Savannah redirects to savanna. The Savannah spelling is often used as the name of female humans ... except for my 15 year old granddaughter, Savanna. She gets a bit indignant when folks spell her name wrong with that h on the end. Vsmith (talk) 18:20, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

The lorax I was searching for an editor who knows something about climate and found your name. Can you answer my question? (See just above.) CorinneSD (talk) 22:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Corinne, but I'm actually not sure, William M. Connolley is a bonafide climatologist and might be able to answer your question.--The lorax (talk) 23:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Vsmith I just noticed that at the end of the third paragraph of this article there is a website. I don't think it should be there, should it? CorinneSD (talk) 15:49, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Moved to an external link. Vsmith (talk) 17:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Attiriontes

Looks like the guy who named the file couldn't spell much .... File:Antoine de Favray - Portrait of the Countess of Vergennes in Turkish Attireontes of Vergennes in Turkish Gown - Google Art Project.jpg - it wasn't me this time. Hafspajen (talk) 19:11, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Maybe Crisco could correct it. CorinneSD (talk) 15:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

• People just nominate but never vote for others.Hafspajen (talk) 15:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

• What's the correct spelling? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:15, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen Are you referring to me? Are you saying I'm not voting often enough at FP?

Nobody votes enough. Except Cris and me. Two perfectly wonderful noms are going down the drain because nobody cares. People just put their noms up, watchlist it and hope it will be featured. But who is going to do that. Hafspajen (talk) 16:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

• Corinne and Sca - at least read what I wrote as a last straw nom that is going out in like a couple hours. Feels like nobody cares. Hafspajen (talk) 18:52, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Too few users vote on FPCs. The usual suspects.

Generally speaking, I only vote on noms I really like, or dislike. (Same for WP:ITNC.) Sca (talk) 00:20, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• This Hafspajen (talk) 19:40, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen I'm so sorry, Hafs. I will read it in a minute, but just wanted to say that I was kind of avoiding voting on photographs because it seemed like I wasn't knowledgeable enough. Recently, I have only been voting on a photograph if it looks like a really good one. Also, just in the last few days i've been pretty busy and only get to WP late in the day. I will look at all current nominations, and your "lasst straw nom", now. CorinneSD (talk) 19:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

• FPCs needing feedback is that needs feedback. Looks like people never scroll down only to the first five noms. If they want to oppose it is fine, sure, OK, but at least somebody could care a bit. Hafspajen (talk) 19:44, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

How about putting an eye-catching link to FP on the Main Page and on the main page of Commons? That ought to attract more people. Also, on another topic, why is it taking so long for them to decide which image is the Featured picture of the year? Round 2 was over a long time ago. CorinneSD (talk) 19:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

As a readily accessible interactive feature (quite the buzzword these days), WP:FPC should indeed be promoted – but perhaps not too prominently, in order not to attract riffraff casual readers. Perhaps a small notice or link at the bottom of each daily FP – or a listing in the (small-type) "interaction" box on the Main Page?

I've been on WP since '04, but I didn't know about the FP nomination process until a couple years ago. (Some may wish I'd never found out.) It can be quite fun discussing noms with other users, and one learns a good deal from eds having academic or technical expertise. Sca (talk) 13:55, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Turks

Crisco 1492 I don't know what it's supposed to be. Perhaps: Turkish attire. After "attire", I don't know. By the way, I enjoyed looking at the photos of Indonesia on your talk page. CorinneSD (talk) 16:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

• Oh, I think I see it now. Will fix. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Crisco 1492 I saw you fixed the file name. Can you also fix the Title in the Summary below the image? CorinneSD (talk) 20:17, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd guess some sort of diminutive derivative of attire. Sca (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

My money's on a fusion of two variants of the title, from the elision of the middle of an excessively long two-version name. That is, the word in question is just “attire“ (rendered as “gown“ the second time around) followed by the remains of “Countess” and the rest of the second variant.—Odysseus1479 05:49, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians whose talkpages are decorated by Hafspajen

You can add that category to your userpage if you like. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Shepherd

Hafspajen The correct spelling is "shepherd", not "sheperd". It comes from "sheep" + "herd".

Hafs, I don't understand the point of the category that JJ suggested I add to my talk page (in section above), "Talk pages decorated by Hafspajen". Is there a particular reason for it? CorinneSD (talk) 16:32, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes. No. I am depressed. Hafspajen (talk) 16:33, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen What's wrong? CorinneSD (talk) 19:35, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

This was wrong. But at least is going down with four votes, not only three. Maybe can be renominated some day... unless a miracle not happens in the last second. Hafspajen (talk) 22:59, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Messier 81

Crisco 1492 or Hafspajen I liked the image of Messier 81 so much that I added it to my user page. However, I saw some unusual information in the licensing section under the file name, and I'm wondering if I need to list any particular permission next to the image on my user page. CorinneSD (talk) 20:47, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

I am not an expert on this. Hafspajen (talk) 22:05, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Its a pending OTRS. The mail is sent (as the creator mailed me) but I am waiting for a volunteer to update it. I think you need an attribution as I had here..-The Herald _{my strength} 02:48, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Amer Fort

Crisco 1492 In the article Amer Fort, which I was looking at after seeing the Featured picture nomination, I couldn't make out the image at the right in Amer Fort#Layout, so I clicked on it to get a better look. Here's the image:

.

• It looks like the image is upside-down. Am I seeing it incorrectly, or is it really upside-down? If it is upside-down, can you turn it right-side up?

• Also, I'm puzzled. In the nomination made by The Herald at WP:Featured picture candidates#From Amer Fort, the caption says, "A view from Amer fort", but the caption for the same image (to the left of the upside-down image, in Amer Fort#Layout) says, "View of Amer Fort". Also, other images in the article show the large, red building that is below the summit of the small mountain as the fort. So the caption at FP might be wrong. CorinneSD (talk) 21:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, is it really upside-down! But I think there is some way of rotating it. Hafspajen (talk) 22:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

• GOSH, they really USE this in the article, how silly. Hafspajen (talk) 22:04, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

• Rotation requested — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:49, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

• Well, well, well...It was my father who shot the pic and I uploaded it. I wasn't aware (may be you too) that the picture don't have Amer fort in its frame. It was shot from the fort in the hilltop. I'll change the file description...-The Herald _{my strength} 01:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The Herald Well, actually, I was a bit confused as to which was Amer Fort – the big reddish-colored building below the summit or the smaller fort all the way at the top, but I have re-read the article (after copy-editing it) and see that the bigger building (complex) is called both Amer Fort and Amer Palace, and the smaller fort at the top is call Jaigarh Fort. CorinneSD (talk) 19:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Sminthopsis84

Sminthopsis84 edited today! Jippie!! Hafspajen (talk) 22:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

That's great! (Now I know you're Swedish! You pronounce "j" as "y". We spell it "Yippee!") By the way, did you ever see the movie I Remember Mama? It's about a Norwegian family in San Francisco. It's one of my favorite movies. I thought of it because "Mama" also pronounces "j" as "y". But of course I got the sentiment behind "Jippie!!" CorinneSD (talk) 23:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Haffy did it on purpose..-The Herald _{my strength} 02:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Ya, yoost like Sonya Henie in this movie! Sca (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

However doubted until now I was Swedish ... hum? :( Hafspajen (talk) 20:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

No, I didn't doubt it. Are you feeling better today? You said yesterday you were depressed. CorinneSD (talk) 20:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• No, well, I mean - really, I nominated the German guy who is soo damn totally unknown - with the Alp-landscape - and is passing - and I nominate a seriously famous picture from a famous Italian guy and people don't even BOTHER to check.... And it is not getting featured because a photo-team guy make an oppose - like it have been a photo - saying it is too dark. It is so seriously wrong. This is a GREAT artwork, a RARE depiction of the object, a wonderful piece of art and nobody cares. --Hafspajen (talk) 22:49, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• Maybe if you wait a few weeks and nominate it again, it will be promoted. What do you think of my idea of a colorful icon that can be placed on the main page and on one's talk page to make it easier to get to FP? Also, and this is a separate issue, I noticed that after you vote and save the vote, you go back to the main candidates' page, but you have to scroll down through all the instructions and then a few candidates to get to the next one. After a few times, this gets tedious. Maybe people get tired of doing that and stop after the first few images. I wonder if there is a way to separate the current candidates from the long instructions so that it takes less time to scroll down. CorinneSD (talk) 00:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that after you vote and save the vote, for going back to the main candidates' page, but you have to scroll down through all the instructions and then all the above candidates to get to the next one. I did, and I guess it is irritating. You should be back were you were, on the candidate you edited ... at the same place in the cue. About the the main page, I am not too sure, it might attract vandalism maybe. DYK articles sometimes are heavily vandalized because they appeaser on the main page too... and vandalism stops when they are removed. I think FAs are generally routinely protected under the time they appear on the main page. Hafspajen (talk) 02:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC).

Well, maybe just an icon-link to FP that one can put at the top of one's talk page. CorinneSD (talk) 16:09, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Climate change

Rwood128 and Rothorpe I'd like to offer my support to NewsAndEventsGuy in his quest to remove the hyphen between "climate" and "change" in the phrase "climate-change fiction", the second phrase in the article Climate fiction, but before I do, I'd like your opinions. See Talk:Climate fiction#a dash of detail (first comment only) and User talk:Paine Ellsworth#Climate fiction. I don't think all noun phrases that are then used as adjectives need to be hyphenated, do you? (Of course, feel free to weigh in on those discussions.) CorinneSD (talk) 17:29, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree with removing the hyphen. 'Climate change' is a well-known phrase. Rothorpe (talk) 17:42, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

To be honest the very idea of an article on Climate fiction seems odd (absurd), let alone climate change fiction. I won't ask if it's a genre!

I agree with Rothorpe. Rwood128 (talk) 18:11, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

This has led further – as you have probably seen – and after "series" comes "fiction"! The question of genre and the word "fiction" has been something that keeps cropping-up. Rwood128 (talk) 11:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I hadn't looked at the talk page in a while, but I see. I agree with you that if "cli-fi" is to be spoken about in relation to both literature and films, it ought to be called a theme rather than a genre. I'm sure you'll find sources to back you up. I am amazed that the discussions on that page - a topic I never heard about until now - (all in March) have gotten people so worked up. CorinneSD (talk) 16:46, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes more "Talk" than article by miles and I'm guilty too. Fiction needs attention before this minor article. Undoubtedly climate change (rightly) raises emotions. Rwood128 (talk) 22:22, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Picture this

talk→ WPPilot  17:43, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

What a beautiful photograph! It's a nice-looking house, and it's a beautiful, clear day, and the blue trim on the house and the purple flowers in front show up clearly and add color to the picture. Also, since mining is an important part of American history, the photo has encyclopedic value. Is it in an article? I think it has to be included in an article for at least a week before being nominated. CorinneSD (talk) 17:48, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree, great picture. Rothorpe (talk) 17:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you both. Yes I am aware of the preq. for use of 7 days before nomination, I just knew you would enjoy the shot so I thought I would share. It has been used on Park City, Utah and the house itself has a lot of history to it. It really deserves a Wiki of its own as a historic landmark in Park City.. talk→ WPPilot  03:03, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

La Laguna Cathedral

Hafspajen I just finished going through La Laguna Cathedral (again) since more material had been added. I believe non-native speakers of English (probably Spanish speakers) have been working on this article. I left a note on the talk page offering to help clarify unclear spots. I noticed a red wiki-link to Juan de Miranda about two-thirds of the way through the article. I know I had seen that name before, so I thought I could clear up the red link, but I see that there are two Spanish artists named Juan de Miranda. It's got to be the one who painted a painting called (I believe) The Last Supper (it is mentioned near the red link in the article). Can you figure out which Juan de Miranda is meant, and fix the link (if there is an article on him)? CorinneSD (talk) 00:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Lord Howe Island

Vsmith Have you seen the interesting photos of geological features in the article Lord Howe Island? Look in Lord Howe Island#Geography and Lord Howe Island#Basalts and calcarenite. Also, from there I looked at the article on Guyots. I noticed (unless it's there and I missed it) that there is no explanation for the flat tops of guyots. There is a sentence at the end of the article that expresses Hess's theory, but no real explanation. CorinneSD (talk) 20:07, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Those are great images. And yes, the guyot article could use some work ... like thousands of others... Vsmith (talk) 23:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Mica

Vsmith I just finished reading the article on Mica, and I made a few copy-edits. I wanted to ask you about something. What do you think of the sentence with the long list of adjectives (indicating qualities, or characteristics, of mica) about a third of the way through the first paragraph in Mica#Properties and uses? While they may all be true of mica, the sheer length of the list may overwhelm a reader. A reader's eyes may begin to glaze over after the first five or so. Also, right after the list, specific qualities are discussed in detail, which is more informative. If you think it should stay, that's fine. I just thought I'd ask you what you thought. CorinneSD (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

That would be better presented as perhaps a bulleted (and annotated list) rather than the present form. The sentence beginning: It has superior electrical properties ... also could be broken up/improved. Vsmith (talk) 17:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Vsmith I'm sorry, but I don't know what you mean by annotated. When you say a bulleted list, I assume you mean one adjective per bullet/row. Shall I go ahead and make the bulleted list, and you can add whatever information you want to the items, or do you want to take care of all of it? CorinneSD (talk) 23:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

That'll learn me :) OK, in my too quick of an assessment I was thinking of a list of those terms (characteristics) with brief explanation from the following text. But that gets rather involved. Also, the entire paragraph is copied from the USGS 2008 Minerals Yearbook with only trivial changes. To me, that's cheating - but as it is in the public domain, OK per copyright stuff... arrgh. My typical reaction here is close the browser window and find something else to do. To me a complete rewrite is in order - but not now, already closed that window ... maybe tomorrow. Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 01:13, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Vsmith Now you probably dread seeing a ping from me. You know it will probably be something that requires some work. Did you see the other note I left you, below, on Stroma, Scotland? CorinneSD (talk) 01:19, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

No, future pings are fine ... may run from work tho' - the weather is fine and the woods beckon. Vsmith (talk) 01:30, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Edna Ferber

Rwood128 and Rothorpe What do you think of this edit to Edna Ferber? . I don't understand the removal of the word "strong". CorinneSD (talk) 00:16, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it cries out for an edit summary. Rothorpe (talk) 00:23, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

You mean an edit summary accompanying a revert? Do you have any suggestions? CorinneSD (talk) 00:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

No, I meant the edit the editor made should have had a summary. But I agree with Rwood, immediately below. Rothorpe (talk) 01:20, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

You should revert and give your reason as "no explanation given for the previous edit". Rwood128 (talk) 00:50, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I reverted and used one of the standard edit summaries from the drop-down list: "Unexplained content removal". CorinneSD (talk) 01:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Didn't know about drop-down lists. Thanks. Rwood128 (talk) 22:08, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Stroma, Scotland

Vsmith I left a question about an edit to Stroma, Scotland on Prioryman's talk page. See User talk:Prioryman#Stroma, Scotland. However, I don't know whether I should just revert that entire edit, or just add the hyphens that were taken out. Two links were added in that edit, and I don't know whether they should stay or not, and I don't want to bother Prioryman again. CorinneSD (talk) 00:38, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

hmm.. wasn't aware of that language difference. I'd say fix the hyphen bit with an explanation (ed summary) and don't revert the whole edit. Vsmith (talk) 01:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

And thanks for that ping, hadn't seen that article previously. Interesting read. Vsmith (talk) 01:38, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Why all caps all of a sudden?

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

I just made an edit to Edna Ferber undoing an edit. I selected one of the standard edit summaries from the drop-down list at the bottom. After I saved the edit, I noticed that all the edit summaries on my watchlist had changed to capital letters. What happened? Can I get it to go back to the way it was? Do I have to undo that edit to do that? CorinneSD (talk) 00:57, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Never mind. It changed back after another edit or two. Thanks, anyway. CorinneSD (talk) 01:20, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, iv'e changed the template stating that you have been helped. LethalFlower (talk) 01:24, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! CorinneSD (talk) 01:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/File:Vincent van Gogh - Houses at Auvers - Google Art Project.jpg

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Vincent van Gogh - Houses at Auvers - Google Art Project.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust 02:37, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/M 81

If you liked it, you could have voted for it..Canvassing you....-The Herald _{my strength} 08:01, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

I think this was nominated at about the time that I decided not to vote for too many photos because I felt I didn't know enough about image quality, but if you think it's all right, I'll vote occasionally. Thanks! CorinneSD (talk) 01:55, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Geology

Vsmith, Rothorpe What do you think of these edits, and the ones just previous to them by the same editor, to Geology? Vsmith, you can judge the content, but regarding wording, my impression is that the later versions are less direct and more wordy than the earlier versions. CorinneSD (talk) 21:08, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, I echo your second sentence there. Less idiomatic too. Rothorpe (talk) 21:42, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Reworded things a bit, don't know if I covered your concerns ... just did some fixing. Vsmith (talk) 23:51, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Diabetes Mellitus

Jytdog Hello, Jytdog! Judging from the essay you wrote on MEDRS, I believe you have a background in medicine. Would you mind reviewing these edits to Diabetes mellitus and those just previous to these by the same editor? I can't judge the content or formatting of section headings, but I wonder about the sentence that contains "must" twice.

Also, I haven't seen much work on your wonderful essay. Have you forgotten all about it? Did I do too much copyediting to your draft? If so, you can always undo my edits. CorinneSD (talk) 21:16, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I am on it! I have paid mind to your comments and have been thinking about them. i really appreciate the time you took to copyedit and give feedback. i will try to get back there today or tomorrow. i am pulled in so many directions here these days... :) Jytdog (talk) 21:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Stratigraphy

(1) Vsmith and Rothorpe I have just started reading the article on Stratigraphy. I want to ask you about something in a sentence. It's the first sentence in the second paragraph in the section Stratigraphy#Historical development. Here is the sentence:

• The first practical large-scale application of stratigraphy was by William Smith in the 1790s and early 19th century.

I just wonder about "in the 1790s and early 19th century". I think the combination of two dating formats in the same phrase can throw a reader off, making him or her have to stop and think about it. I wonder whether it would be better to use the same dating format, either

• in the 1790s and early 1800s

or

• in the late 18th and early 19th century.

What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 21:50, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Quite so. The last is the neatest. Or perhaps I prefer the decades. Vsmith can decide. Rothorpe (talk) 22:21, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Changed to early 1800s for consistency ... Vsmith (talk) 02:44, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

(2) Vsmith I want to ask you about another sentence. It's the second sentence in the second paragraph in the section Stratigraphy#Lithologic stratigraphy. Here it is:

• Carbon and oxygen isotope ratios vary with time, and researchers can use them to map subtle changes in the paleoenvironment.

I know this is probably clear enough to you, but I'm wondering if it would be clearer for the average reader if "that occurred" or "that took place" were added after "subtle changes". (I believe the paleoenvironment is the very ancient environment of the rocks and rock layers, right?)

• Carbon and oxygen isotope ratios vary with time, and researchers can use them to map subtle changes that occurred in the paleoenvironment.

• Carbon and oxygen isotope ratios vary with time, and researchers can use them to map subtle changes that took place in the paleoenvironment.

– CorinneSD (talk) 22:02, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

done. Vsmith (talk) 02:44, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

(3) Vsmith Here's another question:

The section Stratigraphy#Lithologic stratigraphy has a link to the article Lithostratigraphy and starts, "Lithostratigraphy, or lithologic stratigraphy,..."

The section Stratigraphy#Biostratigraphy has a link to the article Biostratigraphy and starts, "Biostratigraphy or paleontologic stratigraphy...". Does it matter that the first section has the two-word phrase and the second section has the one-word phrase? Or is there a good reason for that? CorinneSD (talk) 22:11, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

done. Vsmith (talk) 02:44, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

(4) Vsmith and Rothorpe The last paragraph in the section Stratigraphy#Chronostratigraphy is:

• A gap or lacuna in the geological record may be caused by erosion, in which case it is called a vacuity, or by non-deposition, where is known as a stratigraphic hiatus. It is called a hiatus because deposition was on hold for a period of time. A physical lacuna may represent both a period of non-deposition and a period of erosion. A fault may cause the appearance of a hiatus.

I thought italics were used mainly for non-English words or in order to provide emphasis. I believe "lacuna" and "hiatus" are English words, and I don't think emphasis is needed here. Is there a reason why these words should be in italics? I was thinking of changing them all to regular (Roman) font and putting "on hold" in quotation marks. What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 22:30, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree again. Maybe there was a confusion with 'words as words', which WP says should be italicised. Rothorpe (talk) 23:03, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Reword w/ another ref & left out the obscure lacuna as unneeded jargony. Vsmith (talk) 02:44, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

(5) Vsmith I was reading the section Stratigraphy#Magnetostratigraphy, and in the first paragraph I came across this phrase: "detrital remanent magnetism (DRM)". I have two questions:

(a) Since I had never seen the word "remanent", I thought it might be a typo for "remnant". First, I looked for it in the article Magnetostratigraphy (a link is provided at the beginning of the section), but I didn't find it. Shouldn't it be there?

(b) Then, I looked up the word "remanent" in Wiktionary, and I was surprised to find it there. It is indeed a word, so I guess it's correct. Is there any way to provide a wiki-link at the word "remanent" to the definition? I know an external link there is not right; is there a way to provide a wiki-link?

Added wikt:remanent w/ pipe. Vsmith (talk) 00:11, 5 April 2015 (UTC) And then I discover remanence (discover heh, but I see it's on me watchlist). Vsmith (talk) 00:53, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm puzzled by something. It seems as if "Lithostratigraphy" (or "Lithological stratigraphy"), "Biostratigraphy", and "Chronostratigraphy" are all activities or fields (that, of course, employ techniques or methods), but "Magnetostratigraphy" is a technique or method. Am I misunderstanding something? CorinneSD (talk) 22:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Made it a subheader of Chronostratigraphy as it is one technique used in chronostrat. Vsmith (talk) 01:17, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Happy Easter

	Happy Easter
	Happy Easter.... Hafspajen (talk) 19:03, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Tanks..

What do you think about this edit? I don't get it. Hafspajen (talk) 21:22, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I saw that and wondered about it, too. I don't get it, either. What's wrong with "Missions work"? If that's not all right, then something better has to be found. Let's ask Rothorpe what he thinks. CorinneSD (talk) 21:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

And anyway, Francis was not really a missionary, was he? CorinneSD (talk) 21:31, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Missions work, don't they? That's mission's work, or is it missions' work, the work of how many missions? There's a grammatical ambiguity about the phrase which is unsettling. Rothorpe (talk) 21:38, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

if:A missionary is a member of a religious group sent into an area to do evangelism or ministries of service, such as education, literacy, social justice, health care and economic development - well, no, not a missionary. Hafspajen (talk) 21:41, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I suppose "Missionary impulse" refers to his efforts to travel outside of Italy to bring the Word of God, as described in that section. I think I'm going to have to say that I can't make a decision on this because I don't know enough about it. What do you think of the caption to the painting on the left side in that section? Here it is:

• Saint Francis Abandons His Father. Francis of Assisi renouncing to his father and his patrimony, laying aside even the garments he had received from him in front of the public.

Should this read, "Francis of Assisi publicly renouncing his patrimony in the presence of his father, laying aside the garments he had received from him"?

Can a person renounce his father? How about "breaking off his relationship with his father and renouncing his patrimony"? CorinneSD (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Also, I think - if you check the latest changes, it is that it is wrong to put Clara to mission. Yes, one can renounce his father - or mother is the person is crazy. Hafspajen (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

HafspajenOh, Hafs, I forgot to thank for for the chocolate bunny. I love chocolate. Thank you! I don't understand why you gave me a link to the edit window at Francis of Assisi; how can i see changes in the edit window? Also, I don't understand "it is that it is wrong to put Clara to mission". Do you mean "the poor Clares"? I don't understand "to put...to mission".

When you wrote, "Yes, one can renounce his father - or mother is the person is crazy," I thinking you mean "IF the person is crazy", right? That's why I don't want to say, "he renounced his father". "Renounced his patrimony" makes sense, but not "renounced his father". If you think we should say something about the father, then I suggested, "breaking off his relationship with his father", but perhaps it is not necessary. CorinneSD (talk) 22:10, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

• Yes, added your caption. yes, if it is a crazy person Looks like it doesn't work, that link. If you go in to latest edits before this user made their lasts, push previous; edit and click show changes, down you'll notice s/he changed the heather, and put the whole material iof The Poor Clares and the Third Order under Missions work - and that is wrong. Hafspajen (talk) 22:20, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Do you mean this? In this edit, the editor moved the information about the founding of the Poor Clares and a third order (of laity, etc.) to a subsection (Founding of the Friars Minor) under the larger section Francis of Assisi#Founding of the Franciscan Orders. Since the Poor Clares was founded in 1211, only one year after the Franciscan order was founded, this organization makes sense. It's not under "Missions work" (now "Missionary impulse"). CorinneSD (talk) 22:28, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Got that now. Revered to his-her version. But missionary impulse sounds crazy to me.Hafspajen (talk) 23:18, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Rothorpe and Rwood128 Can you think of a better section heading than "Missionary impulse". I know what the editor was thinking. It's just that that phrase is a bit strange. If you read the first two paragraphs of that section, you'll see that Francis was moved to spread the Word of God outside of Italy, and made several trips and attempted trips, but he didn't really spend much time as a missionary. So he was moved, or motivated, to be, well, I guess it's not really a missionary but rather an evangelist, for a short time. Would "Evangelism" or "Early evangelistic efforts", or something like that, make more sense? CorinneSD (talk) 14:01, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Certainly. Or 'Evangelistic impulse' indeed, or does that sound odd too? Rothorpe (talk) 16:18, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, while it may be true that Francis was acting on a type of impulse (to spread the Word of God outside of Italy) when he made (or attempted to make) his few trips, I don't think it's the best word, partly because the paragraphs don't discuss anything about the internal workings of his mind; they merely describe the trips, and one attempted trip. I'd like to hear what Rwood128 and Hafspajen think. CorinneSD (talk) 17:32, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

CorinneSD, I cannot do anything now, but will try and look at this tomorrow. Rwood128 (talk) 20:10, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Linking

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Linking. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Wiki

See this.] Sca (talk) 01:18, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Sca Thanks for the link to the video. I enjoyed watching it. CorinneSD (talk) 00:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Cucurbita#Folk_remedies

Can you look at just that section? Various people reworked it. No need to ask me about changes, I didn't write it so feel free to just change as you see fit. Thank you. HalfGig talk 01:36, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Jytdog As you can see, HalfGig has asked me to copyedit a section of the article on Cucurbita. (I had already done a lot of copyediting on this article a while ago, getting it ready for FA; there has already been a peer review, and I believe it has been promoted to FA.) Early in this section I saw the word "antihelmintic". Since I had always seen "antihelminthic", I thought it might be a typographical error, so I clicked on the link and saw that the WP article is titled "Antihelmintic", with that and "antihelmenthic" given as alternate spellings. Is this a British English/American English difference, or is "antihelmintic" really the more common spelling. I'm just puzzled. CorinneSD (talk) 17:39, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

American English. See top of talk page. HalfGig talk 21:42, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

HalfGig What's American English? Which one? I read the entire talk page and didn't see anything related to this. The first comment at the bottom of the page has two alternate spellings but not the alternates that are now at the beginning of the article. CorinneSD (talk) 00:57, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Go to the talk page and search for "This article is written in American English ", it's the second box on the page, right under the article milestones box. HalfGig talk 22:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Jytdog Which spelling and pronunciation would you consider to be American English: antihelmintic or antihelminthic? (See comments just above.) CorinneSD (talk) 00:43, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

well, neither! I would go with with NLM's MESH term, "anthelmintic". This is the same term the Merck Manuals use ( see here for example) and for whatever it's worth, what our article is called: Anthelmintic. sorry that is orthogonal to the choices Jytdog (talk) 01:04, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

HalfGig and Peter coxhead I was going to put this on the article's talk page, but I don't want to overwhelm anybody (except you guys), so I'll post it here:

Folk remedies

I know that because sentences are paraphrased from various sources, it is not easy to form a cohesive paragraph in which the sentences flow smoothly from one to the next, but I thought I'd ask for feedback and/or suggestions regarding the section Cucurbita#Folk remedies. I noticed that the verb tenses change from sentence to sentence to such an extent that the sentences do not flow well and the paragraph has a choppy feel (and it's not just the verb tenses). I'm looking right now at the first paragraph in that section, and I will copy it here with the verbs highlighted in boldface so that they are easy to see. I have also numbered the sentences for ease of discussion.

(1) Cucurbita have been used in various cultures as folk remedies. (2) Pumpkins have been used by Native Americans to treat intestinal worms and urinary ailments; this Native American remedy was adopted by American doctors in the early nineteenth century as an anthelmintic for the expulsion of worms. (3) Seeds of C. pepo were used in southeastern Europe to treat irritable bladder and benign prostatic hyperplasia. (4) In Germany, pumpkin seed is approved for use by the Commission E, which assesses folk and herbal medicine, for irritated bladder conditions and micturition problems of prostatic hyperplasia stages 1 and 2, although the monograph published in 1985 noted a lack of pharmacological studies that could substantiate empirically found clinical activity. (5) The FDA in the United States, on the other hand, banned the sale of all such non-prescription drugs for the treatment of prostate enlargement in 1990.

(1) The first sentence uses present perfect tense (have been used) but gives no indication of when, how often, or to what extent. It's quite general. Presumably, the sentences which follow will supply the details, and they do, but notice the tenses.

(2) The second sentence has two clauses. The verb in the first clause is in present perfect tense (have been used), with no indication of when, how often, or to what extent – and since this sentence is giving examples supporting the first sentence, it really should give more of such an indication of time. The second clause (following a semi-colon) gives one detail of how this Native American remedy was adopted by American doctors in the 19th century. However, the present perfect tense in the first clause allows for the possibility, and to some extent suggests, that the use of pumpkins by Native Americans has continued up to the present. (However, the use of present perfect tense ("have been used") could also mean that pumpkins were used just a few times in the past.) Thus, the second clause "adopted..." is not about how Native Americans used the remedy; it is about the use of the remedy by American doctors. Only by inference do we learn that Native Americans used the remedy in the 19th century, but it doesn't say anything about the centuries before or the century after. (The phrase "for the expulsion of worms" is not really necessary because an "antihelmintic" (or antihelminthic) means a remedy for the expulsion of worms.) If the sources support it, I suggest adding the adverb "long", but it would really be better to use a more precise phrase:

Pumpkins have long been used by Native Americans to treat intestinal worms and urinary ailments.

(3) The third sentence switches to past tense (were used). Since this sentence is another example of the use of Cucurbita in various cultures, introducing a use in another part of the world, I recommend putting the place first in the sentence: "In southeastern Europe, seeds of C. pepo were used..." However, the verb is in past tense, which suggests either that it was a one-time use at some time in the past, or that it was used in the past but no longer is used. If the remedy is still used today, or up until recently, the verb should be in present perfect tense ("have been used"). If the remedy was used in the past, some indication of the time when it was used would be helpful. To say something was used without giving the time leaves the reader wondering, "When was this? How long ago was this?" and "Why "was used"? Was it used only once or was it something that was common in the past but is no longer, and if so, why is it no longer used?"

(4) In the fourth sentence, it says pumpkin "is approved for use", but it doesn't say that it is used, so it is a little different from all the other examples. Also, the adverbial clause beginning "although": "although the monograph published in 1985...", qualifying the status of "approved" in the first clause, mentions "the monograph" when no monograph has been mentioned. To fix this, either "the monograph" needs to be changed to "a monograph" or a phrase explaining which monograph this was needs to be added (something like "the monograph published in 1985 that led to the approval").

(5) The fifth sentence states a fact, that the FDA "banned the sale of all such non-prescription drugs for the treatment of prostate enlargement in 1990", indicating a contrast to the German approval for that condition. It would be nice (and would support the first, or topic, sentence of the paragraph better) if there were some indication of the use (and status of approval) of any species of Cucurbita for treatment of any medical condition in the U.S., not just pumpkin and not just for treatment of prostate enlargement.

I know this is a rather detailed analysis, but if someone has the time and patience to follow it and knows the subject matter, some small tweaks to address the issues I've raised would probably produce a better paragraph. CorinneSD (talk) 18:58, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

And folks, that's what passes for an "improved" paragraph on wiki. I already fixed their atrocious referencing formatting, or more accurately lack thereof. Someone that's good at copyediting should do these fixes. Thanks Corinne, good catches. HalfGig talk 21:53, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

I can do the one or two minor ones, but I can't supply missing words, phrases, or information. CorinneSD (talk) 00:58, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Basically, if past tense is used, the time when it occurred should be given. If present perfect tense is used, either a starting point should be given ("Since....") or the length of time should be given ("For X years/centuries,..") OR that sentence should be followed by examples giving specific times. CorinneSD (talk) 01:03, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Call in the people that created this mess of an "improved" section. HalfGig talk 02:03, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Casliber You are probably aware of what happened a few weeks ago at Cucurbita. See Talk:Cucurbita#Alternative medicine section. In the course of that discussion (and, I suppose, accompanying edits), two of the editors who had worked very hard for months on that article to get it promoted to Featured article status – User:HalfGig and User:Sminthopsis84 – were so upset they gave up on the article, and Sminthopsis84 actually left WP for a few weeks. I recently got a request for help on copyediting the section Cucurbita#Folk remedies from HalfGig. See User talk:CorinneSD#Cucurbita#Folk_Remedies. I read the section, made a few minor copy-edits, and then wrote up a detailed analysis of what was wrong with the prose of the first paragraph. I felt it just needed a little work from someone who understood both my comments and the subject matter to fix it. Then I realized that HalfGig was so disgusted by what had been done to the section by other editors that s/he didn't want to work on it. See replies at the end of my comment on my talk page and additional comments at User talk:HalfGig#Cucurbita 2. I don't fully understand why HalfGig and Sminthopsis84 were, and still are, upset, nor at whom, but since HalfGig suggested I ask for help at WikiProject Plants, that's what I did, and I found your name on the list. After reading all this, could you do whatever needs to be done to improve the prose and the reference formatting in this section of the Cucurbita article? I don't know what else to do. CorinneSD (talk) 01:49, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Ummm, no. I wasn't aware of any of this. Need to digest this, which will take a bit of time and think about what to do next. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Ok - have a better idea of things now. Will have to hope offline for a bit though. Back later. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:44, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Pierre-Auguste Renoir

Hafspajen and Rothorpe I was looking at the latest edit to Pierre-Auguste Renoir. I wanted to see if the change was made due to a desire for political correctness or for accuracy. If I read the article correctly, in 1867 Renoir was not married, so I guess "mistress" could not be correct. However, I feel that, even if "lover" is more correct, the way the sentence is worded places too much emphasis on it. I thought if I reverse the name and the phrase, it would de-emphasize "his lover at the time". I would change from:

• Renoir had his first success at the Salon of 1868 with his painting Lise with a Parasol (1867), which depicted his lover at the time, Lise Tréhot.

to:

• Renoir had his first success at the Salon of 1868 with his painting Lise with a Parasol (1867), which depicted Lise Tréhot, his lover at the time.

I also think this order, giving the name first, shows more respect for the woman. What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 01:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• To be precise, Renoir had so many woman that he didn't really had any ... lovers - not in the meaning that he was inloved with them, he had sexual partners, yeah. Manet had a lover. Renoir had several women at the same time sometimes... I don't know the right definition of the word, a woman other than his wife with whom a married man has a continuing sexual relationship is probably not. But he was severely promiscuous. Lover sounds .. to nice. Hafspajen (talk) 01:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I didn't know that. I think the word "lover" can be used even if the relationship is brief. I may be wrong, but I thought the word "mistress" is used for a lover of a married man (ie., not his wife), but if I'm wrong, then perhaps "mistress" can be used here. CorinneSD (talk) 01:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Corinne. Rothorpe (talk) 01:33, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Since I am not an English expert, I guess you are both right. Hafspajen (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

So, "lover" is O.K., then? What about my other question about re-ordering the words? CorinneSD (talk) 01:36, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

In both respects. Sorry, I was being brief after a couple of ecs. Rothorpe (talk) 01:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

On another topic, I don't understand the comment about the painting of Gaudioso at FP. I would agree with him only if the claim is being made that it is an accurate portrait of Gaudioso, but I don't think that is being claimed, is it? CorinneSD (talk) 01:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

No, it certainly isn't. Strange comment. Rothorpe (talk) 02:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

No, it certainly isn't. Strange comment. Hafspajen (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen and Rothorpe I forgot to tell you: about two weeks ago, I was driving on a highway and I saw about sixteen turkeys just at the side of the road! I had never seen so many in one place. There were about three adults, and the rest were all young. (Turkeys seem to know to stay off the roadway.) CorinneSD (talk) 02:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• User:Curly Turkey would have been ecstatic. Hafspajen (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Of course! It's been a long time since I've seen the folks. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 02:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• Are you people interested in writing an article? here, check, - this is a good painting. If it had an article - could easily be a FP. Are you interested ? Hafspajen (talk) 02:36, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind writing the article. I'm not particularly crazy about that painting (I"d like to see more of his paintings), but he seems like he was an interesting person with varied interests. Is that text with the painting what needs to be paraphrased? CorinneSD (talk) 02:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• Check John Brett. Yes, that needs paraphrasing, try start here - User:CorinneSD/John Brett - The_Stonebreaker ... Hafspajen (talk) 03:03, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

That painting is an important work.... Hafspajen (talk) 03:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm... The one I like best is "Near Sorrento". I'll work on the paraphrasing tomorrow. Too tired now. What about my comment below? We need a picture of young turkeys in the Turkey (bird) article. CorinneSD (talk) 03:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Hafs, there is no picture in the article on Turkeys that shows young turkeys. Can you find one? CorinneSD (talk) 02:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC) Also, in your comment at Gaudioso, you might want to fix a typo. You have, "In he above reasoning". I think you mean "In the above reasoning". CorinneSD (talk) 02:46, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Must I find a young Turkey? I like them big... Hafspajen (talk) 03:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

We're talking about turkeys here. Young turkeys are cute. They also look different from adult turkeys. CorinneSD (talk) 03:14, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

They don't look young enough here... https://commons.wikimedia.org/Category:Meleagris_gallopavo Hafspajen (talk) 03:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree. There is only one photo that shows a young "poullet", but it's not a clear photo. What do you think about adding this one to the article?

Bog

Hafspajen Do you agree with this edit to Bog and the ones just previous to it by the same editor? CorinneSD (talk) 02:38, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

No. Hafspajen (talk) 02:40, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I hope you'll work your magic on the article. (If you need to consult anyone on content, ask User:Vsmith.) CorinneSD (talk) 02:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC) Or, forget that last comment. I just remembered that you are a landscape architect, so you must know about bogs, and I can see the work you are now doing on the article. CorinneSD (talk) 02:51, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

One should leave significant illustration in article if enough place, and that article was well illustrated. Put back some, moved gallery to end. Hafspajen (talk) 02:58, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• ÖÖö, content? I am still a landscape architect... should know a bit about bogs... Hafspajen (talk) 02:58, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I know. I remembered after I wrote that. CorinneSD (talk) 03:07, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Pollarding

Hafspajen Do you agree with this edit to Pollarding? I don't know whether it's important here, but I notice that it's unsourced. Also, even if the statement is all right, is it in the right place? If you approve of the sentence, I will fix the sentence structure a bit.

Yes, that is fully OK.

Also, did you see all the edits made just before that by an unregistered editor (red user name)? CorinneSD (talk) 14:06, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Check (I) Hafspajen (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Society of Jesus

Hafspajen I was looking at this edit to Society of Jesus . I thought other Misplaced Pages articles are not to be used as sources. Also, I noticed that the entire paragraph is unsourced. What do you recommend? CorinneSD (talk) 14:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

True, other Misplaced Pages articles are not to be used as sources. Unfortunately know nothing about Jesuits in USA. But you who live there could easily find sources... Hafspajen (talk) 14:27, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Noo, **** - and it's cruel!

Pollarding All WRONG. Hafspajen (talk) 14:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• Sminthopsis84 !!!!!!!!!!!!! Hafspajen (talk) 14:46, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• No way you use plums, absolutely NOT. NO WAY using that. No Junipers, (Juniperus spp), generally not dogwoods (Cornus spp), but theses were in the article already. Someone must look through that.

• None of theses are typical or used at all. NOT very typical, sweet chestnut Castanea sativa(?), ahem Aesculus but not Castanea, ...plums, cherries, peaches, nectarines, apricots and almonds???? (Prunus spp) err, ... they are prone to bleeding sap, sumachs -well, - about - birch (Betula spp), not too sure. Hafspajen (talk) 14:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• Sminthopsis84 !! Hafspajen (talk) 14:51, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Ash, yes, willows yes. Hafspajen (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• What 'Cotoneaster spp, brooms (Cytisus spp)?? What Clematis, and Wisteria?? - Hafspajen (talk) 15:06, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
• Sminthopsis84 !Hafspajen (talk) 15:07, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
• This is a reliable source, https://www.rhs.org.uk/advice/profile?PID=156

• Found the edit that added the plain bullshit. This must be removed because it is plain wrong. Hafspajen (talk) 15:32, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

• This source is used all over Wiki articles, but I never heard of this author or book. 'HDRA encyclopedia of organic gardening by Pauline Spears - ??? Hafspajen (talk) 15:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

In Spain and Italy Castanea sativa is pollarded, a lot, I don't know why. These images are typical of chestnut orchards. On a lighter note, apparently the author's name is Pauline Pears, as on the book cover! Sminthopsis84 (talk) 18:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I think pollarding is cruel to the tree. CorinneSD (talk) 00:44, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

You may have a point there. It's typical for Dutch "knotwilgen," though. I didn't know that "lei-lindes" also fall into this category. We've got four of them in the front-yard; I think they're very "burgerlijk," and would like to replace them by "meidoord" and the like. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:35, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

"meidoord" are good; they bite back if someone tries to cut them, and the wood is very hard. Mispel, Crataegus germanica are good too, such as 'Dutch giant'; makes wonderful jelly that seems to work synergistically to be even better with cream cheese. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 18:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, indeed. Can't say I am an expert on Castanea sativa, we can barely manage to make it survive here, much less start pollarding it. The main reason why it was done here to obtain those thin, strait willow branches, to use it making different structures baskets and soon - and to feed it to animals, sometimes, too. Why on earth is he using Pauline Spears if she is called Pauline Pears? Hafspajen (talk) 08:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Hypercorrecting what someone thought was a typo?? Sminthopsis84 (talk) 18:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Re-arranged talkpage

Hi Corinne. I did some re-arranging; only the welcome-message is still not okay, I think. If you don't like all this, please revert. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan Thank you, Joshua! It looks very nice. (Perhaps the image of the purple painting is a little large; I have my screen zoomed to 150% so it is very large on my screen.) That's a very interesting painting by Mondriaan. Not only had I never seen that painting before, I had completely forgotten all about Mondriaan, so now I'm going to read the article on him. I don't understand why you put the tag "Talkpages decorated by Hafspajen" if it was you who decorated (that is, re-arranged) my talk page. Does that phrase simply refer to the fact that Hafs often puts various images on my talk page? If so, that's fine. CorinneSD (talk) 17:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

It refers to Haf's decoration service, indeed. I'll resize the image. Which of the two headers do you prefer? Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:43, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I've added MiszaBot. This automatically archivates threads at your talkpage. I've configurated it for archivating threads after three months, with minimally 10 threads left. when an archive grows larger than 200K, a new archive is automatically started. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 19:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, but could you tell me what a thread is? Also, JJ, it's archives, and configured. In both words you added an extra syllable, "ates" or "ated". Those syllables appear in other words, like ruminate, laminate, contemplate, and percolate. CorinneSD (talk) 23:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

A thread is an item on a talkpage, like this subsection. Did I use the wrong word? Ah, yes: my "Dutchanisms" again - "gearchiveerd," "geconfigureerd." Thanks! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:26, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Laurence Olivier

Hi Corinne. Thank you for your comments there. You said, "I thought William Avery did a pretty good job of summarizing your points", but perhaps you meant me? Alakzi (talk) 17:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Alakzi Thanks for pointing that out. I immediately fixed it in my comment. Since I hadn't read all the preceding comments, I guess I misunderstood some things, but I had read earlier comments on the same page about two weeks ago. I also don't think the comment to which I was responding was especially clear. CorinneSD (talk) 23:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I do generally try to disengage after a couple of replies when people seem very passionate - for want of a better word. The points the editor has made appear to reflect a certain ideology, which might be difficult to challenge at this time and in this setting. Misplaced Pages is often not the friendliest of places, and, when it comes to infoboxes, people have learned to assume the worst. Alakzi (talk) 00:24, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Alakzi Thanks for your thoughts. I was distressed by all the sniping and nasty comments on that page. It's so unnecessary and counterproductive. I personally like infoboxes. What I think people who oppose infoboxes don't understand is that people like to get their information in different ways, and not always the same way; it depends upon what they're looking for and how much time they have to spend at that moment. I don't find infoboxes distracting at all. Sometimes I don't even look at it and go right into the article. But I'm not going to argue over it. There are many other less stressful things to do. I'm just curious – why don't you register so that your user name will turn blue, and then you can create an interesting user page. CorinneSD (talk) 01:14, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

I am registered - I've just not got around to creating a user page yet. I'm quite secretive by nature, so I've had a bit of trouble deciding what to put there. Maybe I could link to some of the music I've been listening to. :-) Alakzi (talk) 01:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh, sorry about that. Why don't you spend some time looking at various editors' user pages? They're all different, and some are quite creative, and you could get some ideas from them. CorinneSD (talk) 01:56, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Corinne, thanks for "try to disengage" and user page suggestion, a topic not discussed for the first time, see? - What do you think of the project of the outcasts, with as many active women as men, and (dangerous) thoughts about infoboxes? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:49, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

He's done it! Alakzi (talk) 13:05, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt Thanks for your comments and for the links. Those are interesting pages. I guess I'll join the project. Your "thoughts about infoboxes" page is succinct and very nicely organized. Alakzi I'm glad you made a user page. Congratulations! It's a good start. Just a suggestion (you don't have to follow it, of course): My first reaction when I read, "Greetings, stranger,..." was that I was no longer a stranger, so "stranger" was jarring. I think that even your friends might occasionally visit your user page, and they might be taken aback by "stranger". How about just, "Greetings"? CorinneSD (talk) 13:45, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Quite right, thank you. Alakzi (talk) 13:57, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Isamu Noguchi

Hafspajen and Rothorpe What do you think of this edit to Isamu Noguchi? If you think it's all right, a missing space needs to be added. CorinneSD (talk) 01:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Sourced and looks OK. Rothorpe (talk) 01:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Eh, I thrust Rothorpe on this one. Hafspajen (talk) 08:49, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Yngvadottir

Thank you for your message. Frankly I am shocked and devastated. I had no idea about this, unfortunately I was out of communication since January. She is wonderful and always will be. Again, thank you for letting me know. (Erica Blatt Harkins (talk) 02:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC))

Here

I think I found an artist for you you might like. Oscar Bluemner. Article needs copyed, though. --Hafspajen (talk) 08:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I will read the article shortly. This particular painting is somewhat dark, but I like some of the others that are in the article. His use of color is similar to Robert Delaunay's.

CorinneSD (talk) 15:25, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen Hafs, I just read the article on Oscar Bluemner and made a few copy-edits. In the two block quotes in the section Oscar Bluemner#Later years, I found a number of typographical (spelling) errors. In the second quote, one of them has "" after it, indicating, as you know, that that is the way it appeared in the original, but none of the other errors have that. I tried to check the text of the first quote (NYTimes) but couldn't get access to the entire article. Can you find the original text in the source for both quotes? If you can, I'd be glad to point out the errors, here, and you can compare to the original.

• Also, there is a table with one image from the Corcoran Gallery in it. I clicked on the link at the painting to see it but it did not lead anywhere, so I couldn't see the painting.

• Finally, there is a statement toward the end of the article about one of his paintings that brought a huge price at a sale in 2011, I think it was. It would be nice to show that painting in the article, if possible. CorinneSD (talk) 23:15, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I try. Hafspajen (talk) 23:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Can't we put the image of the painting Illusion of a Prairie, New Jersey... right next to the sentence in Oscar Bluemner#Legacy that tells about its sale? It's your call, Hafs. CorinneSD (talk) 21:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC) P.S. Hafs, I have been noticing that, in Edit Mode, there is a red circle (in a small gray box) with a white "X" in the middle of it at the right margin, next to the file names of images in articles. What is that? Is that something new? I never noticed it before. Or have I inadvertently enabled something? CorinneSD (talk) 21:50, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Where? Hafspajen (talk) 21:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I see it here in this section, in the Bluemner article, and in the Bernini article. In Edit Mode, near the right margin, next to image files. CorinneSD (talk) 21:57, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Noooo ... nothing. ... ? Hafspajen (talk) 23:49, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I've noticed that too, one per image. No idea what it might mean. Rothorpe (talk) 01:38, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Red X

Joshua Jonathan and Hafspajen See on-going discussion in response to my request for help at Misplaced Pages:Village Pump (technical)#Red X next to image files in Edit Mode. This started at about the same time JJ re-did my talk page. Is there anything you might have done, JJ, that might have caused this? I'm happy about the page; I'm just trying to figure out how to get rid of the red X's. Rothorpe said he sees the red X, too. Note that it's only in edit mode. CorinneSD (talk) 19:11, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

I just realized that here, in this section, in Edit Mode, the image file names are red -- just the file name, not the size details or caption. I checked in an article (Gian Lorenzo Bernini) and went into Edit Mode and saw that all of the image file names are colored. One is red; the others are all blue. I don't remember seeing file names in color before. What color are they for you, in Edit Mode? (I have wikEd enabled, but I have for a long time.) CorinneSD (talk) 19:22, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

I've added the screenshot; it's got to do with WikEd. I guess the red is just a handy took to find the pictures; maybe the red x has got the same function. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 20:29, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Fburg

Why is it I don't see your Flensburg question on my talk page? Sca (talk) 16:30, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Maybe because I added it to a section on Flensburg that was already there from a while ago. I guess I should have pinged you. It's at User talk:Sca#Flensburg, fairly high up on your talk page. CorinneSD (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Patience Wright

Hafspajen I left a note for Vsmith on his talk page at User talk:Vsmith#Patience Wright, and he replied, but, before I do any combining, I thought I'd ask you what you thought since Patience Wright was a sculptor. If you want to do the combining and/or adding "citation needed" tags, please feel free to do so. CorinneSD (talk) 22:39, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen I saw your edits and the note you left on Vsmith's page. I looked for the tag you said you placed "at the top" but didn't see it. Where is it? CorinneSD (talk) 23:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

New Hampshire

Rwood128 and Rothorpe What do you think of this edit to New Hampshire, and the edit summary? Maybe the statement about same-sex marriage can't be said to be an example of a libertarian spirit, but I think the statement about N.H. being the only state that does not require adults to wear seatbelts while driving is. (I don't know much about libertarianism; I'm just assuming it means a spirit of letting people do what they want to do as much as possible.) If no introductory sentences are included, it can sound just like a list of unrelated facts. What do you think?

Editorialising, so correctly removed. Rothorpe (talk) 01:49, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Bernini

I just finished reading and copy-editing most of the Gian Lorenzo Bernini article. I noticed that there are two pictures of the Fountain of Four Rivers (Fontana dei Quattro Fiume, or something like that) in the article. Do you want both of them? CorinneSD (talk) 00:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Hafspajen (I just realized that I had forgotten to ping you for the comment just above.)

Hafspajen and Rothorpe I have nearly finished reading the article and have made a number of copy-edits. I have come across a sentence that I need to ask you about. It is in the middle of the second paragraph in the section Gian Lorenzo Bernini#First biographies of Bernini. Here it is:

• This would mean that first, the commission did not at all originate in Queen Christina who would have merely lent her name as patron (in order to hide the fact that the biography was coming directly from the family) and secondly, that Baldinucci's narrative was largely derived from some pre-publication version of Domenico Bernini's much longer biography of his father, as evidenced by the extremely large amount of text repeated verbatim (there is no other explanation, otherwise, for the massive amount of verbatim repetition, and it is known that Baldinucci routinely copied verbatim material for his artists' biographies supplied by family and friends of his subjects).

(1) I think the sentence is too long.

(2) I question the statement that the second noun clause ("that Baldinucci's narrative...") logically follows the statement in the previous sentence:

• ...recent research now strongly suggests that it was in fact Bernini's sons...who commissioned the biography from Baldinucci.

In fact, the proof of "that Baldinucci's narrative was largely derived from..." lies in what follows ("as evidenced by..."), not what precedes "This would mean that".

Hafspajen, you know, or can look up, the original text from which this was presumably paraphrased. Once we know what it is supposed to say, together we can come up with a more accurate and more concise sentence (or two). CorinneSD (talk) 21:23, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

In my first set of edits to the article, you will see this:

• The St Peter's Baldacchino was the centrepiece of this. Designed as a massive spiralling bronze canopy over the tomb of St Peter, Bernini's four-pillared creation reached nearly 30 m (98 ft) from the ground and cost around 200,000 Roman scudi (about $8m in currency of the early 21st century).

When I was going through the article, I saw this reference in Edit Mode. It had the two separate single quotation marks at the beginning of "Bernini: His Life and His Rome" and double quotation marks at the end of that title. I didn't know whether it was supposed to be in italics or not, so I changed the first separate single quotation marks (for italics) to a pair of double quotation marks. I believe that if it is a book title, it should be in italics, and if it is either a monograph or a chapter in a book, it should be in double quotation marks. Is that right? Could somebody check to see which it is, so we can be sure the title is in the right formatting? In other words, Bernini: His Life and His Rome or "Bernini: His Life and His Rome". (I see a title right after that: "Money, Wages, and Cost of Living in Baroque Rome", but it is in neither italics nor double quotation marks, so I don't know what that is.) CorinneSD (talk) 21:36, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Haffen and Garvin

Have you looked at the Louis M. Haffen article? It outlines the scandal lightly referred to in the Bluemner article, caused by Haffen's favouring Garvin over Bluemner who was the real designer of the Haffen Building. Rothorpe (talk) 02:23, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Rothorpe Thank you, Rothorpe. I just read the Haffen article (made a few edits, as usual), then revised the Oscar Bluemner article. CorinneSD (talk) 21:59, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Right! Rothorpe (talk) 01:32, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Featured Content

We would like to have a group discussion on Skype text chat with everyone on the FC team. In a few days, User:Go Phightins! will contact you privately to coordinate this. Please let him know about your availability if you are willing to participate. Thank you. Gamaliel (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Gamaliel Thank you for telling me about this. I didn't even know I was on the FC team, but I'm glad to learn that I am. I will tell Go Phightins about my availability. I've never used Skype, but I see it is installed on my computer. It sounds like I can use Skype with only text, not using the webcam or microphone. Is that right? CorinneSD (talk) 16:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

This is Misplaced Pages, anyone can be on whatever team they want. Skype allows text only chat; the Signpost editors do it all the time. I don't even have a microphone or webcam on my computer. Gamaliel (talk) 17:06, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

O.K. Thanks! CorinneSD (talk) 17:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Go Phightins! Am I supposed to tell you my available times here? CorinneSD (talk) 17:16, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, twice

WPPilot I just saw the two photos of your wonderful cat and read what you wrote under the photos about her passing. I don't know when this was, but I just wanted to say how sorry I am. It sounds like you and your cat had a great friendship, and that you took really good care of her. I hope you will get another cat. I am also sorry that you and Hafspajen aren't getting along. I hope it is a temporary thing, and that things will change in the future. Best regards, CorinneSD (talk) 17:05, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Ya well thank you for the thoughts, she really was the world to me and I can not believe that it has been brought back to the limelight in this manner. She was a sweetheart, and not a day passes that I don't miss her. Your kind to mention it and thank you for the thoughts, I am at a loss as to how to deal with this. I would love it if you would e mail me, WPPilot@Hotmail.com gets to me and your invited to use it. talk→ WPPilot  23:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Ginger

Sminthopsis84 and Rothorpe I wonder if you would review the latest group of edits to Ginger. While there were perhaps too many instances of "also", I think some adverbs improve sentence flow and make the writing more interesting. With no modifiers, writing can sometimes sound dull. I'm wondering if you want to revert the whole lot, and then make selected edits, or revert a few individually. CorinneSD (talk) 20:45, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Too many edits in one edit is inconsiderate to other editors. Rothorpe (talk) 00:17, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm guilty of that; see my edits to Gian Lorenzo Bernini; but they're mostly punctuation. Did I make too many in one edit? CorinneSD (talk) 12:08, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

No, that's six small edits, which is fine: any one can easily be reverted without having to put a lot of changes back. Whereas the change you linked to above... Rothorpe (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Ugh, those removals were made without much regard to the meaning. I've changed some back and removed some duplication, but didn't look systematically for duplication. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Graphic artist who likes molluscs and spiders

Apokryltaros and Vsmith Have you seen this editor's user page? User:KDS4444 He creates some fantastic graphics. CorinneSD (talk) 14:11, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Utterly fabulous.--Mr Fink (talk) 14:31, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Apokryltaros I can't tell whether you are serious or are teasing me. CorinneSD (talk) 14:36, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't joke about talent as great as KDS4444's.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:00, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

O.K. It's just that I hadn't seen you use that phrase before (and can't see your expression or hear the tone in your voice). I agree with you, though, about his talent. Really outstanding. CorinneSD (talk) 15:51, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

No, I hadn't seen those before - and I agree utterly fabulous. Altho' I prefer my molluscids and nautiloids fossilized. Vsmith (talk) 17:41, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

How does one go about illustrating the internal parts of an extinct mollusc? CorinneSD (talk) 21:11, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

KDS4444 If you haven't seen the comments just above this, bask in them now. I asked a kind of rhetorical question, but you could probably answer it (if you want to). I've pinged you, though, because I was just looking at the article Rhombohedron, and I noticed that in the table in Rhombohedron#Special cases, there is no illustration for a General rhombic prism. Also, below the table, there are four bullets, each item expanding on one of the columns in the table. However, there is no bullet for the fifth column, General rhombohedron. Very puzzling. CorinneSD (talk) 22:01, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen

Hafspajen and Crisco 1492 I just read the article on Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen (I should have read it before I voted at FP) and made a few copy-edits. I came across a sentence that is not clear to me. It's at the end of the fourth paragraph in the section Career. Here is the sentence:

• Other paintings such as The Nativity (1512) and Saul and the Witch of Endor were visually similar to what the Catholic essays patrons were writing.

I don't understand the clause "what the Catholic essays patrons were writing". Grammatically, it doesn't make sense. What are "Catholic essays patrons"?

Also, the painting Saul and the Witch of Endor is mentioned twice in this section but I don't see the painting in the article. Don't you think since the painting is mentioned it should, if possible, be in the article? CorinneSD (talk)

Dirck Jacobsz.

Joshua Jonathan I just finished reading and copy-editing the article Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen (which I read because of a painting at FP). Then I just started reading the article on one of his sons, Dirck Jacobsz. In the section Dirck Jacobsz#Career, I saw his father's name, Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen, with a period at the end of "Cornelisz". Since I had just finished reading his article and had not seen his name – or any name – written with a period even once, I thought it was a typo, so I removed the period. Then, right after that, I read,

• He married Marritgen Gerritsdr. in 1550, and they had two children, Maria Dircksdr. and Jacob Dircksz.

I see a period after "Gerritsdr." and after "Dircksdr." Then I noticed the period after "Jacobsz" in the title of the article. Now I'm totally confused. Where is the period correct, and needed? What does the period signify? CorinneSD (talk) 16:54, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

• Mysterious. We need a Dutch. Hafspajen (talk) 17:36, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

I think that the period is correct. The full name is "Jacobszoon", "Jacob's son." Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:47, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Even in the titles of the two articles? Does "Cornelisz" mean "Corneliszoon," or "Cornelis' son"? CorinneSD (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Frans Hals

Hafspajen I just started reading the article on Frans Hals. In the first paragraph in the section Frans Hals#Biography is the following sentence:

• His Mannerist influence, however, is not noticeably visible in his work.

This sentence has two instances of "his", and the previous sentence mentions two males: Frans Hals and Karel van Mander. I'd like to clear up any possible confusion as to who each "his" refers to. Am I right in thinking "his" in "His Mannerist influence" means van Mander's Mannerist influence, and that "his" in the phrase "in his work" means Frans Hals' work? If I am right, I would re-word this sentence:

• Van Mander's Mannerist influence, however, is not noticeably visible in Hals' work,

or even this more concise version:

• Van Mander's Mannerist influence, however, is not noticeable in Hals' work, or

• Van Mander's Mannerist influence, however, is barely noticeable in Hals' work.

What do you think? Rothorpe What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 23:16, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, and how about joining the sentences? '...whose Mannerist influence...'? Rothorpe (talk) 23:26, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

O.K. Good idea. I'll go ahead and select "is barely noticeable in Hals' work" to finish the sentence, but if Hafs wants to choose another ending, that's fine. CorinneSD (talk) 23:30, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Trbl

Looks like our friend is in trouble. Sca (talk) 01:51, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Your revert of my removal of unreferenced content

Please be advised that your revert to restore deleted unreferenced content in the lead section of the Gertrude Bell article breaks Misplaced Pages rules. Content that has been deleted as unreferenced cannot be restored without providing an adequate reference or references. Your edit summary was inaccurate - there is no content in the body of the article that contains the deleted claim. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 01:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

User:Tiptoethrutheminefield I disagree with you. In my edit summary , I said the information was supported by information contained in the body of the article.

1) In the second paragraph in the section Gertrude Bell#War and political career, we read:

• Later, she was asked by British Intelligence to get soldiers through the deserts;

2) In the section Gertrude Bell#Work in the Middle East, we read:

• In November 1915, however, she was summoned to Cairo to the nascent Arab Bureau;

• Under recommendation by renowned archaeologist and historian Lt. Cmdr. David Hogarth, first Lawrence, then Bell, were assigned to Army Intelligence Headquarters in Cairo in 1915 for war service.

Although the word "spy" is not specifically used, I believe it is understood that when one works for British Intelligence, one is a spy.

Also, according to Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Lead section#Citations, particularly the second paragraph:

• Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. Leads are usually written at a greater level of generality than the body, and information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source; there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads. The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus. Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations; others, few or none. The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every article nor prohibited in any article.

Thus, if a statement in the lead that is not controversial is supported by sourced information in the body of the article, the source does not have to be given in the lead.

I also disagree with you regarding the word "skill". I think a person's skill at most anything can be improved through experience. In addition, a person may possess innate skill at something. Since this statement has to do with policy-making, I think "skill" is the better word here. CorinneSD (talk) 19:20, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

If the word "spy" is not used in any sources, the article cannot use the word "spy" simply because an editor considers something equates to being a spy. BTW, I see nothing in her life that equates to it. And it is a very controversial claim to make - you cannot make it without strong sources to support it. No sources have been presented to support it. A lead, as the advice says, is meant to just summarize what is in the body. There is NO content in the article to support the word spy being inserted in the lead. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:38, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

If you don't mind, I am going to put the content issue part of the above onto the article's talk page, and ask that if you want to continue this we take it to the article's talk page. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:54, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but can I ask you to revert your recent edit to the GB talk page since you are duplicating my post by reproducing my words and also having off topic things in it like my advice on reverting edits that remove unreferenced content, and the discussion on the skill versus knowledge wording. You could present your reasoning below my reasoning on the talk page. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Archive parameter

Hallo Corinne. I've changed one of the parameters of MiszaBot for the moment, to see if it works. If it does, a lot of threads will be archived one of these days. NB: it is also possible to configure your archives to have an archive for each year, andit's even possible to have a separate archive archive for each month. How about those options? Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:49, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Comment at WP Village Pump (technical)

Thanks for pointing out my double negative -- I've edited the passage and added a suitable edit summary. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 21:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

1. For the conversion of 17th-century Roman scudi to modern American dollars, see Mormando, "Bernini: His Life and His Rome", 2011, pp. xvii-xix, Money, Wages, and Cost of Living in Baroque Rome.

• Wikipedians whose talkpages are decorated by Hafspajen