Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:03, 11 February 2010

.

Archives
Sept 2003 – Dec 2005 Jan 2006 – June 2006 July 2006 – March 2007 April 2007 – October 2007 November 2007 – February 2008 March 2008 – August 2008 September 2008 – September 2009

NowCommons: File:EuroDishSBP front.jpg

File:EuroDishSBP front.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:EuroDishSBP front.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Misplaced Pages, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Misplaced Pages, in this case: ]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:OTEC diagram.gif is now available as Commons:File:OTEC diagram.gif. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Alfred Jodl USA-E-Ardennes-2.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Alfred Jodl USA-E-Ardennes-2.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:HERTS

Hey there.

I've recently posted on WP:HERTS and User:Simply South's talk page about the possibility of bringing the project back to life, and if so how we would go about this and what we would do. I was wondering if you would be interested in getting involved? I think we have a small but dedicated and diverse group of editors, with interests including geography, sports, transport, mills, politics, music and history among others. If we could bring these talents together I reckon we could produce some fantastic work on some of the project's key areas, for instance (but not limited to) Hertfordshire, History of Hertfordshire, and the county's larger settlements.

Personally I believe the key to successfully bringing together the efforts of editors with interest in anything remotely Herts related will be to maintain at least a semi-active talk page at WT:HERTS. Feel free to give any thoughts or suggestions there, or even to ask if you simply want a second pair of eyes on something. Regards, WFCforLife (talk) 21:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd forgotten I was a member but continue my interest in local history. I'll look for opportunities to get involved. Lumos3 (talk) 13:46, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Please desist

Thanks, but please desist from recommending that I log in. Your suggestion is not welcome. After my experiences with Wiki editors, I would never reveal a login name again.

Cheers,

Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.54.127 (talk) 10:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

jesus man............i love babar. i got his face tattooed on my kids arm the other day. i even make the little lad eat out of a shoe box while wearin a crown coz they wouldnt let me rent an elephant at the zoo. i just rented a punto instead and selotaped ears onto the yoke.

nice talkin to ya.

babar out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.125.111.194 (talk) 15:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Controversy

Regarding the extremely lengthy topic of renaming the CRU incident article, I just saw your comment about the alleged controversy just coming from "bloggers". I researched this earlier but you might've missed it, the talk page is a nightmare to follow. Both CNN, on this topic, and the BBC World while hosting a panel with this years Nobel Prize winners refer to this as a controversy and the latter even spend a lot of time talking this through in what it means for science. That would imply that this is a lot bigger than "some bloggers". Of course, maybe you knew this already and if so please disregard this comment. Troed (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Neither of these use "Controversy" as the title for their reports which is what is being proposed in the discussion. There may be some who see a controversy here but this is not big enough to be the title of the article. Lets put it within the article as a section. Lumos3 (talk) 23:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Lumos3! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 1 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Richard Turner (software) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Sundials

Thanks for taking up the challenge. The whole history section can be floated. The sole problem was the correct name for the article. If we can get an article on Sundial art then we can hoick out a lot of off focus images too. --ClemRutter (talk) 15:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Analemma#Merger_proposal_for_Analemma_calendar

Could you please either strike or rewrite your comments in this section? You "opposed" the merger at 12:02 and then six minutes later you moved the article and redirected it. Such an oppose doesn't make much sense now. In any case, it would have been nice if there had been a bit more discussion, first, instead of the unilateral action. Viriditas (talk) 20:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I opposed the merger of Analemma_calendar with Anelemma on the basis that the article was about the Anelemma sundial. I then realized that the article was in fact mis-named and tidied it up, moving material from the sundial article which is flagged as too long and in need of being split into many articles. I have now re titled and expanded the "(Analemma_calendar)" article now called Analemmatic sundial. No changes have been made to the Anelemma article itself. I am still opposed to a merger of the sundial material into Anelemma, but I will tidy my comments there for clarity. Sorry if this is confusing. Lumos3 (talk) 23:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

It's not confusing to me, but surely you can see how your oppose to the merge of a non-existent article appeared strange. Do you also understand that a "see also" is an indicator that a link or section discussing the topic the link describes, should be merged into the article? This does not necessarily mean merging the entire article but incorporating the subtopic. I have already posted a reference to an article in Centaurus by Nathan Sidoli that says, "The analemma appears to have had its origin in gnomonics, the theory of sundials." That's also obvious in the etymology, as the name of the topic comes from a sundial. Although that particular article is focused on specific methods, there are other articles that discuss the analemma in terms of sundials as well. I don't see the need for two articles at this time, but I'm not against it. However, there is no reason to keep the two subjects separate, and we should follow WP:SS. Viriditas (talk) 09:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter

The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter Issue 2 (January 2010) Previous issue | Next issue

Content

AfD nomination of List of fictional computers

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of fictional computers. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Misplaced Pages:Notability and "What Misplaced Pages is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of fictional computers. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:12, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Why do you stick this in my house?

Why do you stick this in my house? from User 168.103.182.177

This is a welcome message to the Misplaced Pages project. If it bothers you please ignore it. Lumos3 (talk) 09:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

frank

frank was a ledgend and did rock the school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Psprulez (talk • contribs) 16:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Marketeer

The article Marketeer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable neologism

While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gobonobo 06:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

List of futurologists

You may be interested in this proposal. --Michael C. Price 11:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Climatic Research Unit hacking incident

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Climatic Research Unit hacking incident, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- TS 17:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please consider signing our proposal.

A number of editors have been working on a proposal regarding the renaming of the Climatic Research Unit hacking incident and we are now in the process of working with people individually to try and garner support for this proposal. Please review the proposal and if you are willing to support and defend it please add your name to the list of signatories. If you have comments or concerns regarding the proposal please feel free to discuss them here. The goal of this effort is to find a name that everyone can live with and to make that name stick by having a strong show of unified support for it moving forward. Thanks. --GoRight (talk) 16:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)