Revision as of 19:14, 10 December 2014 view sourceMontanabw (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers105,438 edits →Lusitano: Go away and discuss at talk← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:50, 10 December 2014 view source Alvesgaspar (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers6,676 edits →Edit warring report: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 631: | Line 631: | ||
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on ]. Regards from ] (]), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- ] (]) 03:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC) | If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on ]. Regards from ] (]), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- ] (]) 03:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC) | ||
== Edit warring report == | |||
I have reported your actions on ] in Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Please see -- ] (]) 19:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:50, 10 December 2014
This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Montanabw. |
User:Jake Wartenberg/centijimbo
|
Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
An editor thinks something might be wrong with this page. They can't be bothered to fix it, but can rest assured that they've done their encyclopedic duty by sticking on a tag. Please allow this tag to languish indefinitely at the top of the page, since nobody knows exactly what the tagging editor was worked up about. |
Misplaced Pages is no place for humour. Everything is very serious here and we are all terrifically important. |
Sandbox invite
Archives |
2006 • 2007 • 2008 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 • 2014 • 2014-2 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Anyone may play in my sandboxes, in the archive list to the right, IF you promise to behave. This means:
- No kicking sand
- No hitting other people over the head with toys
- No pooping, even if you are a cat and neatly cover it up!
- It's my sandbox, so I can throw you out if you misbehave! :-)
—User:Leaky caldron to User:ThatPeskyCommoner" readers will not be privy to the massive undercurrents of dross that underpins WP. They require well written, well sourced, encyclopaedic material that can inform, enlighten and satisfy their interest."
—The user formerly known as Malleus Fatuorum"We live a time when criticism, especially here on Misplaced Pages, is considered to be a personal attack, which is at the root of this nonsense. Yet without criticism we can't improve."
24 December 2024 |
|
—User:Drmies"Montana, you know I respect you greatly--you write FAs that have fewer adjectives than that outburst."
—User: Liz"Every edit, especially bold ones, is disruptive. Disruptive just means changing the status quo and because Misplaced Pages is in a constant state of evolution, it is in a constant state of disruption ..."
Before you post on my talk page (humor)
Don't call names, you unmuzzled hedge-born lewdster!
You have been noticed using opprobrious epithets. It's payback time from the Shakespeare Insult Generator! To activate the Insultspout and receive fresh insults, click here. Note that all insults generated by the Spout are guaranteed literary and cultured, unlike the nasty things you said, you mewling beetle-headed clotpole.
This talk page is automatically archived by some bot or another. If you are rude, sarcastic, temperamental, or hostile, your section may be thrown into the abyss |
Happy Montanabw's Day!
User:Montanabw has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Awww, gee! That was really super nice! Thank you! Montanabw 04:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Louisa Venable Kyle wrote a children's book on The Witch of Pungo --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:50, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- Precious translates to the PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:03, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
New contest!
WikiProject Good Articles' 2014-15 GA CupJoin the 2014-15 GA Cup competition in an effort to reduce the GAN backlog. All users, new and old are welcome. The GA Cup has begun! Sign-up here (refresh) |
AreBuddhistsRacist.com
Its just another NKT site. Its run by Kelsang Rabten.VictoriaGrayson 03:30, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think its run by the NKT. It says its run by an independent UK journalist based in the UK. Its also a very helpful collection of clear, concise criticism of the persecution of Dorje Shugden practitioners and the media coverage! Prasangika37 (talk) 14:57, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, it's biggest problem is that it is anonymous and whoever put it up hides his/her affiliation, so it's also probably a fail based on WP:SELFPUB. Irrelevant who is behind it; its content reads like some paranoid nutcase's rant. Not RS. Now please, both of you, let's go back to the drama page. I have articles about equine roundworms (Parascaris equorum) to write... ;) Montanabw 17:33, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Website is gone now. VictoriaGrayson 22:48, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
- Well, that pretty much shitcans any argument that it's a reliable source. Montanabw 00:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
what about the other 37s?VictoriaGrayson 03:28, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- Are there more besides the Audrey one? Can you list them here? (I didn't list Audrey because that account has gone inactive...). Montanabw 04:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- Essence37VictoriaGrayson 04:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- Inactive since August, but I'll watchlist. With these sorts of accounts, the best thing to do is just keep an eye on them. I've taken them to WP:SPI in the past, but when they are "stale," there will not be an investigation absent an active problem. However, what skilled socks to is to create a bunch of "sleeper" accounts where they make a minimal number of edits to get past the "new user" stage and then ignore them for months on end. Then they activate them as needed, claiming to be longtime users or something similar. So per WP:ROPE, just keep your eyes open in case they reanimate like a zombie... Montanabw 04:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- Essence37VictoriaGrayson 04:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Shambhala Training
If you have any time, would you kindly look at Shambhala Training. IMO that article relies far too heavily on primary sources. The only secondary or tertiary sources cited are where the article explains some Tibetan terms and concepts. There are no objective secondary sources used in relation to Shambhala Training itself. Consequently the article reads like a subjective promotional piece - not an encyclopaedic article. I've left a note about this on the talk page of the article as well. Chris Fynn (talk) 16:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- @CFynn: Answered there. Montanabw 20:54, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
How do I untangle this?
(Hopefully this appeal may appeal to your love of equestrian related topics (if only peripherally) and momentarily distract your mind away from Tibetan goblins.) I noticed an article Windhorse but was disappointed to find that it was only related to a film called Windhorse so I moved that to Windhorse (film) which seemed more appropriate. Then I discovered an article Wind Horse (bad name) the content of which properly belongs at Windhorse. But I lack the magic senior wizard's power to move Wind Horse to Windhorse (with some kind of disambiguation for people who actually are are looking for an article on the film)- as a page by that name (currently a re-direct) already exists. What is the best way to proceed from here? I suppose I could cut and paste, but it would seem better If someone could delete Windhorse and then move Wind Horse to Windhorse. I have already taken care of links to Windhorse that did intend to link to the article on the film. (BTW I made the graphic of the Windhorse which I have just posted on Commons and put here for your pleasure.) Chris Fynn (talk) 18:44, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- Let me see if I understand this, you want to move Wind Horse to Windhorse, merging the histories? Dreadstar ☥ 19:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- For now, I made Windhorse a dab to both articles. I have no magic admin wand, but Dreadstar does. You definitely want a history merge, but I'm a little unsure why the move is needed (normally I really hate compound words if they can be avoided, but that's just my personal quirk) I'd suggest you two wort out the RS verification that the compound form is the more correct version. Whatever works. Montanabw 20:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- @Dreadstar: Yes that was the idea. An article about the Tibetan concept of "Windhorse" would obviously be the main article. The name of the film is derived from and references that. I was thinking of a DAB hatnote at the top for people who want to know about the film. (There is also an academic journal on Tibetology named "Windhorse" but so far no article on that - several commercial firms with Windhorse in the name as well.) @Montanabw: I know what you mean about compound words but the Tibetan term rLung-rTa which it translates is one word and concept and people generally seem to write it in English like that as a single word. BTW Most words in the Tibetan dictionary are compound words because each and every syllable in Tibetan has a meaning and most words consist of two or three syllables with the words almost always having some relationship to that of their component syllables. Chris Fynn (talk) 21:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me, you guys sort it out. Cheers! Montanabw 22:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey there
Hi. I, rather stupidly, couldn't help myself from commenting at the GGTF arbcom proposals talk page where I mentioned you by name in regards to your interactions with Carol when the GGTF first started as an example of a battleground attitude in Carol's original assumption you that you were a man. The difs have been part of evidence from the start and had been discussed before so I thought little of it as bringing up an example in a passing remark, but I mentioned you specifically and I've seen other editors take offense to thier named being used without notification. It was a small remark of little consequence but I just want to be sure no offense was taken and if you feel my remark casts that episode in a different light than I said let me know and I'll strike it. Capeo (talk) 01:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- I'll peek at it. Appreciate you letting me know. Montanabw 01:13, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- Also (unwisely) succumbed to commenting, after reading your remarks. The eight letter rule is interesting. Is this a standard technique? --Djembayz (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- No, I made it up on the spot. But it has the elegance of preventing compound four-letter obscenities (butthead, jerkwad, shitface, etc.) yet allowing for cleverness and creativity, to say nothing of specifity, in venting one's spleen. In other words, "imbecile" is not acceptable, but "ignoramus" would be. Figured it would be worth a try! LOL! But more to the point, banning person A or person B doesn't eliminate the problem; as they like to say elsewhere, focus on the content, not the controibutor. And penalties need to be short, sharp, guaranteed, but over quickly and allowing for rehabilitation. Montanabw 22:57, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
DYK for Parascaris equorum
On 16 November 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Parascaris equorum, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that female Parascaris equorum roundworms, an intestinal parasite of horses, can grow to be as long as 15 inches (38 cm)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Parascaris equorum. 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) 00:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Gaslighting?
"You are the master of projection and gaslighting". I'd never seen gaslighting before reading your post containing that sentence. Interesting how a colloquialism comes into academic usage. - Sitush (talk) 12:31, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Photo of Polson, MT
Photo was actually taken from the southeast looking northwest. Rcopeland17 (talk) 17:52, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
- @Rcopeland17::Can you link which photo you are talking about? (Most of the lake ones were either shot off the docks by KwaTukNuk or else from the top of a hill on a back road on the west side of Polson... Montanabw 18:07, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Magnificat
Since you participated in previous discussion about merging the Bach Magnificat articles: After discussion at my user talk page, I have restored the pre-merger situation as best I am able. There may be talk pages left in the wrong place and so forth. I expect a new merger discussion to be started and to be closed by an uninvolved person, preferably another admin. It might be a good idea to inform a relevant wikiproject or two? Yngvadottir (talk) 20:18, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
I've found my name.
As you know, I really love horses. I've found the perfect name for me, the Oglala Sioux name of Tȟašúŋke Kȟokípȟapi or Young Man Afraid Of His Horses. I'll have to drop 'Young' off of it and according to my wife, I'll have to drop 'Man' too. Bgwhite (talk) 08:08, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- @Bgwhite: I think that this would mean your name would therefore have to become "Old Fart who craps his pants when he sees a horse"? LOL! Montanabw 17:00, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- That was a good one. Add mother-in-law to the end of it and it would be come my perfect name. Bgwhite (talk) 22:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- "Old fart who craps his pants when he sees his mother in law? No wait, we could just limit it to Old Fart -- that says it all, as there is the adage that when one reaches A Certain Age, you never trust a fart...! Montanabw 23:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- That was a good one. Add mother-in-law to the end of it and it would be come my perfect name. Bgwhite (talk) 22:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Take Charge Lady
Article up and running. Haven't spent so long on a US horse article since Carry Back! Lede and background need some work. Tigerboy1966 20:30, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Just curious
I notice you removed me from the authors section of the List of people from Montana page. Any particular reason? I'm not clear on the criteria for being included on that page, but I certainly feel like I meet them all. Did I violate a rule by adding myself to the page? Being a (very) part-time Wikipedian, I may not be up to speed on all of the rules and etiquette. Gary D Robson (talk) 03:44, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
- Probably because it was a redlink at the time, the list is basically an index to articles already on wikipedia. You have to pass WP:NOTABILITY to have a wikipedia article about yourself and per WP:COI, you can't write it yourself. Looks like you've got an article up now, maybe User:Mike Cline would be interested in working with you further, I think he maintains the list. Montanabw 18:03, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
- I'll check with him. I didn't write the article about me, but I do edit it from time to time. Gary D Robson (talk) 00:31, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Mary Wollstonecraft Award
Mary Wollstonecraft Award | ||
The Mary Wollstonecraft Award is awarded to contributors who have helped improve the coverage of women writers and their work on Misplaced Pages through content contributions, outreach, community changes and related actions. In particular, thank you for your efforts with the WikiProject Women writers start-up; your ideas and contributions are much appreciated. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:05, 29 November 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks, Rosie! Montanabw 23:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Getting Back in
I have an urge to write on wiki, and the nicest editor I am aware of is you. So to you I say I do wish I still knew how to create articles. I want wiki to include some of the best horses of the past who aren't given their due. Every year a promising 2-year-old comes along and up goes an article which then remains static if the promise goes awry. I'm guilty of that myself. Meanwhile some of the greats have no article at all. Once upon a time I busily wrote over 200 or so articles: horses, races, a few jockeys, a racetrack or two. It was simple. But now I have no idea how to work with wiki except simple editing. Of course, many of my articles are marked as too colorful, not very wiki, and would someone please do something about it. No one ever does - except Silky Sullivan. Silky was cut to shreds. I admit I know too much about Silky because I knew his owner (recently deceased) and had little in the way of citations. That's the problem with the older horses. No online citations. Those today can simply be cited right out of Bloodhorse or wherever. Easy peasy. And there's my whine for the evening as I go about making sure the races are kept up to date the best I can. Stellabystarlight (talk) 04:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Stellabystarlight: I'd be glad to help you along. Can you point me to anything already up that got tag-bombed and I can look at it? (I'll look at Silky Sullivan too) Also, is there a horse not yet having an article you'd like to start one for? (We could work on it in a sandbox for a bit before taking it live) I think it's a great idea to do more articles on horses of the past, particularly if you ahve the sources right on your bookshelf. The trick is to write in a dry, rather boring, "just the facts" encyclopedic style - yet not put people to sleep! The master of this stuff is probably @Tigerboy1966: who can whip up a basic article faster than -- hmmm -- Secretariat? (Wait, Secretariat can't edit wikipedia, he can't even use a computer and he's dead, but never mind... work with me here! LOL) Also @Ealdgyth: has done a lot of articles that went GA and FA on famous historic Quarter Horse sires, and she has a lot of book sources. (See, e.g. Go Man Go, Barbara L, etc...) My advice on writing articles that will pass muster is to 1) avoid overuse of adjectives, particularly flowery ones ("greatest", "magnificent" etc...), 2) Footnote every. freaking. thing., (sure there is WP:POPE but no one actually believes it...) and 3) as far as books go, they are perfectly fine so long as you demonstrate a track record of accuracy. Montanabw 15:59, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
- The problem with articles on US horses pre-1990 is that the google news search was changed. You can't do an archive search anymore, and the date range search DOES NOT WORK! Looking at articles like Roman Brother or Hasty Road which I did some expansion work on a while back, I honestly don't know how I'd do them now. Maybe things will change, I'd love to do some work on Fort Marcy (horse) for instance. TIP, the best way to get a bit of colour into a factual article is to use sourced quotations. There is a difference between "Neddy produced an explosive turn of speed" and "Neddy produced what the Daily Planet's Jim Journo described as "an explosive turn of speed"". Tigerboy1966 17:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Where you can find a link, Wayback is helpful. It's frustrating that Time, the New York Times, etc have put their articles behind a paywall, though it's "legal" to cite to the hardcopy without a URL (Ealdgyth verified this for me.) The bottom line is where you have books or a paid database subscription, use meticulous citations - have page numbers and full citations so those who might actually care (as opposed to trolls) can independently verify what you wrote (Inter-library loan is a beautiful thing). The main thing is that we can't have too much "color" in these articles, which sucks at times, but oh well, I guess after doing a few articles, we all probably could try to write for publication to let our creative side have free rein! Montanabw 17:16, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Hi Tigerboy1966 and Stellabystarlight. You can still search the Google news archives. Go to http://news.google.com/newspapers. Here's an example of a search on "Silky Sullivan", and here's one on "Fort Marcy". Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:37, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
- thanks for that. I did try this page before with little success, but it seems fine now. Tigerboy1966 17:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, wow. Thank you all. What I'd like to do is a history of American horse racing, or perhaps just the extremely interesting Nantura Stock Farm... but I have a feeling whatever I chose would work better as a book, colorful language and all. I've looked at the way things are going on wiki and with its desire to be dry and encyclopedic (no blame from me) and now with the loss of good citations (if there were any to begin with), I wonder if I belong here. I rather think I don't. I'm not a non-fiction writer in the first place, but even if I were, I simply can't keep to just the facts, ma'am. Although I thank Tigerboy1966 for the great stuff on Silky. And you, Montana, for offering to mess about in a sandbox with me. I hope I haven't wasted your time. But no, I'm not a wiki writer. I know that now. I am a wiki user though. And I'll continue updating races.Stellabystarlight (talk) 18:42, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
- Please, please keep the race updates going. It is a very important and much appreciated task. Good luck with the book: would be honoured if you used any of the WP articles I've contributed to. Tigerboy1966 19:01, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Stellabystarlight:, You can still use good old fashioned paper books. And actually, it would be very helpful to even just have stub articles on some of the horses where we have redlinks (early Derby/Preakness/Belmont winners in particular) What we are most restricted on with wiki is use of original research - i.e. our own knowledge. (So once you DO write the book, tell us all and we'll use it as a source!) This has periodically driven me completely crazy with some of the horse articles because so much common knowledge has not been written down - it's tougher than you think finding a RS for why you should tie a horse with a slipknot and not hard and fast. I even once had to "prove" that you can't post to the pace because some idiot claimed that you could! Try sourcing THAT! =:-O)! Montanabw 19:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Bach Magnificat un-redux
Hi: Gerda is understandably exhausted with the whole matter, but following the closure of Talk:Magnificat (Bach)#Merge discussion against the merge, I could really use a clear statement on whether I need to move any articles over existing redirects, and if so what to where. If I attempt to figure it out, I will probably botch it badly. I am leaving it up to you who know the subject (I won't say "know the score" - oops, I just did) to decide what to reverse from Francis Schonken's earlier moves of material between articles, but I have reverted his actions today at Magnificat in D major, BWV 243 since they appear to be reimplementation of the rejected merge, and have warned him about edit warring with Gerda. I'd appreciate if you could tell me - or find someone else who can - if there is something requiring admin tools to move, title-wise. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Yngvadottir: and @Gerda Arendt:: In my humble opinion, if Francis is doing something that requires admin tools to fix, then he is probably doing it against consensus. He seems to be forum-shopping (deliberately or otherwise) by posting things at multiple articles so no one has the faintest clue what precisely he is doing, and then claiming there is no objection to his proposals, and in the process the multiple threads cloud the picture considerably. My advice is just. say. no. -- and watchlist all articles involved. Montanabw 19:13, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Hmmm looks like @Drmies: was also involved, so I shall ping him to this discussion as well. Gerda is the Bach expert (though she may be modest and deny it), I'm the style, flow, structure wikignome. Who likes to sing Baroque music sometimes. Particularly at this time of year. Montanabw 19:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- The thing is, he made multiple article moves as well as merges of material, and consensus has now been firmly established against him. So I feel safe leaving the material moves for others to revert, but are there any article moves that non-admins can't revert because there is now an edited redirect in the way? There's no big haste, except that I'd like to get it all squared away to make it clear to him that he cannot violate consensus like this; and there is a pending DYK submission involving Gerda's newer article, so its title needs to be established. Yes, Drmies closed the merge discussion (and deleted a merged draft); I've pinged him at my talk. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:18, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Repeating: Move the present Magnificat in D major, BWV 243 over Magnificat (Bach) - as it was in the beginning, to keep it simple. No problem with that name as long as BWV 243a can co-exist. Collect all discussions on those two on Talk:Magnificat (Bach) and archive ;) - Discuss things like the enormous table. - I added so much to BWV 243a today that there can't be much duplication left, and it doesn't bother me anyway. Some things are actually even more different than I first thought. Looks as bit as if we had a female and a male version now, - why not? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- ps: yes, the move over redirect requires admin tools, otherwise I had done it myself, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- That was what I thought you might want. I have moved Magnificat in D major, BWV 243 (back) to Magnificat (Bach), and I have attempted to history merge the two talk pages. I will leave you folks to archive. I hope I didn't mess it up, it's awfully fiddly. You folks, check for redirects that are now pointing to the wrong place. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:10, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- The thing is, he made multiple article moves as well as merges of material, and consensus has now been firmly established against him. So I feel safe leaving the material moves for others to revert, but are there any article moves that non-admins can't revert because there is now an edited redirect in the way? There's no big haste, except that I'd like to get it all squared away to make it clear to him that he cannot violate consensus like this; and there is a pending DYK submission involving Gerda's newer article, so its title needs to be established. Yes, Drmies closed the merge discussion (and deleted a merged draft); I've pinged him at my talk. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:18, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Like Gerda said, and if she needs you to fix anything further, I presume everyone has this thread on their watchlist so we can all converse here as needed. Montanabw 21:01, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for graciously hosting this, and renaming and merging. My talk: Francis saying that he adjusted to the move today which was reverted, true. (As I said before, he moved things in before, which I don't mind being there if nobody else does.) - Revert the revert and take discussion from there? - No more for me today, please!! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- When something is this messed up, sometimes the best approach is to provide a permalink to the "right" version and then rebuild from there with any article improvemnts that have occurred since. When it is convenient, Gerda, perhaps post that URL here? Montanabw 21:21, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Answered my talk: forward please, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- When something is this messed up, sometimes the best approach is to provide a permalink to the "right" version and then rebuild from there with any article improvemnts that have occurred since. When it is convenient, Gerda, perhaps post that URL here? Montanabw 21:21, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for graciously hosting this, and renaming and merging. My talk: Francis saying that he adjusted to the move today which was reverted, true. (As I said before, he moved things in before, which I don't mind being there if nobody else does.) - Revert the revert and take discussion from there? - No more for me today, please!! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Like Gerda said, and if she needs you to fix anything further, I presume everyone has this thread on their watchlist so we can all converse here as needed. Montanabw 21:01, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
TFA-related discussions
Hi Montanabw, just to let you know about what I've said at Misplaced Pages talk:Today's featured article#Wrapping this up, in case there was anything you wanted to say there. Best wishes, Bencherlite 12:04, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Bencher. Yup time to wrap it up. Sheesh. What a can of worms a few simple ideas opened. Oh well. Montanabw 22:16, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
be careful
be careful you don't break 3rrVictoriaGrayson 04:29, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
- I didn't mass revert, I kept what was sourced... ;-) Montanabw 04:30, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 is just around the corner...
Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.
- We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
- In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
- The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Misplaced Pages.
If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 03:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Edit warring report
I have reported your actions on Lusitano in Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Please see here -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)