Misplaced Pages

Signatures

The page was getting kind of heavy, I just figured I'd clear some off. You can put it back or put yours back if you want; it is after all, your page just as much as mine. (How's my driving?) ❖ 19:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

RE:Teh Signatures

Thanks for leaving me a signature! User:Da.Tomato.Dude

Pagename vs PageName

"Pagename is a rediect to Dummy target. Why isn't this one?"

The answer is that wikipedia article titles are case sensitive. Thus, Pagename and PageName are entirely different articles. Another example is PANDORA (all caps), which re-directs to the Pandora Archive, and Pandora (first letter caps), which sends you to the article about the Greek mythological figure.

Hope I could help!

The Dark Lord Trombonator (((¶))) 08:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Question on MOTD

Hi. I'm kind of confused about the edits procedure, proposed by you. If a motto has several edits, is the one with the most supports approved, and the other ones rejected? Also, are mottos with too few votes always reopened, even if it's one of several edits? Were there any mottos that were rejected and forgotten even with too few votes? Also, is there an archive for past mottos? I really think the mottos should be archived, or at least removed from the in review section, if it's already on the nominations page. This is because if the in review section is too long, it can cause browser problems, but the nominations page can be edited over several sections. This problem hasn't occured before, did some rule about it change? Also, great job with everything else on MOTD. PS. I created the motd star. Thanks. AstroHurricane001 22:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, first off, the most common way to close an edit is to approve only one and reject the other versions. This is because consensus usually favors one over the other, and they're usually so similar that approving two versions would violate the rule of duplicate mottos. However, as in the case of this nomination, some edits may be approved in addition to their original nomination. In that case, the "edits", if you can call them that, we different enough from the original nomination that they all were approved.

Next, about approving edits with too few votes, as long as one of the versions has gained enough support to be approved, the other versions may be rejected, even if they haven't received enough votes. The only time they would be reopened is if none of the versions had received enough votes to determine consensus. If that were the case, the entire nomination, edits and all, would be copied back into the "In review" section.

I don't know of any (recent) mottos that were rejected and forgotten even with too few votes. I know of one mass closing by User:Vanderdecken, which essentially created the Misplaced Pages:Motto of the day/Nominations/Archive 2 page, in which he was forced to either make a decision based on the 1 or 2 votes, if any, or reopen nearly all of them. Of course, that was back when MOTD had Overseers... But now, I think nominations are receiving enough votes that most are either approved or rejected. You can take a look at Misplaced Pages:Motto of the day/Nominations/Archive 4 for my recent mass closing, and to see some of my reasons for rejecting mottos. Most of the time it was because of a unanimous oppose or because there were strong opinions on both sides, and therefore no consensus (even with enough votes).

Yes, you can view the archives for discussions from the link on the nominations page, which includes archives 1, 2, 3, and 4. A similar archive for the schedule page can be found at Misplaced Pages:Motto of the day/Schedule/Archive/2006, or from the archive box on the schedule page.

The "In review" section is merely a subpage for the current mottos, and is transcluded to the nominations page, so no duplicates should exist. The nominations page essentially acts to display all of the current nominations, with its three sections ("In review", "Awaiting decision", and "Decisions to be acted on"). The In review subpage was initially created by User:Geo.plrd, with the reason, In review allows for speedy archiving. (discussion).

I think that covered most of your questions. Contact me further if you need more detail, or if I interpreted one of your questions wrongly. --Tewy 23:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply. Hi. Thanks for answering my questions so thouroughly, and yes, you did answer practically all my questions. I could still not find a direct reason why the in review page is being so large, I thinkit is because of your mass reopenings and closings, and the huge number of mottos. I am beginning to resee mottos already forgotten for weeks. I don't really mind the page being so large, I think my browser can handle it. I guess the problem is,some mottos are so boring or unpopular, people are not paying attention to them, not even enough to oppose on its boringness. Anyway, thanks again. Bye for now. AstroHurricane001 00:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd say it's the combination of a large number of nominations with a small number of votes. That leads to more reopenings, which only compound the problem. And yes, I've noticed that many people don't vote on bland or just plain bad mottos. The unanimous opposes are usually only for obscene and offensive mottos. --Tewy 01:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've revised the procedures on the nominations page, to address some of the "FAQs" on my talk page, but you can revise them further if there's a part that might confuse someone. --Tewy 04:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Score

Greetings AstroHurricane001!

Please read the message I have put at the bottom as a reply to the accusations from several people (here). Thank you for your interest in this matter. It is nice to know that there are hardworking Wikipedians who believe in fairness and no-cheating(as I do).

Sincerely, Yuanchosaan 07:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice job

Good work on copy-editing homework. Chill Factor Five 18:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

About that...

Ah ha! Our first victim is one of our own! See Misplaced Pages:Motto of the day/April 1, 2007. Happy April Fools' Day! --Tewy 00:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Ha, or was I the intended victim... --Tewy 00:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Guess not. --Tewy 01:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #11

Number 11, April 1, 2007

The Hurricane Herald

This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.

Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.

Storm of the month

Hurricane Will developed from a tropical wave to the east of the Caribbean Sea and intensified. It crossed over Jamaica and re-emerged over water a few days later. The storm intensified into a hurricane and an eye began to develop. Will became a major hurricane over the Gulf of Mexico and made landfall on the vulnerable Gulf Coast of the United States soon after. To date, Hurricane Will has claimed over 350 lives and is directly responsible for about $5 billion of damages; of which an unknown amount was insured. Despite the damage, it is not expected that the name will be retired by WMO.

Other tropical cyclone activity

• After threatening the Eastern Seaboard for some time, Hurricane Hink has turned away and the NHC has cancelled all warnings associated with the storm.
• The 2007 Pacific typhoon season began with Tropical Storm Kong-rey forming on March 31.
• There were a total of 7 cyclones in the southern hemisphere: Becky in the South Pacific, Indlala and Jaya in the Southwestern Indian Ocean and Odette, George, Jacob and Kara in the Australian region. Indlala killed at least 80 and left over 100,000 homeless; whilst Cyclone George was the worst storm to affect Port Hedland in over 30 years.

Member of the month

The April member of the month is HurricaneIrene. Irene began contributing to tropical cyclone articles on Misplaced Pages in August 2005, but ran out of steam and left after barely 2 weeks. However, Irene's influence on the project has been wide-reaching. Her efforts led directly to two articles attaining featured status and her legacy inspired many of our most active editors to write a plethora of good articles on a wide range of storms.

New and improved articles

• The was one new featured article: Hurricane Kenna
• New Good articles include: Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale, Hurricane Florence (1988), Tropical cyclone observation and 1996 Pacific hurricane season.
• New storm articles include: Hurricane Lili (1990), Tropical Storm Alberto (1988), Cyclone George and Typhoon Durian.
• New non-storm articles include: Tropical cyclone naming, list of cyclones in Western Australia, Hurricane evacuation route and Tropical cyclone rainfall forecasting.

Main Page content

• Hurricane Iniki appeared on the Main Page as Today's featured article on March 15.
• Entries from 2 articles: Hurricane Katrina (1981) and Hurricane Guillermo (1997) appeared on the Main Page in the Did you know column during March.

Storm article statistics

Grade	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr
FA	23	25	28	29
A	2	2	2	2
GA	74	75	80	82
B	71	76	78	80
Start	193	195	194	209
Stub	16	16	16	17
Total	379	389	398	419
percentage Less than B	55.1	54.2	52.8	53.9

The Main Page

The WikiProject has a narrow scope, so it is not surprising that our articles are not frequently selected for Today's featured article. Most destructive cyclones are likely to be mentioned on the In the news column. We have no real control over that, but we should submit suggestions when appropriate.

However, we can do a more lot more to place our content in the other major section of the main page: The Did you know column. In the past month we created over 30 articles. Of these only 2 were even submitted as suggestions for DYK. We can do much better, please submit DYK entries for new articles when you do the initial assessment.

Re:please decide on it soon!

Hi. It wasn't meant to be a joke on my part. I only remebered that there was a motto like that after you showed it to me. I was wondering where the April fools' nominations had gone, I couldn't find it in the history. Also, I see you turned your page into AAAAAAAAAA! Why not add the diagonal banner at the top? Thanks. AstroHurricane001 14:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

If you haven't found them already, the April Fools' Day nominations are here. As for the border, I might add it later, maybe. --Tewy 19:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Sponge quotes

• See: Misplaced Pages:Quotations. -AMK152 19:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The Motto

I want to post this motto @ MOTD if you like it:

Over the river and through the woods to editing Misplaced Pages I go!

If I nominate I'll be sure to format it like this: AstroHUrricane001 proposed it; motivation from Squeak (see User talk:Steptrip#That Box for further information). Tell me if you like it.  ~Steptrip 23:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

RFB vote

Ah, that's great. I hope I didn't jump in too early... by the way, I have answered your question at the help desk about popups... or at least, I think that I answered it (correctly, that is). Happy editing, Gracenotes § 01:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Nesolagus

AstroHurricane, Most times when ecologists and biologists don't know why an organism is exceptionally rare they say it "may be habitat loss." That's all the reference said. (How's my driving?) ❖ 00:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Since that's what the source said, I don't see why we can't say it, too. Instead of removing the content, find a better source that explains it better. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

The only thing is that there are not many sources period. On Google Scholar the relevant sources start falling off by the second page. I suppose my argument doesn't look so good, but I still believe "may be due to habitat loss" should be removed because the answer is not known. (How's my driving?) ❖ 01:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

By the way AstroHurricane, I think it was exceptionally good of you to notify each of us of the happenings and get us to talk about it. I personally believe it is from to recent speciation due to habitat bubbling from sea level rise after the Pliocene epoch. The sea level rose (and ironically) this cut off the ancestor(s) of the Nesolagus from each other and put them in their own separate bubbles; they turned into their own species (plural), but there were only few of them in each bubble, and they weren't that suited to begin with in the new native land.

During glacial maxima, sea levels over the Sunda shelf were almost 150 metres lower than today, connecting Sumatra, Java and Borneo to the Asian mainland7. The ancestral Nesolagus may have been distributed over areas of this region at a time of lower sea level in the Pliocene, and its range would have been repeatedly dissected by periodic changes in both sea level and forest habitat.

The contraction and expansion of ranges in and out of such allopatric refugia can generate divergence, with the sister genomes being protected by hybrid zones if they make contact, leading to speciation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mac Davis (talk • contribs) 03:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you/It's a pleasure

Thanks for signing my page, and for caring about my sig being there (most people would have relished the chance to mercilessly delete something). And: it's a pleasure, signing yours. Happy Editing! Goldfritter 08:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

For the sig Mr. AstroHurricane001The New Mikemoral

Geology Project

The project has been created. Please check out the project page. Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Geology Solarapex 00:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Signpost

Template:Signpost-subscription has instructions - you can sign up for the spamlist, or just put the template on your user page, however you prefer. --Michael Snow 17:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Help at MotD, please?

Hi, Atro. You've introduced many mottoes at MotD, but you haven't voted on many others. I would really appreciate if you would help me (and Tewy, and Magnus, etc.) to close some nominations. The page is currently very long, and any help would be appreciated. I'm not saying this to be mean or anything, but very few users help out with the "boring stuff", so I thought recruting some helpers would be benificial. Thanks for all of the work you have done so far too! *Cremepuff222* 17:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

No, no, no, no! Two supports helps a ton! Sorry if I was a tad angry-sounding earlier; I was just a bit frustrated. Please keep it up, and thanks! 20:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, Astro, thanks for all the helpful feedback on my talk page; I really appreciate what you're trying to do for Misplaced Pages. Also, it's great to meet editors that aren't ashamed of their status as transsexuals. Keep up the great work.