Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:47, 21 May 2009

Archives

1 (Bannon, Rawlings, Bethune) 2 (Bannon, Mockingbird, Miss Julie's LGBT Newsletter) 3 (Mockingbird, Birmingham campaign) 4 (Everglades NP, Birmingham, Mockingbird) 5 (Mulholland Dr., Douglas, Everglades) 6 (Everglades) 7 (Everglades, Jeff, Stonewall) 8 (Admin, Milk) 9 (Milk) 10 (Miscellanea: Nov 08 - Jan 09) 11 (Milk, MOBA) 12 (Rosewood)

Nicolò Giraud

Please review the history of the Nicolò Giraud and look at the talk page. I would like someone to be neutral on the matter and also can look at the fairness in regards to the LGBT aspects. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Let me see if there's anything I can do. I'll reply back here or on the talk page after reading what there is. --Moni3 (talk) 12:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Pleae read. Not only does it introduce things that are blatant peacock terms into the lead and stating more than can be stated ("torrid" and making it seem like there is consensus, when only a minority of scholars think that there was a love affair or proof of such), it removes important information about Giraud. Sigh. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:33, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, he moved statements from the biography section (fact) into the relationship section (speculation). Ottava Rima (talk) 15:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Urgh. Ok, my thoughts on this. I read the talk page yesterday. I have criticized Haiduc before for not using highest quality sourcing for very contentious topics, namely in the Historical pederastic relationships article. I have criticized you for not being able to leave well enough alone, but not related to Haiduc. So, I don't know if I'm the best person to try to mediate here. I have a sinking suspicion if I tried, no one would like what I say and it would devolve into nonsense and mediation, or ArbCom or some other tar pit. I haven't read these sources, but the only thing to do to step in between would be to get them, and read them, and offer a 3rd opinion how they are being used. I have to look at this economically, as an issue of the worth of my time. I honestly don't know if I spent all the time reading this, writing my opinion and posting on the talk page, if it would make the situation worse. I would, of course, wish all articles to be as accurate as possible, but that often means that I have to be the one expending energy on ensuring that, and I have a limited amount when other things like ego and agenda are involved. Let me think on it. --Moni3 (talk) 15:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

It needs an expert in MoS and the rest who also works with the LGBT project pages to look it over. You are the only one that I know of. If you think that my take is unfair, then I will listen. However, he is now rearranging stuff almost randomly. It is as if he is challenging everything in some sort of trolling campaign. I can send you quotes of any sources that you would like to see the original content of. This only started happening after I listed the page for GA. One of the GA requirements is to not have any edit warring. The damage he did makes it so that it would need to be corrected to be GA, but his persistence shows that he will edit war it. Either way, his actions would ensure the failure of the page. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that GA thing is going to suck. I had to hold off on doing anything with Harvey Milk until it was finished with mediation plus two weeks for stability. I have to go to the library this weekend for another of my articles. I will see if it has any of the sources mentioned in the article, and try to figure out some kind of medium. --Moni3 (talk) 16:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The content is normally kept to less than 10 pages per source, so I can easily transcribe or submit you images for any that you need. I own most of the sources listed and have access to all. Just leave a note for which ones you would like to see. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Everglades

Moni, I spent Saturday with my family at Shark Valley biking the 15 mile trail. I got some great pictures of Everglades, a turtle laying eggs and quite a lot of birds and alligators. Hoping to contribute something worthwhile to Misplaced Pages I intended to upload these but after seeing what is already on these pages, I think I'll skip it. I did not realize you brought Everglades to FA - nice article. NancyHeise 05:01, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Sweet. Everglades is not yet FA, but it's still on my radar, as is returning there soon. You should load your images to Commons anyway. It would be nice to rotate some of the images if they portray the same things. --Moni3 (talk) 12:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Gosh I must have been looking at another article you did on Everglades. As far as uploading my pics, OK, I'll do that. I actually got a good closeup of a large snout nosed turtle laying eggs. Most of my alligator pictures don't trump what is already on Misplaced Pages but I might upload a couple of them just to add variety to the database. NancyHeise 20:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I added all my images to this page Shark Valley. NancyHeise 21:37, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Galleria

Ms. Moni, I got myself a question 4 u. I've tried locating a guideline related to the usage of image galleries. The only thing I found is rather open to interpretation. Are there any examples of an article with a large image gallery passing GA/A/FA nomination? I found an article containing 3ish paragraphs and 24 images. I'm trying to explain on the article's talk page why the current layout looks unprofessional, but good-faith (fellow WP:NRHP members, so they're automatically cool just like APK) editors want to keep the gallery. Am I incorrect or can large galleries be considered useful to the readers? In case you're wondering (probably not), I'm not trying to solicit an agreement on the article's talk page. APK is a big boy (almost potty trained). He's just a queer who finds image policies confusing. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 19:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Here's my off the cuff guess based on what I've seen in FAs. Galleries logically belong to articles where visuals are integral to understanding the context of the ideas within, like art, museums, and sometimes historical places or buildings. Most art FAs (see the list here) have enough text that the images are interspersed throughout the article, making the gallery unnecessary. Salvador Dali has a small gallery at the bottom. However, you would have to be careful to make sure the gallery images are public domain. For instance, it would not be a good idea to place a gallery of Norman Rockwell's images at the bottom of his article because they are mostly under copyright, non-free images. All non-free images have to have a rationale to include them. FA non-free rationales should be rock solid: this image is here because readers will be unable to understand the information without it. Thus, if it's in a gallery, it's not necessary because there is no text to support why the image is so important.

I'm assuming you took these yourself? In that case, don't worry about the non-free. Are you hoping to add enough information to the article to make the gallery unnecessary?

I reviewed White Mountain art for GA many moons ago (now I see the lead has been gutted...). That has a gallery because it is an entire art movement. Hope I answered your question in my rambling babbling way. --Moni3 (talk) 19:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Galleries are a relatively rare issue at FAC; typically there is enough text to incorporate images without a gallery. The most recent time this came up at FAC (that I can remember) was regarding Robert Peake the Elder, where a small gallery of his paintings was rather hotly debated at FAC. The article ultimately was promoted with the gallery, presumably because (1) it had something like 17 other images and (2) the gallery offered the opportunity to incorporate commentary/interpretation/cites. Kind of a backasswards answer, but a little precedent never hurts. Maralia (talk) 19:30, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Must share a gallery at The Swimming Hole, FA quality article, and naked butts to boot. The gallery here uses studies for the end work of art for the reader to peruse. Hoysala architecture has a gallery of sorts, though not in the gallery tags. --Moni3 (talk) 19:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice, only took you 3 minutes to come up with an FA that I didn't remember. And I reviewed that one, too. Jerkface. Maralia (talk) 19:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

O gentle and meek Maralia. What has caused you to overlook such a significant article? Is there something about the article, nay...painting? that you have completely erased from your mind? What mental trauma has caused you to bleach the episode from your consciousness? Inquiring minds want to know. --Moni3 (talk) 20:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I've always liked retrievers. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm. Nice scenery. I've found a new appreciation for 19th century paintings. Thank you Mr. Eakins. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 20:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I didn't take any of the photos. See Richardsonian Romanesque (one of my fav architectural styles in D.C.). APK is ready for the tourists to leave 19:37, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Gah! Yes, that needs some assistance. Ideally, an article about an architectural movement should use each image to illustrate an integral component to the style or the formation/evolution of the style. As it is today, Richardsonian Romanesque has very little text and a lot of visuals. If you would like to take on this article and expand it, I would leave the gallery in until you have enough text to employ images to illustrate each important concept. What is leftover can be placed in the gallery. If you feel the gallery is very helpful for the reader, then you should stick by your guns and say when reviewers at GA or FA suggest getting rid of the gallery to keep it. --Moni3 (talk) 19:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Gracias mi amiga lesbyterian. I mentioned your obvious solution on the talk page. BTW, I didn't even notice someone else had replied to my original comment. So thank you as well, Maralia. Your user page reminds me of North Kakalaki. My best friend's family owned a condo in Carolina Beach. We stayed there almost every weekend during the summer college break. During low tide, we could see the remains of a shipwreck. (not that one) Random comment, I know. But the Lord laid it upon my heart to share this moving story. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 20:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, APK, and I'm totally with you on 'userpages remind me of random things'. Yours puts me in mind of Krispy Kreme in the DJ booth at Tracks, back when I was young and justifiably stupid. Ah, the olden days! Could you be persuaded to make an appearance at a DC meetup? I think you're fucking hilarious.

RE galleries, just came across another article that passed at FAC, this time with a gallery requested because there were so many images interspersed throughout: Caspar David Friedrich. Maralia (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

A thousand apologies, my dear. APK didn't notice your reply/question. He was removing lovely rumors from a talk page, etc. (the talk page of every Wikipedian's favorite media mogul) I attended the May 2008 DC meetup, but was unimpressed by some of the admins' trash-talking of fellow editors. I might attend a future meeting. Is there one planned for the near future? We met at Uno's-Union Station in May. I suggest meating meeting somewhere a bit more, uh, lively. (APK is trying to imagine User:Newyorkbrad tipping Ella Fitzgerald) APK is ready for the tourists to leave 05:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Wait a minute. I attended the May 2008 meetup. I didn't meet you. How can this be?? Maralia (talk) 05:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I was the tanned 6'4" gayngsta sitting at the end of the table with Becksguy. My t-shirt had a picture of this with the caption "Here comes the Weinermobile!". Classy. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 05:52, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Did I drink more than I thought? Criminy. I was the only girl there at the beginning (another came later). Perhaps more memorable: I came with a handsome Italian guy, poofy black hair, spent a fair amount of time talking to the reporter. We were at the far end of the table from Kirill, Raul, and SwatJester; more people arrived later and tables were added on, so we ended up in the middle. We went to Cap City with a smaller group after dinner. It was a rare night off from being mommy, so I probably made an ass of myself. Maralia (talk) 15:56, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Got time for a little Balzac?

Hello, Gainesville! I thought about you during my recent spring break, since it was all cold and frigid up here in Wisconsin and several of my students went to Florida. (I ordered them to visit Gainesville, but of course they stuck to Orlando and Daytona.) Anyway, I recently finished reconstructing my latest Balzac article, La Cousine Bette. I'd be honored if you'd care to look at it and offer some comments. Thanks in advance and kudos on the whole MoBA front page thing! Scartol • Tok 12:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Whoa. Start class, whatever. I just looked at that article and Start class my fat behind. I'll give it a read, just to give my opinion. I've never read this book, but that doesn't stop me from making an opinion. Would you like to give a PR for my latest, a local history article called Rosewood massacre? I'd appreciate your input. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 12:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and for God's sake, will you watch this if you're going to make me read BAALLLLZAC? That's all I ever hear when I think of this guy. --Moni3 (talk) 12:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm interested in Rosewood, so I'll totally check that out. I only just put that reconstructed page up in the main namespace, so I think it hadn't been re-rated when you looked at it. And you didn't know about Balzac's time machine? (Thanks for catching those typos.) Yknow, Figureskatingfan made the Music Man reference too. I guess I don't have a choice. I'll check it out soon. Scartol • Tok 19:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Bless you, sister. Scartol • Tok 00:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Susanna Clarke

I was wondering if you would be able to offer me some advice regarding the Susanna Clarke article. It is the first living author biography I've tried to write on Misplaced Pages (you have already tackled this beast). The sources are a bit thin and I was looking for some wisdom regarding other avenues for research and some suggestions regarding article organization (in addition to the usual peer review stuff). I'm not sure I like how I've structured the article. If you could offer some thoughts on the article talk page, I would really appreciate it. Awadewit (talk) 19:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Were you thinking of making this FA, or just scouting the possibilities? I worked on Ann Bannon's article when I was just learning what I had available at my fingertips in terms of sources. I was lucky in that her story is compelling enough that she's been the subject of quite a bit of writing, but 30 years had to pass between the publication of her books and the first analysis of their influence. I've worked on some others, such as Marijane Meaker (which probably could be brought to FA, but I haven't read most of her pulp fiction books or her children's novels) and Gale Wilhelm that I've pretty much reconciled will remain start or B class articles.

I did a search in the databases here (which is dangerous because I wander all over the place when I do that), and found quite a few reviews. I don't know if you don't have access to these. The database Literature Resource Center yielded articles, reviews, and a biography. An article in Library Literature & Information Science, but not much else. If I get all serious about getting an FA on something, I almost always contact an expert in the field. In the case of Ann Bannon, I contacted her directly and made the priorities of neutrality and COI clear, but asked if she knew of sources I could use. She had some listed on her website. The Museum of Bad Art had all of their press mentions listed (was a huge list, too). These nudges were helpful in that each source mentioned another somewhere. Does Clarke have a press or literary agent? Might it be possible to contact the agent to assist with some citations you could hunt down?

As for the arrangement of the information, I think what is in the article is appropriate for the amount of information available, or at least what you have read. If you find more information, or more gets published, it might be worth it to revisit the structure of the article when that happens. I wish I could be more help to you. Sorry. --Moni3 (talk) 20:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I think GA is as far as this article can go. I'm not particularly keen on taking BLPs to FA, since their lives are still unfolding and thus the article is constantly in flux. Clarke is not mentioned in academic sources yet - I've had to rely on reviews so far (and, let me tell you, those reviews are skimpy!). I will try contacting her press agent - that is a good idea. I'm also going to try and get a better image from her or her agent (here's to hoping). Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 21:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Might I mention how fun your talk page is? Mine is full of serious topics like plagiarism. I need to live a little. Awadewit (talk) 06:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Riffraff, all these people. Or Palm Springs per Robert Mitchum, who said jail was like Palm Springs without the riffraff. Or Truvy's hair salon from Steel Magnolias without Sally Field freaking out and wailing about death or something.

How is it Sally Field fits into almost any reference to anything? Like Kevin Bacon's six degrees of separation, Sally Field has a 10 minutes until you mention a Sally Field role. --Moni3 (talk) 12:12, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello nurse

Heard you had something lanced, peeled, tucked, shaved, trimmed, scoped or otherwise altered so wanted to be sure the nurse (shark) came by to kiss any booboo you may have. -- Banjeboi 23:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, how comforting that image is... Yeesh. Is no problem. I haven't had cartilage in my knees for a while, so I got bilateral arthroscopic surgery to remove the rough parts of the joint. Not very invasive, but my knees are adjusting to how to walk again. I hope to be able to run stairs in a few weeks. Yay! --Moni3 (talk) 11:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Why would anyone want to run stairs? Karanacs (talk) 13:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I dunno. I haven't been able to walk more than a flight of stairs in several years. I'm too young for this kind of disability mindset thinking. I don't like being limited. --Moni3 (talk) 14:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Well knowledge is power so maybe levitation would eliminate the need for those troubling stairs, and even free up space for a designer closet. -- Banjeboi 01:56, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work all through on Indigenous people of the Everglades region.

♠TomasBat 18:37, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Sacred Cod of Massachusetts

hey, how have thing been going since the whole MOBA whirlwind? If you have a chance, i have been having a tough time with doing references and other small things on the article I am currently working on, Sacred Cod of Massachusetts. Would you be able to just take a quick look at the page and tell me if I am citing things corectly? i have fixed the first three cites and want to know if I am headding in the right direction. If you are to busy I understand, no biggie.--Found5dollar (talk) 20:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't responded, Found5dollar. I will look at your citations soon, I promise. Interesting looking fish uh, article. --Moni3 (talk) 20:40, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Milk and White picture

If you don't mind participating in the discussion a little bit more before threats are issued it would be much appreciated Gang14 (talk) 07:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, discussion is the way to go. Everyone has to start somewhere, including learning about non-free images. I really don't like being a complete whore warning then reporting users for 3RR, but the resolution is in the discussion, not reverting to a version that policy says is wrong. Yes, there are dozens of images of Milk that would be great to have. I contacted several photographers to ask them permission to use their images in this article, but they turned me down because they own their images and they get paid for their craft; it's their prerogative to say no to giving their work away for free. I even downloaded and tried to use images taken by Harvey now owned by the San Francisco Pubic Library, but their non-free rationales were not strong enough for a featured article. --Moni3 (talk) 13:47, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Susan Boyle

The article equivalent of munching on popcorn. I'll get back to real work, shall I? Tim Vickers (talk) 20:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Kee kee. I made a point of saying to the students, "Seriously people, he needs some science work. Give him something to do." They tittered. --Moni3 (talk) 20:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Once or twice people have been known to laugh with me, but that isn't usual. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:11, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Images

You need a new lead image. Give me a bit. Tim Vickers (talk) 23:51, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I've put it in the article. Tim Vickers (talk) 00:39, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Query

Maybe this should continue via email, but I'll start it here. In my RFA back in March, you opposed because of my lack of judgment, along with several other editors, and I agree it was well worth it. I've had a lot of RL work on my hands, so I've procrastinated this for a while. What do you suggest to work on to fix my compromised judgment? I figured I would start it here, since you're the probably the oppose I'm most familiar with (if that makes sense at all). Ceranllama chat post 22:47, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I'm doing this for the community benefit, not for self-gain. I'd like to make that clear.

I don't participate in RfA much. I seem to miss editors I know, and most of those up for RfA I have had no contact with. So it's a rarity that I commented at all. Initially, I hoped to spark a discussion. I know that's a foreign concept at RfA beyond "You suck!" and a string of acronyms that are impossible to figure out. I hoped that you would participate to indicate your advancement within the past year. I've made some wince-worthy edits when I didn't understand what I was doing. Making mistakes is ok; I wanted your input on it. The lack of discussion is what disappointed me.

So what is your own opinion of your judgment? How would you characterize your growth from the time you started to the period I made reference to in your RfA (the passing of GAs that were clearly not ready) to the past 2 months?

It is difficult to ascertain from every editor I come across what their priorities are. An ideal admin, in my opinion, is here to add content and does not see having admin abilities as a token of status or popularity. Unfortunately, when the process is made so freaking difficult and arbitrary, it's almost impossible not to see becoming an admin a rite of torturous passage. Among admins who are familiar with content expansion, I would like to know that content is their highest priority, and that they are able to assess when an agenda or other motivation is clouding an editor's judgment. I believe that acquiring GAs got in your way some months ago. Whether that was due to age or your relationship with EotW I cannot say, but article content was clearly not your priority. It's ok, you know, to say that you screwed up for whatever reason, back when you were passing poor GAs. You may have been busy in your real life during the RfA, but the lack of discussion and participation in your opposes was, unfortunately, a sign that you are not ready to dedicate some time and effort in addressing those issues. --Moni3 (talk) 17:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I just wanted to clarify that. Also I hope you and other editors have come to appreciate the enormous growth of maturity I have undergone since then. Back when I was passing articles as GAs, I had no purpose for editing. I just let my attitude flow into whatever I was doing. Of course, now, I would like to think I have a purpose here-expanding earth sciences articles. I'd like to focus primarily on them, from now on, rather than getting involved in the politics of RFA and the rest of the bureaucratic side of the wiki. As I pointed out in an email to WereSpielChequers (my nom), I don't think I'm really interested in running for an RFA after three months until I can be sure my judgment is not severely compromised, as suggested in my RFA. Something tells me I'm not cut out for the job-even if others offer to nominate me, I intend to decline, at least within the next six months. Sorry if you felt I wasted your time. Ceranllama chat post 19:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Today's drama brought to you by ...

In the flattery department I copied the guidelines for safer sex practices but now a user is slapping {{howto}} and suggesting we're giving medical advice that's not proven not to be bad ... I know, like ants at a picnic. Anyhoo would you visit here and offer some kindly insight. They may be correct but they may be, not so much. Any ideas appreciated. -- Banjeboi 00:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I have no strong feelings about it either way. I knew the same quote box in the Lesbian article might not fly and I was surprised when it was allowed in GA. It can be argued either way, but I think this is a matter for policy to decide, not consensus in the MSM article. --Moni3 (talk) 12:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

What's the best place to have a ... healthy and neutral discussion? -- Banjeboi 14:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Opened a thread here, but I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place. An RfC is imminent on this issue I think. --Moni3 (talk) 15:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

We're making progress with a title change. If we can understand the issues better we might also add a footnote of some sort. I think WP:VPP might be more helpful but as were making headway I'd say hold off momentarily to see if we come up with any more solutions. -- Banjeboi 15:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Question for Moni3 from Dr. Fanucci's student

Moni3,

I'm a student in Dr. Fanucci's course and my article title is "Ethanol Induced Non-Lamellar Phases in Phospholipids". I notice that when i click on my topic from the group page nothing appears and it says that I'm currently editing. Yes, I am editing the page but I don't understand why nothing appears on the page at all since I have submit information for readers to make edits before my final submission.--Dream22 (talk) 01:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)Dream22

It's missing a lede, that may be part of the issue. -- Banjeboi 03:05, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I think I figured out the problem, I think the link on the class page did not use proper capitalization of the titles. I find this aspect of Wiki quite frustrating that if the page is named Site-directed spin labeling, but you type Site-Directed Spin Labeling, the software cannot recognize that they are the same pages. I change the capitalization of the link to the "Ethanol Induced Non-Lamellar Phases in Phospholipids" on the Misplaced Pages:UFCHEM site and the link now goes to the page that is listed on Dream22 page. Please let me know if I have solved this problem for you. --Gfanucci (talk) 13:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

That is easily fixed with a redirect, which I can do quickly. Just indicate which of the article titles are like that and I'll fix them. --Moni3 (talk) 13:34, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, I don't think there was ever a real page created with the mis-capitalization. When we typed it into the class page, it was not typed correctly. I do not think there are 2 pages with the same names, does the redirect work for any misspelling? Should we create redirects for any topic that someone might search in an alternative word choice (like a cross listing in the old card catalogs for searching libraries?)--Gfanucci (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

No, it generally works with capitalization, unless the spelling is so off it is commonly misspelled by many people or there is a general difference in British/American spelling, such as anaesthesia and anesthesia. Creating a redirect would help if others come along after you and want to add more to the article. Be advised I'm communicating with Tim Vickers regarding the merging or possible deletion regarding Membrane receptor and Transmembrane receptor. On his talk page, and in the thread below. --Moni3 (talk) 19:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Afterthought

Hi, wanted to make sure you've seen my afterthought as well as my original reply to your question here. Best, CliffC (talk) 03:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Wlstutts

Hi! I'm still working on the lipid rafts page and I am still having trouble with my references. The main problem is that the same reference is listed 5 or 6 times with different numbers. Could you please help me with this? Thanks!

The hope

Hi Monni3. I uploaded the image successfully, But in my discussion, I'm classified under the molecular biology project while I'm under the Ufchem project. I don't know if I can correct this. Thanks

clarification from idevera

Perhaps I was misunderstood about what page I'm going to edit. I'm not editing the Second Messenger Systems page but the Lipid Signaling page at: http://en.wikipedia.org/Lipid_signaling. When I clicked the link in the Articles and Members section of our Biomembranes wiki page, I was surprised to know that I was assigned to edit a different page. The article on Second Messenger Systems is a very broad topic since it encompasses basically all types of second messengers. Whereas the page I'm proposing to edit is more focused on lipid signaling, with a section on second messenger lipids--the same topic I presented in class.--Idevera (talk) 20:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

question from gfanucci

OK, to chat with you and ask questions, is this the correct format to use? I ask because I am not quite sure how to respond to Matt's question as he didn't make a page for himself, if I leave something in response, do I just click on his talk page link and write back? Will he see it?

thanks for this help, I hope that we can pull this off and have something respectable by the end of the semester!--Gfanucci (talk) 04:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

ALso, I can't seem to find the page you set up for the course. There is nothing on the UF Biomembranes page that is linked from my user page...and I am traveling, so I don't have my notes with me...help? Only one student has put something on my talk page. I hope they start moving on this. Oh, when you answer questions on my talk page, how do you know things are posted there? are you constantly watching it? SHould I respond on that page or on your page?--Gfanucci (talk) 04:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

• So, it appears that some bots are going around after students are editing and uploading figs. I have noticed some problems with figure liscencing, so if I find something that looks OK, but a bot says it is not OK, I will contact you; as I think you will pay attention to my notices more than the students will! smile. Can you check out the Lipid signaling page discussion to see if the problem with the figure was addressed? --Gfanucci (talk) 13:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Membrane receptor

I could merge Transmembrane receptor into the membrane receptor article if you wish, I don't think there is much to choose between the two titles. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:47, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

It's not my wish. I have no idea how close these issues are. I'm concerned that a merge will be imminent and the students will lose their edits. --Moni3 (talk) 18:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Can you fill me in on this? Who is editing membrane receptor page or transmembrane receptor page? I don't see this listed on the class site and no one has emailed me with this topic. Perhaps I can provide an additional perspective?--Gfanucci (talk) 19:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

A merge won't happen without notice and discussion, so there is no hurry and no chance of this deleting somebody's work. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Per Gfanucci's talk page, the last two to sign up indicated they will be editing Membrane receptor in lieu of Transmembrane receptor because Transmembrane receptor was not organized the way they wanted, as I understood it. --Moni3 (talk) 19:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

There is very little content in transmembrane receptor, so merge at some point in the future would be relatively simple. Tim Vickers (talk) 19:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Wlstutts

Thanks for your help! I think I got it. Now I have a new question...some how I was logged off wiki during my editing, so now all of my most recent edits are showing my IP address. Is there a way I can change that to just show my user name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wlstutts (talk • contribs) 15:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Now to lighten the tone a little and talk about......

(in best Bill Hicks impersonation) ...racism. I saw Person of color and figured it may be best merged into racism as it came across as so entwined with the phenomenon it may be better discussed in context of the latter article - however, I am not American so input from locals may be much appreciated as to whether I have missed something. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

In my best layman's opinion here, "Person of color" is a 1990s euphemism for anyone who is not white. While it got its fancyness in that decade, it hasn't quite died out. If the Wiki community is hot to merge it somewhere, I would suggest Political correctness instead of racism. The term reflects more the phase of inclusiveness we all remember so well. But ask others. I suggest going to WP African Diaspora and posing it there. --Moni3 (talk) 12:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the link and suggestion. I wasn't sure on it and am open minded about it :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

AGF

Hi Moni3, especially after running into you yesterday, I've decided to stop by and mention something. I did sleep on the matter, so I'm not just impulsively coming here and blabbing "did you know". Since you're an admin., you're fully aware of AGF, and I hope that you'll do so in this case. To the point, there is a guideline being drafted:

• Misplaced Pages talk:Deceased Wikipedians/Proposal to establish practices to be followed for deceased Wikipedians

I posted at CENT, AN, and Village pump, but thought perhaps they were not pages you watched. I noticed in my travels that you were friends with Jeff, or at least you knew him through his work here. A recent letter from Jeff's mom is what finally pushed me to the point that I wanted to make sure you were aware of the discussion. David Shankbone posted the letter at the bottom of the proposal; so, if nothing else I thought you may want to read that. I'm not trying to canvass you into adding your opinions on the items being considered, but if they were something that you'd be interested in, and I didn't mention it to you - then I would be the one in the wrong. I noticed several other people who knew Jeff, but haven't edited the proposed guideline as well, since you are an admin, I'll leave that to your discretion as to whether or not to inform them of this as well. I did notice one other admin. that knew Jeff, so I may drop a note at Keeper's talk as well, but outside that - I think it better that you mention it to anyone else that may be interested. Again, if you are already aware of this proposal, and just didn't care to add your thoughts - please forgive me, and feel free to disregard or even delete this message. I promise you, I'm making this post with only the best intentions in my heart. Best wishes, Ched. — Ched :  ?  16:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

MBChandl is in need of some guidance

Hey!

I just got done uploading all three of the subsections I updated for Lipid Polymorphs. I'm confused on how to format them properly and how to site my sources properly! The three sections I updated were on micelles, bilayers and hexagonal phase lipids. If you could take a quick look at them for me and give me some pointers, that would be great. Also, I'm having difficulty with uploading some pictures as well. Thanks for you help! MBChandl (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Lesbian

Hey. The article currently has no section dealing with parenting and reproduction but you may be interested in this: "Lesbian and bisexual youth are up to seven times more likely to get pregnant than their heterosexual peers, a study of British Columbia students has found." Vancouver Sun Phoenix of9 (talk) 21:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Help improve figure quality from Gfanucci

It seems like many of the figs that the students have uploaded have very poor resolution. Can you help with this technical detail? they likely have to save the file with higher resolution but I am not sure exactly what details to give them. In anycase, it is all good practice for them because these will be the same problems/issues they deal with in writing manuscripts and their Theses/Dissertations.--Gfanucci (talk) 15:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I suspect it is related to the type of file, whether it is jpg, svg, or png. I can ask an image expert, but it might take a day or so to get an answer. --Moni3 (talk) 15:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Links

Ah yes, I've actually added information to two separate areas. I tried adding information to the bilayer page, and did, but didn't realize that what I was adding to the wrong section. A "phospholipid bilayer" page was already in existence so someone deleted everything I had added to the "bilayer" page.

Micelles http://en.wikipedia.org/Micelle Hexagonal http://en.wikipedia.org/Hexagonal_crystal_system

MBChandl (talk) 18:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Peer review of Ali's Smile: Naked Scientology

Hi Moni3, hope you are doing well. Awadewit (talk · contribs) recommended you as a good peer reviewer - I have nominated the article Ali's Smile: Naked Scientology for a peer review, and if you have time I'd most appreciate input at the subpage, Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Ali's Smile: Naked Scientology/archive1. Thank you for your time, Cirt (talk) 21:26, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Awadewit is so nutty. Is she making up stories again? She must be watched closely at all times... Regardless of my peer review oddities, I will give it a look. Only because it has to do with nekkid people. It might take me until tomorrow, though. --Moni3 (talk) 21:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanksomuch! Cirt (talk) 21:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: All Through the Night

Oooh, I know you! I sent you a message awhile ago because I loved the work you did on And the Band Played On, which is one of my favorite books. Anyway, glad to know you also enjoy the song, it's one of my personal favorites (Which is why I decided to completely re-write the article.) I'll get to work on your concerns, however I added everything I could find, so I won't get my hopes up on the meaning of the lyrics. More comments about your expansion concerns are available at the GAR, and I hope you check them out as soon as you have free time. Thanks for the review! :) CarpetCrawler 02:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Legolas found the meaning of the lyrics, in a book! :) Check the review page for details, when you have the free time. :) CarpetCrawler 04:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Not just any book but Billboard itself. A very short review, I must have missed it don't know how. Do tell us if you are facing any other concern. --Legolas 09:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thank you for the review! :) CarpetCrawler 19:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

for the userpage protection! –Juliancolton |  19:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Levineps splitting

I see that you have warned User talk:Levineps about his rampant and undiscussed splitting of articles. Well, what he's done now is split every single NFL team's article to a "Logos and Uniforms of Team" page. He did not make a single discussion post, nor left a single edit summary. I strongly feel that these splits were absolutely inappropriate: he did not improve any of them, leaving them unreferenced and of poor quality; many of the team articles are not long and do not need tobe split; and logos and uniforms are not notable enough for their own article. I went and reverted most of these unnecessary, unexplained splits, and then Levineps just undid every one of them with no comment, no question of me, nothing. I would really appreciate it if you could get into this and even block this user, as youhve warned him. Thanks, Reywas92 21:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I will be remerging these articles now. There's really no reason to have so many excessive articles. And these football ones aren't even nearly as bad as this: /. Reywas92 21:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, shoot. I just started an ANI thread about merging these and deleting the Logos articles. Hmmm. Wanna pipe up there? --Moni3 (talk) 22:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Moni3, I believe he is now doing the same with his IP address: Contribs. Ironically, he commented on my talk that I really have to use the talk page. Thanks, Reywas92 20:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Is this anon IP just undoing your edits or splitting articles? Looked at a few contribs and didn't see the splitting pattern Levineps has done. Levineps was not the initial splitter of History of Thursday Night Baseball, although both that article and Thursday Night Baseball look poor. I can't tell if the history section was supposed to be a part of the parent article or what. --Moni3 (talk) 20:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, undoing my edits. That history article should be within the main article; it was linked to as a subarticle. I have now merged them and created threads on the talk pages of the main articles. If you don't mind, it would be great if you could give some input. Reywas92 20:56, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Carol Ann Duffy

Hi Moni, do you know about our first woman, and gay, poet laureate? Her article needs some work and I think you might be the perfect editor for the job. Just a thought, Graham. Graham Colm 22:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I saw the announcement, but I don't know who she is. Let me peek at her article and see what can be done with the resources I have. I may have to recruit someone else for the poetry thing. Ogden Nash remains my favorite. After Ogden, I am unable to determine quality of poetry at all. --Moni3 (talk) 22:21, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Candy is dandy but liquor is quicker - neither am I wrt to quality, and this is about my level:-) As I said—it was only a thought. Graham, Graham Colm 22:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

See, I came here to tell you that I've (finally!) signed up to review Rosewood massacre in all of his horrible, nightmare inducing glory, but now all I'm thinking about is poetry. I love Duffy, and can't recommend her enough -- even to someone who isn't very poetically inclined. :) I wrote a 15 page paper on her brilliant The World's Wife collection (my favorite is "Tiresias's wife") while studying contemporary poetry in England, and "Warming Her Pearls" is one of the most gloriously sensuous poems ever written. In short, she's super cool and I was pretty "chuffed" to think of her as the newest poet laureate across the pond. Check her out, if you ever get a chance. María (habla conmigo) 20:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Clearly there is a better candidate to take on the Duffy article. I am keen to get Rosewood massacre reviewed, however. What to do, what to dooooo? --Moni3 (talk) 20:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Dude, don't you know I concentrate all of my literary research on dead people? Math Writing articles about people who are still alive is hard. You've got to, like, update them and stuff. I have a hard enough time updating the antics of polar bear celebrities. (Note to self: do that.) Beginning review soon... María (habla conmigo) 13:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Such considerations I should have undertaken when I was contemplating writing articles on existing, moving, and living ecosystems. My poor Everglades National Park article is in dire need of updating. Fools write articles that require constant updating. Fools! --Moni3 (talk) 13:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

hey girl hey

I was looking at the FA queue (congrats), and noticed several unlinked words in the lede/lead/weed. Is that intentional or should I add wikilinks? Yes, this is a newbieish question. I'm only asking because APK is unfamiliar with the FA prep process. Feel free to point and laugh. (Mama said they were gonna laugh at me) APK straight up now tell me 07:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Hahah. Congrats. I saw that the bot added the main page template for tomorrow and I made the same sound Homer Simpson makes when Lisa wants him to take her to the museum. <looks around furtively> and for a moment contemplated removing all the citations...

Anyhoo... it depends. When that article was promoted there was a push for linking minimalism at FAC. Like Scandinavian design, I guess. So whatever is essential to the article's understanding is linked, and linked only the first time. It will stay that way until minute one the moment it goes live, and it's anyone's guess what will happen to the article then. If you want to link, by all means, go nuts. --Moni3 (talk) 12:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/May 8, 2009

Look at you - on the main page. :) Awadewit (talk) 13:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

You know you're a bit jaded when you see GimmeBot put that on the talk page and shout "Crap!" But I copy edited it a bit and updated... Yee haw. I predict the response will be negligent compared to what I hope to have on the main page on June 28.--Moni3 (talk) 13:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

We're all a bit jaded. I had two articles on the main page in quick succession, so I ended up saying "Another one?" :) I can't wait to see Stonewall on the main page - that is such a good article. Awadewit (talk) 14:11, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Congrats. I visited the main page, and was surprised to see it there. Horologium (talk) 00:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, for all the vandalism potential, it is still quite an honor, methinks. Kudos to you, M3. Scartol • Tok 02:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd forgotten what a fine article this is, Moni3. It's every bit as informative and pleasurable to read now as it was the first time I encountered it. Although I admit I would rather they'd chosen the picture of the three spoonbills as the image. You go, girl. Risker (talk) 02:26, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you all. It's a quiet article. I hope it gets more earnest readers than vandals today. --Moni3 (talk) 12:03, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Very nice job. Congrats! BTW, I haven't forgotten about the related Hamilton Disston GAC. I got "made" over at Commons and have been trying out the shiny new buttons there. This weekend I'll try to carve out some time. Wknight94 13:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

There's no rush. Congratulations on the admin at Commons. Hope it comes with less drama than adminning here. Thanks for your comments! --Moni3 (talk) 13:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are a member of the GA WikiProject. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Great comment

Kudos for your post to AN. :) Durova 19:53, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Kee kee. Knockers. --Moni3 (talk) 19:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Cogs, Trees, and the Forest

I really enjoyed reading your essay and decided to add it to the User essays category so it can have wider exposure. Hope you don't mind. -- OlEnglish 01:58, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Due to

Hi Moni, long time no speak. Personally, I think "due to" is overused in some texts, and some (perhaps not all) changed to "because of" or "since". What is your view? On that subject, do you share my misgivings about the use of "as" (in its meaning of "because")? Occasionally it's clear, but my feeling is that often its dual meaning of "while" or "because" has to be reverse-disambiguated by the reader. A faulty little nook of English? Tony (talk) 14:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it's interesting that I have worked with copy editors who regularly make my plain language read smarter and they drop their pearls of wisdom on me and I feel as if my writing style is primordial sludge to their evolutionary marvels. Scartol's advice never to start a sentence with "There" had me dumbfounded. Other common sense tips on your interactive sentence strengtheners were more "duh" moments. Now I must limit the use of "due to". What is surprising is that I had Scartol, Dank55, and others pore over the article in which the anon IPs changed the due tos. How strong is the faction of grammar wonks who must cloak themselves in anonymity to copy edit FAs for mention of things being due to other things? I'm imagining an entire V for Vendetta kind of grammar-propelled secret society. --Moni3 (talk) 14:25, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I've been looking into the whole "Don't start a sentence with 'there'" thing, and it seems that I've been pushing a narrow ideological preference under the guise of a consensus guideline. In fact, my Warriner's Fourth Course grammar textbook includes directions for diagramming sentences beginning with "there", as close an endorsement of the acceptability of this practice as I can find. So I guess it's a personal problem that I've got. (Apparently Grammar Girl does too, but Woe is I says it's a silly rule.) I'll try to be less dogmatic in the future. =) Scartol • Tok 18:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

White Night riots

I have made changes to the article to address many of your concerns, and I will continue to take care of the handful that remain. Would you mind taking a look at the page and checking it against your list, to see how it is progressing? I took your list of concerns and turned it into a checklist, complete with the status of my actions for each one of them. Also, in the section below that where we were discussing images, I asked a question about potential replacements for one of the images you were concerned about. When you get a chance, please review these and offer feedback on how i'm progressing on getting it to a solid GA-class.

Thanks, Firestorm 03:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: I've made the image fixes, which I think were some of your biggest concerns. Please review them and let me know what you think of how its progressed so far.

Thanks,

Firestorm 03:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Give me a couple days. I'm out of town. --Moni3 (talk) 22:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, no rush. Thanks again for the feedback. Firestorm 03:33, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ] 08:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit war over LawrenceFobesKing.jpg photo in Violence against LGBT people

Hi - Several editors involved in the IfD are edit warring over the inclusion of the photo in the violence article. Would you look at it and take whatever action you feel is appropriate. Regardless of the debate about the fair use inclusion, the edit war is unhelpful for everyone. Since you commented in the IfD, you are more aware of the context involved, but if you would rather not get involved, I will understand and will post at ANI. — Becksguy (talk) 11:50, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm watching it now. It seems to have slowed down, and if it picks up again I'll protect the article. --Moni3 (talk) 12:03, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Possible homophobia

In response to your ANI concerns, I will put this up for analysis: I work as a Catholic Apologist, which means that I actively defend the Catholic Church and their positions in many ways (promotions, articles in the newspaper, opinion columns, etc). I have always acknowledged this and have CoI'd myself from many articles here. My statements on Misplaced Pages Review were an explanation of the Church's stance. In it, I stated that the Church believes that marriage is only for reproduction and sex is only for children. This does not make any claims about sexuality, nor does it distinguish heterosexuals from homosexuals. I was also challenged about those who are heterosexual and cannot have children (which also should not marry, and, if they find out that they married but cannot have children, this is grounds for an annulment or, if they stay married, they are called to be chaste). In the Church's belief, all humans are children of God, and all are called to Chastity. Yes, people sin. Yes, people can seek forgiveness and redemption. The Church has no problems with platonic love in any form.

Now, for my personal actions on Wiki, I have always tried to be considerate of different people's views. I have even worked with Haiduc in improving an LGBT article that I saved from AfD. Our dispute was not about the sexuality of the individual, but over individual weight given to individual critics (I wanted more Byron criticism sources and he wanted more historical/socio-historical sources). The other disputing with him on the page about pederasty was merely carry over from some other pages and had nothing to do with our individual dispute. We have since gotten that page to GA level. I have also worked on many other LGBT pages and I have no problem with them. Many of the authors I have written about have long documented homosexual experiences. I have also spent a lot of time discussing with and working with many prominent homosexuals, bisexuals, etc, of Misplaced Pages on IRC in order to ensure that characterizations were fair. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm a convinced Quaker, and I have to admit that sometimes I would like to post "Get the gun!" at ANI. Follow my bouncing ball, if you will. I think it would be interesting to poll editors on Misplaced Pages to find out the age range and predominant sex at different forums and Wikiprojects. What that might imply, I don't know, but it's my distinct impression that 17-year-old males dominate RfA. I don't understand the preoccupation by people at RfA to undermine other editors. Though you don't seem to be able to say "Whatever" to comments made at or near you, I can't figure out wtf is going on at RfA most days of the week. I try to devote some energy to untangling the woven webs of crap, but generally I just can't muster up the care. Content editing is so much more fun.

Seriously, you should try it: "So what?" It's liberating.

Reminds me of Julie Brown's song "Cause I'm A Blonde": "I know that other people are smarter than me, but I have this philosophy: So what?"

The point of my posting at ANI was to the RfA shenanigans. It's drama because it's unclear. --Moni3 (talk) 18:04, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I am 26, by the way. I also frequent RfA in order to at least put an effort in ensuring that problematic admin that disrupt the content building of those like Malleus do not get through. I have also witnessed many techniques and patterns used to game the system, so I look out for that. I have had a lot of experience witnessing the damage that bad admin can do about here, so it is more than just "so what". Sorry. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

(total change of pace, sorry Ottava...) I adore that song, but now I'm going to be hearing it in my head all day... dang you Moni! Ealdgyth - Talk 18:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Rock on, Ealdgyth. I've been working on a song article recently. It's awesome. Were I so inclined to try to post my crackpot theories into articles, it would be in the Creativity article (I haven't even read it) that would state an essential element of creativity is monetary, emotional, or social poverty. People who are forced out of the normal working parameters find other ways to work. Blacks and gays are two groups that have exhibited extraordinary creativity in American culture because they have been excluded from mainstream expressions of what they hold most dear. It's not limited to such marginalized groups, though. Anyone who rejects a faulty system and makes his own parameters is creative. Get enough of that will to screw what is wrong and work in your own realm and history is made. The caveat is forming a direction. Without it, telling the faulty system to screw itself is just cranky, not creative. --Moni3 (talk) 18:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh gesh, Ealdgyth! :) Ottava Rima (talk) 18:50, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I think I'll stick with dressage... Ealdgyth - Talk 18:58, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

"People who are forced out of the normal working parameters find other ways to work. Blacks and gays are two groups that have exhibited extraordinary creativity" – no, no, no. What's true for some subcultures in 20th century America isn't true for other times and other places; the driving force of social, artistic and political change is and always has been the idle rich. Artists starving in garrets, well, starve. Click on random biographies of prominent historic artists, and count how often you read the words "the second son of Lord…" or "his father, a wealthy…" (poor sharecroppers can't afford to put their kids through art school, and even if they could couldn't spare them from the farm). What differentiates post-war Western society from any other is that mechanisation, the decline of social hierarchy and vastly increased literacy have put more people in a position where they have free time to do "their own thing", and the basic framework abilities to do so competently. (Personally, I'd question the whole "blacks and gays" thing anyway, even in the current climate; for every Motown legend or super-hip NYC scenester, there are a million ordinary Joes and Josephines just trying to pay the rent. The whole "gays are so artistic" thing should rightly have died with Oscar Wilde.) – iridescent 21:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

You're going to make me write the entire creativity article right here, aren't you? Ok, it is true that there are elements of creativity that must be present: time (for Aristotle, that means time was created by slaves; now time is created by machines), access to a wide array of infuences, and an inherent talent that is individual and not ascribed to groups. But what I am most interested in is how an individual takes on what s/he learns as a member of a group and changes it into something new and revolutionary. It is my belief, due to my observations, that people who have a searing desire borne of living without, added with the three other elements are the most creative. One of the recurring themes on The Actors Studio is that every interviewee who has appeared on that show has either lost a parent or had parents who divorced or left. Being marginalized does not create talent. Being talented does not equal creativity. Creativity comes from seeing what lacks and desiring that something better should fill it. I am in no way romanticizing financial poverty, but there is a soul-altering sadness in poverty and disenfranchisement that revolutionizes human expression, because those who have been rejected by the mainstream in turn reject the mainstream. I am not suggesting that only poor or sad people can be creative, but I am becoming convinced that truly content people will or can not be the kind of creative that affects society deeply. --Moni3 (talk) 21:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Not convinced. If anything unifies great original artists/philosophers/scientists/engineers (the four blur together until the 20th century), it's that something happened at some point to lodge the twin (related) ideas "there must be something more than this" and "I can do something to make that something happen". The first is indeed often a corollary of poverty or disenfranchisement (but can equally well be a product of religious training – cf. Darwin, Vivaldi, Newton); the second generally requires some permutation of free money or free time. I suspect the "disenfranchisement" thing stems as much from the fact that radical change is generally a reaction against something, and people who are comfortably off are less likely to feel the need to react – but those few that do feel the need are so much better placed to do something about it. – iridescent 22:09, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

<undent> I see your point, but I cannot discard mine. The study of creativity and intelligence is only about 100 years old. Your references address a period before the study of what makes people intelligent and creative. Though I know science and engineering requires creativity of the sort I'm talking about, I usually concentrate on arts and humanities when bolstering my crackpot theories. Studying creativity in science would be very interesting. Our divergent observations make it possible that my views are distinctly American in that I'm assuming everyone knows that revolution is good, and the innovator should be studied and honored despite class status. This suggests that a compelling element of creativity is a variable. Furthermore, I tend to study creativity that comes not as conscious thought but an uncontainable urge. Much food for thought. --Moni3 (talk) 22:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

If you want a starting point (well, a starting-from-a-long-way-already-down-the-line point), I'll recommend the book I recommend to pretty much anyone given any excuse, The Making of the Atomic Bomb. Even if think you've no interest in the subject at all, as far as I'm concerned there's never been a better guide to the way art, science, engineering and philosophy blur together (my personal favorite is Niels Bohr, who went from playing for Akademisk Boldklub to unravelling the structure of the atomic nucleus – as with Eilley Bowers, Julian Cope and Amelia Fletcher, I have a great fondness for people who combine two apparently completely unrelated careers); it's also a superb guide to the mentality of people who start off working in obscure fields and end up changing the world, and how and why they react as they do at all the stages along the way. – iridescent 22:41, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I brought your concern up here. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of homophobia, I find iridescent's user page to be highly offensive. The video is obviously a metaphor. (two pussies doing the bow-chicky-bow-wow = typical lesbyterian relationship) Well, I have news for you. Not all lesbians bite, hard. Not all lesbians end their sexual encounters by fighting and running off into the woods. Not all black lesbians are bottoms. Stereotyping pussies is very unacceptable. Now, if you'll excuse me. APK has to eat his dinner. I'm having turkey and biscuits. Mmm. APK straight up now tell me 23:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I didn't follow a word of that. --Moni3 (talk) 23:59, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank God for that. I thought for a second I must have had a stroke, and lost the ability to understand English. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:12, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Quick! Get the translator! To the dickphone! --Moni3 (talk) 00:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Ya'll suck. Chávez has expressed his desire that "everyone get the opportunity to get their hands on a dickphone". Moni, are you making fun of me because I appreciate the male anatomy? Why do you hate gay people? APK straight up now tell me 00:25, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea of a dickphone, but inside sources tell me this is more accurately translated to "cocksation". Sweepin' the nation. --Moni3 (talk) 00:45, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh great admin...

Hi Moni, might I impose upon on you to wield your mop for me? I'd like to know the license template with which File:Johnson house Lichfield.jpg was uploaded. I transferred this image to to the Commons using a bot when Samuel Johnson was at FAC, and I'm concerned that the correct license didn't carry over (the transfer gave a PD-Author template naming Ottava Rima as the author; this is not correct, as OR only cropped the image. Julianboolean was the actual original uploader). Would you mind taking a look at the deleted en.wiki version and letting me know whether the original template was PD-Author for Julianboolean? I just want to be sure it's correct on the Commons side. Here is the log, if it helps. Эlcobbola _talk 22:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Somebody should be an admin himself ... <tap, tap> ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:26, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Deleted history shows Julianboolean (talk · contribs) uploading as {{PD-self}}. –Juliancolton |  22:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

So I was waxing poetic with Iridescent and are my rusty and lackluster services still necessary? --Moni3 (talk) 22:31, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Too slow! Thanks, Julian! And Sandy, someday my unicorn shall cometh... Эlcobbola _talk 23:07, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

That image was a little iffy back then (I am always weary about the PD self images), but it had a full name. Full names normally lend some credibility. But yes, Elcobbola should have been an admin years ago. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:19, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

This thread reinforces the original owner's uploading of the image if anyone needs verification. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:15, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Question

Sorry to trouble you, but OR quotes you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Moni3.27s_comments and apparently believes you have supported his view that Everykings answer to question 15 on his Rfa is a clear personal attack on OR. I do not read it that way; it reads to me that you are saying you'd like clarification. Please clarify, here or on ANI, thanks much. KillerChihuahua 22:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I state that I support Moni's request. I provided my side of the request. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:17, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Ya, I asked for clarification, diffs, links, whatever was available. I'm not following this from the RfA so I don't know the intricacies of the discussion from there. All I know is it appears Ottava Rima was accused of using hate speech, and that it may have been homophobic in nature. If that is the case, evidence, please on the ANI page. If not, the comment should be retracted. --Moni3 (talk) 23:57, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Ottava was apparently under the impression that your statement supported his contention that the statement in the Rfa was clearly a personal attack. The virtually unanimous view of others is that when originally accused on the other site, Ottava might have had grounds for complaint, but as an explanation of past occurrences it merely relates what was said in the past, in response to a direct question.

The statement was an answer to an Rfa question, and refers to an incident in the past on another site. He has not been accused of hate speech here, or recently. A reference was made to remarks on the other site which the nominee considered at the time to be in the category of hate speech. Ottava Rima was subsequently banned from that site due to his remarks there. The question asks "15. User:Ottava Rima is clearly strongly opposed to your candidacy. Are you aware of some conflict (resolved or not) between you that would explain his or her continued commenting on !votes? ..." The statement reads, in its entirely, "A: Ottava Rima and I interacted on Misplaced Pages Review last year. He presented numerous off-topic arguments related to religion and society, and I believed his arguments included hate speech, so I called for him to be banned for the forum for that reason. He was subsequently banned with the agreement of almost everyone on the forum. There hasn't been any other conflict or interaction between us. ". Discussion concerning this has been on the talk page of the Rfa, On ANI here, and again on ANI at WP:ANI#Ottava Rima and the Everyking Rfa, take 2 as well as across multiple talk pages.KillerChihuahua 09:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Harvey Milk

Hello, Moni. Congratulations for this article, I loved it too much! I had translated it to pt-wiki and now it´s a feature article there too. Cheers, Pamela SP (talk) 23:08, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Good for you. Yay! --Moni3 (talk) 23:58, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Email

Ottava Rima (talk) 00:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Monitor! Are these technology-related nouns, or just random utterances? --Moni3 (talk) 00:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC) Yes, I replied.

Cherry Springs State Park

	<font=3> Thanks again for your peer review - Cherry Springs State Park made featured article today! Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch ><>° 01:57, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Rock on, dude. You're an animal. --Moni3 (talk) 02:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Eraserhead (again)

I'm going to start working on this. What was the general availability of the book sources? I have found and printed plenty of articles, but I want to look at Sheen at the very least, or any book you can tell me that has substantive content about Eraserhead. --Laser brain (talk) 16:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I have access to anything here. You can search for David Lynch. I used 4 books for Mulholland Dr., but there are more that were published before that movie was released. Let me know. --Moni3 (talk) 19:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

There is a tremendous body of work about this film. I've contacted a few film studies professors to ask their opinions on which sources to use. I'll ask DL as well. I'm not sure whether to consider the baby a character in the film... --Laser brain (talk) 19:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

White Night riots

Just wondering what is going on over at the talk page. It looks like you are already reviewing the article, but not on a subpage, and you didn't claim responsibility for it at GAN. So I went ahead and created the subpage and signed for it before I saw your section. Are you doing an official GA review, or just an unofficial peer one? It might be good to move the review to the subpage I created, and replace my sig with yours at GAN. Thanks, — Jake Wartenberg 16:57, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not reviewing it for GA officially. I'm making suggestions to the editors who nominated it. Your comments are welcome. I wrote the article for Harvey Milk and I may add to the White Night riots article because I have many sources leftover from the Milk article. --Moni3 (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Wonderful, thanks for clarifying. — Jake Wartenberg 17:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Your evidence

You noted you've not participated in RFAR before and that you're not sure what you're supposed to be doing. I've not been heavily involved in any ArbCases before, but I've made comments in a few, followed a couple others, and even been named a time or two... maybe three. >_> I forget now. Anyway, I just wanted to note that, in my opinion, you've done well to present your evidence and elaborate upon it. لennavecia 13:51, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Okeydoke. As posted, I'm happy to clarify. --Moni3 (talk) 13:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

"Keep it civil, guys" APK straight up now tell me 14:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

No no no. I will accept payment, not give it out... Dang it! --Moni3 (talk) 14:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid you'll have to plead your case at CfD. APK straight up now tell me 14:11, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Civility for deletion? I support that. لennavecia 14:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Jackie Robinson

If you have the time I'd like your input on the Jackie Robinson article. You'd commented during its prior FA nomination. Since then I've substatnially re-worked the article, and re-nominated it for FA status. BillTunell (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd be very pleased to review it. Give me a couple days. On cursory look, it already appears to be more substantially cited than it was in the last FAC. --Moni3 (talk) 16:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as you always know these things…

…and I can see you online now – do you know what (if anything) our policy is on the reliability of theses (thesises?) as sources? Amazingly, there doesn't seem to actually be anything in WP:RS about them (Vauxhall Bridge, currently ref 25, if you want the specific instance – the site itself requires registration but it's also in Google's cache here) –  iridescent  22:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Really? There's nothing on theses as reliable sources? Puzzling. I think the guideline is that unless there is just not a lot of information published, theses are to be avoided because they are generally considered not to be fact checked consistently from one professor to the next, or from one university to the next. I will defer to Ealdgyth and Awadewit on this, however.--Moni3 (talk) 22:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Butting in. There have been many conversations about this at the Reliable sources noticeboard (the most recent here with links to past discussions) and (surprise) there is no solid answer. If it's a doctoral dissertation from Harvard and the claim it's supporting is non-contentious.. sure. If it's a Master's thesis from an accredited but obscure institution and the claim is incredible... well, better to find a better source. One good suggestion is to look at the sources used in the thesis. More often than not, they will also help support the claims being made in the paper. --Laser brain (talk) 22:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

It's (I think) a doctoral thesis (architectural qualifications confuse me; Chinese architectural qualifications certainly confuse me), but from the University of Hong Kong which is certainly a respectable institution. I'm only using it to add additional background such as exact dimensions to a section that's already mostly sourceable to unquestionable RS's, so shouldn't hopefully be an issue. Anyway, the most important line in that article ("A large crowd assembled on the bridge in September 1844 to watch Mister Barry, a clown from Astley's Amphitheatre, sail from Vauxhall Bridge to Westminster Bridge in a washtub towed by geese") is impeccably sourced. For that one, I've temporarily suspended my longstanding aversion to DYK; that deserves a moment on the main page. – iridescent 22:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Risker wonders if that amphitheatre had anything to do with this. Bad Risker. 02:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

This makes sense. I checked out a University of Florida thesis once on the anthropology of Kingsley Plantation. This seems like a logical use to me since anthropology student go to Kingsley Plantation all the time, and there does not seem to be a lot of information floating around on slavery in northeast Florida. I think that would be an acceptable use. I might look askance were a UF thesis going to support general facts, information readily found in a lot of available sources, or going to support some nutjob claim that Jane Austen was channeling alien thought patterns. --Moni3 (talk) 22:55, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey, how did you get hold of my dissertation??? --Laser brain (talk) 22:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

You did a dissertation on goose-propelled washtubs? – iridescent 23:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Clowns... *shudder*. Laser brain, are you going to contact DL? I am curious and full of questions. --Moni3 (talk) 23:02, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to yes. I believe he's traveling right now so I'm waiting, because he won't correspond from the road generally. Anything you want me to ask him? --Laser brain (talk) 23:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I have a list of issues to discuss about Mulholland Dr. I signed up for his website some months ago in the hope of finding some contact info for him, but I was unable to. Tell him I said hey, and I have issues. --Moni3 (talk) 23:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

(outdent and ignore the weirdnesses...) Laser's advice is good. It's also good if you can find that someone's cited the thesis in other work too. (This happens with history thesis occasionally.) If another scholar is using it as a source, it generally helps prove the reliability. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I am glad to see this discussion as I have wondered as well....re theses that is ...(goes off to find some cool theses to ref something, anything...) Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I never claimed I could SPELL! I leave that to Malleus... (runs. Very far away. Before she is killed.) Ealdgyth - Talk 02:55, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Chill, petal. Casliber is referring to the top of the thread where it was discussed the plural of thesis, which you spelled correctly. --Moni3 (talk) 02:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Malcolm X

Thank you for your note. It is my first time on the front page, and it's a bit of a rush. :-) — ] (talk · contribs) 16:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The Giano matter

Hello, Moni3. I don't think we have interacted much, if at all, before, but from what I remember, you seem to be a fine editor and a valued administrator. That's why I am very surprised to see you write that you changed the block duration of Giano II (talk · contribs), that you knew that this was wheel warring and that you did not care.

I am not particularly interested in what eventually happens with the Giano situation (although I am surprised at the amount of drama he always seems to attract), but I have much less ambiguous views towards wheel warring. That's why I am asking you to please undo your block reduction – which is unsupported by WP:ANI consensus – or I may refer this matter to arbitration. Thanks,  Sandstein  12:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)