Misplaced Pages

User talk:Huon: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:25, 9 July 2013 editHuon (talk | contribs)Administrators51,324 edits Review of Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Epiphany Eyewear: reply← Previous edit Revision as of 04:56, 9 July 2013 edit undoTazerdadog (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers9,032 edits Talkback: new sectionNext edit →
Line 365: Line 365:
:At a very short glance I'd say two parts should be improved: Firstly, you have a very long list of "External References". Those that are reliable sources and actually discuss Epiphany Eyewear in some detail should be turned into references proper: Summarize what they say about the glasses, and cite the source in a footnote. The others should be removed. Secondly, the "Reception" section. That's useless in its current form. Summarize what those publications have to say about Epiphany Eyewear, and cite your sources, don't just say that reviews exist. Were the reviews positive? Negative? Mixed? Why? The section doesn't say. :At a very short glance I'd say two parts should be improved: Firstly, you have a very long list of "External References". Those that are reliable sources and actually discuss Epiphany Eyewear in some detail should be turned into references proper: Summarize what they say about the glasses, and cite the source in a footnote. The others should be removed. Secondly, the "Reception" section. That's useless in its current form. Summarize what those publications have to say about Epiphany Eyewear, and cite your sources, don't just say that reviews exist. Were the reviews positive? Negative? Mixed? Why? The section doesn't say.
:On an unrelated note, I've just tagged ] for deletion. Unless the Washington Post released the article under a free license, that's a copyright violation. ] (]) 01:25, 9 July 2013 (UTC) :On an unrelated note, I've just tagged ] for deletion. Unless the Washington Post released the article under a free license, that's a copyright violation. ] (]) 01:25, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

== Talkback ==

{{Talkback|Tazerdadog}} ] (]) 04:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:56, 9 July 2013

thanks

Appreciate your answer to my question regarding my article submission. Have a lovely weekend. Adam Silverstein (talk) 15:57, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit to Burnley

Thanks for your advice. I'll try a new user name. The previous information is over 5 years old and some claims are incorrect. I could include it but other local towns don't seem to include old statistics, just updated new ones? Thanks again for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burnley College (talkcontribs) 20:25, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

The Organization Workshop

Hello, Huon, I think that the 'new look' AfC should be ready now for at least a preliminary viewing. I am still trying to get my head around how to do the internal 'wikilinks', and I hope I'll eventuall crack it - in the meantime, though, you will see that I have subjected the text to some 'harsh discipline', especially in the area of drastically slimming down the notes. I have also added one final (External Links) section at the end which you have not seen before(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 11:37, 4 June 2013 (UTC))


Re: supra. Re: wikilinks - still not getting the hang of it. The html5 video playback does not work on my laptop. I tried the University library, but theirs do not support either. So I have to do it manually. When I tried to enter (‘’A Future’’ 2000 p.15) by inserting: <ref name=’’A Future’’2000-15/>, I cant find nuffin, either in the body of text nor in References? Will keep trying. (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC))


Wednesday morning: making some (slow) progress in the wikilinks department now. Probably not perfect yet. Re: 1.^ A Future, Carmen&Sobrado (Eds) 2000. A Future for the Excluded]. de Morais bio: chapter 2 (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 08:18, 5 June 2013 (UTC))


Unfortunately I find myself more busy this week than I expected; I'll take a look at your references (have you read WP:Referencing for beginners or Help:Footnotes?), but I may not find the time for the once-over I promised. Huon (talk) 08:36, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Understood, Huon, thanks for telling. Yes, I am being guided at the moment by WP:Referencing for beginners. In the meantime, will keep honing away at the text: I managed to slim down the references to a mere shadow of their previous (inflated) size. Will have to have a look at Help:Footnotes, too. Cheers (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 08:58, 5 June 2013 (UTC))


Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Sandom and associated Talk Page". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot  01:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:4RoundBracket-Byes-NoSeeds-2Legs

Thanks for the help. It looks like it is working just fine. I'll start using it in some articles. So far it looks great. Thanks again! --MicroX (talk) 04:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for the help on the bracket. I really appreciate the help. MicroX (talk) 21:16, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome; I was happy to help. Huon (talk) 21:23, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Syria map

Important - there is an argument to the discussed change of Syria map template, which you have taken part of here|Syrian civil war detailed map talk page; and a consequent vote is ongoing at Template talk:Location map Syria#Should Israeli-controlled part of Golan be in different color.3F. Please present your opinion there.Greyshark09 (talk) 09:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for Redirect: Plug and chug

Here's a source for the redirect request you recently declined:

http://books.google.com/books?id=hdw2CbhoFIQC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=plug+and+chug+problem&source=bl&ots=_ceiTna2Au&sig=VsrTjWuFi7CwwxwtCJIkE-1_S24&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vw21UcelIqrqiwLDtYDABg&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=plug%20and%20chug%20problem&f=false

Now what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.213.26 (talk) 23:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Now I have created the redirect. Thank you for your contribution to Misplaced Pages. Huon (talk) 23:33, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.213.26 (talk) 23:34, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Clarification Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/William A. Cohen

Thanks, Huon, for your help. In the past an editor wrote that a USAF Major General is by definition notable. Nonetheless, the references to confirm notability include the Air Force Biography (afb), book review, university awards (Claremont Graduate University and California State University, Los Angeles web pages), and the nomination of his latest book as best marketing book 2012. These in addition to the opaque Who's Who, where I found the Israeli jet info. I am revising the submission. Can I send it to you, once that is done, so that you can compare it against your suggestions/comments and tell me if I have adequately revised the piece? If so, how do I do that?Flairdrive1 (talk) 23:03, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Those university websites are not independent sources on their own alumni and thus don't help to establish notability. Similarly the Air Force is his former employer, not a third-party source. If, for argument's sake, Cohen were an incompetent bumbler who was promoted only because of his seniority, the Air Force would be unlikely to say so. I would expect better sources to exist; for an Air Force general that's indeed very likely, but we'll still have to find those sources.
If you want me to take another look, you can drop me a line here on my talk page. Alternatively you can simply submit the draft for another review. Huon (talk) 23:23, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

The Organization Workshop

Hello Huon: as per my talkpage message yesterday, I think I am now 'done' with 99% of the latest copyediting. I am at the moment still making some changes/additions to the last (Controversy) part, especially, as you will see, a new caption on 'non-political' resistance/opposition to the OW (clientelism). cheers (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 11:07, 11 June 2013 (UTC))


Hello Huon: I posted on my talkpage this morning (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 15:04, 14 June 2013 (UTC))


Saturday afternoon: Dear Huon: received your copyedit for which a warm vote of T H A N K S !! I was going to send you a comprehensive reaction to all the points you made, but in the meantime this must serve as an intermediary answer: since your copyedit came in at 15:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC) there have been a couple more notifications on my personal email, one of them, when I checked, with the puzzling dodger comment which was inserted AFTER you did your copy edit? re: Comment: Please submit this asap - it really needs to be in mainspace. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:28, 15 June 2013 (UTC) (??). Before being able to send you a comprehensive reply, I was still trying to chase your re: The draft cites a 2012 paper by Labra & Labra, but the link for that source instead points to a 2011 paper by Andersson, Carmen and Labra Comment: It would help if you could plz pinpoint where in the AfC exactly the problematic Labra&Labra ref appears. What I do know is that in this AfC I n e v e r (consciously!) referred to a ‘2011 Andersson, Carmen & Labra’ file. What I “think” this may be about is the 2011 ‘The Organization Workshop’ article which got me in all that terrible OTRS hot water in the first place,(remember?: the article that stood me accused as having copied from myself. . ) and which I thought had been removed from the web, but mysteriously must have crept in again?? I have not been able to verify this as there are a lot of ‘Labra&Labra’ refs and the text and you were not telling me which ‘Labra&Labra’ ref is causing the problem? On another note: on my talkpage today you are telling me that you removed the External Links altogether from the AfC, but I notice that they actually all still are there? Anyhow, this is merely a preliminary reaction and I will be answering more in extenso later. Many, many thanks again in the meantime!(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 17:24, 15 June 2013 (UTC))

The Labra & Labra 2012 paper is in the biliography: Labra, Isabel; Labra, Ivan (2012). The Organization Workshop Method. Seriti, S.A.: Integra Terra Network Editor. It links to this paper on capacitation. All the "Labra & Labra" references in the text link to that one bibliography entry.
Regarding the external links, I meant those in the article proper, not in the "external links" section - what I removed wholesale was this:
Other enterprises (Brazil) e.g.: the COOTEDAM andCOPROSER Cooperatives.
Roger (Dodger67)'s comment is a very good sign: I'm not the only one who thinks the draft's issues are resolved and that it should be moved into the main articlespace. Huon (talk) 17:51, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: yours: The Organization Workshop Method. Seriti, S.A.: Integra Terra Network Editor. It links to this paper on capacitation. All the "Labra & Labra" references in the text link to that one bibliography entry

Hello there again, Huon – oops, that was a honest mistake – I would never have ferreted that one out unless I had had my nose rubbed into it. The correct url is: http://www.seriti.org.za/phocadownloadpap/OW/OW%20Method%20Laboratories.pdf and I corrected it already in the bibl in the draft. What do I do now? Should I, as dodger suggests - (bravo! – what puzzled me that he was so QUICKLY ‘au fait’ of the latest developments!) – should I, as he suggest, press the ‘submit’ or leave whatever remains to your very competent hands?

PS: care to know how I feel? I feel like a 10 ton load is slowly lifting from my shoulders. Cloud 9,ere we come (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 18:43, 15 June 2013 (UTC))

Yes, I think you should submit the draft. I stand ready to accept it, and apparently so does Dodger67. I'm fully aware of the massive amount of work you've invested, and for a new article this is far above average (admittedly there's more to write about OW than about the newest band with a few albums and half a tour, or about yet another dot-com company).
Do you happen to know of any freely licensed (or public domain) images that we could use to illustrate the article, for example of de Morais or of an OW? Those aren't necessary, but they'd be a nice touch. Another suggestion would be to nominate the article for the "Did you know" column on Misplaced Pages's main page that highlights the best new articles - I don't have much experience with that, but in my opinion this article should qualify. I'll gladly take care of the technical details of the nomination, but of course you'll get the credit as author. Huon (talk) 19:26, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Dear Huon: my cup runneth over! If there are any medals to be handed around, I know on whose chest mine would land. I'll have to check my Picasa pictures file, but that will have to wait for tomorrow, as I am truly exchausted. . .And, ok, with a little trepidation, I'll go and press that submit button now. Feeling lighter, lighter, lighter. . (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 20:25, 15 June 2013 (UTC))


Hello, Huon: I am almost ‘back to normal’ now: I have only one eye and the Misplaced Pages ‘nano’ script was an etra challenge, especially on a notebook. I started my search for a suitable pic – with ‘suitable’ being the operative word: one ‘large group’ looks surprisingly much like the next large group of people, ie what proves that this is not eg an Assembly of God group, rather than 'An OW' – tricky! {Rafaelcarmen (talk) 19:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC))


RE: 17 Monday - Images for the OW article: Hello again Huon: I have now a good selection of pictures for the wiki article to choose from. They are all sourced from either Integraterra in Chile or from seriti in South Africa. The two sources have already delivered the pics by email(most are images in Powerpoints, some with text, eg the explanation of the 850 Matzinho participants in Mozambique is integrated in the powerpoint, which is handy: no possibility for mistaking this group for a Seventh Day’s Adventist convention!) I have already looked into the ‘how to’ (upload images on wiki) and it is clear that I need to have the permission of the owners of the images and that the owners (or I, on their behalf??) have to obtain an OTRS number. Before proceeding any further, I would welcome any advice you could give me on this issue at this stage. Many thanks again (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 17:38, 17 June 2013 (UTC))

It's a little more tricky than that: Permission to use the image on Misplaced Pages is not enough. With some exceptions (which don't apply to this article) Misplaced Pages only accepts images that are released under a free license so that everybody may re-use and modify them for any purpose, including commercial purposes. The copyright holder would have to release the images under such a license (preferably the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License). Then the image can be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons (a central image repository for all Wikimedia projects including Misplaced Pages) via their UploadWizard, and a confirmation email should be sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org - an example release form is here.
I'm not sure whether the Commons accept PowerPoint files; it may be necessary to extract a JPEG or PNG image. I wouldn't be overly concerned about the risk of the images being mistaken for something else - that's what image captions are for. Rather, I'd expect that an image of one of the "large groups" will drive that point home much better than words alone. Huon (talk) 21:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

The Commons' picture of the day

Tuesday morning: thank you Huon for these as usual concise and precise instructions. In practice this means that, just as for the AfC itself, I am feeling like a novice again and starting on yet another learning curve, this time starting with 'how do I extract jpg from pp'. Being a slow learner, all of this will take me some time (sure it will!), but I'm confident I'll get there. One question, though: once I'm 'there' what is the next step, I mean, how to go about integrating the (now licensed) images into the text?: do I go into my sandbox, edit, upload and save? And, supposing I have done everything correctly, will this result into the images actually appearing in the actual article which is now online? I told you, I'm a novice! (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 08:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC))

I'm not really an expert on images, and much less so on PowerPoint. It might be possible to upload a PowerPoint slide or an entire sliedeshow, but I can't remember ever seeing that. My rather primitive suggestion for "extraction" would be to take a screenshot and to save it via MS Paint or the like, but I just took a quick look at the OpenOffice equivalent to PowerPoint, and it has an "export" option that allows saving slides in a wide variety of image formats - I expect PowerPoint also has such an option which would be much more comfortable than the screenshot approach.
Once the imageg is uploaded, adding it to the article is the easy part. I have added an example image to this section; the file is File:View from Humboldtbox - Berlin Cathedral.jpg (with the orginal at the Commons, see commons:File:View from Humboldtbox - Berlin Cathedral.jpg - files uploaded to the Commons will automatically be available on Misplaced Pages), and the code that displays the image here is ], where the "thumb" parameter creates a thumbnail in an appropriate size. For more details on displaying images see the picture tutorial. Huon (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Tuesday 15.00hrs: believe it or not, since I posted this morning I have successfully extracted jpgs from powerpoint (using ‘Paint’ in the Accessories). So I have the jpegs-minus-pp on file now. The next thing I am planning to do is to send (respectively) to Chile and S Africa and ask the ‘owners’ to fill in the Wikimedia ‘permission’/’donation’ form. I presume they then will be getting a number from Wikimedia which I then can use to upload the images onto Creative Commons. Not quite sure of the exact sequence yet. Am differently occupied at the moment but I will take the process forward tomorrow. (One step at a time !) Thanks again for the help.(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 14:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC))

If the owners are okay with the uploading, my suggestion would be to do it the other way around: Upload the images first, then have the owners send the mails to OTRS and have them refer to the specific uploaded images. That way it'll be much easier for the OTRS people to know what those permission mails are about, and they can add the appropriate tags to the image pages. Huon (talk) 14:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Stop with the page moves

... until this is discussed at the project page. They are potentially disruptive. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 21:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

And your own moves didn't require prior discussion? See also WP:BRD. Huon (talk) 21:57, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Anne Delong is messing up again

Dear Huon:

Once again I have made a mess and I come to you for help. I found three copyright violations that had been declined for other reasons and I thought that I could resubmit them and use the script to decline and speedy them. However, this resulted in the decline messages being sent to me instead of the proper user. I asked for help at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Pritch London:, but there is conflicting advice and I am afraid of making it worse. Can you fix this up? Please? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:24, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

The articles already have been deleted; I don't think I can do anything about them any more (nor would we need to do anything about them, except possibly notify the author if that hasn't been done). Regarding the procedure, my suggestion would have been yet another one: Don't bother with the AfC submission templates at all, simply tag the drafts for speedy deletion and leave a note at the authors' talk pages.
If you want to submit an article on another user's behalf, therer's a way to do so: The {{subst:submit}} template can accept a username as a parameter. For example I could submit a darft on your behalf by adding {{subst:submit|user=Anne Delong}}. Then a review would notify you, not me. Huon (talk) 18:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I didn't know about that. Can I just pick up the notifications from my talk page and move them to the talk pages of the editors involved? The messages don't have a user name on them. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good, if you know the editors involved. I would have had to dig them out of Rankersbo's contributions, and I'm much too lazy for that... By the way, I don't see how this counts as "messing up". You helped us get rid of multiple copyright violations, in my book that's not "messing up" but "good work". Keep it up! Huon (talk) 20:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
No, they shouldn't be in anybody's contributions but mine. I submitted the pages, so that would be my contribution, then I declined it, blanked it and speedied it, so that was me, and the only thing that went wrong was that the messages went to the wrong person (me) instead of the editors who should have received them, and they are probably wondering where their articles went. I will move the notices if I can figure out who they are. —Anne Delong (talk) 20:39, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Since the articles have been deleted, their histories is no longer available. From what I gathered, Rankersbo originally reviewed the articles and has notified the authors; those notifications would be what I'd be looking for to identify the authors. If you know the authors or have edited their talk pages, that would be much easier. Huon (talk) 20:50, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Nholz99/sandbox: APSE

On the APSE wiki page, I am not exactly sure how to go about this. Do I need to find you newspaper or magazine articles that support what I have written? No one has ever written the history of APSE until I did. I interviewed everyone who was involved in the formation and continued development of the organization. These are first person accounts, not opinions. I read the wiki article about using sources such as these and there was a section that stated this:

Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves, without the requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:

  1. the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
  2. it does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities);
  3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
  4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
  5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.

I feel that the article I wrote meets these five requirements. If I am wrong in this please help me figure this out. Thank you.Nholz99 (talk) 02:55, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

If no one else has ever written about APSE before you did, that draft is original research and not appropriate for Misplaced Pages. There are two problems with your interview approach: Firstly, our readers have no way of verifying what those people told you because those interviews weren't published. Secondly, you should have another look at the fifth criterion you listed above: Your article is almost exclusively based on such sources, but it should primarily be based on third-party sources. If no such third-party sources exist, the organization may not be notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Huon (talk) 03:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

The Organization Workshop

Just now I managed to upload a test picture: http://commons.wikimedia.org/File:MeansofProduction.jpg. I will do some more and then contact the owners for the OTRS. Not quite sure about 'how' and 'where' to insert the picture file in the wiki OW article: 1. Am I 'allowed' to change my own article now and is this done in the to me familiar 'sandbox' mode (edit-->save)? 2. I will want the picture(s) to appear in a precise location in the text. How do I pinpoint that precise spot. Sorry if those questions sound a bit 'basic' to you, but I am still learning. Thanks again. (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 10:58, 19 June 2013 (UTC))

You can edit the article just as you edited the draft. You can determine where the upper end of the image will appear; I'd usually choose the beginning of a paragraph. Take the example image I added above: I placed the image code immediately above the "Tuesday morning". The article text will automatically flow around the image. I've also added two of your uploaded images to the article; please move them around if you think they're better-suited in other places, or change the captions - I'm not really happy with the wording of the "early days" caption. File:OWfreedomtoorganizewithinlaw.jpg has a very low image quality; I'd probably not use that one. Huon (talk) 15:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Wed 18.00hrs: I had been planning to do everything one step at a time (spent some time still perfecting pp extraction – could not get the size right), then uploading, and the next step was going to be tomorrow ie the owners emailing the relevant urls for OTRS (one of them is travelling today and out of computer/signal range until tomorrow)- but I see you have been far ahead of my hesitant 'first steps': barnstar! I find that the introductory black&white pic (albeit a bit on the large side) lends ‘gravitas’: it is obviously a historic document (although even in the 90s OWs had been happening for a couple of decades previously) and as such I presume 'low picture quality' is one of its. . .qualities(?). The ‘early days’ was the caption in the original (seriti) pp before I extracted. You are right, there is no mention in the article of ‘early days’ as there was no space for this, but ‘as a rule’ groups tend to hang and mill around like headless chickens for an average of three days, before they ‘get organized’ ie democratically elect a steering (management) committee (the previous self-appointed "leaders" 'trying to do everything' having failed miserably. In Africa, they will just sit and sing. If they don’t make it beyond this point, the OW flounders, but instances of this are extremely rare. Clodomir’s method is not for nothing ‘scientific’ : it is repeatable and events predictable. I was planning to use images sparingly, as the borderline between ‘measured’ and ‘garish’ is very thin. Well, I will see now how to replicate the excellent demonstration you gave, Huon. Still a nagging worry: if I can editsave pictures/texts does that mean anyone else can?(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC))
While the article may not mention "early days" it does mention the initial phase of anomie; I've added the ""early days" image to that paragraph. For the image at the top I had deliberately increased the size; on the one hand it's a very detailled image which could well do with more than the standard "thumbnail" size, on the other hand there was the whitespace next to the table of contents which I thought we could use as well. If you think I overdid it, you can change the "400px" parameter in the image code.
Indeed anyone else can edit the article as well; for example Khazar2 already corrected some typos. That's nothing to worry about; Misplaced Pages is a collaborative effort. If someone changes the article in a way you disagree with, you can easily undo those changes, though if it's not obvious vandalism you may want to also leave a note at the article's talk page to explain why you reverted those edits. One word of warning: Reverting back-and-forth is known as an "edit war", is strongly frowned upon and may lead to blocks; there is a "three-revert rule" to prevent edit warring. Instead it's preferred that editors who disagree discuss the issue on the talk page and reach a consensus. To see whether others changed the article you may want to add it to your watchlist (if it's not on the watchlist already); I've added it to mine as well and will keep an eye on the article. Huon (talk) 18:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

14:00 hrs - just uploaded some more pics - am contacting owners for commons permissions and will then decide which ones to use in the article (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 13:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC))
OK, great! Thanks so much for your effort! File:LaurelOWClosingCer..jpg seems an accidental duplicate of File:LaurelOWClosingCeremony.jpg; if you want I can tag it for deletion. Just out of personal curiosity, there's a "Welcome to the English course exhibition" banner in the background of that image - it's probably not relevant enough to add to the article, but do you know why the course exhibition was held in English? Some event for the OW's international organizational backers? Or is it the exhibition of an English course that taught language skills, as an equivalent of the carpentry and confectioner skills taught? Again, that's probably irrelevant for Misplaced Pages's purposes, I'm just curious.
Anyway, all the pictures are nice; I especially like File:ContractnegotiationSAfrica2012.jpg for the illustration of the interaction between PO and FO (I take it the person at the right is a representative of the FO while the persons in orange T-shirts belong to the PO?) and File:Laurelvocatskills2005.jpg for the vocational skills (File:LaurelOW2005VocSkills.jpg could also be used for the latter purpose, that's mostly a matter of personal preference, but, having done neither myself, the images suggest confectionery requires more of a collaborative effort than carpentry and thus would be a better representation of the OW's core principles). Huon (talk) 14:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

17:40 I found an old email of 11 November 2005: “English” was top of the list, with 143 subscribers(on the pre-OW applic list: (more later)

ÉXITO EN LA CAPACITACIÓN MASIVA OUTCOMES OF THE LARGE GROUP CAPACITATION PROCESS: Inscripción en curso: Subscribed to the following Courses: Inglés English 143 Computación Computer137 Fieltro – peluche Felt/Plush 53 Artesanía country Country artisanal craft 35 Electricidad Electricity 25 Proyectos Projects 16 Repostería Confectionary 104 Corte y confección Fashion couture and Tailoring 46 Mecánica 49 Mechanics Belleza 91 Beauty products Mantenimiento de computadora Computer Maintenance 46 Ebanistería Cabinet making 18 Manipulación alimentos Food processing 34 Electrónica Electronics 29 Lista de espera Waiting list 100

¡NO ESPERE Y COLABORE! DONT WAIT AND JOIN!(Rafaelcarmen (talk) 16:41, 20 June 2013 (UTC))

Ah, the subtle ambiguities of the English language! My first reading was completely wrong. Thanks for satisfying my curiosity! Huon (talk) 18:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

19.45: my broadband had cut out the moment I hit 'save', so I thought this (above) had failed to go thru -Preparing the OW is one of the 3 tasks of the FE framework(see wiki article!). The PE (Participants Enterprise) organizes, among others, a post-OW fiesta, where all products and services elaborated during the OW are exhibited, and that included here, apparently, the banner in impeccable postOW English. . .

I don’t know where the ‘delete’ tab is for the ‘Closing Ceremony’ duplicate, so, yes, please. Uploading will be a job for tomorrow (1 step at a time) – will try to keep pics to the minimum, though. Re: carpentry- these guys will have set up some kind of post OW cooperative enterprise, so the division of labor principle is still there. Thnx again for your comments and help {Rafaelcarmen (talk) 18:53, 20 June 2013 (UTC)}

I've tagged the duplicate Commons image for deletion. Regarding carpentry, I assumed as much, but I'd say an image of the lone person sanding that door doesn't illustrate the division of labor quite as well as the image of the bakers and decorators. As I said, that's a matter of personal preference and I don't insist on a specific image; those are just the ones I liked best. Huon (talk) 20:57, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Friday 10.00 From the same retrieved 2005 email: they were 600, not 400 - re

EL DIA 18 DE OCTUBRE INICIO SE INICIO EL LABORATORIO ORGANICACIONAL DE TERRENO EN LA COMUNIDAD DE CORREDORES CON 618 PERSONAS. A DIFERENCIA DE NOSARA EN ESTE CASO LA INICIATIVA NO SURGE DEL APARATO INSTITUCIONAL SINO DEL SECTOR SOCIAL ESPCIALMENTE COOPERATIVO DE LA ZONA. EL 4 DE DICIEMBRE SERA LA CLAUSURA DESDE AHORA LE INVITAMOS On 18 October 618 people of the Community of Corredores started an Organization Workshop (OW). The difference with Nosara -- (NB, also in Guanacaste, one of the poorest districts of Costa Rica - where a series of OW's took place, and are still on-going starting in 2002) -- the Corredores OW initiative did not come from the Institutional Establishment but from the local social sector, especially the Cooperative sector of this Zone. The Closing Ceremony will take place on the 4th of December to which we invite you all. (Rafaelcarmen (talk) 09:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC))

Disambiguation link notification for June 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Religion in national symbols, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prayer shawl (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Reply at Template talk:Tanzanian ministries

Hello, Huon. You have new messages at Template Talk:Tanzanian ministries.
Message added 03:14, 22 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

AfricaTanz (talk) 03:14, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
Thanks for sorting photo upload for me Kaul784 (talk) 15:31, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, but all I did was fix a typo. Huon (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

The Organization Workshop

The Articles for Creation barnstar
on the day 25 June that the last and final (Costa Rica) OTRS came in, a special Guidance Barnstar in appreciation of the perfect Zone of Proximal Development guide in my 'first article' wiki-Capacitation process Rafaelcarmen (talk) 17:04, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, though you did all the hard work, and I truly appreciate it. Huon (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Handsome

Fancy a date? ;) xxxxxxxxxx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.103.42 (talk) 21:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Zsolt Felcsuti

Dear Huon


Thank you giving me help at the help desk. I modified my article, giving references where weren't enough and I deleted those parts which couldn't be covered as Misplaced Pages standards require.

Please make your review again at my article.


Thank you in advance, Josef.smith1222 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josef.smith1222 (talkcontribs) 23:54, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't speak Hungarian, and I don't have access to the Financial Times, one of your best sources. Thus I'm probably not the best to review your draft. Please resubmit it via the "resubmit" button in the "submission declined" message box. However, I don't think the new source will suffice; for example, for all I can tell it doesn't mention Felcsuti's father or his "graduation as Technician". Huon (talk) 00:41, 29 June 2013 (UTC)


I don't want to disturb you, and I am sure it's not easy to translate Hungarian to English but in the Manager Magazin source they write this about Felcsuti:

Felcsuti Zsolt (41) A műszaki érettségi megszerzése után kereskedelmi közgazdász, majd marketing-szakközgazdász képesítést szerzett.

In English: After he graduated as technician Felcsuti gained International Business Administration and Foreign Trade at first, and then Economics and Marketing.

His father is mentioned on the MPF Group's website, in the about us article. I tried to make new cites which can help confirm me.

Thanks for your time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josef.smith1222 (talkcontribs) 10:29, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you so much! It was really bothering me that his name is spelled wrong. But no one would change it. So I thank you a lot. May God bless and reward you heavily. I will also add to Maytham's page over a period of time. There is a lot about Maytham and I hope that he gets recognized around the world. Once again thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabranos (talkcontribs) 07:32, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Imran khan on 1971 genocide

I didn't mention but I also added a lot of Misplaced Pages links . Almost every single fishy fact is covered by the Misplaced Pages articles. And the video I uploaded It was live on TV and Imran khan himself was viewed there. So it is beyond any debate. The words you have mentioned is ideological form of the conversation he had on TV which is shown in the video. "Haam apne logoke sath keya kia...etc" obviously doesn't express a realization a simple mistake. Also there is to mention the wiki based references I'd request everyone to check out before making any baseless accusation .hakaluki88 17:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asheq Siddiquee (talkcontribs)

Misplaced Pages does not consider itself a reliable source. See also WP:SYN: No original synthesis please. I don't think any of the other sources out there on Misplaced Pages will discuss Khan's stance, so they are irrelevant here. I won't understand the video so watching it is no use, but I'm immediately prepared to believe that you reproduced the "ideological form" - also known as "propaganda". For example the number of victims is highly disputed, and you used the highest estimate out there. Does Khan discuss the number of victims at all? The wording throughout that section is anything but neutral and unsupported by the given third-party references. Also, the grammar needs work. This discussion should take place at the article's talk page, Talk:Imran Khan. Huon (talk) 17:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
One of the most accurate and knowledge helpers on ##wikipedia-en-help, Huon shows a large passion for helping others and reaching out to their questions regarding Misplaced Pages. Being one of the most active and determined helpers, I award him the Barnstar of Diligence! Excellent work, Huon! JustBerry (talk) 01:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Enjoy a cookie for all of your hard work! JustBerry (talk) 02:05, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thanks for being on the IRC talk channel to help me! Matty.007 18:49, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Taliban

I'm saying that why the Taliban has wide support from Ethni Pashtun.see it. João bonomo (talk) 15:27, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

That alone does not make them nationalist. Nationalism is a matter of their goals, not of their base of support, and I haven't heard that they wanted to create a Pashtun nation. Why discuss this here? Huon (talk) 17:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Hi Huon,

I just want to say thank you so much for fixing up the article on Zuo Shu Zhang. Misplaced Pages needs more users like you who are prepared to fix anything thrown at them.
By the way, I was sorting the article as part of WikiProject Notability, a project aiming to eliminate the current backlog of articles of unclear notability. At the moment we need to sort 57,713 articles dating back to January 2008! Jackc143 (talk) 20:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

US civil war battles

Hi as American Civil War is a subcategory of each of 1861,2,3,4 and 5 it makes sense to add the specific year to each battle I think. Tim! (talk) 07:17, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

WP:CAT disagrees, especially as those battles already tend to be categorized not by war, but by campaign. Adding every tiny skirmish to the top-level "Conflicts in X" category will make those unmaintainably large. Huon (talk) 07:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
When cats become "unmaintainably large" the usual process to is to create subcategories but the campaigns don't work because there is no guarantee that they don't last for more than one year. Tim! (talk) 20:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Sharpe Rowland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (state) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for your help at List of field marshals and grand admirals of the Third Reich. Much appreciated! RetroLord 14:30, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Organization Workshop

Updated DYK queryOn 7 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Organization Workshop, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that from 2000 to 2002, over 100,000 Brazilians participated in Organization Workshops, creating over 3,000 startup companies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Organization Workshop. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:04, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Huon. You have new messages at RadioFan's talk page.
Message added 22:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RadioFan (talk) 22:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

my page marked for deletion

Hi there. Seems as if you made my page for myself Mark Yaeger, marked for deletion, stating there are no notable sources. I've put everything I can find on there, but as a composer there isn't too much available publicly. There are audio interviews of myself, several official and unofficial pages, twitter, IMDb - which should be the most reliable source as it cannot be altered. I want to remove all warnings on my page, as all requested biographical info is properly cited, and if anything, I am writing as a auto-bio and can prove my identity; therefore all info is correct.Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks so much

None of your sources is the kind of reliable, independent source Misplaced Pages content should be based on. IMDb is expressly not considered a reliable source for biographical information due to their lack of editorial oversight; see Misplaced Pages:External links/Perennial websites#IMDb. If that's indeed the most reliable source to be found, then you unfortunately are not notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Also, writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged due to the conflict of interest. If you feel you do satisfy Misplaced Pages's notability criteria, you should try and add reliable sources to the article to support your claims, and you should comment at the deletion discussion: WP:Articles for deletion/Mark Yaeger. Huon (talk) 19:19, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Review of Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Epiphany Eyewear

Hi Huon: I reworked Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Epiphany Eyewear incorporating your suggestions and would like your feedback again. You've been very helpful. Appreciate your Talk with me. Thank you, 301man (talk) 23:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

At a very short glance I'd say two parts should be improved: Firstly, you have a very long list of "External References". Those that are reliable sources and actually discuss Epiphany Eyewear in some detail should be turned into references proper: Summarize what they say about the glasses, and cite the source in a footnote. The others should be removed. Secondly, the "Reception" section. That's useless in its current form. Summarize what those publications have to say about Epiphany Eyewear, and cite your sources, don't just say that reviews exist. Were the reviews positive? Negative? Mixed? Why? The section doesn't say.
On an unrelated note, I've just tagged commons:File:EpiphanyEyewearWSJ-11Nov2013.pdf for deletion. Unless the Washington Post released the article under a free license, that's a copyright violation. Huon (talk) 01:25, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Huon. You have new messages at Tazerdadog's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tazerdadog (talk) 04:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)