User talk:Tom Morris

York meetup

Hi. I was there but didn't make contact with anyone and no-one made contact with me. See my remarks at User_talk:Tagishsimon#York_meetup. Best. --GuillaumeTell 22:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Dennis E. Puleston Page notes.

Mr. Morris,

I appreciate your constructive comments on my recent postings. I was given Dennis E. Puleston as an assignment in a graduate level class. Therefore it is imperative that I work through the issues you found for me. I can assure you that Dr. Dennis E.Puleston is of great importance to the field of Maya archaeology. How do I address the notability issue in a way that is satisfactory. Also, I do not have the option of collaborating on another project at this point, as I am putting together a second page for another assignment and have a number of term papers to get done. I need to see exactly what I need to do so that I do not run into the same issues on the next go around. I will read all of the links you gave me tomorrow and see what I can glean from them. Afterward, I would love to have you review those changes if you could and give me specific references to the problematic issues.

Corey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cakerkela (talk • contribs) 20:56, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi Cakerkela, I made no specific comments regarding Dennis E. Puleston, so I'm guessing the comment is in reference to the welcome template I left on your talk page. I had a look at the article and have made a few changes:

1. I've removed the first header as it is not required.
2. I have removed the third paragraph in the lead which read as follows:

   The unique nature of Dennis’s passing is only overshadowed by the unique nature of his life and career. A brief synopsis of some of his studies is included below, but more detail can be found at www.puleston.org for those who are inspired to learn more.

   This is due to the fact that Wikipedia avoids editorializing: when writing an essay, this kind of editorializing is not necessary. Writing on Wikipedia tries to take a sort of "view from nowhere" approach (however much academic theorists deride such a style): saying that Puleston had a "unique" life and career goes outside of the style of writing that Wikipedia tries to go for. I removed the link also as links go in an external links section at the bottom of the article.

3. I changed the first section name to 'Biography' as this is reasonably customary on Wikipedia.
4. I have merged the section with the one below on childhood and education. I have removed the extensive quote from the Pulseton Sr. article that has been included. Wikipedia doesn't allow quoting from other Wikipedia articles for two reasons: firstly, they aren't reliable sources and secondly, because the text can change.
5. I've pruned the section on Pulseton's family and removed reference to the location of images. Unlike print publications like newspapers and books, Wikipedia doesn't make direct reference to the location of images (saying they are on the left etc.) as different browsers render pages differently. What may be on the left on one screen may be different on, say, a mobile phone screen or widescreen tablet. Instead, that material can be included in the image caption.
6. I changed the section heading to remove the reference to the "unique approach": again, this is editorializing, a style of writing we try to avoid on Wikipedia.
7. I've removed this: "Below are brief synopses of three of his most influential works in experimental archaeology." Wikipedia tends to avoid this kind of 'navigational' text: it tends to be that if the article needs that to be readable, then things like section headers haven't been appropriately thought out. Which brings me to...
8. I've changed the next two section headers from being "Dennis and" to "Research into", as that is the sort of style expected in the relevant section of the Manual of Style.

There's still quite a few things that need fixing. Here's an example of that editorializing style again:

While many of his resultant hypotheses are controversial, one would be hard pressed to attribute the problematic areas of these hypotheses to methodological errors, scientific veracity, or a lack of data.

Imagine me as a somewhat snarky professor: "'One'? Who is this 'one'?" On Wikipedia, we discourage original research, and so to really meet the style and content guidelines, it would be better to either attribute this response to the various critics of Pulseton to either some actual responder. I'm not familiar with the literature or the topic, but it's certainly something I'm tempted to write in philosophy articles, but I have to temper with "well, who said this?". This is important because Wikipedia is about what is verifiable.

I would say pretty much the same thing about the following statements:

1. While traditional archaeological methods rest on theory interpreted through anthropological observations and repetition of artifactual data from site to site, this approach does not bring satisfying answers to the questions that Dennis was most interested in.
2. Experimental archaeology is rare today.
3. Unfortunately, arguments of environmental change since the “collapse” of Lowland Maya societies have been convincing and have been used to undermine the approach to the point that it is now rarely practiced.
   • Specifically on this one, imagine you are writing for someone who knows absolutely nothing about archaeology, history etc. This line of thought needs attributing properly: this isn't an essay, remember. But also, a savvy but not historically-aware reader (like I hope I am) will look at this (style issues aside) and say "oh, okay, so, Puleston was interested in doing tests on societies and then there are the other guys in the field who don't do this because of the... Lowland Maya societies which have scare-quotes collapsed". I don't know about the Lowland Maya societies: what happened there? As a Wikipedian, I also read that and see point-of-view pushing. As if the concerns of the "environmental change" guys are completely worthless. That's something we try and avoid on Wikipedia: reading an article like this is supposed to help me understand Puleston, rather than convince me that his approach is correct.
4. But, if Dennis was still around, it would be easy to imagine his creative style would have found a way to counteract the detractors of experimental archaeology and his continued work would be invaluable to the field.
   • Wikipedia doesn't deal in counterfactual history.

Okay, that's a few things. There's still lots to fix, and I'm gonna invite some of my fellow Wikipedians to take a look. I hope my critique helped: it's meant in a spirit of good faith, even if the particular criticisms may at points be a bit harsh. You can see the specific changes I've made here.

Thanks again for contributing to Wikipedia. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Mr Morris,

Thank you! This is exactly what I needed. I will allot some time to this on Saturday or Sunday and let you know when I am finished. I appreciate the approach and your time. Talk to you soon.

Cakerkela {Cakerkela (talk) 12:34, 4 November 2011 (UTC)}

Mr. Morris,

I have altered the intro and Biography to help clear the notes. I will get to the rest later today or tomorrow. Thank you for your patience. {Cakerkela (talk) 19:45, 9 November 2011 (UTC)}

Mr. Morris, I believe I have addressed the issues and would love to see if I can get the notes removed. If there is more I need to do, I would love to do it soon. I added several references and some data on why he is important. I also tried to eliminate my bias for his work.Please let me know what you think when you get a chance. Thank you very much!

cakerkela {Cakerkela (talk) 23:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)}

Euthanasia and the slippery slope

Could you please explain why you think that Euthanasia and the slippery slope is an essay? A bit of a discussion, on the talkpage there, about it is usefull... Night of the Big Wind _talk 23:00, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

"Spam" warning questioned

Dear Tom, Various external links that I've added recently have been deleted supposedly as "spam", and I'm not clear why. I've read the Wikipedia guidelines and they say that external links should be added to "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues,[2] amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons."

I believe that the links that I added fall into that category. They are links to online textbooks which have in-depth analysis of the specific subjects in question. For several of these, the relevant Wiki pages are very brief and contain little or no background information, and the external links were intended to give people precise, encyclopaedia-type information which would be directly relevant to them.

If these links aren't appropriate to Wikipedia, please could you show me why? And if they are, how do we correct the decision?

Thanks for your help. Info284 (talk) 15:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tom Morris. You have new messages at Skomorokh's talk page.
Message added 16:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Skomorokh 16:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

ipad editing

Hey Tom, I was reading around for resources about editing on the ipad, and came across your helpful blog post on the subject. After playing around a bit with the concept, I liked the principle but hated the fact that the only monospaced font that the ipad uses was courier, just about the worst monospaced font possible. However, I then realised that I could use google webfonts in my vector.js to replace courier with inconsolata. I think it works better and gives a very clear ipad editing experience and thought you might like to try it out. Ajbpearce (talk) 20:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh thanks, that's a really cool idea. Hadn't thought of using WebFonts to supplement the fonts on iOS. —Tom Morris (talk) 00:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Genesis creation narrative

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Genesis creation narrative. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 15:17, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Feedback Dashboard task force

Hi Tom,

Since you were a part of the WikiGuides project, I thought I'd give you a heads-up about a new way you can help/mentor newbies on en.wiki: we've recently released a feature called the Feedback Dashboard, a queue that updates in real time with feedback and editing questions from new registered contributors who have attempted to make at least one edit. Steven Walling and I are putting together a task force for experienced Wikipedians who might be interested in monitoring the queue and responding to the feedback: details are here at Wikipedia:Feedback Dashboard. Please sign up if you're interested in helping out! Thanks, Maryana (WMF) (talk) 21:38, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Interview

Hi, I am a Wikipedian and researcher from Carnegie Mellon University, working with Professors Robert E. Kraut and Aniket Kittur. We’ve published many scholarly papers on Wikipedia and are partnering with the Wikimedia Foundation on several new projects.

I have been analyzing collaboration in Wikipedia, especially Collaborations of the Week/Month. My analysis of seven years of archival Wikipedia data shows that Collaborations of the Week/Month substantially increase the amount and nature of project members’ contributions, with long lasting effects. We would like to talk to Wikipedians to better understand the processes that that produce this behavior change.

We’ve identified you as a particularly good candidate to speak with because of your involvement with the WikiProject Video games' Collaborations, which is one of those we’ve been investigating. It would really help us if you would be willing to have a short talk with us, less than 30 minutes of your time. We can talk via skype or instant messenger or other means if you’d prefer. Do you have time at any point during this week to chat? If so, please leave a message on my talk page.

Thanks! (This my personal website)Haiyizhu (talk) 04:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Astrology

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Astrology. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 16:18, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

AFD on penis ramoval case

Existing lists are mostly consisted of events which have articles of their own on wikipedia due to their notability For example, see List of serial killers by number of victims, List of assassinations and assassination attempts, List of bank robbers and robberies, and List of kidnappings, List of unsolved deaths

almost all of their entries link to articles of their own, List of kidnappings has Mary Jemison, List of bank robbers and robberies has Banco Central burglary at Fortaleza, List of assassinations and assassination attempts has Ehud, List of serial killers by number of victims has Luis Garavito, List of unsolved deaths has Benjamin Bathurst. Very few red links are included

the only two entries at list of cases of penis removal which have their own article are John and Lorena Bobbitt and Sada Abe. the rest are all unimporant cases about a random guy mostly in china, mr joe six pack getting his penis cut off by his wife, they aren't notable, they don't have their own wikipedia articles.

These lists specifically state, "The following is a list of some of the most famous assassinations and assassination attempts. It is not intended to be exhaustive." "This is a list of famous bank robberies, bank robbers and gangs involved in bank robberies.", and "This list of unsolved deaths covers notable cases and where victims have been murdered or have died under unsolved circumstances"Bunser (talk) 04:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Media deletion dropdown reasons

For discussion on Sunday if you can help. See User talk:JamesBWatson#Media deletion dropdown. Attempting to delete an image that actually exists on Wikipedia, the dropdown list comes from MediaWiki:Filedelete-reason-dropdown. But if the image don't exist, it uses MediaWiki:Deletereason-dropdown see for example File:NU badge en.png and File:DCP 2020.JPG - not very helpful if you want to select "F2: File description page for a file on Commons". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:27, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs			Cleanup
	Muskowekwan First Nation			Enter Suicidal Angels
	Hugh William Blackadar			Derek Humphry
	Ni Min-jan			Hemlock Society
	American Foundation for Suicide Prevention		Merge
	The Suicide Twins			Jus soli
	R. J. Herrera			Haim Smadar
	Postvention			Hiba Daraghmeh
	Francisco Romão		Add sources
	Evangelical left			Primacy of the Roman Pontiff
	Mary Katherine Campbell			The Complete Manual of Suicide
	Christian republic			World population
	Suicide Bombers		Wikify
	Rory McCann			Jenifer Papararo
	Mortality displacement			Golanthara
	Aqib Khan			David Bar Katz
	Barren Lands First Nation		Expand
	Mortal wound			China
	Maurice-Régis Blondeau			André-Joseph Léonard
	Sue Rodriguez			Paul Chung

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Southern Baptist Convention

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Southern Baptist Convention. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 17:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Possibly hammering imacro javascript into wiki scripts

Hi, the source code for the abbreviation expanding macro mentioned at the wikimeet is #8 at User:Fæ/Geek, let me know if anyone is interested in taking a look at the other scripts listed and I'll paste up the source. --Fæ (talk) 08:59, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Help Me Anthea, I'm Infested

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Timothy E. Quill

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Dennis E. Puleston follow up

If you get a chance, could you please review the changes made to Dennis E. Puleston. I believe i have addressed the notes and need to ensure that I have done enough to clear the notes. Please let me know if there is more to do.(Cakerkela (talk) 00:33, 18 November 2011 (UTC))

Thanks!

Thanks for the shiny award :) I look forward to the memeage with only slight trepidation... Accedie^{talk to me} 09:20, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mythology

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mythology. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Um . . .

An embarrassing trout-related incident

Regarding this: Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. Please be careful not to delete one editor's comments when adding your own.--~TPW 13:13, 22 November 2011 (UTC) D'oh. Sorry about that. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC) No worries, I don't get many opportunities to bring out the fish.--~TPW 13:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ram Dass

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ram Dass. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 23:16, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

For agreeing that I could write this Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tom Morris ϢereSpielChequers 11:23, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

When are you thinking of going live? I'm keen to give my opinion! --Fæ (talk) 11:45, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Real soon now! —Tom Morris (talk) 11:49, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Oops!

Sorry! I reverted then undid myself. The combination of the redlink and that fact you hadn't completed the substitution made it all go wonky. Good luck at RFA! Pedro :  Chat 

You might find it a wise idea to sign your acceptance however :) Pedro :  Chat  21:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

• Tom, Pedro has made a few considerably valid points in your RfA. It'll be good form to reply to his issues. At the same time, as much as I know Pedro, he'll weigh your nomination according to your contributions, than with respect to the current issues; provided, I believe, you reply. Kind regards. Wifione ^Message 04:05, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, noticed just now. You've replied :) Thanks Wifione ^Message 04:07, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi.

I like your work you are a mastermind at editing and I need your help on something talk to me on my User talk page please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GH200 (talk • contribs) 01:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Yuppie ki yay

Hello Tom, back in June you added a reference to the Encyclopedia of Contemporary British Culture to the article Yuppie. However, it's not quite working. Would you care to see what is the problem? --hydrox (talk) 23:43, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done Fixed! —Tom Morris (talk) 00:06, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, the section title made me smile. Thanks. —Tom Morris (talk) 00:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs			Cleanup
	Devil's Crush			History of early Christian thought on abortion
	Dungeon Explorer			Ram Vilas Paswan
	Super Star Soldier			Video game console
	CPT (file format)		Merge
	V. K. Saraswat			Early history of video games
	Console application			Console manufacturer
	Aremonia agrimonoides			Exscientologykids.com
	Demetrios Kydones		Add sources
	Williams Arcade's Greatest Hits			Super Bowl
	Corel Photo House			Final Exit
	Hans Loritz			Suicide legislation
	System console		Wikify
	Installed base			FreeTV Australia
	Arm Wrestling (video game)			Bernie Stolar
	Vicious Engine			Pelican VG Pocket
	Mini Polystation 3		Expand
	Alien Crush			Video game console emulator
	Wojnowo, Lubusz Voivodeship			Theodor Duesterberg
	Imabikisō			Legal death

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:55, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tom Morris. You have new messages at FleetCommand's talk page.
Message added 14:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Fleet Command (talk) 14:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astrology

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astrology. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Eton International School

I have restored the article Eton International School so if you want to continue the AFD please reopen it. Apparently not a copyright violation since permission is granted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Ohio Wing Civil Air Patrol page

Hello,

I saw you visited my wing's page and added some requests for references. It is well, still a work in progress but I'm adding in the references and intend to have more up. I just wanted to ask what else would be required to have the bars at the top removed is all. This is my first wiki article and I'm finding it an interesting experience, haha.

Cheers, OHWGHistorian

Hi OHWGHistorian, that article looks like it is coming on extremely well! Congratulations on your hard work, and I hope you are enjoying it!

As you've put a number of sources in, I've removed the {{unreferenced}} tag and replaced it with {{ref improve}}. These are included both for the benefit of the reader (so they can proportion how much to trust an article to the quality of the references) and for the benefit of other editors, so they can hopefully find articles which have problems and need improvement. I've also replaced the "Under construction" with {{Expand section}} which is the standard template used to note that the template needs expansion.

The other tag on the article is the {{cleanup}} tag. This is because some of the formatting and reference templates could be improved to make them more in-line with the style that Wikipedia attempts to adhere to. Don't worry about that: everyone has to learn, and you are doing a really good job so far, and the prose looks like a pretty promising start. There are people on Wikipedia who spend their time improving people's prose and fixing up formatting issues on all sorts of articles. With a bit of luck, they will swoop in like helpful angels and help improve the article.

A few things you might want to do having written a new article. You might want to post a request for feedback. This will get experienced Wikipedians to hopefully come and have a look at the article and suggest ways to improve it. You may also want to submit your article as a Did You Know?: this is a short nugget of interesting information from the article that gets put on the front page of Wikipedia. I've had a couple now. If you want to do this, you'll need to be quick: you have to do it within seven days of creating the article, and it's a bit fiddly to do it right, so you may want to ask me or another experienced user.

Finally, you might want to look at WikiProjects: these are groups of users who try and improve articles on a particular topic. I added Ohio Wing Civil Air Patrol to both WikiProject Ohio and WikiProject Military History. You can join there, find people who are interested in similar topics and they can help you collaborate on improving the article, and they may be able to help improve yours. They are lots of fun and may just send you further down the very addictive rabbit hole of writing for Wikipedia.

I'm a bit busy until Wednesday, so if you've got any further questions, don't think me rude if I don't immediately answer them. If I don't answer them, some nice person I know might (talkpage stalkers, that means you). Glad you are finding it an interesting experience. All the best, —Tom Morris (talk) 22:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Howdy Tom, Thank you for the prompt and thorough reply. Hopefully this weekend I can tinker a bit more and some of my partners can provide information to fill in the gaps on the page. The "Did You Know?" submission looks like fun, and well, I might as well submit and give it a shot. I'm welcome to have folks help me fix the article up or provide helpful suggestions. Bit by bit it will be cleaned up and hopefully provide the information the general public and future recruits desire :) Cheers, OHWGHistorian — Preceding unsigned comment added by OHWGhistorian (talk • contribs) 22:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jupiter (mythology)

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jupiter (mythology). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Grats

UoL is not a terrible school! Enjoy your time there, it promises to be better than a hernia in a minefield. 72.75.123.207 (talk) 05:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Your Request for Adminship

Dear Tom Morris,

I have closed your recent RfA as successful per the consensus of the community. Congratulations, you are now a sysop! Please make sure you're aware of the Administrators' how-to guide and the items on the Administrators' reading list. Feel free to contact me if you need anything, and good luck. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll try my hardest to not screw this up! —Tom Morris (talk) 02:30, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Be bold this time! I have sent you something to love with! --Katarighe (talk) 03:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades. Here's an apply pie you can enjoy

Well done! Congratulations, sorry you just missed the wp:100 but its always a bit difficult to get there without enough opposition to pique people's interest in the RFA. There are some bits of code in my monobook that you may find useful - dropdown boxes for block reasons and so forth. ϢereSpielChequers 08:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Congrats Tom. Wear this when you're doing any scrubbing to save getting your Sunday suit dirty! .Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:13, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Kudpung! —Tom Morris (talk) 13:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Also, I gave you an apple pie to enjoy! Katarighe (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Congrats and welcome -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:28, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Boing! said Zebedee. And another big thanks to everyone who voted in the RfA. A whole day with me as an admin, and the wiki is still functioning and Jimbo hasn't sent the secret wiki-police round to my house, so I can't have screwed anything up too bad. —Tom Morris (talk) 23:32, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

From what I've seen, you're doing a grand job; keep it up. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Matt Goetten article

The seven days are up. Should that article be deleted? The creator removed that info giving no reason for doing so, have not responded to questions in the debate about it. The username is interestingly the same as a media firm that specializes in helping politicians. Matt Goetten is a client of that firm. Does not look for Wikipedia when media firms like that can get away with creating promotion.Do excuse me if I'm breaking any rules. It really makes me annoyed when people use Wikipedia for promotion. Goetten is the same guy who accepted a sketch plea deal in a case involving the starvation deaths of dozens of horses. It was reported on numerous websites in the states and I've found articles from the UK and Germany about it. No mention of that there.CamRock85 (talk) 03:39, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: November 2011

This Month in GLAM – Volume I, Issue XI, November 2011 USA report • UK report • Italy report • Spain report • Australia report • France report Mexico report • Russia report • Argentina report • East Asia report • Qatar report • Event calendar Read this edition in full • Single-page To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 13:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

AfD

Hi Tom. I just deleted E.D.O.T (Gary Houston) for you that you closed as delete at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Houston‎. It was moved by the author during the AfD. You wouldn't have known about it and what you actually deleted was the redirect ;) Happy sysoping! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:25, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Cheers for that. I had actually seen it, but just forgot to delete it. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the administry

I see it didn't take you long to get started - (RPP).--SPhilbrickT 15:14, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I've done some CSD, some PROD, some AfD and some RFPP. I still have yet to delete the main page or indefinitely block Jimbo. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Well done from me too! Brookie :) { - he's in the building somewhere!} ^(Whisper...) 12:34, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

regarding my Page Sahil kaila

Hi sir ,

i had created a page named "sahil Kaila" which is now Deleted . I want to know the reason that why that page has been deleted because i will make new page overcoming that mistakes. Thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahilkaila (talk • contribs) 19:40, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, the article was deleted for a very simple reason: on Wikipedia, all articles about musicians need to show that the musician is in some way notable. This is done through pointing to chart performance, critical reception and so on. The article you created about yourself makes no mention of such notability. In addition, on Wikipedia, you generally aren't allowed to write about yourself because of our policy on conflict of interest. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Rhys Morgan

It looks like this is mostly wrapped up now. I have to say, it has left me with a bad taste in my mouth. It seems some (not, so far, explicitly all) the legal threats on Twitter were withdrawn; none were made against me, here or anywhere, but a generalised accusation was levelled by User:doktorbuk against all of those who opposed the AfD, which includes me. That hasn't been withdrawn. This sort of thing is exactly why I usually stick to adding information to article pages and wikignoming, and avoid aggro and contention and weird threats and having to refer to lots of policies. It is also exactly the sort of thing that I imagine would drive away new editors, such as the handful of SPAs that came to say "Rhys isn't a hoax!" So. What to do. Not sure really. Advice? BrainyBabe (talk) 21:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not a drama-monger either. My first day as an admin after telling everyone that I'd stick to wikignoming, and I have to go to ANI? Not ideal!

Sadly, this kind of thing will drive away new editors, although I was trying to welcome some of the SPAs. Other than that, my views on this issue are well-explained on ANI. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

He withdrew the legal threats against Rhys and one other (in odd language IMHO); he has not withdrawn the general accusation, placed on my page among others. I suppose I will link to the ANI and try to forget it. He goes in my "editors to avoid" column, and you in my "reasonable people to deal with" one. Thanks; I'll get back to editing. BrainyBabe (talk) 22:04, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

I would just like to thank you for clearing some of the backlog of requests at the WP:RFPP, you're doing great so far and keep up the good work. -- Luke (Talk) 03:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks from Borkfisch

Thanks for the strawberries! Borkfisch (talk) 20:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Trenzalore article restoration

Hello, I lost my temper a little in the following writing. I have been apart of Wikipedia for a long time and have donated to continue the growth of this wonderful website. I have spent a lot of my time analyzing the structure of Wikipedia articles and it has taken me more than a year to get together enough material to warrant an article. Then i was met immediate resistance to the publication of this article "Trenzalore". There were no compromises just the immediate deletion of the article. I was not even given the chance to make correction to the article. Please rethink your stance on the topic at hand. Hoping for the reversal of you decision, Jerrydeanrsmith (talk) 00:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)JerryDean Smith

Wikipedia does not have firm rules. Rules in Wikipedia are not carved in stone, and their wording and interpretation are likely to change over time. The principles and spirit of Wikipedia's rules matter more than their literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making an exception to a rule. Be bold (but not reckless) in updating articles and do not worry about making mistakes. Your efforts do not need to be perfect; prior versions are saved, so no damage is irreparable.

6-month redirection is adequate. I will revert the content once the time allotted has expired. I expect no repercussion for these action. I have done a lot of research into the matter and you can find almost an entire novel in the Trenzalore discussion section with information relevant to the article that i published. Please be sure to check out the internal wikipedia links Jerrydeanrsmith (talk) 05:13, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I've responded on User talk:Jerrydeanrsmith. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Have a Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Great work and perserverance with these vandals. For the past few hours I hadn't noticed anyone else reverting, then all of a sudden you popped up with dozens of reverts. Great work!!! Sincerely, He's Gone Mental 15:09, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! We so badly need ClueBot NG back! —Tom Morris (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Rafic Hariri Bio

Mr. Morris Thank you for taking the time to manage the Rafic Hariri page. While many parts of the bio have some level of accuracy I must say that I am deeply offended and surprised by the section titled "corruption". The facts in it are not accurate and it is heavily biased towards claims (untrue and unfounded) by political rivals of the late Mr. Hariri. I am more than happy to help you correct this information and answer any questions you have, however I would ask that you remove this section or at least reflect both sides of the argument around these allegations. It is not right to try and tarnish the image and reputation of a man that did as much as Mr. Hariri did for his country and people. Regards, AMH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.28.241.20 (talk) 17:12, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Please discuss changes to the article on the talk page at Talk:Rafic Hariri to see if others agree with your concerns. I've protected the article to stop you from reverting back-and-forth. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Userpage Shield

		The Userpage Shield
		For his tireless effort protecting my Userpage from vandals I didn't even notice, it is my honor and priviledge to present this Barnstar to Tom Morris Achowat (talk) 18:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Just doing my (Hugglin') job! —Tom Morris (talk) 18:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Urgent!!!!

Mind yo own fucken buisiness stop fucken changing my shit fuck you!!! eat a mutha fucken dick. Ill beat yo ass come find me nigga i go here!

Urgent!!!!

Mind yo own fucken buisiness stop fucken changing my shit fuck you!!! eat a mutha fucken dick. Ill beat yo ass come find me nigga i go here!