User talk:LeadSongDog/Archives/2008/June

24 million

Your change to the lead on Alzheimer's disease may have removed ambiguity about the extent of "affects" but reintroduced the false statement that the 24 million is cases of Alzheimers. It is an estimate for dementia as a whole. Since there doesn't seem to be a reliable estimate for AD worldwide, we need to find a way of saying that the 24 million is for dementia, of which Alzheimer's is a common cause. Colin°^Talk 06:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Took another go at it. See what you think.LeadSongDog (talk) 15:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Too much jargon, too much information for the lead and the plural "dementias" doesn't work. Rethinking the "is the most common cause of dementia, which affects an estimated 24 million people worldwide." I think the extent of "affects" isn't really a problem. I don't think anyone's expecting a figure for indirect affect (where would one draw the line anyway). Perhaps we should take this to the talk page? Colin°^Talk 16:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Doing so.LeadSongDog (talk) 19:21, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Mergers

I was just clearing out the backlog of merge tags. These tags were old and I missed the discussion which was not labled specifically as a "merge" discussion, a limitation to a bulk process. If you feel that the mergers should happen just do it. There was plenty of time for discussion and objecion. Be bold and good luck. --Kevin Murray (talk) 14:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Karin Schäfer

Hi, as you recently edited and improved on that article, I'd like to ask you: Do YOU feel that article to be "stub" class? (I do not ;) according to FAQ). Please reply in the article's talk page rather than elsewhere. TX, WeHaWoe (talk) 12:28, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Oil shale geology

Hi, LeadSongDog. I am going to nominate the Oil shale geology article for the GAN. However, I think this article probably needs some more editing and improvement before the nomination. Maybe you are interested to take a look on this article? Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 09:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:RSUE

You may be interested in this proposal to revise the text for articles using non-English sources. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 04:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Katie edits

Regarding your huge mass of edits here, couple of questions. Does "year" matter over date? I'll have to admit that 90% of those references were done by me, and I always use "date" for year. I'm not sure it matters, but maybe you know. Also, when I do references I use, ISBN-13. Both ISBN-10 and ISBN-13 are linkable with Wikipedia, and I thought the more modern ISBN number was 13. But I might have been drinking at the time.  :) OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 03:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure, but I think that some of the citation templates, databases and helper bots have some difficulty with partially specified date. ISBN-13 is more modern, but the tools don't all handle it yet. (please don't ask me which: I've forgotten...) LeadSongDog (talk) 04:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

No mention of ISBN-13 on Template:Cite_journal#Usage. I note it shows distinct use of year versus date.LeadSongDog (talk) 16:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Disgusted with Arbitration Committee

This decision in the OrangeMarlin case should make any thinking person want to retch. They've decided to take the "arb" part of their name way further than anyone should accept. Secret hearing and all. I won't be editing for a while. Lets see how long it takes before the appeal is launched. LeadSongDog (talk) 20:13, 27 June 2008 (UTC)