User talk:Mcorazao/archive 2

Welcome

Hello Mcorazao/archive 2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Neo-Jay 04:33, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Mcorazao. You have new messages at Nsaum75's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NowCommons: File:Galveston bay area.gif

File:Galveston bay area.gif is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Galveston bay area.gif. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Galveston bay area.gif]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 06:36, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Galveston Bay Area Locator.gif is now available as Commons:File:Galveston Bay Area Locator.gif. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 06:39, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Dutch Voight and Ollie Quinn

Recently you wrote these two articles and, rightfully, put {{WPBiography}} on their talk pages. Unfortunately, you did not put any of the parameters in the template. While it would be most helpful if the parameters had values, there are bots and people that are dedicated to doing that. Please include |living=, |listas= and |class=.

Thank you for your cooperation. JimCubb (talk) 17:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of History of Galveston, Texas

Hello! Your submission of History of Galveston, Texas at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! [Belinrahs|^talktome⁄ _ididit] 18:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mcorazao. You have new messages at Belinrahs's talk page.
Message added 21:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

[Belinrahs|^talktome⁄ _ididit] 21:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Photos

I may have come across a way to get photos of "gangster" individuals. I need to brush up on copyright laws first, but I think I can get them out of online archives and/or microfilm of the Galveston Daily News, as long as its a certain number of years have passed since the date of publication; however I'm not exactly sure on that, so I'll check. --nsaum75 ^¡שיחת! 04:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Great Texas Coastal Birding Trail

On November 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Great Texas Coastal Birding Trail, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Jake Wartenberg 13:22, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Bad faith edits?

Please adjust your edit summary for the future. Since when is removing unsourced content from a completely sourced list a bad faith edit? Garion96 (talk) 18:05, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I use {{fact}} often enough, but to add these tags to a completely sourced article is just degrading the article. If your edits were blatant vandalism or something like that I wouldn't even have bothered with an edit summary but would have just rollbacked your edits. I stated in my summary "remove unsourced", you understood that, so why bother with a message on your talk? Yes, these messages are nice but sometimes you can never get anything done that way. Plus it really is (and is now done) up to you to provide sources. I didn't had time (or at that moment interest) to look for the sources myself. Garion96 (talk) 19:06, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: GA Mentor Q

Hi, Mcorazao. Sorry for the belated response, I've been exceptionally busy. Both of the articles you nominated and the DYK you nom'd look great. I understand it's frustrating that your articles aren't getting reviewed - but that's the fatal flaw with GAN. If you'd like me to review one, I'd be sure to. Perhaps you can ask another reviewer to review the other article you nominated, as well. Your "friend" as you called them should also do this. Karanacs is an outstanding reviewer who writes Texas history articles, she should be able to be extremely helpful too. Hope this helps! ceranthor 01:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

San Antonio Sporting District

Hi Mcorazao, thanks for reviewing La Amelia - I've had a look at San Antonio Sporting District as requested, just a minor query at DYK. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 16:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I can enhance the cites to the newspaper articles with quotes (in a couple of days from now). Although I didn't go this far with my edits, I have doubts about whether Eisenhower had anything significant to do with the elimination of the District (although I recognize that you cite a contemporary source for that view). His tenure there (in 1941) only lasted from July to mid-December. He was never the commander of the base, but deputy chief of staff (then chief of staff) to others. Although he received local publicity when he arrived, when he was promoted, and when he left, his name never appears in any of the local newspaper articles about the crackdown, and the articles about him make no mention of the crackdown. The Police Commissioner took responsibility for the crackdown and stated that nobody had pressured him to get rid of the District. Others in the Army (other than Eisenhower) were the authors of letters commending the Commissioner for the crackdown. I would assume he was in favor of it, but I tried and failed to find some indication in the articles at the time that he had some role in bringing it about. Wikijsmak (talk) 05:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for San Antonio Sporting District

On November 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article San Antonio Sporting District, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 01:01, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Quick advice on GA

Articles about history-related topics, should be placed in the history section. There's not really many subtopics under "history" for various regions, so placing them in the broad "world history" category is most appropriate. Placing them under "Places" wouldn't exactly fit because that's more for the general articles about the location itself. If the article isn't getting too much attention, you might try posting a note on the talk page of the WP:CITIES project, or maybe one of the local Texas wikiprojects? Dr. Cash (talk) 15:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Lottie Deno

On November 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lottie Deno, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

⇌ Jake Wartenberg 02:36, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Territorial era of Minnesota

On December 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Territorial era of Minnesota, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

⇌ Jake Wartenberg 10:21, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

You said "everybody knows that natives in the U.S. were disenfranchised." Wrong - I didn't, for instance. DS (talk) 17:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Vernacular names

I saw your post at the veined octopus (Amphioctopus marginatus) talk page, and have a couple of comments. First, WP:NC does state "Articles are normally titled using the most common English-language name of the person or thing that is the subject of the article." I agree that we should give a little more leeway for vernacular vs. scientific names, which is the reason why my test requires the vernacular name to be used at least one-fifth as often as the scientific name (as measured by Google Books/Scholar hits in the absence of a better measure). I intend the test to capture (1) whether the proposed vernacular name is substantially in use at all; and (2) whether the name is in common use. If those two conditions are fulfilled, I think the vernacular name should be used as the article title.

For the rodents I have mainly applied the test to, it works well enough, since generally no one even cares to mention them outside the specialized literature. In the case of the octopus, though, the animal is also commonly mentioned in news articles, which complicates things. I added a note to that effect on the User:Ucucha/Titles page. As for your note on the use of Google hits, I noted that my test can never be an exact one, and as an approximation it works well enough. But if you have any suggestions for improvement, I'd be happy to hear them. Ucucha 18:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I think we actually all but agree. I see the limitations of Google hits; they provide a sample (a large, though not exhaustive one) of the English-language scientific literature. That sample may not be perfect, but in practice I believe it works good enough, and I'm careful to recognize complications where they arise. One example is Aegialomys galapagoensis, formerly at "Galapagos Rice Rat"; the Google hits for that vernacular name actually often used it for a different animal, Nesoryzomys instead. You wrote that we should be "trying to find reasonable alternatives where reasonable alternatives actually exist." That is true enough, but the problem is that in very many cases the reasonable alternatives do not exist. Ucucha 19:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Atkins Nutritionals, Inc.

Hello,

My name is Andrea Davidoff and I work for RF|Binder Partners, the PR agency of record for Atkins Nutritionals, Inc.

I recently posted on the Atkins Diet Wikipedia talk page regarding some suggested changes for the Atkins Wikipedia entry. I noticed you have an interest in the Low-Carbohydrate Diet Wikipedia page, and I would appreciate your assistance in reviewing these edits. We want to be sure to follow Wikipedia's guidelines relating to corporate voice on the site, so I am avoiding making these changes myself.

Of course, any edits to the site are solely up to you, I only wish to draw your attention to this page as we feel some of the information is outdated and inaccurate.

If you wish to contact me to discuss this further, please leave a message for me on my talk page or email me at andrea.davidoff@rfbinder.com.

Suggestions for the Atkins Wikipedia entry:

1. We suggest a new section in the main entry “Scientific Support for the Atkins Nutritional Approach” as a foil to the “Controversies” section as several prominent scientists have used the Atkins Diet for a wide variety of illnesses. Some examples include:

a. Low-Carbohydrate Diets and the Brain - Eric H. W. Kossoff, M.D., Assistant Professor, Neurology and Pediatrics Medical Director, Ketogenic Diet Center Director, Pediatric Neurology Residency Program Johns Hopkins Hospital.

i. Kossoff, E. H., Krauss, G. L., and McGrogan, J. R., Freeman, J. M., "Efficacy of the Atkins diet as therapy for intractable epilepsy," From the Department of Neurology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, 61, 2003, pages 1789–1791.

b. An Updated Perspective on the Role of Dietary Saturated Fat on Cardiovascular Risk - Jeff S. Volek, Ph.D., R.D., Assistant Professor, University of Connecticut, Neag School of Education.

i. Volek, J.S., Sharman, M.J., and Gomez A.L., et al., "An Isoenergetic Very Low Carbohydrate Diet Improves Serum HDL Cholesterol and Triacylglycerol Concentrations, the Total Cholesterol to HDL Cholesterol Ratio and Postprandial Lipemic Responses Compared with a Low Fat Diet in Normal Weight, Normolipidemic Women," The Journal of Nutrition, 133(9), 2003, pages 2756-2761.

ii. Volek, J.S., Westman, E.C., "Very-Low-Carbohydrate Weight-Loss Diets Revisited," Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, 69(11), 2002, pages 849-862.

2. We suggest the addition of new scientific, peer-reviewed studies for the “Scientific Studies” section. These studies have been funded and researched by outside third parties and are backed by scientific facts.

a. Shai, I., Schwarzfuchs, D., Henkin, Y., et al., “Weight loss with a Low-Carbohydrate, Mediterranean, or Low-Fat Diet,” New England Journal of Medicine, 359(3), 2008, pages 229-241.

b. Foster, G.D., Wyatt, H.R., Hill, J.O., et al., "A Randomized Trial of Low-Carbohydrate Diet for Obesity,” New England Journal of Medicine, 348(21), 2003, pages 2082-2090.

c. Brehm, B.J., Seeley, R.J., Daniels, S.R., D’Alessio, D.A., “A Randomized Trial Comparing a Very Low Carbohydrate Diet and a Calorie-Restricted Low Fat Diet on Body Weight and Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Healthy Women,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 88(4), 2003, pages 1617-1623.

d. Brehm, B.J., Spang, S.E., Lattin, B.L., et al., “The Role of Energy Expenditure in the Differential Weight Loss in Obese Women on Low-Fat and Low-Carbohydrate Diets,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 90(3), 2005, pages 1475-1482.

e. Samaha, F.F., Iqbal, N., Seshadri, P., et al., “A Low-Carbohydrate as Compared with a Low-Fat Diet in Severe Obesity,” New England Journal of Medicine, 348(21), 2003, pages 2074-2081.

f. Seshadri, P., Iqbal, N., Stern, L., et al., “A Randomized Study Comparing the Effects of a Low-Carbohydrate Diet and a Conventional Diet on Lipoprotein Subfractions and C-reactive Protein Levels in Patients with Severe Obesity,” American Journal of Medicine, 117(6), 2004, pages 398-405.

g. Greene, P., Willett, W., Devecis, J., et al., “Pilot 12-Week Feeding Weight-Loss Comparison: Low-fat Vs. Low-Carbohydrate (Ketogenic) Diets,” abstract presented at The North American Association for the Study of Obesity Annual Meeting 2003, Obesity Research, 11S, 2003, page 95OR.

h. Westman, E.C., Yancy, W.S., Edman, J.S., et al., “Effect of 6-Month Adherence to a Very Low Carbohydrate Diet Program,” American Journal of Medicine, 113(1), 2002, pages 30-36.

3. Please elevate the Atkins Diet article from Start-Class to a higher quality rating. Related to this, we request an assessment of the article’s importance on Wikipedia’s Importance Scale.

I look forward to working with you.

ADavidoff (talk) 20:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of History of the Galveston Bay Area

The article History of the Galveston Bay Area you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:History of the Galveston Bay Area for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Dumb question

No, as the bot is a simple archive bot; it has no ability to "reject" anything. It simply uses that tag to identify sections that are not resolved, but have been sitting a while since the last response. It will eventually archive the section if there is no further posting. This is to prevent old requests from sitting on the page forever. If you wish, you may remove the tag and post a new message in the section to bump your request, ensuring it remains there until the next time it is old enough to have the stale tag applied. If you do not, and no one else responds, it will be archived eventually. I don't remember the exact timing at the moment.--Dycedarg ж 09:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

PR

You are most welcome. Glad to help. It's an interesting article on which you've clearly done a lot of work. Finetooth (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review

Thanks :) And I'll try and take a look at the article sometime over the next few days. WossOccurring (talk) 16:49, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Ya Sure ya Betcha[1]

Welcome to the Minnesota corner of Wikipedia!

• The steamboat image is from page 101 of the Gilman book, which can be viewed on Google Books. The Minnesota Historical Society has two (undistorted) versions of it also.[2], [3] The photographer died in 1893, so clearly public domain.
• The image of Little Crow is interesting. The MHS uses it in an article,[4], p. 82, dates it as 1858, and states that it was taken by A. Z. Shindler (spelled Schindler in other sources), and comes from the Smithsonian Ethnology Collection. Id., p. 96. Other sources also indicate Shindler was the photographer. I cannot however find the photo attributed to Shindler in the online database. The Smithsonian however has the image , attributed to Julian Vannerson of the James E. McClees Studio, and dates it 1857.[5] As other images from that photographer and studio are dated 1858,[6] when the Dakota were in Washington,[7] the Smithsonian may have entered the date wrong. In any event, it is reasonable to assume that the creator of a photograph taken 150 years ago has been dead for 70 years, making the photograph public domain. (See [8], fn. 4.) I don’t know when Shindler died, but Julian Vannerson died in 1875.
• Your excellent new article on the Territorial era of Minnesota has one anachronism, referring the "U.S.-Canada border" in 1818. At the time British North America would be more accurate. I would just delete the "U.S.-Canada" as the meaning is clear without it.
• Your wife is correct.

Best regards, Kablammo (talk) 00:30, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Copy edit

Hello, I have give History of Galveston Bay Area a bit of a copy edit. There were a few things I was unsure of that maybe you could look at:

• What is the "bay system"? I presume it is a natural network of streams, or something of that nature. But I am not sure, you might want to clarify that.
• Is this particularly relevant? I removed it: "although there was a previously established Spanish settlement known as Galveztown in what is now Louisiana". If not is makes the sentence it was in rather wordy. If you re add it I would make it a separate sentence.
• "They named the site El Orcoquisac and established a Catholic mission. The Spanish were not successful at maintaining trade with the natives and the post was abandoned within a few years." It would be better if you could change the end to be more definitive. By what date was it abondoned? Or about how long did it remain in use?
• "The construction of the Galveston, Houston and Henderson Railroad further spurred more growth in the region." - About what year was this?
• "o major battles were fought on the mainland shoreline but the region saw some action as the conflict moved from the battles at Galveston to Harrisburg and Houston." Its not clear to me what this sentance means. I think there is some words missing
• "Much of the Allen Ranch was liquidated opening up new development around Pasadena and other bayside communities." Why was the ranch liquidated?
• " The first refinery by the bay opened in Texas City, followed by refineries in Baytown and Pasadena." - are there years for this?
• You use the phrases "such as" and "including" and "much of" alot. In the future try to say the same thing in different words to keep the text more interesting.

You can revert or change anything you don't like. I think it pretty close to GA quality myself. It is a little choppy in places where the topics don't flow together so well. Hope my copy edit helps. :) —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:26, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Mindlessly patrolling

Thanks for your improvements to the Pasadena article. I watch about 1,800 articles and sometimes forget that there is a live human who has a continuing interest in the article! My apologies if I overstepped. My concerns, not limited to smaller places, have to do with suburban areas, like Pasadena, standing in the shadow, as it were, of larger, or better known places, like Houston and Galveston. I just wanted to be sure that Pasadena gets its due, as it were, and gives up none except where essential. It is so easy for Houston and Galveston to get public credit for something, overshadowing other area towns and cities.

Large cities have an allied problem, but I won't go into it here. I will try to be more considerate in the future. Student7 (talk) 21:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Let the fur fly

Mc-- you may be interested in this article, more specific to the North American fur trade, coincidentally called North American fur trade.

It's another on my list of articles where I have intended to do work, but have failed to deliver. (When winter comes we hivernauts tend to go into hibernation.)

Regards, Kablammo (talk) 21:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:Citing sources

Thanks again for pointing this out to me; since Free State of Galveston does follow current guidelines, this is not your problem, but I wasn't aware such a goofy change had been implemented, and do intend to argue that change in citation formatting at the talk page of Citing sources, unless someone gives me a good reason not to :) My friend has not yet gotten back to me on review of the Galveston article; I suspect she hopped a plane to Haiti to help out there. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:48, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Gulfton and the Spanish Wikipedia

Hi! I posted a request for translation at es:Usuario_Discusión:Mcorazao - I understand that you translate Houston-related articles into Spanish. You have way more fluency than I do, so if you want to translate another thing, would you like to try translating Gulfton, Houston? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 19:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks in advance! Gulfton has a mainly Spanish speaking population, so it would be helpful to have a version of the article that the population could read. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:04, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
  • A trick I use is making a draft page in one's username space, i.e. es:Usuario:Mcorazao/Whatever - And then have a native speaker look at it and correct it. Then you can move it off of your userspace into the main space. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
    • In any event, thank you for starting the stub about Gulfton! WhisperToMe (talk) 18:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Texas WikiProject on Spanish Wikipedia

I have another idea: Would you be interested in starting a Texas WikiProject on the Spanish Wikipedia?

There is a es:Wikiproyecto:Estados Unidos which has es:Wikiproyecto:California - if you are interested, I'll help post the project tags in Texas-related articles on ES. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

• I asked here: es:Wikiproyecto_Discusión:Estados_Unidos#Wikiproyecto_Texas WhisperToMe (talk) 12:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

German-Japanese relations

Thanks a lot for having a look on German-Japanese relations. I've resolved nearly all mentioned issues and would be grateful, if you could have a swift look on it again - especially on the, now defused, overly long sentences ;) --Gliese876 (talk) 23:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I continued expanding certain paragraphs including the introduction. Do you think the article is ready to be suggested as a featured article? --Gliese876 (talk) 11:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. I shall do that. Regardless of its outcome, a nomination will certainly cause additional attention for the article. --Gliese876 (talk) 17:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

On navigation templates

Well, basically there are two approaches to it. First, there's the fact that a too-broad navbox is of little interest to readers of the article. Generally, even though I might have an interest in reading Goose Creek Oil Field, I will more than likely not really be interested from reading that article in readin Drilling engineering and Chevron Corporation. And if my reason for navigating to it is that I'm already interested in the field of petroleum drilling as a whole, then most likely I am already familiar with these articles and adding them is just pointless for me as the connection is just too tenuous.

Second I believe that a navigation template that is applied beyond its scope (AKA on articles not listed in it) is "selfish" because it concentrates traffic to these articles while distracting it from the smaller articles that are more topically related to the article at hand, plus it might not direct that much traffic anyway because of the above remarks (see here for an analysis of the effect of a topical navbox). I would greatly approve of a template about, say, the Texas Oil Boom, oil drilling in Texas or the Gulf of Mexico (a poorly covered topic IMHO), or even the history of ExxonMobil that included the article, {{petroleum industry}} is just too remote, just like {{methodism}} arguably has little business in Fred Pierce Corson.

Note that yes by both these logic I think a template like {{scientology}}

Navbox application is not an exact science. Maybe a slightly better argument is that the Navbox appears much more focused on the technological side of the petroleum industry than either its economic or geographical aspects. When I meant "too broad" I did not mean that the template had a too large selection of articles, but rather that I felt it was applied to articles where it did not do much good. Sorry about that confusion. Circéus (talk) 02:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

pre-FAC review

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I haven't forgotten that I promised to help. I got sucked into the latest BLP controversy and have spent the last few days rescuing older articles in danger of deletion. I'll get back to you next week. Karanacs (talk) 21:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Potlatch River

I responded. Joe Chill (talk) 17:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I suggested an alt hook. You have been very helpful. Joe Chill (talk) 17:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Barbours Cut Terminal

On February 3, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Barbours Cut Terminal, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Not at all

I am absolutely thrilled by your detailed critique and am not at all offended by your suggestions. I'm not a religious person (spiritual yes, and sympathethic to Islam because of its cultural contributions to the Arab world, of which I am a part) and I can understand where you are coming from in the suggestions you are making. In no way do I want another reviewer. I'll need a couple of days to effect the changes you have suggested, and I hope I can live up to the challenge before me. I want to thank you for taking time to do the review and if I can manage to meet the challenge, I believe the article will develop for the better. Thanks again. Tiamut^talk 20:56, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. I just wanted to check in with you regarding the changes I made to Qedarite in an attempt to addres your concerns. I was hoping to get more feedback from you on whether you would like to see more changes made or if what has been done so far is sufficient. I believe there is a deadline of 7 days from the time you made your detailed review, which would mean time is up some time soon. So whenever you have the chance, please do come by there to take a look and let me know wht you think. Thanks. Tiamut^talk 18:59, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Tiamut^talk 19:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank your for all your help in improving the article and for the promotion to GA status. I managed to get my block reduced and come back early and just wanted to also say thanks for being understanding about the situation and doing the last bits yourself. Happy editing. Tiamut^talk 09:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Twin creeks middle school

The article Twin creeks middle school has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of meeting the notability guideline at WP:ORG.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. +Angr 17:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Qedarite GA fix delay

I don't know whether you noticed this but Tiamut is blocked until Monday. So could you leave the article on hold until she is unblocked and can make the fixes? Or, if you aren't prepared to wait, it looks as if she will accept the pictures simply being removed.--Peter cohen (talk) 15:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of El Paso-Juárez Metropolitan Area

Hello! Your submission of El Paso-Juárez Metropolitan Area at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Arctic Night 13:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Difficult article because some may consider it a content fork of the two separate city articles. Good luck on resolving this issue. The way to resolve this and still keep the article is to write about cooperative efforts between the two cities and issues about the cities, not an article about the two individual cities. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Lemme try to merge the history and see if it works. I'm going to try in a few moments...WhisperToMe (talk) 18:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Austin WikiProject

• 1. Isn't the User:TheAustinMan actively involved in the project?
• 2. I added the Austin portal tag, and I linked to the WikiProject from the portal so more people will know about it
• 3. There's also the possibility of turning the Austin WikiProject into a task force of WikiProject Texas.
• 4. I had expressed the idea of starting task forces of other areas (San Antonio, El Paso) in the Texas WikiProject. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

1. Ah, based on his edit history, his last edit was on February 13. Anyway I also notified him about the plane crash article. Hopefully he'll help with the article 2. According to El Paso metropolitan area the only county within the El Paso MSA is El Paso county in Texas. Maybe in 2010 the US gov't could redefine a New Mexico county into the MSA - that could help things. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

What official definitions do is that they provide a solid justification for the scope of a project. That way project members and the outside users have a clear understanding of what the scope is. I used the MSA as the scope for the Detroit task force when I proposed it, and so the scope is the MSA. Also, I set the MSA as the scope for Austin, and Houston uses its MSA as its scope too.

It is true that projects need to cast a large net so that they get large numbers of members. This is why, in the case of Austin, I began adding articles from surrounding counties to the project. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Which article names have parts of the history? I couldn't locate the article history parts when I first tried. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Move clarification

When El Paso-Juárez Metropolitan Area was moved to El Paso-Juárez Region and then El Paso–Juárez region, that was the original article, under a different title. When you edited El Paso-Juárez Metropolitan Area after the move, you weren't restoring the old article -- you were creating a new article at the old title, losing all the edit history which is required under the licensing we use here. Hence, when you urge people to edit the original article, you actually aren't following your own advice. It is possible to merge the histories of the articles, but I'd recommend that you just edit the article at El Paso–Juárez region, and continue to discuss the move at an appropriate venue, like the article talk page. See WP:Requested moves for more details on how to move it back properly. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mcorazao. You have new messages at SarekOfVulcan's talk page.
Message added 21:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Greater Austin

On February 27, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Greater Austin, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:05, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

thanks for the notification re: the regional proposal

It looks good so far. Am rather busy offline, but I will have some suggestions for making it more consistent with existing policies and guidelines before the end of the week. Best, Amerique^dialectics 18:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

In particular, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC encourages the use of Google rankings and other online search engines to determine the common usage of a term. Amerique^dialectics 18:53, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

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

Re: RFC, you haven't structured it in terms of a proposition to support or oppose, etc. I would put it in project space and request comments on whether it should be a guideline. It could still be effective as an essay if it does not gain consensus as a guideline. Amerique^dialectics 20:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Philip the Arab and Christianity GAN

I have replied to your offer, Mcorazao. G.W. (Talk) 23:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

San Antonio task force

Hi! After starting the San Antonio task force I'm glad that I found a dedicated San Antonio contributor who could be a part of it too - Hopefully WP Texas can use this task force to coordinate efforts in improving San Antonio articles!

One thing I notice is that there aren't as many articles about San Antonio neighborhoods compared to the Dallas and Houston projects. Would you know of any very distinctive San Antonio areas (aside from Downtown) that could warrant some good articles? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 03:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

• I have a question about Oak Hill in Austin - Is "Southwest Austin" always synonymous with Oak Hill, or is the term different? I've heard both, but I don't know if they refer to the same area. WhisperToMe (talk) 04:07, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Obviously it depends on who you ask but, the terms are not universally used synonymously, though the Oak Hill area is the largest part to most people. Nevertheless Sunset Valley would be considered by many to be Southwest Austin but not Oak Hill. Even Westgate is sometimes considered Southwest, though many would consider it more South. Take a look at Insider's Guide to Austin, pg. 362 for one definition. --Mcorazao (talk) 05:13, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying! I would have to look further to see if the Fuddruckers headquarters is considered to be in Oak Hill as well as in Southwest Austin. WhisperToMe (talk) 09:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Spanish Wikipedia Texas WikiProject

Hello! I started es:Wikiproyecto:Texas on the Spanish Wikipedia, so please stop by if you are interested! WhisperToMe (talk) 08:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

History of vice in Texas

This is a very impressive article. Great work. If nobody gets to it first, I'll try to review it for DYK purposes tonight. The fact that it's so long and detailed (not bad things, of course) makes it a bit daunting to undertake the assessment. 16:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Philip the Arab and Christianity GAR

Hey, Mcorazao. I've brought Philip the Arab and Christianity to GAR. The page is here. G.W. (Talk) 16:09, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of History of vice in Texas

Hello! Your submission of History of vice in Texas at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --Orlady (talk) 03:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Franco-Mongol alliance

Thanks very much for the comments at the GA review. I apologize for my delay in responding... The article had been nominated back in January, and I was on wikibreak for the first part of March. Just luck of the draw that that's of course when you got a chance to review it! I'm digging through miscellaneous backlog now, and will address your comments in detail ASAP.  :) Thanks for your patience, --Elonka 21:32, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I think we've addressed all of your concerns at Franco-Mongol alliance, as listed at Talk:Franco-Mongol alliance/GA1 (and thank you again, I know it's a lot of work to review a major article like this). If you see anything else which might be blocking GA status, please don't hesitate to let us know! --Elonka 00:54, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your help with the Good Article Review. The Franco-Mongol alliance article is definitely better, as a direct result of your thoughtful comments. I'd be happy to work with you again at anytime.  :) Best, --Elonka 00:00, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Johnny Jack Nounes

Thought you would like to see this, since you created the article. Regards. --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 08:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Conurbation guidelines

Thanks for your note. I'll try to give it a deeper look later. Maurreen (talk) 22:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mcorazao. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/Texas Oil Boom/archive2.
Message added 02:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Finally done! —Mono·nomic 02:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mcorazao. You have new messages at Mononomic's talk page.
Message added 15:12, 24 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I've added some responses to your comments on the review page (and I've replied on my talk page too). —Mono·nomic 15:12, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for History of vice in Texas

On March 25, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article History of vice in Texas, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 02:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

congrats on history of vice in Texas

It must have been very challenging to write, but you made it look easy. Is this a topic that you study professionally? I am so happy to see professional researchers sharing their knowledge on wikipedia.

I'm also impressed that you've managed to incorporate wikilinks to this article -- with its unconventional title -- into so many other WP pages. [9]

btw I'm writing from an IP address because I'm on a forced wikibreak from my user:Agradman account during final exams. I would love any response to to to my talk page, since I don't have a watchlist from here. (By the same token, I might not see any response for a few weeks ... :) 160.39.221.14 (talk) 06:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Commas

I've done those comma corrections I had planned to do on Texas Oil Boom. Feel free to remove any that you don't find necessary. Let me know if you have any additional questions—I haven't made any changes on the peer review page since it's been archived. Thanks! —Mono·nomic 17:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

If you want to respond to anything I said in the peer review page feel free to respond on the article talk page or here. Also, I added an RfC on the talk page for your suggestions regarding the Iconic Figures section but have not gotten any feedback. If you'd like to share more of your thoughts on the matter there please feel free.

I haven't had a chance to start going through all of your feedback and modify the article but it is on my to-dos for this week. --Mcorazao (talk) 19:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Barbecue in Texas

Thank you for helping with the article :) - I consider this to be a major part of my home state's heritage, so it really helps

Sometime when I'm back in the United States I need to get photos of Texas-style barbecue (of both Eastern and Central variations) to post.

Also on ES I am going to put "Barbacoa en Texas" in the Texas Wikiproject's requested article list. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Territorial era of Minnesota

The article Territorial era of Minnesota you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Territorial era of Minnesota for things which need to be addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:19, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Texas county histories

Thanks for responding to me on the WikiProject Texas. I feel better about what I have already done in some 40-plus counties in Texas. Given that amount, only one editor to disagree is not bad.

I've actually been using a standardized template of Texas history, deleting or adding to fit the county.

My roots in Texas go back almost a couple of hundred years, so this is something I do for Texas.

Loadmaster is a little more than over-zealous. He's still trying to convince me of his point of view.

But...onward with Texas history. My goal is all 254 counties. Maile66 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC).

Re Free State of Galveston

I will be glad to take a look at Free State of Galveston and the FAC and see if I can make some suggestions. It may take me a day or two. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the prose is overall pretty good, but will try to copyedit it over the next 24 hours, with some comments / suggestions on the talk page. Will also try to think of some mentor type comments for FAC - only have 2 or 3 so far. Sorry to be slow, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up - I have supported and was BOLD and replied to Iridscent's question. The image in question is in the Galveston infobox at the bottom of the article. If worse come to worse it could be removed (the image). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note at my talk page. I'm currently swamped in real life, so I don't think I can offer a review, but you've done a great job with the article, and by the looks of the FAC it seems like it will be listed at WP:FA soon. Congrats. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for your maintainence and improvements to the Austin, Texas article, as well. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Galveston Bay Info

Thanks Maile66 (talk) 23:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

History of Texas sidebar

Please refer to my user page. This sidebar was on the History of Texas Wiki page. Do you think anyone would mind if I borrowed it for counties? It's perfect for background history info. Maile66 (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't clear. I meant to put it, as is, on any county page I work on. No changes to it. It is so perfect as is. If that's on the county page, then all I really have to do is write county history and let that existing sidebar be a reference link for Texas history. I was just unsure about usage of something someone else has created. Maile66 (talk) 22:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for additional direction. Specifically, I'm only adding history sections to Texas county pages that already exist. I'm not doing separate history pages for any county. Within that context, do you feel it would be OK to add the template {{Texas History Navbox}} at the bottom of each page? I would be happy with that, because it works just as well. Maile66 (talk) 22:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all your insightful expertise. I believe I'll pass on creating a History of Texas Counties - the aggregate history of 254 counties would, to my perspective, be a duplication of the Texas History page. I'm sure you have a more experienced perspective. Thanks anyway. Maile66 (talk) 11:54, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Eichmann trial

The Israeli court ruled that the Israeli law regarding nazis didn't create new legal norms but only facilitated bringing the nazis into justice, and that everywhere in the world, the actions were already illegal and the nazis knew that they were illegal. And because the situation in Germany was of complete illegality at the time, they weren't punished then but justice demands that they will be brought to justice. The court also relied on prior statements of the Allies that the nazis will be punished following the war. as for the fact that Israel wasn't yet founded at the time, the court said that the nazi regime's intentions were also against the Jews in the Land of Israel at the time. Surprisingly perhaps, this is not currently at the Eichmann page either, but it's indeed an interesting subject. Amoruso (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Advice

The only other advice I had was to let people who had reviewed the article in depth know when it was at FAC. I plan to support it at FAC, and I would imagine if you let the previous PR and GAC reviewers know they might weigh in at FAC too. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:48, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

As do I. In fact, I was surpised it didn't pass. It was a wonderful read. Best, ceranthor 17:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Photo

Early 1900s. I have a photo-postcard of Murdoch's that has a stamp cancellation date of 1919 on it. I scanned it a while back and uploaded it to flickr, since the copyright has expired. http://www.flickr.com/photos/nsaum/697532228/ If you want to use it for the article, let me know, and I will upload it with proper copyright release etc. --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 22:57, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

That would be great! The section on Prohibition in Free State looks a little barren without an image and I thought maybe the article would sell better on FAC with something there. I don't know where I'd find an image that is directly relevant (like a photo of the Maceos or other gang leaders of the era) but I thought at least a photo of some famous structure in the 1910s and early 1920s would suffice. Thanks. --Mcorazao (talk) 23:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I will be here until mid May, so I'll see if I can dig up some copyright-expired photos of them somewhere... Maybe the archives at the Rosenberg Library will have something pre-1923 that can be used. --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 01:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Murdoch's Pier at 23rd and Seawall circa 1919

History Projects

Read with interest re your projects. You are correct about my interest in history, specifically Texas history. Right now, I feel I need a little more experience on the research end. I'm a bit intrigued by how so-called reliable sources on any given minutia have conflicting data. I have sometimes spent an entire day nailing down one paragraph. I also feel that every location in Texas has a fascinating story to tell - but the telling of that story depends on how well anyone bothered to document anything. You probably know I just created pages for Cherry Spring, Loyal Valley and Sisterdale - Germans are often very good at getting the story down. So, yes, you are correct about my interest - I just feel I need more experience under my wings before I take on larger projects. Maybe someday, if you still have those projects out there... Maile66 (talk) 01:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for History of Texas forests

Materialscientist (talk) 16:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Odd

I was poking around Google Maps to see if I could find some easy way to graphically represent how far apart the Lost Pines Forest is from the East Texas Piney Woods and I found the strangest thing. Thought you might get a kick out of it. Look up Bastrop on Google Maps, set it to hybrid view, zoom out until you see the text for Buescher State Park and then look to the right. Can't miss it. — e. ripley\^talk 02:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Image

Sure, I will remove it. Bureaucracy moves slow, so it may be a while before they send me a copy of the 1915 ordinance adopting it as the city symbol. Regards --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 05:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Best of luck with the FA. The article looks good, although I might be slightly biased :-) Regards --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 05:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Galveston

my pleasure Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations! Thanks very much for the barnstar too! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Article History

Next time you have an article promoted to FA, please do not manually update the {{ArticleHistory}}. The FAC template has clear instructions to this effect since as you found out there is a bot which will go through at an appointed time to do the updates. The only time this is done by hand is when the bot is not working and then it is only done by the FAC delegates. -MBK₀₀₄ 02:42, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mcorazao. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:CVU.
Message added 14:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Immunize (talk) 14:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Photo-taking

Hey Mcorazao! At times do you go on exhibitions to take photos for Wikipedia?

In the Galveston Bay area there are a lot of towns that need photos of things ("Welcome to..." signs, town halls, post offices, schools, libraries) - Galveston itself is well covered, but many places in Galveston County and southeast Harris County need photos. If it is convenient, if you want, why not try doing that.

If you want I could compile a list of places and what photos they need.

I will be back from Europe in June 2010, so I will resume photographing places in Houston at that time.

WhisperToMe (talk) 22:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see!

There's some things in Austin that are needed:

• The Texas Department of Motor Vehicles has its headquarters at 4000 Jackson Ave., Austin, TX 78731
• The Austin Fire Department is based out of 4201 Ed Bluestein Boulevard
• Also Dell used to have its corporate headquarters in two places:

• Arboretum complex: 9505 Arboretum Blvd., Austin, TX 78759.
• Las Cimas complex (Capital of Texas Highway and Las Cimas Parkway - Dell occupied Las Cimas II and Las Cimas III) (Here is a copyrighted photo of one of the buildings)

If you want, would you mind getting those places?

Thanks,

WhisperToMe (talk) 18:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

BTW, there are a lot of articles written about real estate transactions related to Las Cimas, so sometime I could write an article about that complex. I started one here: Las Cimas WhisperToMe (talk) 18:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

:-) I used to work on Las Cimas.

I'll see about finding some time to go take pictures. --Mcorazao (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks in advance :) WhisperToMe (talk) 14:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

You have removed valuable references from GPS

You have removed valuable references from the GPS article. You removed the reference providing the User Equivalent Range Errors. You have removed valuable references on the Space segment. I am the one who has contributed the more difficult work on error analysis. I hold advanced engineering degrees from both the University of Arkansas and UCLA. Who do you think you are declaring references to be inappropriate for no good reason? Undoing the terrible damage you have done will take a lot of time and effort. RHB100 (talk) 19:57, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Why don't you think more and edit less

Mcorazao, you need to start thinking more and editing less. In one of you recent edits, you changed a reference to almanac from an in line link to a numbered reference which requires that you go to the end of the page to see the site to which it links. When you do this you make it much worse. Before when I update the table I could quickly and easily navigate to the almanac and check to see if the table needed to be updated. Now with your update, when I want to navigate to the almanac, I have to use a trial and error process, navigating back and forth to the end of the GPS article until I find the particular numbered reference which links to the almanac.

It appears that you go through like a robot and make changes without bothering to think whether an in line link or a numbered link would be best. You should keep in mind that GPS is a big subject and that this going back and forth to the end of the page is time consuming. RHB100 (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

RHB100, if you continue with the personal attacks I will report you. I would recommend that you take a break from editing in Wikipedia and spend some time reading the Manual of Style. Wikipedia is not your personal blog and you cannot arbitrarily make up your own rules about about the articles. --Mcorazao (talk) 01:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I am not attacking you, I am making valuable suggestions for your benefit as well as Wikipedia. You should be overjoyed to receive this valuable information. Use a little common sense. RHB100 (talk) 02:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Infobox road updated

I just wanted to let you know that the revamping of {{Infobox road}} was completed yesterday. Included in the update were the ideas you posted on May 1 (here). Thanks again for your input. —Fredddie™ 06:07, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Great texas coastal birding trail logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Great texas coastal birding trail logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:29, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Galveston Bay

I think we might have gotten off on the wrong foot a few months ago on Clear Creek (Harris County, Texas). I apologize for that. Lately I've been editing articles about Texas bays, and I was wondering if we could collaborate on Galveston Bay and help it reach GA status. What do you say? --William S. Saturn (talk) 06:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

The article is very close to GA status already. A few items need to be referenced, a copy edit would be beneficial and I was thinking about reorganizing and expanding it in the same manner as the GA Matagorda Bay. --William S. Saturn (talk) 17:10, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Roman Imperial Church

I am glad I could be of some help. The reason I claimed earlier that "Catholic (or Orthodox) Church" did not look ambiguous in my opinion, was because, since the "Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church" and the "Roman Catholic Church" claim to be continuations of the Roman Imperial Church, I thought that term could be also used there. However, as I said, on the talk page there, I have no problem using a different term there. Cody7777777 (talk) 17:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, for me personally "Catholic (or Orthodox)" does not say that it is probably the "Roman Catholics" that are right, since I actually became more used to refer to the "Eastern Orthodox Church" as the "Catholic Church", since the EOC also refers often to herself in older documents as the "Catholic Church", you can check the "Confession of Dositheus" the Orthodox patriarch of Jerusalem, which dates from 1672, it often uses "Catholic Church", the Confession does not even use the expression "Orthodox Church" (except in the notes added by modern scholars), it uses the word "Orthodox" only when referring to the "Orthodox faith" or the "Orthodox worshippers". However, I realize now that you are probably correct in assuming that other users and readers could have thought of the "Roman Catholic Church" instead. Cody7777777 (talk) 18:16, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Afd at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/State church of the Roman Empire (formerly Roman imperial church). Johnbod (talk) 23:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

This edit reflects the sources, but may be too controversial given the present climate. I support it and its validity but submit it for your review and possible reversion given the current climate.μηδείς (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

My point is that editors who already object that there is no such thing as the imperial church or who object that the topic should only cover from 380-476 are likely to object to the idea that the imperial church could be referred to in the context of the late Middle Ages. I would respond that an idea can outlast its referent and that if scholars comment on the influence of an idea then it is legitimate for us to mention what they say. Certain editors, so far as I can even understand them, seem to object to the article based in part on the idea that merely discussing the imperial church implies that we are therefor asserting with the authority of wikipedia that there METAPHYSICALLY IS some such entity as the IMPERIAL CHURCH apart from our using that term as a convenient way to describe whatever did happen to exist independently of our ideas from it. Like I said, I am bringing the edit up to you not because I think it is wrong, but because I can see that it would possibly have an impact on achieving consensus, and that's the basis upon which I might accept its present reversion.μηδείς (talk) 19:45, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Let me know if you need my support in any disputes. I intend to revert bad edits. I have no intention of actively contributing to an article while "editors" who want the article deleted tag it in bad faith.μηδείς (talk) 01:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Roman Imperial Church

Hello! Your submission of Roman Imperial Church at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Rlevse • Talk • 23:59, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Roman imperial church

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:02, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Independent school district

Hello. In March you added a citation to a book from the "Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series published by Icon Group International to this article. Unfortunately, Icon Group International is not a reliable source - their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. [10]). I've only removed the reference, not the text it was referencing. I'm removing a lot of similar references as they are circular references; many other editors have also been duped by these sources. Despite giving an appearance of reliability, the name "Webster's" has been public domain since the late 19th century. Another publisher to be wary of as they reuse Wikipedia articles is Alphascript Publishing. Fences&Windows 17:16, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Note to self

Useful references

• [11]
• [12]

--Mcorazao (talk) 19:04, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

What to do with "Science in Medieval Western Europe"

Hi,

I've reactivated your discussion at Science in the Middle Ages, making your suggestion that we "get rid of Science in Medieval Western Europe" a formal merger proposal. Your comments would be welcome.

SteveMcCluskey (talk) 19:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

You are invited to participate in the vote at Talk:Science in the Middle Ages#Ballot box as an attempt to establish a consensus. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Sources

Vi este artículo, y thought you might find it interesting and/or useful in your endeavors. Saludos --nsaum75^{¡שיחת!‎} 05:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. --Mcorazao (talk) 14:20, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Straw poll at SMA

Hi,

Your recent edit to the headers of the poll has me somewhat confused. I thought we were talking about the sections of the SMA article, but your revised headers suggest we're now dealing with what to do with the other articles. I don't think you intended that but suggest you delete the links to the other articles to avoid any further confusion. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 14:41, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

:I guess I am equally confused. The sections are titled with explicit links to explict articles. My understanding was that we were discussing what to do with each of the articles and SMA in particular. --Mcorazao (talk) 14:51, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised by your reply; my reading of the discussion is that we were only talking about SMA; the other articles (with the exception Science in Medieval Western Europe) were not under consideration there.

One way to avoid the confusion would be to link to the appropriate sections of SMA (a version before I recently deleted them). --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 14:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Clear Creek image

I wish I had seen the discussion on the Clear Creek (Harris County, Texas) Talk page at the time, because I would have liked to weigh in that you were 100% right and User:William S. Saturn was being ridculous. Furthermore, RJN's chastisement of you was way off-base. I have said as much now on the page, and I will be stopping by to take an appropriate picture of Clear Creek to replace William S. Saturn's images.Mmyers1976 (talk) 19:18, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Bronx/the Bronx

Hello, you participated in a discussion last spring that resulted in renaming The Bronx as Bronx. There is now a proposal to open a new Request for Comments on restoring the original name. If you have comments about the timing of such a proposal, please make them soon at Talk:Bronx#Query: when do we consider this? because, unless a there's a consensus against such a Request for Comments, it will begin early this week. —— Shakescene (talk) 21:36, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Edit warring over cleanup templates. Thank you. SnottyWong ^squeal 22:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit warring at Ancient Greece

You have reverted a tag nine times at Ancient Greece since 15 September. While opening a case at mediation is a worthwhile step, it does not entitle you to continue reverting. (So many people have reverted your change, it should be clear to you that you don't have consensus). SInce you are an established editor, I assume you are familiar with the WP:3RR policy. Your last revert was *after* you were notified at WP:ANI#Edit warring over cleanup templates. There may still be time for you to avoid sanctions if you will self-revert your last change. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Should I now assume that you are declining my offer? EdJohnston (talk) 15:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

September 2010

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war at Ancient Greece. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Per WP:ANI#Edit warring over cleanup templates. The editor was offered the chance to self-revert, but declined to do so. Any admin may lift this block if Mcorazao will agree not to add any further templates to the article until consensus is reached. EdJohnston (talk) 15:42, 21 September 2010 (UTC)