User talk:Graham Beards/Archives/2010

(Redirected from User talk:GrahamColm/Archives/2010)
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Ophois in topic Taare Zameen Par


Happy New Year!

  A noiseless patient spider,
I mark'd where on a little promontory it stood isolated,
Mark'd how to explore the vacant vast surrounding,
It launch'd forth filament, filament, filament, out of itself,
Ever unreeling them, ever tirelessly speeding them.

And you O my soul where you stand,
Surrounded, detached, in measureless oceans of space,
Ceaselessly musing, venturing, throwing, seeking the spheres to connect them,
Till the bridge you will need be form'd, till the ductile anchor hold,
Till the gossamer thread you fling catch somewhere, O my soul."

—"A Noiseless Patient Spider" by Walt Whitman

Happy New Year Awadewit (talk) 05:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

John Christie (murderer)

I've become concerned about the amount of editing I've done to this article since its failed FAC without any comment from the principal contributor and FAC nominator, so I'm going to back off it now. I think there's a great deal still to do before it's got a snowball in Hell's chance of getting through FAC, but I've been here before, and I don't want to be accused of tryng to take over, or take credit for, someone else's work. The basics are there, but it needs shaking out. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:25, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I have been watching you edit the article today—in between feeding the cat and washing my pants and socks ready for next week—and I think your edits are a great help. True, it's seems odd that the principal contributor and FAC nominator has yet to respond, but there might be a good, real-life reason for this. Malleus, who the fuck is going to accuse you of "trying to take over, or take credit for, someone else's work"—it's perfectly clear what's going on; as is the value the help that you are giving. Graham. Graham Colm Talk 20:51, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
It's happened before Graham, more than once. Even with GAs, where the "owners" have accused me of "editing too quickly". Once bitten twice shy. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:40, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Not Vandalism

You just used rollback on something that wasn't vandalism. The IP fixed up a redirect. --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 21:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but there was no edit summary, I have 500 pages on my Watchlist and very occasionally mistakes are made. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm Talk 21:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Only 500? I have over 1,000 apparently, and I never make a mistake. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum 21:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
No worries. I make mistakes too. I just thought you should be aware (I've noticed a few other IPs change ILM links over the past few days and for the first one, I almost clicked rollback too). --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 22:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
(ec) Malleus, I had over 1000, but I "unwatched" all your contributions this morning :-) ! Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm Talk 22:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Very wise Graham, I only contribute shit anyway. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 22:15, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Shit can be very interesting, I spent half my life studying it. :-) Graham Colm Talk 22:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Graham! Thank you for the praise. I have attempted to address your concerns for this article. Please take a look. Thank you again. Jappalang (talk) 13:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response, I have added my support with pleasure. Graham. Graham Colm Talk 14:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

International Space Station

  The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For helping out with some astonishingly well-timed copyediting, and help on the nomination page itself, during the Fourth Battle of the International Space Station. :-) Many thanks! Colds7ream (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, my first barnstar of 2010, but I didn't do that much—just a few hours. Well done for persevering with this contribution, without all your hard work and research Wikipedia would not have the best article on the subject freely available to all. I think the article will be on the Main Page soon—but this is just a guess. It will get much attention there, not all helpful. My advice is not to panic (like I have done in the past)—any silly edits will be quickly reverted by other editors. Congratulations, thanks for the barnstar and please accept my best wishes in return, it has been an interesting FAC from which I have learned a lot. Graham Colm Talk 20:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Brad Pitt

Hi, you raised comments about the quality of the prose on Brad Pitt in its FAC in June last year. I've recently undertaken a copyedit, at the request of ThinkBlue, the nominator, and I wondered if you would be kind enough to take a look and provide a little feedback- I wouldn't be surprised if I'd missed something, so any examples of prose needing improvement or general constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time, HJMitchell You rang? 21:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'll read the article in the morning, I have some free time, I sprained my ankle on the Siberian ice that has invaded England :-) Graham. Graham Colm Talk 22:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Ouch! Unlucky! I'm sitting next to my radiator! Thanks again for your time. HJMitchell You rang? 23:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

New-fangled "You're a gem" barnstar collage

  Moni3   Colin   Brianboulton
  GrahamColm

Such a nice message to wake up to :-) Thanks Sandy, I thought you was joking :-) Graham. Graham Colm Talk 10:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:FAC#Problem_with_scripts

Which script are you referring to? Gary King (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Gary, apologies, I am having a general problem with scripts for some reason, most often with wikibits. I only had one problem, once, with one of yours but this has not re-occurred. Sorry for the false alarm. Graham. Graham Colm Talk 10:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Admin help on talk page blurb

Graham,

I wonder if you would oblige here? See my talk page for background. Please check my changes to make sure I've not slipped up with the grammar. Thanks, Colin°Talk 11:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, Graham Colm Talk 12:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I've let Raul know. Could you also amend the text on File:Measuring Ketocal.jpg for me. I want to make it clear (for anyone clicking on it from the Main page) that formula isn't the normal method of taking the KD. How about adding:
Most patients on the ketogenic diet consume normal food with the overall proportions of fat, carbohydrate and protein altered. Patients who are tube fed or are infants can take a formula like this instead.
Perhaps you've got a better way of putting it? Do I need to find a Commons admin? Colin°Talk 13:29, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
It reads OK, but you do need to find a Commons admin, sorry I can't change it. Graham Colm Talk 13:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I've put a request on the Commons Admin noticeboard. Thanks. Colin°Talk 13:57, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
If Elcobbola is around, he may help. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

FA prose

I am trying to make the prose FA-like quality. The FA star is not so important as to improve the prose. What do you think about Nokian Tyres? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I have only read the article quickly, but I didn't see any major issues. I think this sentence does not flow well, "Nokian was the first company to design a tyre with half the tread with a winter tyre pattern and half with an all season pattern to allow for year round use". I suggest checking the article for redundancy — many editors have found this advice helpful. Best wishes, Graham Colm Talk 16:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the informative link. I'm thinking of applying for FA. The drawback is the company is small and makes few products so the article is not too long. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

24 Waterfall salute!

About the article List of central nervous system infections

I decided to move this article from central nervous infection to list of central nervous system infections this afternoon. However, after the move I found that rather than being moved to list of central nervous system infections it had been moved to list of central nervous system infection , which was not what I had wanted. So I attempted to revert my move, so that I could correct this mistake, but for a reason unkonwn to me, I was unable to revert the move. Please help. Immunize (talk) 23:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

  • Immunize, you have made a right mess of this. I and other editors have spoken to you before about your maverick editing. There is a big difference between being bold and being a nuisance. Everyday articles that have been edited by you appear on my watchlist with faults that you have introduced by careless editing. The community has a policy of tolerance of editors new to the project, but patience is wearing thin. I urge you to heed the advice that I and other editors have taken the time to give you on you TalkPage. Best wishes. Graham Colm (talk) 15:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Pasted from deleted TalkPage

In looking at the history of this article and the List of central nervous system infections article, I'm not sure what has happened, but it seems to me like this page should reside at List of central nervous system infections (plural). Should we {{db-move}} it to make way for this article, or am I missing something? PDCook (talk) 17:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I can't fathom what Immunize has done this time, but the article should be plural and reside at List of central nervous system infections, or better still List of infections of the central nervous system (a red link I know). If you have the time to sort this mess out, I would be grateful. Graham Colm (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I'll go ahead and move it to List of infections of the central nervous system; that will avoid the necessity of a CSDG6. PDCook (talk) 18:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Removed my references

Hello, GrahamColm, I am just letting you know that you deleted my references, several diseases included in the list, and the references section in my new article. While I am not intending on reverting the edit that removed my references, I would like an explaination for why you removed my content and references. Thank you. Immunize (talk) 00:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC) I also noticed that you removed the category diseases of veins, lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes. I personally see no reason to remove this from the page, it was added by a fairly experienced user (MuffledThud (talk · contribs)), and appeared fully relevent. Was this removal of content an accident? Immunize (talk) 00:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you too!

  The Barnstar of Diligence
I award you this barnstar for defending the integrity of medical articles! PDCook (talk) 21:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Immunize unblock request

After his first one was declined, he's asking again and seems to understand the error of his ways. Do you have any comment (I usually don't say anything when I make these notifications, but to me a week for that, with no prior block record, seems a little harsh). Daniel Case (talk) 15:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Unblock mailing list

Hi Graham. Just for your info, the address is unblock-en-l lists.wikimedia.org, rather than mail.wikimedia.org. I don't think the latter redirects, so I thought you might want to know. :-) Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 15:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Me again

I'm sorry to bug you, but I would really appreciate it if you could spare 5-10 minutes to examine the (hopefully revamped) prose in Brad Pitt's article and provide a little feedback so any nasty surprises can be dealt with before another FAC. Thank you very much for your time. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 16:25, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Meckiff

Hi again. I've replied YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

A Gram is better than a damn

Thanks for this. I didn't know that. --John (talk) 23:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome, of course Hans Christian Gram didn't invent the stains, but the method is his :-) Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 23:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Any idea why my minor "Influenza" edit was undone by someone?

Hi, Graham. On March 2, I did a minor edit to the "Influenza" page to break up a long, convoluted sentence into point-form for clarity and ease of comprehension. As someone who always received rave comments from students regarding my teaching skills, it disturbs me that someone undid my change a few hours later. Then it appears that you reverted that "vandalism" -- thanks. But my change has disappeared again in the meantime. Any idea why? Thanks.

Myki Cassie (talk) 18:54, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I reverted this vandal's edit back to your version, then I reverted back to the edit before yours because I decided your edit contravened the guidelines. If I was mistaken, please accept my apology. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 21:41, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, Graham. I believe that I did follow the guidelines you pointed out to me. For example the guidelines say: "Do not use lists if a passage reads easily using plain paragraphs", but the paragraph I changed did not "read easily" -- that is the very reason I changed it. I used bullets rather than numbers, as the guidelines suggest. I ended each element with a semicolon, except a period for the last element, as the guidelines suggest. And since the individual elements in the list were sentence fragments, I introduced them by a lead fragment ending with a colon, and formatted each element consistently in lower case, as the guidelines suggest. I don't know what more I could have done to improve the clarity of the original paragraph. But I'll leave it up to you whether or not to change it back. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myki Cassie (talkcontribs) 04:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I am currently finding people to copyedit the article and I made the changes in the lead, as you suggested. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:53, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

The copyedit is being done now by User:SMasters. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 16:57, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Permission to remove the block notice from my talk page

It is stigmatizing to have the "you have been blocked from editing" notice on my talk page, and I would like to remove it. Can I, or is it required to leave all notices your talk page? Immunize (talk) 16:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Immunize,
Yes, I understand your feelings on this. I have created an archive of your Talk Page here. You can move any dated discussions there, just use cut and paste and use "archiving" as an edit summary. I have already moved the salient discussion there and I suggest that you could move much more—your Page is too long. I suggest you keep the most recent three weeks to one month's worth of discussion before moving it to the archive. The top of your Talk Page is very messy owing to all those templates. The link to you Archive is there and looks like "/Archive 1". Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 22:11, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Immunize (talk) 15:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I have now moved most of the old discussions and warnings to my archive, and have removed the messy templates. however, my talk page remains quite long, even when only keeping posts less than a month old. Immunize (talk) 16:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

See my response on your page. Graham Colm (talk) 17:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Is there any automatic method of archiving I could employ on my talk page, such as a automated bot? Immunize (talk) 16:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I have set-up MiszaBot for you. If there any problems please see User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo. Don't use this on any article discussion page without reaching agreement first on the article's page. Graham Colm (talk) 20:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Immunize (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Virus_classification

Hi,

on 26 November 2009 you removed the Casjens and Kings classification of virus at Virus_classification, because it has no citation. You stated that the PMID: 1094918 is the only 1975 paper you could found, "but this is on virus assembly. An the author should be King, not Kings".

Indeed, you found the correct paper. The authors are Sherwood Casjens and Jonathan King. Hence, on all other pages referring the "Casjens and King classification" the surname of Jonathan is not written correctly. The grouping can be found in this paper at page 4 in figure 1.

If you like, you can undo you deletion and cite the paper you found.

Tolot27 (talk) 23:15, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Puzzled

I just received a message from you-but there was no message. No visible changes were displayed on my talk page. Please explain. Immunize (talk) 20:19, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

See my reply to your question above. Graham Colm (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Ian Meckiff

Hi Graham. Brian has kindly completed his copyedit; can you have a look at it please and see what else you think needs to be done? Many thanks YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:34, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Displaying barnstars on User page

Thank you for the anti-vandalism barnstar. I would like to display the barnstar on my userpage, but I am not aware of how to go about doing this. Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you. Immunize (talk) 17:21, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

It's simple, just cut and paste, I have moved it for you. Graham Colm (talk) 21:16, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Immunize (talk) 22:08, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

White Ribbon

Thanks for your interest. I appreciate your interest in making the article as good as possible. Some of your ideas are okay, but there are serious problems with others. Since you wanted to make a large number of edits that seem questionable, I want to invite you to discuss them. If you come to it with an open mind, I'm sure we can work together on it. Once again, many thanks for taking the time to try to improve the article. --Ring Cinema (talk) 01:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Time to request administratorship?

I have been thinking that perhaps now is the time to make a request for administratorship, but I am concerned that I lack the experience to make a good administrator and that my RfA would fail. Do you feel that I am ready for this important position, or not? Immunize (talk) 18:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Immunize, no one can stop you requesting, but I don't think it would go well for you at this time. You have been working hard recently keeping the vandals under control, and this has gained you a lot of respect. But you still seem to be unfamiliar with many important guidelines and policies. If you have got a very thick skin you could apply a see what others think of your strengths and weaknesses. You will be asked why you need the few extra abilities and your answers must be perfect. Applying for adminship can be a very rough ride and it is not for sissies. Adminship is no big deal, many of the most respected contributors that I know are not admins. If you decide to apply, I wish you luck and hope that you at least learn a lot from the experience. Graham Graham Colm (talk) 19:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
You are probably correct that I have much more to learn about Wikipedia's policies before I could have a successful RfA. Therefore I probably will not apply. Are there any specific policies you feel I need to learn more about? Immunize (talk) 19:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
All of the ones here. Graham Colm (talk) 19:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
I feel that I probably take the edit count to much into consideration when I think about whether I am ready for adminship, and do not take my actual knowledge of policy enough into consideration. For instance, I have not read anything on the administrators reading list. I intend on doing more reading up on policy, getting weeks to months more experience, and then considering applying. Best wishes. Immunize (talk) 19:28, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Good decision and your considered reply shows that you certainly have the potential to be a good admin when the time is right. Graham Colm (talk) 19:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I am now a rollbacker, however, I still intend on waiting for some time before requesting administratorship. Immunize (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I already know I saw your user rights being changed, please read the rules carefully :-) Graham Colm (talk) 19:04, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

National Anthem of Russia

Ok, so the FAC is over and the article failed due to grammar issues. I was wondering if you are willing to take a look and see if grammar is the only issue with the article or if there was any improvements with the grammar? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:44, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

cleanup actions regarding render software

Hello, since you deleted the page about the software Fryrender, I strongly ask you to delete the following pages as well, since they violate the rules in exactly the same way. Maxwell_Render, Indigo_Renderer, Vray, Mental_ray and Kerkythea. If you do not delete these pages, I have to ask you to reinstall the Fryrender page, because everything else would be bold injustice and a shame for the whole wikipedia imho. --Morphosto (talk) 01:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I see Maxwell Render has also been tagged for deletion and there are problems with the other articles. You can request the restoration of Flyrender here, in accordance with Wikipedia policy. Graham Colm (talk) 10:40, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I requested the undeletion, but it has NOT been done, even though I included a neutral reference myself before you deleted the article. This means that the articles I mentioned above need to be checked and most probably deleted! Otherwise this would totally be an unfair outcome and a shame for the whole wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Fryrender. --Morphosto (talk) 20:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Nobel Prize FA

Hello! The Nobel Prize FA is now closed so I thought I would ask you directly instead since we can't use the FA page. You mentioned that the gallery for the 2009 winners was against the spirit of WP:NPOV which I don't understand at all. Could you please clarify? Esuzu (talkcontribs) 21:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Christ Myth Theory FAC

Hi GrahamColm, I'm grateful for your helpful comments on the CMT FAC; I've made most of the changes you've requested. I am, of course, less enthusiastic about your oppose vote, however. I'm happy to address specific instances of inappropriate POV you may mention, but the examples you've provided so far seem less than convincing. Compare the lead of the Christ myth theory against the lead of intelligent design--an article which currently has FA status. It seems that, if consistency is to be maintained, either the tone of the CMT article should be considered acceptable for FA status, or the ID article should loose it's FA status for its far more forceful denunciation of its topic in the lead (1 instance of "pseudoscholarship" vs. 5 instances of "not science"/"pseudoscience"/"junk science"). Now I think that the ID article should use the word "pseudoscience" in the lead (once or twice is probably sufficient, though; five times seems a bit much), and I imagine that you agree. So why object to the one instance of "pseudoscholarship" in the CMT article? Eugene (talk) 02:36, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Eugene, I prefer to keep discussions on FACs on the nomination pages. Graham Colm (talk) 19:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Christ myth theory and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

Thanks,

Barnstar

  The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For quick reversion of the vandalism on Virus Immunize (talk) (talk) 18:57, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Hepatitis C Image

You'll recall the little matter of the supposed Hepatitis C image on that article page. I also removed it from the Hepatitis_C_virus page. Now an editor put it back, because we should assume it was put there in good faith! Thought you'd be amused. BruceSwanson (talk) 23:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Greetings, would you have any reply for this peer review? With appreciation. - 06:25, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Help required

Hello, I have two issues which I require intervention from you.

  • User User:Ліонкінг in following link, asks for help from other administrator User:AGKto get support so he can falsely misinform other readers in Wiki. This user is already warned by admin, but still does his dirty tricks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AGK

  • 2nd issue, is another pro-armenian user User:Aregakn, who acts neutral but slowly implements armenian propaganda in Azerbaijan related articles, he warned me by saying I cause racism, despite I was just saying my opinion without any insult and also he don't have any admin rights.

Here is link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NovaSkola

Could you please take action? Big thanks --NovaSkola (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Nobel Prize review

Hello! You reviewed the Nobel Prize at WP:FAC when it was nominated and opposed it. Since then it has gone through thorough copyediting and a peer review which is nearly finished. So hopefully I can re-nominate it soon again. Before I do so I would like to ask if you could check through the article and see if the problems you had with it last time is still there? I would be vary grateful for your help! Cheers, Esuzu (talkcontribs) 14:37, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Premature FAC

Hi Graham, you said at the FAC for Distributed element filter that you agreed it was premature. Have you got any ideas how this could be prevented in the future? The article went through peer review which I thought was supposed to identify problems before it got to FAC, and as far as I was concerned, everything had been ironed out, but clearly this was not enough. There is a sister article, Mechanical filter, currently at peer review and also, on the face of it, looking like it could go to FAC. I would dearly like this one not to be such hard going. SpinningSpark 23:37, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Hepatitis B Image

I was wondering where you got the image of the virus currently used in the Hepatitis B article. Maybe we could get one from the CDC or similar organization? BruceSwanson (talk) 05:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, it's an electron micrograph that I produced some years ago when I had regular access to an electron microscope. Is there are problem with it? Graham Colm (talk) 12:27, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
I guess that you would prefer a more reliable source so I have changed the image to one from CDC. Graham Colm (talk) 11:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Exactly right. Since the Hep B virus really exists there might as well be an official imprimatur on it. BruceSwanson (talk) 04:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Gustav Mahler TFA request

I have proposed Mahler for Today's Faetured Article for 7 July, his 150th birthday. Any support for this would be very welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 22:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I was happy to add my support. Graham Colm (talk) 17:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Alternative text for images

Graham,

I'd appreciate your opinion. As you may know, the WP:Alternative text for images guideline was demoted after it became clear it had no consensus and expert opinion was that we had taken the wrong approach. I drafted a revised text which was advertised for review, ultimately installed and then copyedited/commented-on by others. It lay dormant for a couple of months until SV turned up and started editing. From my POV, there are concepts she doesn't understand and there was a structure and order to the text she hasn't appreciated. This has meant, IMO, that her edits have deteriorated the guideline and made it both wrong and confusing in places. She's insulted me by saying text was changed without due process (I took great care over that) or that text in the lead didn't match the source (you know I'm extremely fussy about this, and chose the best source too). My problem is that while she's happy to edit war to get her version, I'm not, and I've been completely unable to get across to her what is wrong with it. I'm now at the point of giving up on it. I know this request for opinion isn't neutrally worded, but I want you to know how I feel and why I've lost my temper and patience over it. What don't I get? What am I not explaining well? Why is it so hard? BTW: I'm off on holiday for a couple of days, so won't be able to read/respond quickly. Colin°Talk 07:58, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Colin, I will devote some time to this over the weekend. Graham Colm (talk) 17:53, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

FA nomination for Homologous recombination

Hi Graham. I remember your thorough review of Rosetta@home, and would like to ask for your feedback on Homologous recombination if you have the time and inclination. I've nominated the article at FAC here. Though bacterial and eukaryotic recombination garner the most coverage, there's a section on homologous recombination in viruses which may especially benefit from your comments. Regards, Emw (talk) 00:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, and sorry for the delay in responding. I have read the article and I'm looking forward to adding comments at the FAC before the weekend—I certainly have the inclination and I will find the time :-) Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 22:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Hepatitis B Genome

Hi Graham.

I have redrawn you diagram of the hepatitis B virus genome as requested. I've just placed text approximately where the labels appeared on your diagram. If you think they should be moved, or if anything else needs changing, just let me know on my talk page.

Best wishes,

Ben

 

--T4taylor (talk) 19:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ben, thanks so much for this! I have replied on your Talk Page. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 19:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Graham
I've uploaded a new version with arrows showing the direction of transcription as requested.
Any further changes or any other images you want drawing just let me know.
Best wishes, Ben
--T4taylor (talk) 20:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Ben, bloody marvellous! Please feel free to replace the one in the article and on the Commons. My original image has spread all over the Internet. You can upload your version and overwrite mine, if you want to. Graham Colm (talk) 20:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

 
Hello, Graham Beards. You have new messages at Immunize's talk page.
Message added 19:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WP:ALT

Hi Graham, I left a request for you after you reverted my edits that you explain why you find the other version preferable. I find it wordy, poorly written, and technically unclear, though I could of course be wrong. I'd therefore appreciate your input; otherwise I intend to restore the other version as a base to work on. In particular could you explain why you find the longer lead better? The section comparing the leads is at WT:ALT#Two leads side by side. Many thanks, SlimVirgin talk|contribs 17:04, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Belyayev.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Belyayev.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --IngerAlHaosului (talk) 17:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia commons?

Hi,

Do you have a wikimedia commons account? You may be interested (and your expertise extremely useful) here. Thanks, WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 01:31, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I have replied there. Please keep informed of any radical developments, I don't spend much time over there. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 13:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Parity of zero

Hi Graham! I've made some changes to Parity of zero in line with your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Parity of zero/archive1. Could you please drop by Talk:Parity of zero#Leftover FAC line items and say if you see an improvement? I'm not looking for another full review at this time; I'm just trying to measure progress.

Thanks, Melchoir (talk) 20:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

New message

Hello User:GrahamColm. Last year, during the FAC of Kareena Kapoor, you pointed out several important things that were helpful in motivating me to improve the article further. Since then, I have been working on the article. When you have the time, could you please make a comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Kareena Kapoor/archive2 so that any discrepancies can be eliminated. Thanks :) -- Bollywood Dreamz talk 04:38, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Rucka Rucka Ali

Um hello, I'm here to ask about making a blocked article, Rucka Rucka Ali. It is blocked, due to n00bs making bad articles on it. Is there any way that I can make it? Such as you undoing the block?

Arilegolego (talk) 02:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Reply to an offer you made elsewhere…

  You offered to send me an immersion objective.  I was in the midst of typing a very long-winded (typical for me, alas) response to that and several other things, when the section in which I was entering it was closed.  Anyway, yes, I'm interested in the objective.  I don't know if it'll work (it's a fairly old microscope—about forty or fifty years old—I don't know what standards there are regarding objectives and other microscope parts, nor whether this microscope conforms to any such standards) but there can certainly be no harm in seeing if it will fit, and if it does, in seeing if it will work correctly.  If there is any private messaging facility on Wikipedia, I haven't found it, but my email address (in a form that a human should be able to interpret, but spammer bots should not) is my first name (Bob) at a domain name that consists of my last name (Blaylock) under the Tongan top-level-domain (.to).  BLAYLOCK.TO is the domain name, and BOB is the username. — Bob Blaylock (talk) 00:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Bob, you can email me using the link in the column of blue text on the left of the screen. Then I can email you a picture of the objective(s) along with its dimensions, then we can decide if it will fit your microscope. I think it will, microscopes haven't changed that radically since the 1960s. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 08:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

His Band and the Street Choir FAC

Hi and thanks for the review. I've given the article a copyedit per your suggestions. I've also reworded other parts of the article. Would you be able to reply back at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/His Band and the Street Choir/archive3. Cheers  Kitchen Roll  (Exchange words) 15:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. Thanks very much for the support. I've replied to your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/His Band and the Street Choir/archive4. Cheers  Kitchen Roll  (Exchange words) 18:57, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Overlinking solved

Hello, GrahamColm. Me and Flyer22 have solved your concern of overlinking back at the Titanic FAC and your opinion on the work is requested. Secret Saturdays (talk to me) 22:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Shortcuts

Armbrust (talk · contribs) added a bunch of new shortcuts to various guideline pages, including MEDRS, which is why it showed up on my radar. When I checked his contribs I found the others, the first of which to WP:RS (here) had the summary "WP:RSWP=Reliable source walidation process =-)" implying the editor thought the whole thing was a joke. Another of the shortcuts wasn't even an abbreviation of the page. I believe the addition of shortcuts like RSMED to a guideline with a single well known shortcut like MEDRS is unhelpful. The guideline is known by its shortcut rather than by the page name (which appears to have been changed while I was on Wikibreak and I can find no discussion on the matter). I reverted most of the added shortcuts, but not all. Armbrust has now reverted all my reverts. Since he is edit warring with me, I'd like a third opinion. Thanks. Colin°Talk 21:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying. I think the best course of action is to nominate the shortcuts in question for deletion. Graham Colm (talk) 17:43, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Article review

Hello, I found your name under Natural science peer review volunteers. I've been working on the Toxin-antitoxin system article and have nominated it for peer review. I would like to get the article up to GA status but I'm not sure what needs improving. It is certainly shorter than most GAs but that reflects the specialist nature of the topic. A potential problem is some of the more complex explanations being poorly made, this is why a peer review from other molecular biologists such as yourself would be really useful :) If you have time to make a few criticisms and recommendations at the peer review I would be very appreciative, Thanks Jebus989 17:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, sorry for the delay in my replying, it's an interesting topic. I'll take a closer look on Sunday. Graham Colm (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for taking the time to do that review! You have made excellent comments which will really help improve the article. I will do my best to implement your advice over the next few days :) Again, thanks Jebus989 07:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:May Day Parade 1957 Moscow.jpg

 

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:May Day Parade 1957 Moscow.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - Burpelson AFB 18:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

His Band

Sorry about the sources issues. I can assure you I wasn't trying to be deceptive; I interpreted some of the information in one of the books incorrectly, which turns out to be quite significant. I've resolved all the issues Agadant has found. Sorry and thanks  Kitchen Roll  (Exchange words) 19:56, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Ebola

You bet me to addressing the recent edit at Ebola adding jaundice to the list of symptoms. As it happens the CDC do list jaundice as a symptom of Ebola, but I reckon that the rest of the edit you reverted was dud. I was going to chop out the qualifying statement, and link to jaundice. Lavateraguy (talk) 18:50, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it was the "proteins in the liver" statement that was misleading. Thanks. Graham Colm (talk) 05:40, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Roger Waters

Many inprovements have been made to the article since you last reviewed it. We could use your input at the FAC discussion. — GabeMc (talk) 23:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Edward Elgar

Hello, Graham. You contributed last April to the FAC for Adrian Boult. I have now nominated for FAC the composer with whom Boult was perhaps most associated. If you have time and inclination, any contribution you care to make will be greatly appreciated. Regards. – Tim riley (talk) 10:48, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Virus

I noticed for a while that the "Replication" section of "Virus was not entirely accurate. I left it alone for a while, as it was a featured article. But as you seemed to be fixing it up, I made an edit about HIV. Hope that is ok. Also I noticed you asked about the ICTV classification of Badnavirus. It appears to be a genus, not a family. 68.197.174.59 (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, of course it was OK, and thanks for taking the time to edit the article. I wasn't sure about the status of Badnavirus, so thanks again. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 06:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Prose Check

Hi GrahamColm! I've found your comments very helpful in the past and was wondering if you could look at the prose of 1949 Ambato earthquake (at FAC). It would be greatly appreciated. ceranthor 21:06, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Ceranthor, I made a few tweaks, [1] I hope they help. Graham Colm (talk) 10:46, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Toxoplasma and The Colour Out of Space

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Toxplasma.png Dear Mr. Colm, would you grant us a license to include your depiction of Toxoplasmo gondii in our film's featurette? We have adapted H.P. Lovecraft's "The Colour Out of Space" and in our making-of-video I will be explaining some scientific examples of real-life parasites which could be capable of altering behaviour of humans and animals. Your name will be attributed but since the DVD will be commercial, we would need you to license us the image without the 'ShareAlike'-part. Please contact me under huanvu@online.de - you can find information about our film project under www.die-farbe.com

Best regards, Huan Vu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.2.187.161 (talk) 03:56, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I have replied by email and I have granted you a waiver [2] Graham Colm (talk) 11:06, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

recent edits

I find your quick response to all and everyone of my edits to be in serious violation of terms of use of Wikipedia. In all the articles in was not noted the involvement these several figures had with Freemasonry. All my entries were sourced and valid, in no case to represent any type authority that exceeds my own or that of the sources. To my entries were non-encyclopedic is to portray an arrogance that is forbidden from the uses of wikipedia. I've no other intent but to report your activity as soon as possible as you use also traced and followed every successful post I had made. You reveal yourself as a third party sensor that believes all knowledge of Freemasonry and members activities should be sequester. This is against the greater purpose of Wikipedia that you've decided to betray. I am extremely uncomfortable with your action of stalking my entries to delete them. Some of this research has taken me numerous hours to contribute.

Ryan Kutschke

Wikipedia says "Please post only encyclopedic information". I could not see anything in your edits that were relevant to subject of the articles. If I have violated any of the terms of use of Wikipedia, I am sure that my fellow Wikipedia administrators will quickly tell me. I am not a censor. My actions were entirely intended to protect the integrity of Wikipedia. Every article has a page for discussing intended changes to articles. It is important to make use of these before adding material that might be deemed controversial or poorly sourced. Graham Colm (talk) 01:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for History of viruses

Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

History of viruses

Very pleased to see this turn up on my watchlist. I know you've just started, but I have two questions already.

  • The lead says "The history of viruses began in the closing years of the nineteenth century." Is this the history of viruses or the history of human knowledge of viruses?
  • Is "antiquity" defined as "historic, before the middle ages". So would Neanderthals be "prehistoric". Can we say or speculate anything about viruses prior to humans?

Colin

Hi Colin, blimey you're quick off the mark! I only stared the article today! For some time I have felt that page–length constraints forced me to précis the discovery section of Virus, and that more should be said about this subject, which I find interesting, and hope others will too. It is meant to be a short history of viruses as we have now come to understand them, and I felt that it would be wrong to give the impression that viruses suddenly appeared on earth at the end of the 19th century. You are right in that Neanderthals pre-date antiquity, but I wanted to get the idea down before I forgot it. Now doubt, later I will have to move it. There is a lot that can, and will, be written about viruses before the emergence of Homo sapiens. I intend to add and "Origins" section that will be similar too, but expand on the section in Virus and I hope will do more than speculate about the role of viruses on Earth before we came along. I am still researching this section and this will be reflected in Amazon's annual profits for 2010. I think this article provides me the opportunity to write using fewer technical terms that can put off readers. Some will be inevitable when I start to write about the emergence of life and the role of viruses in evolution. Having said this, I only have a rough sketch of the finished article in my head at the moment and I value input from other readers – hence a somewhat rushed and premature "posting". You will have noticed that I have recycled some of the text we wrote for Virus and I gave attribution in an edit summary. This is mainly to give me a framework around which I can build a new narrative although I think some duplication will remain. I am keen to redress the balance/bias towards human virus infections that has been, a valid, criticism of my earlier work, and this will be a new challenge for me. I don't fully understand the concept of content-forking, which I have seen used as a criticism of other articles and I would value your views on this. Any comments about, and edits to, the article will be very much appreciated. It's early days. I am curious to how it turned up on your Watchlist. Is it because I just self-nominated it as a Did You Know? Trust me this is not vanity, it was and attempt to attract more editors to the article and it seems to have worked already. Best wishes. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 22:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Your user/talk page is in my watchlist and I saw you create (and then move out of) the linked sandbox. I've got the article watchlisted now. I won't pester you with queries on every unpolished thought you write down. Just couldn't help myself. I'm just glad you're writing again. I don't know about "content-forking" either. I thought you admins were supposed to know everything. Colin°Talk 22:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Between me and you, and despite my working hard on the project for over three years, many would be shocked if they discovered just how little I know. Some days, I still feel like a newbie :-) Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 23:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
I've suggested an alternative hook, if you've got a second could you take a look? It's a pretty amazing article for a DYK newbie! (Thanks for your mopping earlier on too) SmartSE (talk) 15:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I have replied on the discussion page and I am happy with your suggestion. Graham Colm (talk) 16:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk about "quick off the mark"! This article is only two weeks old and is already at FAC. I forgot about your request. You know I love to read your articles. I will try to find some time. Colin°Talk 08:05, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Too late!

Too late, I already saw it, although how a cunt can possibly be twat-faced (or come to think of it how it can't be) will have to remain a mystery.

But I really came to thank you for taking the trouble to read through William Cragh's FAC, and of course for supporting its promotion. Malleus Fatuorum 20:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

And I thought I was dead quick :-) Some people have an IQ six standard deviations on the wrong side of the median. No need for thanks Malleus, William Cragh is a damn good read. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 20:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
My IQ has always been a mixed blessing. Luckily though, as I get older I get dafter. Or is it lazier? Perhaps it's both. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 20:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Same here, I've just watched the X-Factor :-( Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 21:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Ervin Staub

Hello GrahamColm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ervin Staub, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Courcelles 23:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Rodolfo Carbone

Hello GrahamColm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Rodolfo Carbone, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Courcelles 23:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Anil Verma

Hello GrahamColm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Anil Verma, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A full professor isn't A7-able. Thank you. Courcelles 23:08, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Monika Zguro

Hello GrahamColm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Monika Zguro, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Courcelles 23:09, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Vladislav Finagin

Hello GrahamColm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Vladislav Finagin, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This one is borderline, but I'm going to say being a mayor is a credible claim of "importance". Thank you. Courcelles 23:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Ma Xiaonian

Hello GrahamColm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ma Xiaonian, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Courcelles 23:13, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Gert Spaargaren

Hello GrahamColm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Gert Spaargaren, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Courcelles 23:13, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Craig McKean

Hello GrahamColm. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Craig McKean, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Founding a notable band is enough to get around A7. Thank you. Courcelles 23:16, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Crap, I didn't realise so many of these had been tagged by one person, one consequence of the script, I guess. Of these eight, I'd say at least three wouldn't survive AFD, and two would be debatable. (I generally don't consider full professors to be A7 material, because AFD's tend to split down the middle on them. I also admit I may be a little stricter on A7 than the average.) Courcelles 23:51, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
No worries, I understand the usefulness and the limitations of scripts and I understood the reason why the messages arrived here. Please continue, we all need to use scripts. My comment on your talk page was simply a note of gratitude – that's all. Thanks again. Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 00:06, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Robin Paul Weijers

Hi, I removed the db-bio tag you placed on this article. There is a credible claim to notability (that he founded a company). You should try to prod or AfD this one if still believe he isn't notable. ThemFromSpace 15:05, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I did the same with Özcan Buze. If you want to delete unreferenced BLPs you should try the PROD process, since even an unsourced BLP is ineligible for A7 speedy deletion if there is at least a credible claim of notability. ThemFromSpace 15:16, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, yes thanks for the advice. Graham Colm (talk) 15:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Taare Zameen Par

Hey. Just checking to see if I had addressed your concerns at the Taare Zameen Par FAC. Thanks. Ωphois 20:23, 16 December 2010 (UTC)