User talk:KumiokoCleanStart/Archive 2

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 02:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK nom ... another ..

• ...that Captain Julien Gaujot became so jealous when his brother was given the Medal of Honor that he vowed that he would get one too? by Kumioko

I added a link to his brother, but I suspect this article needs a summary opening intro to make this a B class. Is it possible to put inline citations on the key facts (DYK like this). Oh and I'm one of the other 7. OK with the hook? Victuallers 12:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

On 7 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Julien Edmund Victor Gaujot, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 02:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Use of "public domain" templates in References section

Hi. I noticed that you have recently been adding the {{DANFS}} template to some articles. This template, as well as the one for Marine Corps citations, is meant to be used with specific text from the public domain source is part of the article, not when the source is simply used as a reference. In the case of some/all of the recent {{DANFS}} additions, such as Harold C. Agerholm, these were simply citation.

I see the purpose of these templates as two fold:

1. For complete documentation.
2. To let editors know that "copying" of the text is not a copyright violation, as the text is in the public domain. This helps to avoid tagging for copyright violation.

— ERcheck (talk) 13:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Referencing and citations

You asked:

“ ....when you have 2 sites with like information, like the Marine Corps whos who link and DANFS (for the sake of this we'll say the date and place of birth). Which one takes precedence or should you use both as inline citations. My intent was to use both as citations in case 1 stops working and to help validate the information. ”

If it is a case where the DANFS site is used as a citation for a ship named for an individual, I'd use the DANFS site for the inline citation — as DANFS is a definitive site for information about USN ships. If a url link goes dead, it often still be accessed from archive.org. Nonetheless, keep the "accessdate" entry to help with this; in addition, since such sites are actual references for creating the article, they should be kept as reference.

“ ....more specific to the Medal of Honor citation. I can list at least 5 sites that display the Medal of Honor citation and I was wondering if it was appropriate to list them all as references and or inline citations. Essentially ending up with 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 in brackets after the citation. ”

I would not use all of the site, just one, if they reference exactly the same information. Personally, I prefer to use a USMC site for USMC recipients — so Marines Awarded the Medal of Honor. For the Medal of Honor citations, I prefer to use a miliary site over something like MedalofHonor.com (which I do use for biographical referencing).

Generally, not all sources of information on a topic need to be/should be included. For "References", these should be the sources specifically used to develop/create the article and which provide reliable sources for the information. Likewise inline citations are used to provide specific validation of statements in the article.

If a {{DANFS}} site is the initial site on which an article is based, then it should definitely be included as a reference. If it repeats information that is in the Who's Who site, then, you might consider adding it into the "External links" section as a site of interest.

Certainly, not all sites that speak to the article's subject should be included. For example, if you have a "blog"-like source/personal website that provides information from a reliable source, site the reliable source.

For links such as "Find-A-Grave", I add that to the "External links" section; only including it in the "Reference" section if it is specifically used for creating the article/is the only site with certain information.

Hope this helps. — ERcheck (talk) 14:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

FYI: Archiving your talk page

FYI. I note that your talk page is getting long. Check out Help:Archiving a talk page — you might be interested in archiving some of the oldest entries. — ERcheck (talk) 14:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Andre W. Brewster

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Andre W. Brewster, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/awbrewst.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:47, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

James Machon

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of James Machon, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.homeofheroes.com/moh/citations_1862_cwh/machon.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

See note below: The citation text is from the U.S. Government, and has been copied by HomeofHeroes.com. Homeofheroes does not hold a copyright to this public domain text. — ERcheck (talk) 18:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

About the Arlington National Cemetery website.

FYI. At first glance, one might think that the [Arlington National Cemetery website http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/] is a government website; and, thus assume that the material is in the public domain. However if you scroll to the bottom of their home page, you will find the following disclaimer:

“ This is a privately owned and maintained, not-for-profit, website which is supported privately. As such, it has no affiliation whatsoever with the United States Government or the United States Army. Accordingly, the content here is solely the responsibility of the Webmaster. This Site Is (c) Michael Robert Patterson 1996- 2007, Except Where Noted. ”

I have often found that many of the biographies posted are taken directly from U.S government biographies (though I don't usually find the credits given on the ANC website; I find this when I check it against other sources). The ANC profiles often include obituaries from news sources (often credited). The ANC site is a creditable source, but text cannot be copied.

— ERcheck (talk) 16:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

This note was spurred by the #Andre W. Brewster note above from the bot. I went to the page and did some re-writes. The ANC page did not have any sources for the bio listed (did I miss it)? Often, with the USMC Medal of Honor recipients' profiles, the ANC profile is a copy of the USMC Who's Who page. — ERcheck (talk) 19:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of James Machon

A tag has been placed on James Machon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. —Coastergeekperson04^{'s talk}@ 17:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I've contacted the admin who speedy deleted this as the "copied" text is the MoH citation, from the CMH (U.S. Army) site, and is in the public domain. Homeofheroes, though it has a copyright notice on its main page, does not hold the copyright to any of the military citations. — ERcheck (talk) 18:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

As a courtesy, rather than overturning the admin's deletion, I left the note so he/she can review the reasoning. If for some reason, the admin does not respond in a few days, let me know. I'll restore and contact him/her again. — ERcheck (talk) 18:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Public domain tag.Yes, a "public domain" tag would probably help, as would a <ref> tag to the source. Check out the full citation that I added to the deleting admin's talk page — if the full details (publisher=U.S. Army Center of Military History, United States Army), then it is very clearly stated and editors/admins won't have to check on the link to see where it lead, which would be the case if only the "title" were included. — ERcheck (talk) 18:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

James Machon

Yes, I was in error. It has been restored; I'm really sorry. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, Keilana^talk_(recall) 21:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I added a public domain note to the reference section. — ERcheck (talk) 21:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year, my Marine brother. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser

Hi,

I have approved you for AutoWikiBrowser. You can download it from here. Good luck!   jj137 ^♠ 16:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Please uncheck whatever AWB option converts <references /> to {{reflist}}.[1] Per {{reflist}}, "there is no consensus that small font size should always be used for all references". Gimmetrow 03:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter — Issue XXII (December 2007)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007)
Project news The Intelligence task force has been created. The contest department has completed its ninth month of competition. The top scorer this month is Blnguyen, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter, with 8 points, and Redmarkviolinist, with 6 points. Blnguyen also remains the overall leader, with 162 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries. Help with converting deprecated infoboxes is needed; any assistance is welcome! {{WPMILHIST}} now supports an explicit tag (class=DAB) for marking disambiguation pages.	Articles of note New featured articles: Battle of Albuera Battle of Dyrrhachium (1081) Battle of the Gebora Constantine II of Scotland Francis Harvey Vasa (ship) Wulfhere of Mercia New A-Class articles: 1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing Evacuation of East Prussia
Current proposals and discussions A discussion about minimizing terminological ambiguity has begun.
Awards and honors Blnguyen has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles. Woodym555 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on topics related to the Victoria Cross, notably including the creation of featured articles, featured lists, and a featured topic. For their outstanding efforts as part of Tag & Assess 2007, Bedford, TomStar81, and Parsival74 have been awarded the gold, silver, and bronze Wikis, respectively.
Tag & Assess 2007 Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows: 1. Bedford — 7,600 2. TomStar81 — 5,500 3. Parsival74 — 5,200 4. FayssalF — 3,500 5. Roger Davies — 3,000 6. Ouro — 2600 7. Kateshortforbob — 2250 8. Cromdog — 2,200 9. BrokenSphere — 2000 9. Jacksinterweb — 2,000 9. Maralia — 2,000 12. MBK004 — 1,340 13. JKBrooks85 — 1,250 14. Sniperz11 — 1100 15. Burzmali — 1000 15. Cplakidas — 1000 15. Gimme danger — 1000 15. Raoulduke471000 15. TicketMan — 1000 15. Welsh — 1000 15. Blnguyen — 1000 Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, Anibot (talk) 23:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup

Thanks for all the clean up you are doing. Many of the articles you did are ones I watch, mostly military ones, but you also did the king of Thailand (I helped get it to FA). — Rlevse • Talk • 12:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Armymoh.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Armymoh.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 22:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Kumioko! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. β^_command 14:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Washington, D.C.

Please don't wikilink this city in the infoboxes of NFL players, as you did at Kevin Huntley and Mike Flanagan (American football). The infobox already links birth places, so if you put brackets around them they show up around the already-linked city. Thanks.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 17:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 17:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

AWB strangeness

May I ask why you are doing things like this? I tend to agree with you on "|foo" being preferable to "| foo", but not on "*Foo" being preferable to "* Foo", the former being harder to read. Most editors don't mess with template code, but most do mess with lists. Not a big deal, it just seems strange to me to spend that much time in AWB fixing something that isn't broken as opposed to fixing something broken. For "|foo" it would be far more productive for you to go change the documentation of the infoboxes in question so they stop giving copy-pasteable code that includes unneeded spaces, so henceforth you'd never have to do that AWB run ever again. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The spaces improve readability, I think. –Pomte 04:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you please explain more fully?

Could you please explain more fully this edit? Aside from changes the references to reflist your intent was?

IMO trimming the spaces in the individual <ref></ref>s reduces the readability, and thus the maintainability of the article. Geo Swan (talk) 03:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

AWB comment

Hi there! Just a friendly note on your use of AWB on this dif[2]. If you take a look at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser#Rules_of_use, it says "Avoid making insignificant or inconsequential edits such as only adding or removing some white space, moving a stub tag, converting some HTML to Unicode, removing underscores from links (unless they are bad links), or something equally trivial. This is because it wastes resources and clogs up watch lists." Which is exactly what it did -- clogged up my watch list. Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I see you're still making white-space-only edits with AWB, such as this one [3]. :( --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

We don't prefix single-digit dates with 0. –Pomte 19:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

"Retrieved on..." isn't tacked onto external links. Could you please stop making edits that either introduce incorrect formatting, or make the wikimarkup harder to read? –Pomte 19:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

If a site changes its URL scheme or goes down, the relevant external link template can be updated to match the new scheme or to link to Internet Archive, which would apply to all transclusions. For external links not using templates, the issue is the same. The last active version can be found on Internet Archive independent of the retrieved date, and the site may update after that date. Someone wouldn't just look for the version closest to the retrieved date; they'd look for the most recent version with content.

I also third the request that you stop converting <references /> to {{reflist}} in articles with very few citations, and repeat that spaces after | are to make the wikimarkup more readable, so it's easier to distinguish between citations and content. It serves no purpose to remove those spaces. Thanks. –Pomte 22:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect XHTML-Tag

Why did you replace the correct <br /> with the incorrect <br> in the Hal Lahar article? Wikipedia uses XHTML. See XHTML#Common errors for further details. ––Bender235 (talk) 12:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

It makes no difference at all whether <br>, <br/>, or <br /> is typed. The HTML source ends up being the same. –Pomte 22:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Yet another AWB comment

Add my voice to the chorus above objecting to frivolous edits with AWB. Other than to just futz with extra spaces, there’s no need for edits like this. On some systems a pipe character "|" looks suspiciously like a lower case "L". Having the extra space helps distinguish the two.

There are, I'm sure, many better uses of your time and Wikipedia’s resources. — Bellhalla (talk) 05:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

living people

When adding "living people" categories to articles, please remember that the category names have minimal capitalization: it's Category:Living people and Category:Year of birth missing (living people), not [[Category:Living People]] and [[Category:Year of birth missing (Living People)]]. --Paul A (talk) 01:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kirill 03:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

An edit on Henry Wager Halleck didn't end up the way you intended

Take a look at this diff. I'm not that familiar with the code, so I didn't see an obvious break. Please take a look. Thanks! BusterD (talk) 22:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that's why I didn't see it. Thanks. Very interesting. BusterD (talk) 23:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to Johnston de Peyster

Hey, thanks for looking over quite a few of my articles with AWB, but I noticed that on some of them you have been deleting Wikipedia:Persondata. Make sure that you check over your edits before clicking submit! Thanks. MrPrada (talk) 05:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

AWB image damage

I suspect this [4] is not what you intended to do to the images. Check your work. -- SEWilco (talk) 06:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

removing spaces after section headers

Hi, you're certainly not the first editor I've seen doing this, but my curiosity is piqued. What is the purpose behind this sort of edit? It doesn't seem to make any difference to the reader and requires you to spend time doing it and prompts me, and who knows who else, to double-check when it pops up on my watchlist. I'm not upset. I just don't understand the point. Thanks, BanyanTree 07:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I understand how to use AWB, and I've seen many useful edits with it, as you describe. But I don't understand why line breaks after section headers, specifically, need to be undone. Is it something built into AWB that you are agreeing to because it prompts you, or is it something you added for a particular reason? The reason I'm curious is because I see people, such as myself, add a line after the section header in the edit window all the time and it seems inefficient if there is a guideline in the MOS or somewhere saying otherwise. Thanks, BanyanTree 06:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Ely S. Parker edit

Did you get the Notes and References sections reversed? It seems to me the section that now reads Notes really are References. Thanks. Ward20 (talk) 22:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to Charles C. Krulak - Silver Star

You made a recent edit to Charles C. Krulak, replacing Silver Star with Silver Star Medal. Please note that this creates a redirect, as the main article name is Silver Star. — ERcheck (talk) 01:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I know there is an inconsistency here, but the actual title for Bronze Star article is a Bronze Star Medal, while it is just Silver Star. So, I suggest that you either use just Silver Star and Bronze Star Medal or [[Bronze Star Medal|Bronze Star]] for consistency. Your current updates for the Bronze Star are creating redirects. — ERcheck (talk) 05:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Edits

You've garnered a lot of complaints about frivolous edits. You may want to take them to heart, esp when using AWB, the rights to which can be revoked. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, if you feel just being more careful will do it, go for it. I was merely trying to help. Best wishes. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you that your edits are intended to improve, and in virtually every case have improved the page space you've addressed. I was about to comment favorably here about your pace and dedication. But like User:Rlevse I also urge you to take a bit more caution, especially giving the finished page a once over in preview before saving code related changes. On the whole, good job! BusterD (talk) 02:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

AWB

Take care when using AWB for cleanup, you just edited 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team (United States) in a way that messed up a lot of the images and charts, which would have been harmful as it is a current GA candidate. -Ed! (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Bump Elliott GA

Thanks for contributing to the effort at Bump Elliott. You may want to put this on your user page:

This user helped promote Bump Elliott to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 01:29, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Persondata template

Until AWB adds persondata template, you may be interested in User talk:Dr pda/persondata.js, which works fairly well, depending on the quality of info in the infobox. Regards—G716 <^T·_C> 01:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Milhist coordinators election has started

The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates. Please vote here by February 28. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 11:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Another useless AWB edit…

I reverted your edit of Charles A. Stafford diff. In addition to the removal of spaces at the end of citation templates — spaces which I leave intentionally for ease of reading — you changed Silver Star to Silver Star Medal. Unfortunately, "Silver Star Medal" redirects right back to "Silver Star". I appreciate the time and effort that you put into trying to make Wikipedia better, but you need to have better quality control on your work. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Kumioko, this is the sort of thing I was talking about. You really need to watch this stuff; I know you're trying to be constructive and you're not doing this on purpose, you just need to be more careful. I think I can find someone who would help guide/tutor you through this. Would you be interested? — Rlevse • Talk • 16:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

AWB Broke Wikilink to Woodrow Wilson HS

Hi Kumioko. I noticed your AWB cleanup of Eugene Peyton Deatrick broke the wikilink to Woodrow Wilson High School (Washington, DC). The cleanup replaced "DC" with "D.C" but the article name uses "DC". Are you planning to rename the article as well so the wikilink will work? Thanks. Skeet Shooter (talk) 13:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Reverted your AWB Edit Because of Formatting Aesthetics

Hi Kumioko. I reverted your edit of William B. Ebbert Your AWB edit adversely affected the easy-flowing text that had previously wrapped around photos for ease of reading. Also, the poem text got pushed up into the poem title. Most noticeable was the edit caused all the photos to jump to the left, "divorcing" them from the text. I appreciate the effort, but I feel the previous version flowed much more smoothly and seemlessly. Cordially yours... Partypeeps (talk) 03:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Unites States Army

A tag has been placed on Template:Unites States Army requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:AFC Backlog Drive

WikiProject Articles for creation needs your help!

WikiProject Articles for creation has done a tremendous job in working at WP:AFC over the past 7½ months. Thank you all for your hard work and dedication! Together, we've made the submission process easier and more streamlined, developed tools to make the process go faster for reviewers, and cut the backlog down to a mere fraction of what it once was. Well done! As you all are aware, however, our work is not quite yet done. The project still has 10 archive pages left to complete, which include over half a month's worth of submissions, many of which have not been completely reviewed. We need your help to finish looking over these neglected submissions so that we can finally remove the backlog notice from the page, and put an end to the more than two year old backlog that has been a thorn in our side for ages! Participants will receive an AFC Barnstar, so hurry up and help out while there's still work to be done! Make sure to sign in on the WikiProject's talk page so we know who is involved in what promises to be our final effort to complete this goal. Thank you for all your help! - Happy editing as always, Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

You are receiving this letter because you are listed as a participant in the Articles for creation WikiProject at WP:WPAFC. To avoid receiving further notices, please remove your name from the list. Thanks!

AWB

As per AWB rules of use please do not make inconsequential edits, such as you did to James Record where you modified a <br /> tag. Thanks, Rich257 (talk) 08:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• Same goes for [5] on Pat Robertson. If it doesn't change the appearance of the page, don't do it. Zetawoof_(ζ) 22:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Refs and punctuation

Also don't break the referencing by moving punctuation like you did at <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Antonio_Taguba&diff=194211118&oldid=183779494#_ref-Sullivan2004_0>. A reference is placed after the fullstop when it references the entire sentence, moving a reference to indicate that it references something it does not (e.g. the first part of of a sentence) is wrong. Please revert. -- Jeandré, 2008-03-02t18:20z

John R. Fox

Hello, KumiokoCleanStart ... I noticed that you've made some cosmetic edits to John R. Fox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ... I was wondering if you had any personal interest in the subject ... FYI, my father served with Fox in Italy, and attended the White House MoH ceremony in 1997. :-) Happy Editing! — 141.156.217.11 (talk · contribs) _{16:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)}

Template:Oldprodfull

Hello again, KumiokoCleanStart ... please see this talk page and tell me what you think of my newly created {{Oldprodfull}} ... would you use it, or update it if you encountered it?

Also, what are your thoughts on my proposed WP:FLAG-BIO and other flag templates?

BTW, speaking of high school math, I still have my old trusty & reliable slide rule from high school! :-)

Happy Editing! — 141.156.217.11 (talk · contribs) _{21:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)}

Question

Hello. Where can I learn how to make info boxes and templates? is there any page on wikipedia to teach wiki language? Thanks!--78.180.30.33 (talk) 21:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I'm active in Turkish Wikipedia. I need some citation templates in Turkish, which we don't have yet, so I'll try to translate the existing ones in English. So, I don't need to learn creating from the beginning to the end.. I need to understand the main frame so as to translate them. Thanks a lot!--78.180.30.33 (talk) 21:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Anthony Miers

Why is replacing "Second World War" with "World War II" a "clean-up"? What's wrong with the expression "Second World War"? It seems a perfectly reasonable phrase. Is this an American English/British English thing? Xyl 54 (talk) 17:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Well actually its not a huge deal but the Second World War link was a redirect to World War II so thats why I replaced it. Its just to reduce redirects.--Kumioko (talk) 18:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah! I'll stop being paranoid then! Thanks! Xyl 54 (talk) 09:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Workshop

I think it extremely ironic and silly that Fram accuses Carrite of being aggressive at opposing editors when that is his main modus operundi. I am confident that eventually the community will see through Fram's bullshit and cleverly worded rhetoric and see him for the bully he is. Kumioko (talk) 16:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I think you should provide some diffs for this, as just calling someone a bully is not really on. (Which is not to say that you're wrong, just that you should provide diffs.) I don't mind copying the diffs to an appropriate place in the case, if such a place exists. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

All one needs to do is to read his interactions with other users. You can see many on his talk page or archives, in my archives, in the Archives of Rich Farmbrough, the ANI archives and a number of others. Particularly those he doesn't like. I will provide some diffs but its likely that no one will be interested so I probably won't spend too much time on it.

On second thought no offense I don't think anyone really wants to hear what I have to say so its just a waste of time for me to find links. There everywhere though. The users attitude is toxic. Just look at the ANI he is spearheading against RAN in addition to the examples I gave above. People say I am a jerk but the reason I am a jerk to some users like Fram is because they are jerks to me or others first and after asking them nicely and attempting to work with them, I start being a jerk back because being nice doesn't work with them. He is one of the worst admins in this place and one of the primary reasons that I continue to think that if he and others like him can be admins then the tools really aren't that big of a deal. Otherwise they would have been taken away from them by now. Plus I am indefinately blocked from editing so there is no reason for me to go rummaging through histories and archives when there is no value. Kumioko (talk) 17:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

All right. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:58, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I know my attitude is bad these days I just hope some remember when I actually had faith in the project. If I were too find these diffs and you were to post them somewhere what then? There would be a discussion, they would discount anything I provide as just ranting and trying to be "dramatic" (which is a popular term in Wikipedia referring to anything they don't agree with) and then discussion would be closed with no action. I wouldn't mind doing the work if I had faith the community would actually do anything, which I don't. Kumioko (talk) 18:03, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Your page is watched, even if only by a few editors who don't edit every day, which is why it took me a while to see this. If you can supply diffs, they will be added. Believe me, there are more than a few "jerks" around here whose attitude and contributions would turn Buddha or the Virgin Mary into axe murderers, so I really can't fault anyone for responding in such a way. Also, if you wish, my e-mail is enabled, so if you would prefer that method, that might work better. I could then present that information to ArbCom, I think, saying that the information was forwarded to me and that I reviewed it personally and came to the conclusion that presenting it to ArbCom made sense, provided that would be true, and I think it probably would be. I suppose ArbCom could sanction me for some form of meatpuppetry in that case, but I'd be at least willing to contact them and see if evidence presented in such a way would be acceptable to them if it were presented to me. And good luck over at Simple English. If it would be helpful to you, I've started lists with a lot of the religion projects of lists of articles contained in print and academic encyclopedias, and it might be possible that some of them might be useful to help stimulate content development and improvement over there. Anyway, feel free to respond however you might like, if at all. John Carter (talk) 22:09, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll think about it. I'm still not convinced it would do much good though. It may take some time though to compile a useful list. We were both very active users as were many of the ones he had a problem with so there is a massive amount of information to mine through. Its also not worth falling on your sword for me just because I can see through his crap. The community will figure it out just as they did with Racepacket and several others. With or without my help. As for simple I'm not editing there much either. I was pushing the stewards pretty hard for a global lock on my accounts and I still want that but not enough to turn into a cross wiki vandal. So if they lighten up and block me as I asked that will be the end of it. Otherwise I guess I'll check in from time to time. I also just checked and by my surprise there are about 120 people that watch this page. Down from over 400 at one time but still quite a few given the state of things. Kumioko (talk) 22:37, 3 March 2013 (UTC)