User talk:RexxS/Archive 5

Talkback

Hello, RexxS. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Message added 19:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Immunize (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Replied at WT:WikiProject Medicine#Working in userspace. --RexxS (talk) 03:53, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for Your Cleanup

Dear RexxS:

I much appreciate the fine cleanup work you did on the "Combined Small Cell Lung Carcinoma" article I wrote. I hope you enjoyed reading through it, and I'd ask that you forgive my naivete re some of the things I did wrong. I would also be very pleased and grateful for any sort of comments or suggestions you might have for me - particularly ones addressing your impression of the quality, readability, etc. of the article.

Again, I appreciate your help very much.

With very best regards: Cliff (a/k/a "Uploadvirus")

Cliff L. Knickerbocker, MS DDF 03:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uploadvirus (talk • contribs)

P.S. - I know the last two sections need to be finished, hopefully I will have that done within the next week. If you get time and the desire, check back on it next weekend and I should have it "completed".

Cliff L. Knickerbocker, MS DDF 03:25, 27 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uploadvirus (talk • contribs)

I was typing some comments to you at your talk page as you wrote this! --RexxS (talk) 03:32, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm Humbled and Grateful ...

... for your comments and - especially - for your "Newcomer Award". My Mom died on Wednesday night ... I wish she could have got to see the award. She was going to read my article this weekend (she always did her web surfing on Sundays).

I also thank you for the editing tips - I will put them to good use.

I look forward to chatting and working with you in the future.

Your Wikifriend: Cliff

Cliff L. Knickerbocker, MS DDF 04:10, 27 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uploadvirus (talk • contribs)

I'm really sorry to hear of your loss, Cliff. You deserve the award and I'm sure there'll be many more. Have a look at WP:DYK. Anyone creating new articles or greatly expanding old ones can ask to have an interesting fact from it put on the Wikipedia main page (the Did You Know? section). Please feel free to ask me for any help I can give you whenever you need it. --RexxS (talk) 17:02, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Scuba Diving

Hey RexxS:

Dont know how often you get over here to Yank-land, but I did notice your scuba expertise and interest. Here in Southern Illinois we have an (allegedly) world class diving spot called Mermet Springs ...

http://www.mermetsprings.com/

If you Google "Mermet Springs", you will find plenty of info. I've never dived there, but I have been all over the facility and have witnessed myself the (a) exceptionally crystal-clear water, (b) the HUGE fish in there, some of them 4-5 feet long, with a mouth that looked like it would swallow my (bloody) head :-)

You, and as many other people as can sleep in my 4 meter by 4 meter guest bedroom, would be quite welcome to stay at my house gratis for as long as you can stand my wife and adopted grandson :-O

With best regards: Cliff

Cliff L. Knickerbocker, MS DDF 04:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uploadvirus (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your very kind offer. I've heard of Mermet Springs, but never dived there. I used to holiday regularly in America and I've dived a lot in Florida, as well as the Bahamas, Baja California and Cozumel. Sadly, since I lost my wife to cancer in 2004, circumstances have worked against me getting back across the "Pond". Perhaps now that I'm close to retiring, and once my two kids have finished university, I might find the chance see the States again. You can be sure I'll remember your offer if that ever happens! --RexxS (talk) 17:02, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Your (Eventual) Visit

Would surely be glad to have you anytime. Add me to your e-mail contacts -> uploadvirus@yahoo.com

My heartfelt condolences on your wife - I just lost my Mom last Wednesday. Thanks again for your courtesy and the Barnstar. Take care of yourself, and push those kids thru skool at all kosts!  :-)

Your friend: Cliff

Cliff L. Knickerbocker, MS DDF 02:24, 28 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uploadvirus (talk • contribs)

Hey RexxS: Many THANKS for the links and hints on that image I need. I will check them out. Appreciate it! Keep that oxygen tank full! Your friend: Cliff

Cliff L. Knickerbocker, MS DDF 23:21, 28 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uploadvirus (talk • contribs)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I award RexxS this barnstar for helping to get the midazolam article to pass as a good article. Literaturegeek | T@1k? 20:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that kind thought, LG. I was only only too glad to be able to assist a little with all the fine work you did. Let me know when you take it FA! --RexxS (talk) 21:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Photokeratitis

Hi Steve, I've been following the discussions on Photokeratitis (arc eye, etc.) and the merger is now complete. I saw your original objections to the HOW TO Treatment section and have finished some copyediting on the merged article. If you have a minute to spare, please take a look at the current article and let me know if you still have any problems. Happy editing! --RexxS (talk) 21:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've made a few minor changes to include oral pain relief and changing the lede so it doesn't look like pain relief is primarily eyedrops. It really isn't, and this is a somewhat irritating thing. The patient will get total and instant pain relief in the E.D. from the anesthetic, but can't get the same stuff when the pain returns that night. If the doc hasn't written some good prescriptions for oral stuff, they find the same patient back in the emergency department or urgent care. It's happened to me more than once. Bad UV corneal burns usually feel better even by the next AM (though the eyes look terrible). But it's a LONG night. SBHarris 23:51, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Content inventory

Hi RexxS, Cirrus Editor here again, asking if you would be so kind as to pop over to help me out with a review of some reference coding issues I'm having on one of my draft pages. The page is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cirrus_Editor/content_inventory

I see that Chzz beat me to it. He's an outstanding editor who is unfailingly helpful, so if you can't catch my attention, I'd recommend asking his help any time you're stuck. I've tidied your refs a little (prefer |last & |first to |author, and I recommend you give every ref a name, also using "" allows a wider range of characters in the name). You may want to change dates like "27 April 2010" to "April 27, 2010" as your preference. Hope that all looks ok. --RexxS (talk) 23:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Dammit dammit dammit...

Yeah, I know I'd lost interest for a bit (working on long articles requires the concentration span of a saint very dedicated person) One can borrow books from the university library for 6 months (which is good)....unless someone else requests them (which has just happened with a key book on coffee I had) - I tried to add some material but ran out of time. I will give it a couple of months and get it back. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:16, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Hehe - not to worry, Cas: there's no deadline. I've got two kids at uni, so I can usually get books (eventually) if needed. Mind you, I'm still waiting for a copy of Downes to arrive, which I need to try and save John Vanbrugh from being de-featured. Give me a shout if there's any books I could try to get to help out on Coffee. In the meantime, I've been intending to re-write and restore the section in Coffee about how much caffeine is in typical types of drink, so there's still work to get on with. Cheers! --RexxS (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I found my enthusiasm waned a bit. Get stuck into John Vanbrugh as I have a few other balls to juggle...Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry

Quite right, I'm sorry for doing that. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Mistake

Clicked the wrong button, sorry. :( -- Cirt (talk) 22:03, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Hehe - no problem; we all do it! --RexxS (talk) 22:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Interesting office picture, btw. -- Cirt (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Hyperbaric Medicine

Thanks for your feedback about my recent edit to Hyperbaric medicine. I was using AWB to disambiguate links to Outside, which is why I used the edit summary "Fixing links to disambiguation pages". While AWB pointed out that the citation was badly formatted, I attempted to fix it manually, and did it incorrectly. So place the blame on me, not AWB. I'm glad you've fixed all the citations - they're much better than they were yesterday! I've redone my other edits (including removing the link to the Outside disambiguation page), and used an edit summary that is hopefully more clear. Thanks again for the note! GoingBatty (talk) 23:06, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

You're most welcome. I'm always glad to help if I can. Happy editing! --RexxS (talk) 23:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 99 support, 9 oppose, and 2 neutral. Your support was much appreciated.

Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 17:20, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations Alexandr! --RexxS (talk) 16:06, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Admin

Hey RexxS any interest in being nominated for adminship? We could use some more people with mops around WP:MED. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks for the kind thought, James. As it happens, Axl asked me the same question not long ago - User talk:RexxS/Archive 4#Adminship?. As you can see from that discussion, I doubt that I could convince anyone that I actually need the tools. I can see how it would be useful (like for the Guinea worm disease move), but there's no way I'm going to spend hours on New Page Patrol just to convince people I understand WP:CSD, when I could use that time to get Decompression sickness to GA.

I am really flattered that you would put trust in me, and I'm grateful for that endorsement, but the current state of WP:RfA seems rather inimical to the idea that a content contributor could have the tools, just in case they might need them :) Regards --RexxS (talk) 18:19, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Scuba

Hey. I took a one-day scuba lesson this winter in St. John (Virgin Islands), to see if I wanted to get certified. We only went about 15 feet down, but it was very painful. I kept trying to clear my ears by holding my nose and blowing, but my right ear wouldn't clear properly, I guess. Any free suggestions? This would be an easy way for you to earn an admin vote.  :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Hehe, I'm always happy to give advice about scuba in any case. 15 feet is more than enough to cause pain if your ears are not clearing properly. There are two things you can do:

1. Practise gently clearing regularly each day (doesn't need to be in water) - blow gently against a pinched nose and then swallow. You'll hear each ear crackle or pop. This doesn't need to be anywhere near the same force you use to blow your nose. If nothing happens the first few times, you may need some decongestant - but never take decongestant when you're diving.
2. When you actually dive, descend by working your way down a line, rather than free-swimming. Stop every two feet (seriously), hold onto the line with one hand and clear your ears gently. If they don't clear, ascend back up two feet and clear again. You can keep going back up until you're happy that they are clearing, and then start going back down, repeating the clearing. Don't worry about "holding others up". The try-dive is for your pleasure and you need to make sure you enjoy it. Any dive guide worth his or her salt will be patient with you until you are comfortably swimming around at 15 feet or so.

A small extra point: you also need to equalise your mask - that is, breathe out through your nose once every few breaths as you descend. If not, the dreaded mask squeeze will make your eyes look like you've done a couple of rounds with Mike Tyson for the rest of the holiday. Scuba diving is a wonderful sport and I can promise that if you take things steadily and sensibly, you'll never regret giving it a go. Happy diving (and editing)! --RexxS (talk) 20:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the advice. I'm sure everyone at Wikipedia would want my scuba diving to be safe and painless.  :-). Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:06, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

MOS:ANDOR

Hi! Tried to review the whole page, is much better now than last time I reviewed it, but still suffers from some of the same issues with very specific examples, and it is also very repetitive.

Anyway thanks for pointing out the MOS for me, I was not aware of that one, I though that and/or did not really look good, but what was written was not good either, updated now, hopefully better, thanks. --Stefan ^talk 03:10, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I do agree there's far too much repetition, but it's not surprising. It started off without much structure and different editors added similar bits all over the place, plus it was mixed up with DCI and altitude DCS. Ex-Nihil and I argued and thrashed out the structure, based on WP:MOSMED, which meant that lots of similar bits from different contributors got clumped together. I've been sorting and re-reading all the refs, prior to a good copyedit, as I think it's almost in shape for a try for GA status, but don't let me stop you from rewriting and/or pruning, or both. I'd only ask that you drop a note on the talk page if you're removing sources - text is two-a-penny, but sources are like gold! Regards, --RexxS (talk) 03:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I normally never remove sources (unless they are not RS). Will see if I get time to do some more editing, have been very busy lately. I think the repetition will be a problem with GA, it does not read well now, but it have good coverage and good sources so except for that it should be OK. --Stefan ^talk 07:08, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

From the water to the land

Pstt! [Pod plucks RexxS discreetly by the sleeve. He wants some mummy wrappings too. ] RexxS cool artist, draw pre-historic creatures ! Let Pod look scary like Bishzilla! Please draw mummified Pod! [To persuade T-Rex, Pod starts to draw the epic tale of his own band, the Tiktaaliks, moving from the water to the land (like scuba divers, hehe). The band's squeaky trebles rise mightily over the marshes, it's like hearing Kraftwerk. Their wrappings flutter in the wind. See Tiktaalik and friends by Dave souza?

From the water

To the land

Tik-tik-tik-tik-talic

Tik-tik-tik-tik-talic

Tik-tik-tik-tik-talic

etcetera

etcetera

bishapod splash! 16:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC).

 :) --RexxS (talk) 22:08, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Editing warring

Please stop edit warring on my talk page and Abortion. Get yourself aware of the discussions on the article talk page before assuming bad faith, reverting and threatening other people over content issues.--Nutriveg (talk) 02:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

He made one edit. How is this edit warring? Please provide diffs.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

One revert is not edit-warring. You have reverted three times against the advice of three editors. I have assumed good faith in your reverts, otherwise you would be warned for vandalism, rather than disruption. I am awaiting an explanation of your removal of three specific reliable sources at Talk:Abortion#Edit warring, where content issues are more appropriately discussed. --RexxS (talk) 12:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Humm, You readded content to my talk page the same number of times I did in Abortion before you included that warning on my talk page, despite I've detailed what my edit was about in that article talk page and edit summary while so far you make it sound that the revert of that large change of text still under discussion was a simple removal of referenced text. You assumed bad faith while ignoring the discussion on the talk page and made a bad evaluation of what that change was about.--Nutriveg (talk) 13:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

On the contrary, I made two separate and entirely different comments on your talk page, without any reversion or re-adding. You, on the other hand, have violated WP:BRD. You made a large revision to the article (not a revert), removing three reliable sources; when that was reverted, instead of going to discussion, you reverted again, and have repeated that behaviour when another editor reverted you. That's what edit-warring is, not the single revert in line with BRD that I made. I have read the talk page several times over, including your seven contributions to that thread, as well as another editor asking "Nutriveg, any reason why the Trupin source has been removed?" in an earlier section - to which your reply was "I prefer to use better sources, will try to find some". Again, I'll state that you are not the arbiter of sources. If you don't think it's RS, take it to WP:RSN for an outside opinion. No amount of reading the article talk page shows any good reason why those three sources should not be in the article, apart from your dislike of them. --RexxS (talk) 14:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

RexxS, you should not revert or re-add messages to Nutriveg's user talk page. That's likely to be seen as harassment. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 13:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry that the above statement was so terse and prone to misinterpretation. The above should not be taken as a formal warning so much as an observation: When an editor makes a second comment on a subject, after the first has been removed, such an action may be interpreted as harassing by the person whose talk page it is. Also, you might not be aware of this, but making an identical or similar comment after a comment has been removed may be considered to be a revert, which is why I used the word above. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 14:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to clarify. I am aware that repeating the same point could be construed as harassment, but I hope that from the diffs [1][2][3], you can accept that the second post was a follow-up to the first – requesting discussion at the article talk page and asking for a self-revert – and not a re-iteration of the contents of the previous post. Please accept my apologies if you saw it otherwise, and I assure you I will endeavour not to give that sort of impression in future. --RexxS (talk) 14:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Just a general observation that may or may not be useful or relevant: per WP:BRD, "If an issue is already under discussion or was recently discussed, people may take offense if you boldly ignore the discussion, especially if you make a change away from a version arrived at through consensus, to an earlier or suggested non-consensual version. Ignoring earlier consensus is generally not a wise approach!" So, if a revert cycle is to be broken, it is best to break toward the earlier consensus.Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, that observation is both useful and relevant. Although when I saw sources removed, I searched the talk page for the author's names in those sources. Only one came up, in a (unanswered) question about why it had been removed before. As hard as I look, I still can't see any consensus for either Nutriveg's version or the previous, but I'm willing to concede I may have missed something. As far as breaking a revert cycle, I'd suggest that it doesn't matter where it's broken - see the thinking behind meta:Wrong Version for a comparable scenario. It's the reason that I never make more than one revert (incontrovertible vandalism excepted). As long as editors are willing to work together, the page will be sorted sooner or later. Regards, --RexxS (talk) 23:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, at some articles, editors are often not willing to work together. Indeed, it makes it more difficult to work together when new controversial material is inserted into an article, instead of waiting for consensus. Oh well.Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand, and sympathise. The actual solution to that is to induce more editors to participate. I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but it's tried and tested. I suspect it may work by diluting any POV outliers and bolsters the "middle ground". Abortion is in the scope of six wikiprojects and it may be prudent to inform them that there is a difficulty in finding consensus and invite uninvolved commentators. I freely admit I was drawn into the current debate by a note at WP:WikiProject Medicine asking for wider input. Whether my participation ends up a net benefit or not remains to be seen, I guess. --RexxS (talk) 23:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

The problem becomes one of time. Some editors apparently have fat trust funds, and can spend every waking moment on Wikipedia instead of working for a living (or perhaps this is their work and they're paid for it). I'm out of time right now, and must do other things for a bit. Cheers. P.S. Maybe everyone should be limited to twenty non-minor article edits and fifty talk page edits per day, in order to equalize things a bit: "The Encyclopedia Anybody Can Edit Twenty Times Per Day."Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm a widower, close to retiring, and owing to the recession, virtually free of work at present. Couple that with chronic insomnia, and you'll get some idea of my potential for participation. If there were a limit on edits, what would I find to do with my time? :P --RexxS (talk) 00:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC) P.S. If I didn't live 120 miles from the sea, I'd be able to answer my own question

We could make an exception for scuba instructors living far from sea.Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:17, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I will notify the six wikiprojects Wednesday afternoon, if there is no progress by then.Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Just to briefly follow up, I thought some progress was being made, so didn't seek further input. But you may want to. Alternatively, maybe you can find further sources that all editors will agree reliably support the content in question (and if such sources cannot be found then maybe that particular content is really not very common in the literature on this subject thus implicating WP:Undue weight).Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:32, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I also think some progress is being made, and it's surely a step forward that Nutriveg is now clarifying what he wants substituting for what, even though I totally disagree with his method of picking one source and then paraphrasing one snippet from it, while rejecting everything else. There has been a lot of new, relevant information discussed and I think that the section of the article can be improved and expanded in the light of what has been found. Hopefully, Nutriveg's proposal will receive input from other editors and lead toward a consensus being formed. --RexxS (talk) 18:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

About Malaysian Flora

Thanks for the compliments.I don't really want to promote my new site on the Internet,I only want to meet people who are actively doing research, similar to mine. I mainly study only Flora and the cultural,historical aspects of it. Fauna comes in only as food, since I'm also interested in the cuisine of the jungle tribes and Malay culinary history.I thought about contributing photos to Wiki but the moral state of the Internet changed my mind.People steal, plagiarize left and right not respecting any license agreement whatsoever.This is the reason that on my site all pictures are heavily watermarked and little information is revealed. However, if I receive an email from the right serious person I'm willing to share quite a bit.At the same time I do admire Wiki and would like to contribute, so I will look at my stuff and put together a package for Wiki.Is it alright to use watermark protection on the photos you upload to Wiki? Anyway, I promise I will do my best. Frank Frugivore (talk) 17:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

You're quite right about theft and it's very difficult to anything about it. With today's powerful processors, algorithms can be used that can remove all but the most stubborn watermarks or upsize low-resolution thumbnails, so a determined thief has the tools to get around most of what we try to do to protect our work. Anyway, in answer to your question, watermarks on images are strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, so I'd recommend not putting them on. I'd say only upload images that you won't want to sell or that may have other commercial value. While many people will respect the effort you've put into your work and will properly give you the attribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0, there will always be an unscrupulous few who abuse the generosity of folks like yourself. If you do decide to upload a few images, despite all that, don't forget to fill in the |source= with your website! Regards, --RexxS (talk) 18:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Malaysian Flora & Fauna

After careful consideration I have decided to select and upload to Wiki 100+ photos of Malaysian fauna and some flora.Could I just upload the fauna photos without identifying the species? You see I know botany but not zoology. These species I captured on my camera during my fruit hunting trips and I do not have the time to look up their scientific names etc... So where can I upload them to? Thanks, Frank 193.226.246.99 (talk) 08:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Frank. Although wikipedia wants us to use descriptive filenames, there's no deadline, so it is possible for you to upload a file with a name like "Malaysia FJ - Ape001.jpg". It's not ideal, but there are others who will help in the identification eventually. I would recommend you upload the images to Wikimedia Commons, as they could then be used easily in any of the different language wikipedias. If you make a unified login, you'll be a registered editor on all the Wikipedia projects, so you will be able to upload to Commons. There is a tutorial to help you with uploading here. The upload page is here. There is a tool to help uploading numerous files at once here, but I'd strongly recommend uploading a few files singly to get an idea of what happens, before you do a batch.

Anyway, I've left a note about your kind offer to contribute at three WikiProjects:

• WikiProject Images and Media
• WikiProject Malaysia
• WikiProject Animals

I expect that the experienced editors there will be able to give you far more detailed advice than I ever can, but please feel free to drop me a line here if you run into problems. Finally, I do understand that all of the above may seem like a lot of hoops to jump through, but I would encourage you to persist. Sharing your expertise here on Wikipedia is a rewarding experience (even if a frustrating one at times) and you will make many new wiki-friends who share your interests and are willing to help. Happy editing! --RexxS (talk) 13:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Replied on WikiProject Malaysia and Frank's talk page. BejinhanTalk 03:53, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks, Bejinhan. From looking at his website, http://sites.google.com/site/malaysianedibleflora/ he obviously has a great attachment to Malaysia. Perhaps you may want to "recruit" him to your WikiProject? --RexxS (talk) 04:00, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. And, yeah, I'm looking towards doing that. Just waiting for his reply. BejinhanTalk 04:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Piping

Thnx for the hint, always something new. Though I'm afraid I'm not quite sure what I did exactly. Got into a mess over a botched (my bad) move, then went through all the links affected to make sure there were no circular redirects left (had created some in between after hitting the wrong button). Will keep it in mind. On the other hand, I think I piped the link not to avoid the redirect, but to get the proper name on the list. Effect sure was the same, though. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 12:56, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Having checked, it looks like the article name and redirects are sorted out, and I can see you were trying to eliminate double or circular redirects. Essentially what WP:NOTBROKEN is saying in this case is that if RMS Mülheim, MV RMS Mülheim, RMS Mulheim, MV RMS Mulheim all exist, then from a linking point of view it doesn't matter which one is the actual article and which three are redirects. You can use the proper name (or any of the others) as a non-piped link in text, without worrying about it. If we don't use the pipe, we can check the "What links here" on the article page and see what redirects are actually being used. Hope that helps. --RexxS (talk) 13:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

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

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

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

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I've been following the debate, and I will be interested in how this turns out, although I have no idea of how much use I'll make of it. No doubt it will be easier for the community to form further consensus when we've all seen PC in action for a while. --RexxS (talk) 17:23, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Abortion

You were former involved in a discussion in Talk:Abortion#More reliable references so, if you're still interested about the outcome of that discussion, I ask you to express your opinion in Talk:Abortion#Assessing the current agreement status--Nutriveg (talk) 04:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. I've commented. --RexxS (talk) 16:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi RexxS. Just a heads-up - I'm User:MastCell, not User:Mastcell. I don't know why the software let me register a name that was so close to a pre-existing one (Mastcell was here before me). I don't think it would let a user do that today. Anyhow, I saw your note at User Talk:Mastcell, which was probably intended for me - just wanted to give you a heads-up since it's often a subject of confusion. :) MastCell ^Talk 21:05, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Yikes! I'm so sorry, I never considered that could happen. I'll correct that at ANI. --RexxS (talk) 21:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Hehe - you already did it. Thank you. --RexxS (talk) 21:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Notification procedure

RexxS, I came across the ANI thread that you started. I haven't bothered to check who you notified about it besides MastCell.[4]. However, please do be mindful of WP:Canvassing. Thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 06:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for worrying about me AYW :) The instructions at ANI tell you that "You must notify any user that you discuss" on every edit. I obviously notified Nutriveg, and since I mentioned MastCell and Doc James, I notified each of them them using the {{ANI-notice}} template to make sure I adhered to the instructions. I also value your input, as well as the other editors at Abortion, but it was precisely because I don't want to accused of be canvassing that I refrained from notifying others. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 10:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. FYI, I have started a conversation about this at the ANI talk page (which has to be watchlisted separately from the ANI page).Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The instructions have now been clarified. Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts, AYW. I looked at the discussions, but by the time I did there was nothing I could have added that you hadn't already explained. It should help future editors avoid the "damned if you do; damned if you don't" situation that I felt in. Regards, --RexxS (talk) 20:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Grammar / spelling

By the way many thanks for fixing my grammar. Even though English is my first language I still have problems writing it :-) Any further suggestions for gout? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:27, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

You're most welcome, James, as always. I've just done a superficial copyedit, but apart from some bits of style that I'd do differently, I think it's fine. Nice work! --RexxS (talk) 20:27, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Msg from Amy

Thanks Rexxs for moving my tag on the Abortion page, looks like quite an edit war going there. I am new to Wikipedia so I appreciate the help. ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 21:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

You're most welcome, Amy. I should have also mentioned to you to put new comments at the bottom of talk pages – so that they do eventually get archived, hehe. It's been hard work at Abortion, but in the end the reliable sources trump any editor's view, and it will work out eventually. Please feel free to drop me a line any time you need help, and I'll always do my best to help where I can. --RexxS (talk) 21:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Comment about Wildhartlivie

Hi, I noticed this sentence in one of your comments and I thought it would be better to ask you here than on that page. You wrote: "I apologise in advance for being blunt, and I have personal animosity toward WHL – who is clearly a valued contributor – but if those reversions had been made by a new editor, they'd have been blocked for blatant vandalism by now."

Did you mean to say "I have no personal animosity..."? I wondered if it was a typo because it looks odd against you saying she's a valued contributor. On the other hand, if you have personal animosity towards her, well at least you've been open and honest in declaring it.  ;-) Thanks Rossrs (talk) 02:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

{Facepalm} Thank you so much for pointing that out. I did indeed mean to say "I have no personal animosity toward WHL" and I sincerely hope I never develop a personal animosity toward any other editor. If I ever do, that will be a clear signal I've outlived any usefulness here. Many thanks again, and I'd like to take the opportunity of expressing my admiration for your efforts to mediate a very difficult situation. --RexxS (talk) 02:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. That's a very nice comment, and I appreciate it. Also, you're welcome. It could have been worse; you could have been on a jury. "We find the defendant guilty!"... "no wait, I mean not guilty, not guilty!" No harm done. Rossrs (talk) 15:05, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I meant to mention the question you asked me. I have replied to it here. Cheers. Rossrs (talk) 16:00, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if you saw my comment below yours (you were probably more focused on fixing what Rossrs pointed out), but it seems Jack did introduce the sorting to the table (but back in May) and it was the next edit after his May 2010 edits that broke the table sorting (the edit here). Given that, I don't think your comment He didn't introduce the sorting is strictly accurate, and while WHL shouldn't have reverted without proper discussion, she may have not realised she was reverting to a broken version of the table (she may have confused 'fixing sorting' with 'introducing sorting'). Carcharoth (talk) 02:41, 10 July 2010 (UTC) I see our posts crossed by one minute, so I needn't have posted here! Thanks for following up what I said. 03:08, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you're absolutely right. I worked back by diffs from Jack's "return edit" on 7 July but soon realised that the table had been broken for some time and I never got as far as Jack's May edit (some 20 diffs earlier), so I didn't realise that Jack had originally introduced the sorting (although I should have guessed). I can see that my comment is inaccurate and I'll strike it. I'm quite sure that WHL didn't realise she was breaking the table – she just wanted the years spanning rows again without understanding the consequences for sorting. It just seems such a pity that the whole thing blew up, although I can understand exactly how it did (which is why I force myself to observe 1RR: it's just too easy to edit-war when you're convinced you're right). Best regards --RexxS (talk) 03:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, all. RexxS, there's been lots of discussion: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers/Archive 5; I wrote an awful lot of it. It spawned this current RfC: Wikipedia talk:Consensus/RfC, which is about small groups overriding site-wide consensus.

I did introduce the sortablity in May and it was broken be someone I don't know; Bencey. Subsequent edits added more and more of the rowspans without removing the sortability class. WHL did revert to a broken state but then cut the sorting, too, which then resulted in a table that had rowspans, was not sortable, and was not 'broken' (just less useful).

She knows I'm good with code, as I know that she's not. It's been acknowledged. She simply wants the rowspans, cares not that they are an impediment to others, and is opposing everything I wish to do in this area; i.e. ownership. Cheers, Jack Merridew 03:30, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jack, I appreciate you taking the time to explain. Let me say immediately, I find myself completely in agreement with your goal of improving the standard of markup on Wikipedia – as well as its functionality. I don't know if you've seen my lengthy comment at the RfC, but I hope there's little there that you would disagree with.

It's not my place to criticise a well-respected editor such as yourself, but I can't help think that sometimes each of us can be our own worst enemy. The hardest thing for me on Wikipedia is stopping myself from reverting when I know the other editor is wrong. The thing is, none of us are on our own: if I'm right, somebody else will spot that and the version I'm espousing will get consensus. It takes time, and I don't get the instant gratification of having the right version in place immediately, but it seems to get the best results for me in the long run.

Anyway, forgive my lecturing, please, and consider an open invitation to my talk page anytime you feel you might want a sympathetic ear - or just a chat. You'll always be most welcome. Regards --RexxS (talk) 03:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, pleased to meet you, too. Ya, I'd seen your comments at the RfC; you're spot-on. You obviously get it. I've not made a statement there, yet, too much drama during the drama-out I signed-up for this week. I did make earlier comments at User talk:Moonriddengirl/RfC, which used to be the talk page of that RfC. This dispute has been rolling along since March when she reverted me (hit next until you weary of it;). That wasn't even changing the look of things, it was just de-snotting the page of non-functional code. I believe she was also upset about the format that WP:REFLINKS used on the citations. She went on to demand that I explain myself to her and WP:ACTOR. It reminded me of being pulled over by the police; a bunch of Federales with no stinkin' badges. She sees herself as the protector and defender of all these celebrity bios. She also has a firm grip on most of the American serial killer bios. I'm a pretty mellow guy, really; most of my wiki-career was while living on The Island of the Gods. It's a bit of a checkered history, but as F&W found out, I've supporters. My past gives me a lot of voice, too.

I see you've edited a few times on other projects; me, too: sulutil:Jack Merridew.^(sortable;) BANTOWN can be where you want it to be, and rather than go socking, again, I went UP, to get good with the really serious crowd. 10,000 edits and 500 emails later, I returned to teh toxic-wiki.

These code issue go everywhere; they go to all the projects. Most of the small wikis have really old forms of doing a lot of things; stuff they forked from en:wp in 2005. I've been everywhere; this clean-up to a main page stood untouched for a year and a half. It's tet:, which is East Timor; Tetum language.

Anyway, this mess is about sorted; this was the tipping point, and little's in doubt, now.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 04:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I want to clarify that although the first edit I made took out the changes to rowspan, I immediately edited out the sort. I did not persist in returning a table that had been broken. Regarding the rest, canvass recruiting seems to be a goal? This may be the tipping point for Jack, but the tipping point for me occurred months ago regarding the issues Jack shouts about and follows me about to edit right after me. Wildhartlivie (talk) 14:45, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, I've been able to reconstruct what happened at the article with a much better understanding now. I assume you wanted the table that existed prior to May, which had 'years' spanning the relevant rows. I can see the aesthetic attraction, but I don't think the result you get when using a screen reader is as useful, and you do lose the functionality of being able to sort on the name of the film. There's also the question of how tables ought to use markup, but that's more a pet peeve for a web developer, and not necessarily important until W3C moves onto another round of developments. It just doesn't seem to me to be worth the ensuing incident, and I was wrong to be judgemental, so please accept my apologies for that. On the article that I was commenting on, it does look more like you followed Jack, rather than the other way around? But I guess I'm only seeing one incident among many, so I'm sympathetic to what you say.

Anyway, I won't presume to try to counsel you, but I'll gladly make the same offer I made to Jack: feel free to come here if you're feeling annoyed or frustrated and talk about it, if you ever want to. Regards --RexxS (talk) 16:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)