User talk:Huon/Archive5

I will try to give sources. Till then, let the tag be place there. Thanks -- Arfaz (talk) 03:02, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for improving and sourcing this article. I wasn't able to get even a single reliable source. You have done a marvellous job. Kudos -- Arfaz (talk) 03:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contribution to the discussion on auto-de/da-fe/fé. You're quite right to note that there wasn't much "discussion" after my original suggestion, and that's the main reason I opened up a formal move debate rather than put it through as non-controversial — no useful replies is not the same as concensus, and silence is not discussion. The IP reply is rather intemperate and not entirely factual: there have been a few such comments, which don't really help. I would welcome more informed contributions.

You're quite right that I didn't cite any sources; my apologies for that. I had consulted several before posting my proposal (I didn't have any particular preference beforehand myself), so I've now added details of some into the discussion section. I think the most important thing is to clear up the mish-mash of spellings that were present throughout our articles before, which just looked wrong. Whichever spelling seems best we should then standardise on throughout, with appropriate mention of the alternatives. If a convincing case is made for one of the other spellings then I will gladly apply that throughout once we've agreed, but the thing that mainly swayed me towards "auto-da-fé", for articles in the English wikipedia, was the preponderence of good English dictionaries (UK and American) that give it in that form. Mooncow (talk) 16:00, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Meaghers Playboy mansion is what Aghada is known as humorously to local. It is taken from an eccentric Cork libertine who used to commonly visit the local brothel and tip very generously according to local legend back in the roaring 20s. If you visit Aghada and ask a local they will gladly explain this story to you in more detail.You are obviously not from the area and it would be appreciated if you did not change the Aghada page again as you don't know much about our local history. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.96.3 (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While an interesting anecdote, it would require a reliable source so it can be verified by readers. I suppose such a source will be hard to come by. Unless you can provide one, that nickname should not be included in Wikipedia. Yours, Huon (talk) 22:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

THROUGH THE MIST OF TIME Memories of the past from Whitegate, Aghada, Saleen, Roches Point, Guileen etc. Compiled by Whitegate/Aghada Historical Society. You should read it sometime, its a cracking read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.96.3 (talk) 23:24, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to, but unfortunately I couldn't find out how to obtain a copy - it's unknown to the Library of Congress and the Irish National Library, and Amazon doesn't carry it either. Do you know the year of publication, the ISBN or how I might obtain a copy short of traveling to Aghada? I have referred the question to the reliable sources noticeboard; wider community input may be of help. Huon (talk) 01:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you write to the Litho Press, Midleton,Co Cork,Rep. of Ireland. I am sure they will fill you in on the price of the book and post and packaging. You can then order a copy from them to inform your self of the history of Aghada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.96.3 (talk) 18:41, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Aghada and the reliable sources noticeboard: The book probably is not a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards, and the nickname is probably too insignificant a detail for the article anyway. Huon (talk) 19:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its quite reliable. Come to Aghada you will see that this is definitely not an insignificant detail! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.96.3 (talk) 20:21, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Being an upstanding resident of Aghada for many years I can tell you that this is very true. I don't really think that it's appropriate that a non-local should change what is written about our locality. This is typical of this technological age, small villages history being lost because someone like you think it's "too insignificant a detail". Sir, I can tell you that your kind would not be welcome in my humble town, with your new ways. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.33.96.130 (talk) 09:27, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at Wikipedia's policy about verifiability: Wikipedia is not about truth, but about what readers can verify in reliable sources. And reliable sources are "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", while "self-published media [...] are largely not acceptable." And if you happen to be the author of this edit from your IP, I have my doubts about you being an "upstanding resident". Huon (talk) 11:32, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a common computer so there are several users. There are a few people quite enraged about this issue so somebody must have lost their temper. The last post wasn't me. I feel obliged to inform you that some of the more vocal residents of the fair village of Aghada have taken to collecting signatures of people who'll be willing to conferm the name "Andrew Meagher's Playboy Mansion". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.17.49.1 (talk) 13:12, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid being associated with the other users of that school computer you might want to create an account. And if the signature-gathering effort gets mentioned in a newspaper with an online edition, it might actually get the nickname mentioned in a reliable source. Otherwise I fail to see the purpose of that operation. Huon (talk) 14:59, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Actually, I just started it in order to create my personal sandbox so I can try new (for me) tricks and editing techniques without disturbing anybody else", Your disturbing us. Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.167.185.55 (talk) 17:35, 14 March 2011 (UTC) Account Created — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sword Of Aghada (talk • contribs) 11:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK! The Way I would like to put forward is...to find The Negative,The Root,and The Positive.

Below is an Example Using 100

100 Negative = 99.9

100 Root = 100 ( THE ROOT IS THE START! THE ORIGIN! ) (The Root) is Not The Square Root)

100 Positive = 100.1

A Better way of Looking at the above is 100N(99.9) 100R(100) 100P(100.1)

--------

So Now all we have to find is...

Infinite-Recurring 0.9 Negative = ?

Infinite-Recurring 0.9 Root = ?

Infinite-Recurring 0.9 Positive = ?

A Better way of Looking at the above is IR0.9N( ? ) IR0.9R( ? ) IR0.9P( ? )

Infinite-Recurring 0.9 Negative = ? Put Here I/R 0.9 as a Negative Value

Infinite-Recurring 0.9 Root = ? Put Here what you think I/R 0.9 is ?

Infinite-Recurring 0.9 Positive = ? Put Here I/R 0.9 as a Positive Value

Meanwhile, can you find a number between 0.9999... and 1? = 0.9(.9)1

I have seen Many Example Calculations for Infinite-Recurring 0.9 But no One is Showing the Math from Root as Explained in my Example to it Becoming or is equal to 1

Below is an Example Using 100

100 Negative = 99.9

100 Root = 100

100 Positive = 100.1

Can the above be Shown in the same way for Infinite-Recurring 0.9

Now we are Getting somewhere! Let me show what is wrong with the Examples Below...

0.99999... - 0.1 = 0.8999999... = 0.8 + 0.09999... = 0.8 + 0.1 = 0.9 0.99999... = 1 0.99999... + 0.1 = 1.0999999... = 1 + 0.09999... = 1 + 0.1 = 1.1

First of all you Cannot Add or Subtract Etc. from Something that is Continuous! In this case Infinite-Recurring 0.9 As soon as you do one or more of the .9s is no longer Continuous!

In the Negative Example Below a .9 has become .8

0.99999... - 0.1 = 0.8999999... = 0.8 + 0.09999... = 0.8 + 0.1 = 0.9

In the Root Example Below All the .9s Have Stopped being Continuous! By Assuming They All = 1

0.99999... = 1

In the Positive Example Below...Which is the Worst case! All the .9s Have Stopped being Continuous! Plus There is Now a .1

0.99999... + 0.1 = 1.0999999... = 1 + 0.09999... = 1 + 0.1 = 1.1

What the Above shows is that you Cannot Apply Calculations to Something that is Continuous! This is the Mistake everyone is doing when trying to Prove Infinite-Recurring 0.9 = 1

The Next Main Mistake everyone is doing is Trying to Go Against the Above...by Calculating the Ten Times Calculation 10 x Etc.

There are Three types of Ten Times Calculation Which Concern the Infinite-Recurring 0.9 Problem! Only One is ever being used None of the other Two are mentioned as Possibilities!?

The First is the Normal 10 x 0.9 = 9 This is OK if the 0.9 is a Single 0.9 But I have seen many Example where it is Trying to be Applied to 0.999...Etc. Against the Above.

The Second is The 10 x 0.9 Which could Equal (.9999999999) That is Ten of the Continuous .9s But How can you Separate The Ten From the Rest? Again Against the Above.

And the Third is 10 x All the .9s Again Not Possible Because of the Above.

So to End this... Infinite-Recurring 0.9 Must always be Known and Shown as Having Continuous .9s

The Philosopher Quotes: “ I Think Therefore I am “

The Mathematician answers “ I Continue Therefore I’m Recurring “

GeniusIsBack. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.41.16.181 (talk) 11:28, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously use words with meanings that are not the standard meanings of mathematics or which usually are not defined at all. Thus, we need to develop a common vocabulary. (For example, I'd say that continuity has nothing to do with recurring, because one is a property of functions while the other is a property of decimal representations of numbers.)

The context of 0.999... is usually the set of real numbers. Do you know and understand what real numbers are, and do you agree that 0.999... is a decimal representation of a real number? Any discussion about whether 0.999... equals 1 is useless until we agree what kind of object 0.999... actually is supposed to be. Huon (talk) 12:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed you recently declined a 'redirect for creation' request, Patkai Hills→Patkai. It was by total chance that I came across this, but it seems to been an inappropriate reason to decline. If you'd looked at the article, you would see that "The Pat-kai ... are the hills on India's North Eastern border with Burma." I don't know why you would have declined that request, since "Patkai Hills" is certainly a plausible redirect for hills named 'Patkai'. I've created the redirect, just wondering why you didn't. Swarm ^X 19:15, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

This is to notify you (as you are a participant in the above ANI) that I've made several restriction proposals at this discussion which you may wish to comment on. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you meant Shovon in your latest response? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 09:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, I did mean Shovon, and I provided diffs to what I'd call hypocritical edits by Shovon (first advising to start splitting the article, then calling it "gaming the system"), but I hadn't realized that the post I was actually responding to wasn't by Shovon. Apparently I wasn't alone in that misconception. Bizarre, but certainly my error. I can't tell why Zuggernaut didn't include Shovon among the named participants in the ANI thread. Huon (talk) 09:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate in the discussion on Talk: List of South Asian inventions and discoveries. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:18, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Huon/Archive5. Thank you for patrolling new pages. Patrolling is an essential function at Wikipedia, not only to prevent the wrong kind of pages staying online, but also to do some basic research and tag them for attention. When tagging articles for deletion , please remember to place the special warning template on the author's talk page - I've done this for you this time at Rob Daniels Gambling. There is currently a drive to improve the quality of patrolling - you can help: please read WP:NPP (recently updated), and if there's anything that is not clear, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. You may even wish to make your own suggestions for improvement. Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:52, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Huon,

If send a request to create a category "WikiAfrica" which you declined. If noticed that other WikiProjects do have a category (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Africa) Could you tell me why they did get to create it?Riannedac (talk) 14:58, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thank you for your explanation. I will try to work it out. Riannedac (talk) 09:26, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I feel the article refers to some unremarkable person. It has no sources nor citations either. Its written like an advertisement. --Thalapathi (Ping Back) 09:13, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You are invited to take part in a 'Gordion knot vote' with three options on the future title of List of Indian inventions and discoveries. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Huon, how are you? I would like your opinion ono something. It seems like this website is affiliated to Angie Sage, author of Septimus Heap. She writes articles and letters here. Problem is the url includes the term wordpress, which is not considered reliable in Wikipedia. But can we consider this as the self-published sources like artist or author's own websites. Even Sage's own website links to this one, hence I thought of asking your opinion on this. Please do reply back. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:34, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While Angie Sage may write there, I don't think she's the main contributor. According to the blog's About page, it's maintained by Shauki (whoever that is), not by Sage. I also couldn't find an indication of authorship on most of the individual blog entries; they probably were not written by Sage. If there is clear indication of such authorship for an entry, say for the "Letters from Angie Sage", it should count as a primary source. (As an aside, her latest letter (again) seems to indicate that the movie will be live action; the "casting" comment would otherwise be unecessary.) Hope that helps. Huon (talk) 11:46, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say how much I admire your scholarship and careful review of sources. That's rare here, and it deserves mention, in my view. Best,  – OhioStandard (talk) 14:42, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Writegeist (talk) 06:06, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Huon. Thank you for pointing out that I removed another user's content. It was not intentional at all. I'm not sure exactly how that happened but I did notice that when I saved my comments the page said that there was a conflict, apparently someone else was adding their comments at the same moment. I guess I clicked the wrong "save" after that. I will try to be more careful in the future. Take care. (WanderingFool (talk) 00:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, Huon. You saw this, right? You can read it by increasing the "magnification" in your browser window, usually via CTRL+ of course. Iit lists our friend Prescott as a "partner" in Brown Brothers, Harriman & Company. Of course I'm sure you've noticed, too, that the fax machine stamp says at the top of each page, along with the page numbers and date, says "from PARMET", which evidently refers to Herbert Parmet, and lists a "to" (destination) telephone number of (815) 352-6124. I wonder who Parmet was faxing the documents to? Fun sleuth work. I don't have the time to do it, but the whole process of piecing together the whole story from the bits and pieces available would be fun sleuth work. Cheers,  – OhioStandard (talk) 22:25, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had seen the documents, but I hadn't realized the meaning of "from PARMET". Since Parmet wrote the HNN article I'm not really surprised, though, and I don't think it's significant who received the fax. Probably it was just some intermediate step between the National Archives and HNN. Huon (talk) 23:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Huon, thanks for the heads up. I was not aware that I could create redirects on my own. That's good to know for the future!Hoops gza (talk) 14:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

could you look at this rejection again, as I don't see an article with a matching title?CecilWard (talk) 14:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compound Nucleus is a redirect which points to nuclear reaction. Compound nucleus without the capital N is a redlink, but Wikipedia's search is not overly case sensitive and will point you to the existing redirect even if the capitalization of your search term disagrees. If you want to change the target to something more specific, go ahead and do so. By the way, is there a reason why you don't create redirects yourself? Anonymous users and those with too few edits are prohibited from creating new articles themselves and have to use the AfC process, but that should not stop you. Huon (talk) 14:32, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. I just wanted to thank you for your help with the Given Campbell article. I have tried to make it presentable as a Wikipedia article. I will add in-line footnotes as my time permits. John Mehlberg (email) —Preceding undated comment added 16:33, 1 July 2011 (UTC).[reply]

dear huon, i'm not sure exactly what the problem was with that Mariners' Church of Detroit link. but it links to the correct article now, so thanks for checking it out. Tesuro1212 (talk) 15:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Huon. You have new messages at Aristophanes68's talk page.
Message added 00:46, 5 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Aristophanes68 (talk) 00:46, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a growing consensus to keep this article providing it is stubified and rewritten using scholarly sources. In light of the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Collective salvation, would you be willing to withdraw your nomination of the article for deletion? If we can get the other two editors who !voted for deletion to change their !votes, we can do a WP:SNOW "keep" on the article and save everybody from spending any further energy on the AFD. That way we can focus on writing an encyclopedic article. I assume you would be OK with this as long as it isn't the kind of dreck that was in the article when you AFD'ed it. --Pseudo-Richard (talk) 04:34, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, now it's an article worth keeping. Huon (talk) 10:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ilyas 23:22, 13 July 2011 (UTC) I created an article oflanjar tribe Category:Sindhi tribe and give cite references but the article is still unstable {{help me}}

Thank you for reverting the incorrect data added to the Asian American article. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:36, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that you have done significant consistent contributions to the Zardari page. Could you please join the discussion at FA nomination for Zardari? I may be leaving the country for a month in 3 days and do not want the nomination to fail if I am gone. Any help would be appreciated. Reformation32 (talk) 21:13, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

uuugh, my fault. thanks for "rereviewing" my submission. I had the wrong(?) page open. Don't know how that could happen. mabdul 00:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you told me that "La Barra Del Rojo" it's not the best name.

The article Los Diablos Rojos is wrong in the title, because "Los Diablos Rojos" isn't the name of that barra brava.

As I have shown in sources, the barra brava is called "La Barra Del Rojo".^[1][2]

The name it's in Spanish but it is the true and only name that has this barra brava, should not be changed by language.

190.193.238.97 (talk) 14:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the current article title is probably wrong. But "La Barra Del Rojo" seems rather uncommon too. There is just a single source more reliable than a blog using that term, and it doesn't capitalize the term (neither does the blog) - there's no reason to believe it's a name instead of a description. Other sources call it "la barra de Independiente", which could just as legitimately be called the barra's name. Anyway, what you want is not a redirect; that would only make moving the article more complicated. If you can provide better references showing what the barra brava is named, I'll gladly assist in moving the article. Huon (talk) 15:25, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are another journalistic article. ^[3]

And look here. Talk:Los_Diablos_Rojos

190.193.238.97 (talk) 16:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, even if it's possibly not the perfect article title, it's surely an improvement. The correct capitalization seems to be "la barra del Rojo", though. Huon (talk) 16:32, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You nominated the Agendia article as Afd. I have started working thru it but much remains to be done. Nonetheless, would you please review whether you still believe it should go? Thanks.FeatherPluma (talk) 07:36, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. 07:35, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining at Talk:Karlee Pérez. I am a bit confused about how to figure out what divas in the WWE are notable or not. I assume we do it based on what titles they achieve or how many TV episodes they have been in. Is there something like that I can use to compare to others who do have articles (accepted as notable) to figure out if she is now, or in case she becomes notable in the future? She is getting a 2nd push on NXT with Bateman. Bateman and her rival AJ are both on Smackdown so how many Smackdown matches would Maxine have to wrestle before she's notable enough for an article? Bonechamber (talk) 07:08, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Huon. You have new messages at Alpha Quadrant's talk page.
Message added 18:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Alpha Quadrant ^talk 18:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HUON,

I got all your information on changing my site from my name to a generic name but have no idea how to do this.

Can you please change Fatch1965 to GPSports Systems?

thanks

Adrian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatch1965 (talk • contribs) 03:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied the content to User:Fatch1965/Drafts. Right now notability is not established, the article reads like an advertisement, and if it were moved into articlespace, it would probably be nominated for deletion, possibly even speedy deletion. What it needs are reliable secondary sources (possibly newspaper articles?) to verify the article's content and to establish the subject's notability. I'll do some work on the draft, but I assume you know better where to find such sources than I do. Once notability is established, I'll move the article from User:Fatch1965/Drafts to GPSports Systems. Huon (talk) 11:39, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to invite fellow Wikipedians interested in Florida history to join in our new project page for celebrating our state's 500th anniversay at Viva_Florida_500. Please review and join in getting this project off the ground. It's more than just about Ponce de Leon and his landing it is also about other cultures and what new content we can bring into Wiki such as adding new information about the Native Cultures that were here when this period of discovery began.--Ourhistory153 (talk) 14:54, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Huon. You have new messages at Talk:Pakistan.
Message added 21:55, 8 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

user notified Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 21:55, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Huon/Archive5! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

I've gone ahead and created a draft of an article, located here: User:Jeff Song/Mellanox. I believe the sources provided (Bloomberg, Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Globes, EETimes) establish notability well enough - happy to hear your thoughts. Jeff Song (talk) 20:40, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll be moving it into the main article space soon, in that case. Jeff Song (talk) 21:30, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The new article has just been nominated for speedy deletion. Your input would be helpful. Jeff Song (talk) 17:32, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That nomination seems to have been resolved. While I'm not an admin and cannot look at the deleted version, I doubt the current one really is just a repost; thus the speedy deletion criterion did not apply. I'll add the article to my watchlist and keep an eye on it. Huon (talk) 20:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, the current speedy issue has been resolved. If you have comments the current issue of "advertising", I'd welcome your participation in the discussion. Jeff Song (talk) 20:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi! There's new info at the discussion at Talk:New_Mexico#Official_languages

WhisperToMe (talk) 09:02, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

It's so good to hear from you. I am trying to improve the artitle, "eye movement in language reading," since it needs more citations and a bit information. So I have made some changes and wanted to submit it to "did you know." Which is why I thought that I could redirect the article. I'm a student and this is an assignment for one of my courses (Psychology of Language). I am open to new ideas or changes, so feel please to comment on my work. I will really appreciate it. Thanks!

Julietbee (talk) 15:29, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Huon,

I meant "feel free to make comments on my work." I'm sure you figured that out. Yes, I wanted to replace the article "eye movement in language reading," with the improved version in my sandbox. Thanks for your comments. I've been able to submit my article to "do you know." Thanks for your help!

Julietbee (talk) 23:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I feel silly now! It didn't even occur to me to check whether a Feeder (beekeeping) article existed, once I determined that no such article was linked to from either the disambig page or the Langstroth hive article. I've edited both those pages to point to the correct feeder article, so yes, I agree that there seems to be no need for an (apiculture) redirect — if there are any other apiculture-related pages which should point to Feeder (beekeeping) but don't yet, the corrected disambig page entry should get users looking for it there eventually. Thanks for pointing out my oversight so gently. —GrammarFascist (talk) 11:15, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Possibly not the correct choice though as;

Category:Ancient people who committed suicide > A large category for all ancient people

Category:Suicides in Greece > commited suicide whilst within Grecian boundaries,i.e. the country of Greece

Category:Greeks who committed suicide > people born to the Greece having then at some time committed suicide

plus

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Category:Ancient_Greeks_by_death [this the original source of Category creation request]

shows four categories is incomplete without the requested category

Drift chambers (talk) 17:31, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Huon. You have new messages at Talk:K7 Computing.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

May I know why you have declined all my category requests? All these categories are part of a classification scheme. All of them, and in particular the English descent category, are going to have several articles. 116.48.84.188 (talk) 17:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All but the English descent had only one or two proposed articles; that's very little. The English descent had four, but for three of them I could not ascertain that the people so to be categorized were actually of English descent. I'd say that unless there are at least three unambiguous articles for the category, it should not be created. Can you show that more articles clearly belong into those categories? Huon (talk) 17:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How many would you require as examples? The Manchu one, for instance, got seven articles. 116.48.84.188 (talk) 18:25, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seven would be more than enough; as I said above I'd put the limit at three. But there should be some sort of reliable source for such information. Not a single one of the "Manchu" articles has a source, an external link or anything of that kind to verify that the subject is indeed of Manchu descent (with the possible exception of one Vietnamese fan site I could not read). Huon (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Usually the sources are a lot more extensive in Chinese than in English. 116.48.84.188 (talk) 03:49, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I wouldn't be able to read them, I believe most of the articles did not have Chinese sources either. I'd say if there are no sources available for their descent, it's probably not significant enough to categorize them so. Huon (talk) 03:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go to the Cantonese or Chinese version of the same articles and you can tell. 116.48.84.188 (talk) 11:41, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at WP:DRN regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is [Wilhelm Busch (pastor)]. Thank you. --Stephfo (talk) 14:31, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See follow up Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive828#Block review requested --Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I recently requested a redirect from Ķ to cedilla be created. My apologies if I did anything wrong. I was unsure of the proper forum in which to propose that an article be both deleted and redirected, and AfD doesn't quite seem to fit the bill. What is, in fact, the right forum? Interchangeable|talk to me 15:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since Ķ already is an article, you can edit it yourself and have it redirect to cedilla. There is no reason to delete it first. I also do not see why that article would have to be turned into a redirect in the first place if it is indeed a distinct letter in the Latvian alphabet, but I'm no expert. A suitable forum for a discussion would be either the article's talk page or, for a wider community input, probably WikiProject Latvia. Huon (talk) 15:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's all for the sake of consistency. The other distinctive Latvian letters don't have their own articles and redirect to cedilla. Thanks for the advice. Interchangeable|talk to me 01:57, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But look something for example Narcissus (mythology) or Narkissos (Greek: Νάρκισσος), possibly derived from ναρκη (narke) meaning "sleep, numbness," . The name and the meaning are included both in one article, so I thought that would be useful the category, too. --BBCatport (talk) 03:28, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

This is Davidkim2106 ^(talk). Can you please note that a Dsixl is not the same as a DSI?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidkim2106 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't edited either page nor the Nintendo DSi article nor Template:Dedicated video game handheld consoles in months. Did I make a mistake at some point? Should I do something? If so, what? Dsixl redirects to Nintendo DSi because that article contains information on the DSi XL model; arguably the redirect could point directly to the relevant section. Huon (talk) 00:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the proposed deletion message on this page and have edited the page so it is less cluttered. The links/facts mentioned are verifiable via the Classic Game Room channel on YouTube. The spin-off section can be turned into its own page at some point to include information on it but keep from cluttering the main Classic Game Room channel page for now. As a result of these changes, I've removed the proposed deletion message. Please let me know if there is anything further to add or do in order to ensure the page will remain on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvin0912 (talk • contribs) 18:27, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in that proposed deletion message, we need significant coverage in reliable secondary sources to establish a subject's notability - to show that it is important enough to be included in Wikipedia. YouTube videos, especially ones published by the article's subject, are primary sources and cannot establish notability. The various interviews are better at that, but most of them seem to be at blogs or forums which are unlikely to be reliable sources because they probably do not have the kind of editorial oversight we require. I will have a closer look. In general, more sources and more reliable sources cannot hurt - in this case, there might be articles published in gaming journals or the like. Huon (talk) 00:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hi. When you recently edited Florence Brudenell-Bruce, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Lewis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your Message I just saw you added comments such as this one to multiple articles. I doubt they are useful. Firstly, real vandals will hardly be impressed by a "please don't vandalize this" note. Secondly, you do not own articles you started; you can expect them to be heavily edited by others. Claiming that it's impossible for those articles to violate any policy of Wikipedia does not make them perfect. For example, I believe you're not a native speaker, and your English may profit from proofreading. More significantly, many of those articles are very, very short on reliable secondary sources, and significant coverage in such sources is necessary to establish notability. Huon (talk) 22:05, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I was busy in reviewing few articles therefore I was not able to reply you rapidly, now let me clear the wrong image which you have in your mind, now first of all, I honestly respect you and your comments so no offense, I honestly respect senior Editors therefore I honestly respect you as well but let me tell you bit about me I am editing Wikipedia since 2006 without any user name or ID now in 2010, I register my ID I never say that I own my article what ever we write here its for people who visit Wikipedia, I honestly love and respect Wikipedia, I hope so do you therefore I want to make Wikipedia the marvelous place for everyone who visit here, If someone appreciate Wikipedia or its article its my and i hope your appreciation as well.

Now, Answer for Vandals, here in Wikipedia we believe in GOOD Faith Policy which means we should have a faith on other that the second person wont think negative about Wikipedia, Whenever I write any article I believe in honest work what every I write should be VALID therefore I belive that other Wikipedia user avoid vandalizing any page on our beloved Wikipedia however anyone can contribute in it and go a head type anything which is important, supportive and fruitful for any article on Wikipedia therefore in my work I strictly take care about PG.

3rd Answer, you asked me why my articles are less well there are only few articles who are written less mostly I don't focus on articles i focus on reviewing like you however my working style is bit different I search for citation and fill it by my self mostly I avoid being angry mastodons with anyone as we believe in WP:NAM with all your due respect but you were bit offensive in your messages as I remove the proposal tag because I was working on other article and searching for new citations for my articles.

Your this sentece hurt me a lot ""For example, I believe you're not a native speaker, and your English may profit from proofreading" I always support and appreciate Proofreading its very good for us and for our beloved Wikipedia however your pitch was not good don't forget our policy of WP:NAM AND for kind your information I am NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER, I am speaking English since I was born.

Proposal for deleting any article or declaring it for deleting is your right I do respect it however in bulk reviewing you didn't check it properly in Moni Bhattacharjee article citations are satisfying the secondary sources, look you are agreed on the point that his one movie is very notable, its not only one movie he has more than 6 biggest movies as he is director of nineties therefore its hard to find information on net however I am working on it as soon as I find I will upload it,

Regarding Mahmood Parekh article, I have uploaded the Secondary Sources and tertiary sources as well his interview on TV channels and Newspapers which satisfy Secondary and tertiary sources and he is very known personality in Pakistan and the world he is one of the 20 board of directors of AI must say a legend because he is the only person in Pakistan who started Healthcare Advertisement in Pakistan however as you know Pakistan had poor IT sources at his time when he was struggling, he is Entrepreneur in Pakistan as he is one of the Vice President and Coordinator of International Advertising Association for Pakistan.

I hope that This was very good discussion with you I hope you will reply me in posative manner and reply conclude the article deleting request. --Faizanalivarya (talk) 03:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied at your talk page. Let's keep the discussion in one place. Huon (talk) 15:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Huon,

The sources are given on the G20 School (article page). Please see if anything can be don! Thanks! Merlaysamuel (talk) 07:49, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those are all published on various schools' websites or in schools' newspapers. They are hardly independent of the subject; they are primary sources. What we'd need to establish notability is coverage in sources independent of the subject - newspaper articles (in newspapers independent of the schools!) might do the trick, but Google News turned up nothing, and Google Web didn't look promising either. Huon (talk) 13:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. as you say... Merlaysamuel (talk) 14:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thanks for working on Shadab Restaurant Fauzan (talk) 14:19, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Re: Robert Biggar, Ontario Pioneer. 12 Jan. 2012.

Hi:

I note that you are of the opinion that this submission lacks the specificity of "significance" required for Wikipedia. I cannot disagree more. As you are probably aware, the determination of significance lies in the eyes of the beholder. In other words, it is subjective. One country may consider its citizen worthy of note while another may not. Yet, there is a special place in history for those who undertake challenges and venture into the unknown, no matter what country they may happen to be from. They serve as "beacons in the night" for those who follow. Witness the attributions made in the U.S. to the pilgrims who left England for the New World. With regard to my submission, and without embellishments, I am making a similar attribution.

I would also like to point out that the edit templates for the Seven Years war and Pulteney Estates is incorrect. There are articles in Wikipedia on these subjects.

Thank you for your review and sharing your viewpoint with me. I remain open to any and all improvements you might offer.Michael Biggar (talk) 16:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia measures notability by "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (that's the wording of the general notability guideline). This is not a subjective criterion. Your proposed article was very short on such sources; only genealogical information was sourced at all, and an entry in a book of family genealogy is not "significant coverage".

Regarding the templates, that was a case of wrong brackets: Wikilinks use square brackets, templates (such as infoboxes and the like) use curly brackets. Huon (talk) 17:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Originally, there was one independent source of note. There are now several. It is not correct that in the initial submission ONLY genealogical information was sourced. I continue to be open to any suggestions you might have that might improve the submission. I would appreciate your further comments. 18 Feb. 2012Michael Biggar (talk) 19:28, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jaeger's book is indeed a good source, though unfortunately it does not support the statement for which it is used. The others are rather dubious. For example, I couldn't find the Family of Biggar Genealogical Tables in the Library and Archives Canada or in the British Library. The one reference to Biggar I could find in the official records of the centennial celebration, Bath, Steuben County, New York is not actually in the appendix, and it does not say what you quote that work for (it's not significant coverage anyway). The History of the County of Brant, Ontario exists in the Canadian Archives, but it's apparently not available online, and given that the two sources I could read didn't say what you used them for, I doubt this one does better. My suggestion would be to radically shorten the article and rewrite it closely following what Jaeger says. That should give you about two or three paragraphs which are actually supported by a secondary source, much better than a long article multiple sections of which do not have any sources at all. Notability will still be on the weak side because even Jaeger's book is apparently published by the Brant County Library and therefore at most constitutes local coverage, but it might pass. Huon (talk) 20:42, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your helpful comments. I believe the Dumfries (Scotland) Public Library holds the research material and printers Draft from Mr. Shirley (who also was the Librarian). I happen to have inherited one of the original copies printed. With respect to the Brant County history, I am taking the liberty of attaching a site.(http://www.brantford.library.on.ca-localhistory-pdfs-warners1883.pdf) for your consideration. Should you require, I would be pleased to e-mail a copy to you of the two relevant pages. The purpose of using the Bath reference was simply to substantiate the fact that the Biggar family were , in fact, early settlers on the Pulteney Association's holdings (having arrived there from Scotland) and, as such, were recognized and included in "The Centennial of Bath, N.Y."

My use of multiple sections in this piece probably points out the obvious-it is a complicated world (English Civil War, American Revolution, French Revolution,and the Napoleonic Wars, among others) and perspectives are often narrowly focused. Yet, such events bring disequilibrium to society that may result in huge migration changes. However, I will give thought to a shortened version. Thanks again..19/02/2012Michael Biggar (talk) 22:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article about someone who lived in the backwoods of Ontario; I doubt you can find reliable sources drawing a connection between Robert Biggar and the English Civil War or the French Revolution (neither of which is actually mentioned in the article). If no secondary source makes such a connection, neither should the article. The link to the pdf is actually http://brantford.library.on.ca/localhistory/pdfs/warners1883.pdf, and it seems to contradict other parts of the article: It says that the Biggar family, including Robert, came to Canada "from a place named Biggar, in Scotland" in 1806 and that James Biggar was born in Biggar, Scotland in 1803 and came to Canada in 1806 with his father. Unless that's a coincidence and James' father is not Robert Biggar but someone else who happened to come to Canada in the same year (extremely unlikely given the context), I don't see how one of Robert Biggar's sons could be born in Bath, New York, in 1796. And while the American Revolutionary War had ended in 1783, you claim that Biggar's migration to Canada two decades later was a result of that war. That seems unlikely. I suspect you confused Robert Biggar of Biggar, Scotland, with an unrelated Robert Biggar of Bath, New York, and then made up a nice story linking those two. The more deeply I look into the matter, the more claims seem dubious. Huon (talk) 23:11, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, this is an article about the birth of a new (and different) country and one family's "journey" to achieve a better life. I am simply trying "to give voice" to this journey. One could hardly live in the "backwoods" (whatever that is) with a large family to support and expect to survive. Infrastructure had to be the priority and this could best be undertaken flowing outward from a community or base of operations. In fact, preparations had to be taken to defend the small Upper Canada pioneer communities ( Ft. Malden-across the river from Detroit; Newark, near the Niagara River and Kingston where many of the British soldiers resided) from the constant threat of American invasion after 1800. These fears were substantiated in the War of 1812.

Other issue raised: Surely you can't deny the impacts of all the revolutions mentioned (above) and the impetus for European migrations to America. However, the issue of Family origins at one time may have been Lanarkshire but not at the time of the "coming to America". With respect to the James in your post, I have no particular comment. It is unclear which "James" is being referenced as there were several of that name. My focus is on "Robert". With respect to the the birth at Bath, N.Y. there is a large monument for Charles Biggar near Kingston, Ontario that substantiates this fact. With respect to the migration issue, I would suggest that you may have misunderstood what I wrote; namely that following 1783 some Patriots made life miserable for those they considered former enemies. In my view, history seems to confirm this. One only has to look closely at the writings of Thomas Paine. However, it is more likely that economic factors compelled the Biggars to move on. I believe that the Pulteney settlements were not generating sufficient revenues for the investors. With respect to the precise arrival date in coming to Canada, my investigation is continuing. If Robert "signed up" for Pulteney in 1793 under a ten year contract that would permit him to leave in 1803.

I hope I have addressed all your issues. Thank you for the discussion.Michael Biggar (talk) 17:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC) 20/02/2012[reply]

While unrest in Europe was important to the migration to America, you are not writing an article on the history of European migration but on Robert Biggar. Historical events unrelated to Biggar - that is, not mentioned in connection to him by reliable sources - should not be part of the article. The relevant Wikipedia policy is WP:SYN, which considers this a form of original research.

The Robert Biggar of Mount Pleasant is explicitly said to have come to Canada from Scotland. He is said to have had eleven children of whom James, Hamilton and Herbert still resided in the County of Brant when that work was written. The three entries immediately following Robert Biggar detail, guess whom, James, Hamilton and Herbert Biggar, whose dates of migration perfectly correspond to Robert's. Hamilton and Herbert are called "another son of Robert Biggar" and "also a son of Robert Biggar", respectively. Are you seriously suggesting that the James Biggar who was born in Biggar, Scotland, in 1803 is not a son of Robert Biggar? I doubt that. So let me recount the history of Robert Biggar as the sources verify it, with your claims included.

In 1783, the American Revolutionary War came to an end. At least seven years later, British loyalist Robert Biggar migrated to Bath, New York, from Scotland. There he somehow met Joseph Brant who had left New York in 1784 for Canada. The Biggars nonetheless remained at least until 1797 when their son Charles was born. During their time in Bath they also met Robert Hamilton, the judge or the merchant or possibly both, even though the Hamiltons lived in Canada, not in the US. When the Biggars found out that two decades after independence British loyalists still weren't that well-liked in the US, they moved to Canada in 1806 by way of Robert's ancestral home in Scotland where his son James was born in 1803. Despite knowing Brant, they did not immediately move to Brant County but to Lincoln County and then to Stoney Creek (where he helped the wounded not only of the Battle of Stoney Creek, but also of the Battle of Queenston Heights 30km to the east); they only came to Brant County in 1816, nine years after Brant's death.

This is the tale you want to spin. It falls apart at every seam. In particular, it would require:

• A source that the Bath Biggar is indeed the same person as the Mont Pleasant Biggar despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
• A source about the relationship between Biggar and Brant.
• A source about the relationship between Biggar and Hamilton (and which Hamilton it is).
• A source about Biggar's work for the wounded in 1812/13.

There are lots of additional claims about Biggar not supported by the current sources - and that does not even include the claims not about Biggar in the first place. In its current form the article is unverifiable original research, probably partly made up. As an aside, you are aware that James married Jane, daughter of one William Biggar? Since she probably was not his niece, there must have been at least one other Biggar family in the vicinity; maybe the Charles born in Bath belonged to that other family as well. Huon (talk) 21:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have condensed my original submission and a new submission is to be found in my sandbox. Your comments would be appreciated.~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Biggar (talk • contribs) 22:49, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You for the prompt response to this, but I would point out the rather awkward gaps in the list at Category:Films set in the 2020s and you'll note the redlinks in the horizontal list in the upper right of the pages for the individual years just beg to be created. With only four more to go, it seems a shame to not fill them in yet, and most of the 202# year categories already have only a couple films anyway. The 2030 categories can certainly wait several years, but it looks like the 2020's may be ready now.

Oh, well. In time... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.254.84.45 (talk) 00:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of the five articles that were to fill those categories only two actually mention the year where they were supposed to be categorized. That wasn't too impressive, and even for those I'm not sure the year they're set in is actually an "essential, defining characteristic" of the films per WP:CAT. That there are other tiny categories is not a reason to create more of the same. Huon (talk) 01:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How much have you studied SENS, Huon? What do you know about the science behind it? What is your science background? What do you believe is the cause of aging, and why do you believe that those mechanisms cannot be repaired? The Holliday article that is cited as a reference for SENS-bashing is about "anti-aging", not specifically about SENS as far as I can see. All "anti-aging" is not equivalent to SENS --Ben Best 17:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll reply at that article's talk page. Huon (talk) 18:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For your continued contributions in the Wikipedia Requests for redirect. Excellent work! Rotorcowboy talk contribs 03:48, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Menachem Youlus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Nat Gertler (talk) 01:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Huon, you recently removed a deletion tag from Menachem Youlus. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove speedy deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the tag. Although the deletion proposal may be incorrect, removing the tag is not the correct way for you to contest the deletion, even if you are more experienced than the nominator. Instead, please use the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. Remember to be patient, there is no harm in waiting for another experienced user to review the deletion and judge what the right course of action is. As you are involved, and therefore potentially biased, you should refrain from doing this yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:37, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Huon. You have new messages at Talk:Pakistan/Archive 14#Pakistan has been characterized as "failed state" from last 4 years.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I saw your name when I was looking at comments in the talk page archives related to this particular topic. If you have any opinions about this particular topic, please join the discussion. Thanks, Mar4d (talk) 15:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to thank you for accepting the category request for The Doon School! :) Merlaysamuel (talk) 13:18, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I mentioned here that I do not know the nice ref-format you used, and that I would try to talk you into fixing the manuscripts section here as it gets moved to main space. Now that wiretransfers are out, I thought I would provide cash for it here. Is this enough? Thanks in advance for your help. History2007 (talk) 14:00, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's more than enough. Actually it's not that complicated; I learned it by observing PiCo at The Exodus. You just add a line "| ref=harv" (for Harvard reference style, presumably) to the {{cite book}} template in the bibliography section and the footnotes themselves are created by {{sfn|author1|author2|...|year|p=page number}}, which produces the footnote including an automatic link to the relevant bibliography entry. The books co-authored by Josephus are a little trickier because the {{sfn}} template by default apparently only works with last names of authors (and that would give "Josephus, Flavius"). Anyway, I'll gladly do the work, it's no problem (and I'm much better suited to that type of WikiGnome work than to trying and finding references on something so far outside my area of expertise). Huon (talk) 14:49, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. It looks like we are getting that page into good shape now, gradually. Just one more section to work on. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 15:16, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Josephus on Jesus, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rufinus and Hegesippus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:53, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your concerns, but since it is a valid search term (and the same content is at List of Doon School alumni#Diplomacy) I have redirected it. Hope you don't mind. Cheers, Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From your comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christine Kuo: "Just pointing to a list of non-English search results isn't really helpful."

I agree it isn't massively helpful, however it essentially shifted the burden of proof from the keep side to the delete side. Before, the burden lies with someone to come up with independent reliable sources; after, the burden lies with someone to show the sources are unreliable or non-independent. Deryck C. 12:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting notion that every term that produces a number of Chinese Google News hits is presumed notable, but not one with which I agree. I doubt the same would be true for English Google News hits, and WP:GOOGLEHITS seems to agree. Regarding Christine Kuo, I don't think even the user pointing to that list was actually able to read it. I believe you are - please go ahead and add reliable secondary sources to the beauty pageants, Miss Chinese Toronto Pageant and Miss Chinese International Pageant. Huon (talk) 13:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for your message on my wall but do not understand - could you provide an example please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmanuel Smithers (talk • contribs) 19:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you may have messaged on my wall during editing proccess - how do I check?

Thanks! Emmanuel Smithers (talk) 19:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing he really meant Salvelinus, or "char."RadioKAOS (talk) 20:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that makes sense, I had never heard of char before. But unless there's a source I doubt we need it in the Trail lakes article. Huon (talk) 20:59, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it time to block him? He distracts several people with his games. Locador (talk) 16:52, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. Either he is an extremely clueless new editor, but learning fast, or he is indeed a troll. Some of his more recent edits are clearly appropriate, others are entirely useless. I'd suggest watching him closely for a little longer. If he improves, great; if not, we can still report him to AN/I or even launch a RFC. Huon (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Guidance Barnstar

		The Guidance Barnstar
		I thank you for your helpfulness and patience with me, and your simple yet very useful advise and guidance, and for the time you sacrificed to aid me closer towards becoming a better wikipedian. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 03:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Minor barnstar
	This is for noticing I'd put {{afc-c|d}} instead of {{afc-c|b}} at the bottom of a redirect request at WP:AFC/R. I'm feeling a bit dopey today so never noticed, but it's the little edits like that that make a difference. Keep up the good work! Rcsprinter (state) (Contribs) (Not Rcs) 21:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

--George Ho (talk) 08:54, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I created a sandbox version of the exodus page at User:Quarkgluonsoup/The Exodus/Draft. Please come over and make what edits you think would improve the page.Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The sandbox version of the exodus article has been moved to Talk:The_Exodus/Draft.Quarkgluonsoup (talk) 15:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to get back to you to say "Thank you" for leaving messages on the talk page of my userpage in response to my questions about joining Wikipedia: WikiProject Christianity and Wikipedia: WikiProject Religion. Thank you for getting back to me so quickly - it is exactly this type of collaboration which helps to keep the Wikipedia project healthy! All good wishes, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I have published this article on wikipedia along with some references of youtube.com, where the video proofs are available on a large scale. I appreciate your concern that i should provide more authentic verifications regarding this article and for that i have started my work and i am waiting for the launch of its official website from where i can prove each and every word of my article. I request you not to delete this article till the launch of its official website and till then i can debate with anyone because i have enough evidence to defend my work. I am new to wikipedia therefore i need some encouragement from your side. i am improving my article so please remove the deletion tag so that wikipedians can get the knowledge without any doubt in there minds. Thanks for your cooperation. --Shahenshahkillz (talk) 12:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can remove the deletion tag yourself. But unless the underlying concern is addressed and the article has reliable secondary sources indicating the subject's notability (that is, sources independent of the subject itself, sources known for editorial oversight and fact-checking; in particular, YouTube videos are not reliable secondary sources, and the official website would not be a secondary source either), I would instead initiate a more bureaucratic deletion process (Articles for deletion) which will lead to a community discussion, but without those reliable secondary sources the outcome of the discussion will almost certainly be deletion. Huon (talk) 13:05, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, The concern will be addressed very soon, by providing some suitable and reliable references. Thanks for your cooperation and encouragement.--Shahenshahkillz (talk) 11:05, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I appear to have edit conflicted with you on Bradford Spring. Pol430 talk to me 22:28, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi
You probably don't remember, but you asked a question on the U-48 page. I've answered it, kinda; but hey, what do you expect? It was nearly six years ago! Anyway, if you scoot over there, an answer awaits.

Regards, RASAM (talk) 19:27, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Huon, i am accepting 31.18.253.188 (talk)'s request (that you declined) as i suspect you didn't read the lead sentence of Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, and the numerous occurences of "The Mater" within the article. Cheers, just making sure ~ benzband (talk) 15:21, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt that the Mater Misericordiae University Hospital is commonly referred to as "The Mater". But so are various other hospitals, and I don't see why everybody looking for "The Mater" would be interested in the Irish one. I'll change the redirect target to Mater, which lists them all. Huon (talk) 17:49, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that sounds perfectly sensible. *trouts himself for not checking for a dab page* :) benzband (talk) 18:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have to be blunt.

Let me explain how it was unwarranted.

I NEVER removed the word “Norse”, so your revert explanation is a straw-man, and not WP valid at all. You implied (or maybe you didn't see it carefully enough at first) that I somehow removed the word "Norse". I didn't. I merely ADDED the words "West Norwegian" next to it. For better clarity. And it is a sourced fact in the article.

I merely added the elaboration next to it...of WHAT PRECISE TYPE OF “Norse” he was. He was West Norwegian, and that is supported by refs too. "Norse" is not clear or precise enough. Lief was West Norwegian, and there's nothing unsourced or un-supported about that. He may have been born in "Iceland", but his parents (sighs) were Norwegian. Why shouldn't that be made clear in the "Nationality" section of the info box??

"Norse" is not actually a "nation", per se, but a group of nations. In other words, for example, Lief was not "Swedish". His parents were Norwegian. So putting that NEXT to "Norse" (not removing "Norse" at all), is not a bad thing, and not "unsupported" at all. Then it becomes just a matter of persona taste, (with front lame untrue excuses of "not supported"), and reverting good faith accurate things for personal taste is against WP policy. I won't put up with it.

Good-faith accurate sourced edits and modifications should NEVER be reverted, according to WP policy and recommendation. Only truly inaccurate or truly non-supported things, or arguable vandalism, should be "reverted". It's in the body of the article itself about Lief's West Norwegian background. Are you gonna say that Lief was not "Norwegian" at all? Anyway, the edit stands, and there was no valid WP reason to simply remove it for personal agendas or because "you may not like it". It's valid and supported. Regards. Hashem sfarim (talk) 02:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let's keep it at Talk:Leif Ericson, which is more relevant than my talk page. Huon (talk) 02:33, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, but please stop the silly edit-warring. Lief was Norwegian, (his parents), not Swedish, or Icelandic, in that sense. Bring it to Talk. Thanks. Hashem sfarim (talk) 02:36, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just wanted to give you a heads up about something. I noticed that you declined "Redirect request: Special attaché" over at RfC. Please follow these instructions rather than just the decline template.

1. Edit the page and add the template {{afc-c|d}} directly under the section header.
2. Add the template {{afc-c|b}} at the very bottom of the section, below your reply. Failure to include this template will cause all text on the rest of the page to disappear!

If you fail to do this, people using the automatic RfC will still see the request like it wasn't even accepted nor declined. It shows it as still waiting to be reviewed. Thanks! WheresTristan 17:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. I do sometimes screw up and forget the {{afc-c|b}}, but even in retrospect my edit looks good to me. Could you please clarify what I did wrong? Huon (talk) 20:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What the? I compared our versions and I have no idea what I am talking about. When I looked at your edit, it did not show this template {{afc-c|d}}. I then and added it, and it changed to normal. Are you making sense of this? WheresTristan 20:40, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw what happened: The IP provided a source and in the process removed the closing templates. It did the same with some requests you had closed, providing more explicit explanations. I agree that the term "Special attaché" still does not require a redirect even though Google shows a few results. Thanks for re-closing the request. Huon (talk) 20:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem WheresTristan 18:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Special Barnstar
	I awarded you this barnstar :) Sakifahmed (talk) 17:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but what for? Huon (talk) 17:52, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Jawadreventon (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, FYI, at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia_reliability a drive to slow down self-published book references is getting started. Would you like to join that project? Membership is free. History2007 (talk) 21:21, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I did give a source for that information but I will improve my references in the article to include page numbers. The source identified for this information is Nothing but Names, HF Gardner (1899). The page numbers in this book are 504-5 (Biggar Township) and it states that Charles Biggar's parents emigrated from Biggar, Lanark, Scotland. The same information about Charles' parents also appears in The Canadian parliamentary companion, 1874 HJ Morgan on page 128 which is also used as a source for other information in the article.

As far as there being multiple Robert Biggars, I would draw your attention to The Scottish Emigration Blog which states "I found two Robert Biggars born in Dumfries, one in 1773 and the other in 1776, but there is no way to tell if either is the Robert who migrated to Canada". The names Robert and Charles would probably not be that uncommon in Scotland. --Big_iron (talk) 21:17, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Articles for Creation barnstar
		Thanks for all your hard work at the WP:AFC! Keep up the awesome work! WheresTristan 00:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I really appreciate it. Huon (talk) 01:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! I love handing out barnstars. WheresTristan 19:00, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the repairs on my post on the William Lane Craig talk page...I'm kinda new at this..so my edits can be messy.. Sanju87 (talk) 23:31, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Theraodislong added a mention of the Dawkins debate.I think it advocates Dawkins' POV (this is the first time I've heard this particular reason for not debating Craig, I've heard other reasons being proffered by Dawkins) and thus has an issue of neutrality...I could be mistaken offcourse. Can you take a look??? Sanju87 (talk) 19:18, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the praise, expecially as it comes from the article's nominator. I was just lucky in owning those books. Cavarrone (talk) 22:08, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you much for your withdrawal. Past the discomfiture surrounding it being first brought to AFD, all this took I suppose was an understanding that sources must be shown as available even if not immediately used, and then the allowing of issues to be addressed through regular editing. Again, my thanks. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The person starting the new category made sure that a clear majority were ... Republican figures. (about 2/3 of the people listed) Nothing to do with "cheerleading" at all, as far as I can tell. There are real former cheerleaders in the world, but the selection process here leaves no doubt that this is an improper category. Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't be quite as quick to assume bad faith; many of the articles so categorized mentioned cheerleading for quite some time; in some cases Willthacheerleader18 just replaced another cheerleading category by his new one. His choice of mostly Republicans seems a little strange, though - I would have expected that cheerleading and political affiliation should be independent of each other.

I'd also say that politicians and actors should not be categorized by each and every college sport they played, but precedent for that seems ambiguous. If Reagan, for example, is categorized as a college swimmer and football player, why would categorizing him as a college cheerleader be inappropriate? Huon (talk) 14:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Huon, I am having much difficulty understanding how to use Wikipedia to publish an entry. I just received a message from you on my e-mail, but I don't know what to do now. (I went into all 3 links that you sent me in the e-mail.)

Please advise.

Many thanks, MBM. Buttignol 18:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbuttignol (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Nagged to Ed.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! AndrewN ^talk 02:52, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Huon, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. Any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your continued efforts to answer posts and provide helpful answers at the AfC Helpdesk. Keep up the good work. Pol430 talk to me 09:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I cleaned up the Josephus talk page from all the residual effects of the vandalism. I hope it does not seem like I wanted to delete your comment too, but I have found that the more we respond to these people, the more they will talk back. If you want to put your comments back please do. Thanks. I also asked for page protection now. History2007 (talk) 14:41, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objections to the talk page cleanup, and page semi-protection should indeed help. We'll probably have to semi-protect a few others (such as Tacitus on Christ) as well to really get rid of Lung salad's vandalism. Huon (talk) 15:02, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Requesting another topic ban for User:BruceGrubb. Thank you. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]