User talk:Casliber: Difference between revisions
→*A* previous case?: Happy Bastille Day! |
I am innumerate, but I stronly suspects that "many" is a mystical group of numbers more than one, so I will adjust something soon...preferably after another cup of kawfee... |
||
| Line 1,519: | Line 1,519: | ||
I object to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&diff=301953461&oldid=301951149 this]. I haven't been subject to *a* previous case. I've been subject to several. See [[User:William M. Connolley/For me]]. Please correct your statement :-) [[User:William M. Connolley|William M. Connolley]] ([[User talk:William M. Connolley|talk]]) 07:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC) |
I object to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&diff=301953461&oldid=301951149 this]. I haven't been subject to *a* previous case. I've been subject to several. See [[User:William M. Connolley/For me]]. Please correct your statement :-) [[User:William M. Connolley|William M. Connolley]] ([[User talk:William M. Connolley|talk]]) 07:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC) |
||
:I am innumerate, but I stronly suspects that "many" is a mystical group of numbers more than one, so I will adjust something soon...preferably after another cup of kawfee...[[User:Casliber|Casliber]] ([[User talk:Casliber|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Casliber|contribs]]) 21:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Happy [[Bastille Day]]!== |
==Happy [[Bastille Day]]!== |
||
Revision as of 21:50, 14 July 2009
More unIDed fungiG'day Cas, I've been frogging over the past few days, and the fungi season has definitely started! I have a coral fungi that I thought you would like for wiki, plus I also have a puff ball which I will upload later, will leave a message here when it is uploaded. Saw lots of fungi over the last few days, but only photographed the really interesting ones as I was using my small memory card, and wanted to leave some space for frogs. http://www.flickr.com/photos/52507572@N00/465979784/?rotated=1&cb=1177065560324 Thanks. --liquidGhoul 10:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Nomenclature of fungiHey there. I recently stumbled across an issue of Nova Hedwigia Beheift titled "the genera of fungi" (or was it agaricaceae?). It's filled to the brink with mind-numbing nomenclatural discussions of all the genera ever described (I think, anyway). Would it be any use if I looked up the specific ref or any specific genera? Circeus 00:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
LOTS of "per" in citation here. See [1]
A first incarnation from Tentamen dispositionis methodicae Fungorum 65. 1797 is cited as devalidated: "Introduced to cover three groups already previously distinguished by Persoon (in [...] Tent. 18. 1797) under Agaricus L., but at that time not named. It is worth stressing that [The species now known as Amanita caesarea] was not mentioned."
Donk concludes the earliest valid type is A. muscaria, the species in Hooker, adding that he'd personally favor A. citrina.
Phew! Circeus 18:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
ndashesHTML ndashes suck. If you're on a Windows box, you can get a real ndash (i.e. unicode) by holding down the ALT key and typing 0150 on the numeric keypad. Hesperian 11:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
LOL, I love your sense of humour. Maimonedes is a good reference. The reality is that Islam takes food restrictions from Judaism; and Christianity doesn't have any restriction (courtesy of three references in the New Testament). The reason why pork should be restricted (along with many other things) is not given explicitly in the Hebrew Bible, hence Bible commentators have been offering guesses since ancient times. My own favourite, however, is Mary Douglas, wife of Louis Leakey, daughter of a Lutheran pastor. Her theory is excellent, based on her cultural anthropological observations, with a decent feel for how Biblical text works. It's rather an abstract theory though. Anyway, I'll see if I can manage a literature review of dietry restrictions in the ANE, especially if there's anything explicit about pork. Don't think I'll find a reference for "why" the pork taboo is in place, though, if it's documented, I'd have read about that in commentaries. Perhaps a clay tablet with the answer has been destroyed in only the last few years during the "troubles" in Iraq. :( Alastair Haines (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Spotted this. I'll look for a ref to the Maimonides comment. The normal teaching is that pork is no more or less offensive to Jews than any other forbidden meat (dog, horse etc) or forbidden part of kosher animal (blood, Gid Hanasheh etc). The pig (NB pig, not pork - an important distinction which is relevant for the Maimonides comment too, I note) is "singled out" because it alone of the animals that have one of the two "signs" (it has split hooves but doesn't chew the cud) lies down with its legs sticking out. Most quarapeds have their legs folded under them. There's a midrashic lesson to be learned there, apparently, that the pig is immodestly and falsely proclaiming its religious cleanliness, when it is not. Anyway, that said, I'll look into the M comment - he was quite ahead of his time in terms of medical knowledge (check his biog). And NB my OR/POV antennae buzzed when I read that little section. --Dweller (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Have found good stuff, including online version of Maimonides text. I'll dump it here for you to use as you wish.
So, Maimonides argues "pork contains more moisture than necessary [for human food], and too much of superfluous matter", whatever that means! More importantly, the "principal reason" is that if you keep pigs, you end up with a dirty and unhealthy environment. Important note: Maimonides was writing from Islamic Egypt at the time, which is why he mentions "as may be seen at present in the country of the Franks." (ie France) The comments about the pig's habit of lying with its legs outstretched come from Midrash Vayikra Rabba (ch 13) where it is mentioned as part of an elaborate metaphor, but not in connection with any reason for particularly abhorring the creature. Hope that helps. --Dweller (talk) 09:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC) Greek proofing on WikisourceHi Cas, Would you mind bringing your knowledge of Greek to bear on these three Wikisource pages for me please: [2], [3], [4]? It should only take five minutes I think. If you've got a Wikisource or unified account, you can correct any errors you find; else you can let me know and I'll fix them. Hesperian 02:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Easy peasy you say... nearly all of the yellow pages on this work contain Greek. s:la:Liber:De assensione Stoici quid senserint.djvu. If you could verify even a few of them, especially p.20, that would be fantastic. John Vandenberg (chat) 15:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi again, we have a category for them now on English Wikisource: s:Category:Pages with missing Greek characters. The ones in the "Page:" namespace are accompanied by pagescans; the EB1911 pages usually have a link to the pagescan on the talk page. Cheers, John Vandenberg (chat) 23:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC) Updated UcontribsI added two columns and refined the scan logic on my most recent run, and since you are the originator of the concept, I re-evaluated you. Feel free to find any problems with the latest update, if you need an incentive, let me just say how disappointed I am that two weeks have passed and it is still not a solid list of FA's :) Also, if you're thinking of asking for a new program to show the changes between runs of my other program - no (at least not yet:). I'm wondering about putting in the latest "failed" status too, as in (Failed GA), but I'd need some category hints to work that in. Thanks for the idea, what a great way to learn about article assessments; the wide range(/incoherence) of category names; and mostly, the great diversity of interests and accomplishments of editors of the wiki! Franamax (talk) 12:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
userpage(continuing in this thread despite the different topic) I've skimmed through several categories on commons, like Books and Mappae mundi and Image:Vinland Map HiRes.jpg comes closest to what I think you want. I like the borders, esp. the hue. Unfortunately, it's not easy to lighten and probably not possible at all to remove the ink (I gave it a half-assed try with GIMP). Anyway, just to see if we're on the same page as to your idea. Ideally, several similar but non-identical images of blank pages could be used for something similar to the DT userpage, considering that you have quite a lot of stuff on your userpage (with a different section on each page and some playful navigation). Or did you have something like a central disambiguation in mind, putting all the stuff in different subpages? I envision a self-made treasure map (the real problem would be to get the ragged border to look authentic) with an imagemap overlay on the different words (rendered into the image, possibly handwritten), linking to all the different sections (like on my old userpage or using subpages). And I see a compass rose in one of the corners (bottom right?). Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 18:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. Yes, I look for compass roses on commons, too, and I agree this one is nice and can also easily be used to put it in another picture. It's a pity that the background you found isn't free, because then we'd be ready to go. I've asked my GF about the Vineland map, but she said it would take ages to get it right. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 23:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC) I see you've taken it on, good work. The display and vision bits at Crested Tern apply for all the genus. The opening sentence isn't fully supported by Bridge - although Elegant is very close, Lesser Crested isn't, other than being in the same genus. I won't abandon this article (after all, one good ... aaaarrrggh, it's catching), but let me know if there's anything specific esp from BWP, Olsen or Harrison, where I have the books. Now, must be time for a couple of slices of bread with some meat in. 10:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC) Australian figsBeen a bit of a spike in editing the few days... Guettarda (talk) 00:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
UFOINFOHi, a site called UFOINFO is used in multiple articles as reference. Do you think it should be considered RS? I cannot see any editorial board or anything by which it can be considered RS. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 05:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
perennial user page projectHow about this? The hue is crap, but it's just a quick edit to see if you like the direction. user:Everyme 14:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I see a minor typo. It says "Welcome to Casliber's Cove" where it should say "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here." Hesperian 14:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
You could use the image as a fixed frame, with a scrollable text frame overlaid within it, and/or you could use it as a frame for different "pages" like my old userpage (the final revision of my old userpage combined both: "individual pages" each with a scrollable "inner" frame for the content of each page. btw: could you do me a favour and restore it? I find I need access to some formatting tricks I've collected there). At any rate, I'm going to work over the hue and upload a version without the text. It'd be possible to clone the middle (blank) part, but the limitations are manifold (apart from the challenge of making it look halfway acceptable): Different browsers and different users prefer wildly different font sizes, so you'd end up with a scrollable frame any way (where people would have to scroll "twice", once within the page and once within the frame) or you'd end up with blank space towards the bottom. user:Everyme 14:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Banksia sphaerocarpa var. pumilioFloraBase has an entry for this, but no other information.[5] Know anything about it? Hesperian 04:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I guess you might want to have a look at this too. Hesperian 11:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC) VampireAn astute observation about vampires in movies: "I Vant To Upend Your Expectations". --JayHenry (talk) 14:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
A book you might enjoyIt's all about flowers ... well, err, kind of.
She's a senior tutor in philosophy at Cambridge, written several very entertaining and informative books related to the history of science, probably including her doctorate. But I expect you know of her and this book already. I would have thought it a must read for the Banks-ia Study Group leader. ;) Alastair Haines (talk) 11:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Huia - suggestionsRe this:
This will be hard to fix since I don't have the book Kotare used - and I wouldn't want to either, probably, since a pet hate of mine is anything which lumps traditions from different regions together without giving the sources. I would suggest getting rid of all of this:
We can also add a supporting reference from this page: [7] and could perhaps still add the reference no [9]. Hope this helps Kahuroa (talk) 20:22, 9 January 2009 (UTC) FA collab proposalHow 'bout spontaneous combustion? In all seriousness, it seems like an interesting subject. [[WP:QUAKE|₪]]<font face="Gill Sans MT">[[User:Ceranthor|Ceran]] →([[User talk:Ceranthor|slip]]→[[Special:Contributions/Ceranthor|sled]] →[[Special:Emailuser/Ceranthor|snow]])</font> (talk) 02:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
CockatoosWell if there were a single source I would not have put it where I put it. We cannot (at present) put the whole thing in the article. But we can add some of the info. Here's how: Every time we cite a cladistic study, we automatically accept arguments from parsimony. This is not immediately obvious to the novice reader, but if would not accept arguments from parsimony, each and every cladistic analysis is baseless mumbo-jumbo. We could not argue like this if this were Conservapedia or if we'd subscribe to intelligent design - a Creator could invoke any trait out of thin air, without precedent in the ancestors. Whereas if you accept the premises of cladistic studies as valid, it is automatically accepted that anything that is frequent in the basal and rare in the advanced lineages of a clade is presumed to be the ancestral character state because "it is more parsimonious" to assume a single origin than multiple origins. So we can take all the phylogenetics papers that have been published - as we'll do anyway - and arrive at a consensus phylogeny. And we can reference the appearance of all cockatoos with a single source - Juniper/Parr, HBW, Forshaw/Cooper for example (I would not prefer HBW here, as the other sources are more detailed) and cross-refer them to the consensus phylogeny. And then we can say "It is notable that among the basal lineages, the following plumage patterns are generally seen: ... This suggests that it is most parsimonious that such plumage was already present in the last common ancestor of all living cockatoos." We could cite some phylogenetics textbook's part on character evolution for this, but we don't cite a physics textbook's part on gravity either any time some article mentions something falling down. Taking this, we can note that certain plumage patterns are seen in (almost) all the basal lineages and only lost in the advanced lineages. "Almost" because the question of why Probosciger is aterrimus ("the blackest") is unresolved. So we cannot be certain about details, but we can point out that all the data contradicts certain patterns of plumage evolution pretty certainly. As regards the original cockatoos, what is unparsimonious would for example be:
What we can also use is one of the psittaciform phylogenies that puts the NZ clade at the base (which is essentially any modern psittaciform phylogeny) as corroborating evidence - a cryptic pattern involving some degree of barring is appartently plesiomorphic for all crown Psittaciformes (and I suspect for all Psittaciformes in general). In any case, one thing needs to be noted: the placement of the Cockatiel is not determinable with certainty at present! (IIRC one possibility is slightly more likely than the other, but I'd have to sift through all the papers to find out which. Given how singular it is, even that cannot be regarded as proof; we need fossil evidence from near the point where the Cockatiel branched off from the other lineages, and we do not have this.) Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 09:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC) Gang Gang might actually not warrant inclusion in either subfamily - while the analysis results for the Cockatiel are contradictory because you can get quite good support for either possibility (IIRC), Callocephalon simply refuses to fit into the "nice" dichotomies phylogenetics software will try to construct. As regards the synthesis stick, my take is with WP:BURDEN - it is pretty hard to challenge the obvious (namely that some taxon has some phenotypical traits), especially considering Felsenstein's "Phylogenies and the comparative method" (which should provide sufficient justification for a "naive" character mapping) gets cited in scholarly works on average once every three days since 24 years... Note though that as soon as the phylogeny gets contentious, a dedicated source is surely needed - see for example the very fine paper here. One can actually turn the burden of evidence, in this case for example: "provide a source that suggests that the LCA of cockatoos was all-white/all-black". Otherwise, where would one stop? The conclusion that chimpanzees were never bipedal in their evolution is generally accepted at face value by precisely the same reasoning, although there is simply not a single shred of material evidence to support this assumption: no fossils on the chimp side of the lineage are known, and the fossils on the human side of the lineage are all (at least preferentially) bipedal. But as I said, claims cannot be made with finality as long as there is no study where Probosciger tail and cheek feathers have been photographed in UV or observed under a SEM. What we can do at this point is to observe the obvious, describe the situation as far as can be plainly seen. PS: the molphyl/clock studies of psittaciforms and the fossil record square NO WAY, you guys gotta be careful. The recent "proves Cretaceous" paper was technically far better as I thought, but in the context of Wikipedia it would be accused on severe POVpushing... For one thing, the Cretaceous scenario together with the molphyl trend to put them close to passeriforms (which may well be good, though I suppose not as close as the first large-scale trees suggest) puts the origin of a lot of birdy stuff into the Mesozoic nether regions. Also, a lot of fossils that ought to be there have not turned up, I mean not even traces in well-studied regions. And finally, the entire theory is probabilistic, but if that other paper on Cenozoic NZ and sea levels is right (it is cited off-handedly in the Cretaceous paper), the probability for a deep Mesozoic origin of the Psittaciformes is around 2.769126%ish ;-) (it is hard for kakapo ancestors to survive on a submerged microcontinent...) If they had titled it "cannot refute a Cretaceous origin", I'd have been delighted. But this way, it is just like the bad old times of molphyl 15 years ago -trying to outrace each other with data with a signal/noise ratio that reaches abysmality after 100 Ma.
This medical mushroom article has seen significant change lately if you'd like to have a boo.LeadSongDog come howl 18:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
RE Notable saying?I recalled this one....Talk:Fes,_Morocco#Old_moroccan_saying - is it famous in morocco? Or just some anglophone urban myth...Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
aka the Australian bush fly. It seems the proper name; Google. I found this here; Aussie salute and here; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aussie Salute (second nomination) and see it mentioned here; Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/To-do ( which may be your doing ;). G'day, Jack Merridew 11:40, 4 April 2009 (UTC) Re: Beetles, fungi and macro lensesHi Casliber. I saw the message you sent to fir0002. I doubt he'd be able to take any pictures of fungi since he is stuck in Melbourne due to university. I went for a walk through a cool temperate rainforest area of Wielangta forest today. I took a large number of pretty good quality fungus pictures. I need help with identifying them however, and have posted the images at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fungi#18_IDs_from_Wielangta_Forest.2C_Tasmania. I'd appreciate your help since you seem to be fairly knowledgeable in the area. You also had some gear questions. Since you want to shoot insects too, I'd get a fairly long macro lens such as the tamron 180mm or the sigma 150mm. More critical than your choice of lens is your lighting. You want a 430ex or a 580ex (extremely useful for everything). For insects add a softbox, macro flash bracket and an E-TTL cord. The softbox and macro bracket can be easily home-made. For anything stationary ditch the bracket/softbox and use a $30 ebay shoot through umbrella and swivel, and some ~$30 ebay radio triggers. You will need a light stand or an assistant. For the stationary stuff I'd also consider a decent tripod, allowing you to balance ambient and flash light. The longest exposure in the fungi I've uploaded was four seconds, impossible without a tripod. Compare File:Wielangta Unidentified Fungus 5194.jpg (fill flash) with http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/579/img5192u.jpg, which is only ambient. Noodle snacks (talk) 11:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC) I'm wondering where you stand professionally on the concept? Some are believers, others aren't ... I did a lot of work on that article before a certain ArbCom. It's still a pretty clean article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:04, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
mapsSure, it might not be immediately, but send me the stuff, at mailto:[email protected] -- Kim van der Linde at venus 01:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Banksia and climate changeThis is an interesting paper: "Between 5% and 25% of [Banksia] species were projected to suffer range losses of 100% by 2080." I can send you a PDF if you're interested. Hesperian 23:59, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 DYK that the most important Hindu Temple in Bali has a single sentence of coverage? oldid :( Jack Merridew 16:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
LiopleurodonHi Cas, there is an edit war going on on the Liopleurodon article concerning Charlie the Unicorn. Darimoma keeps inserting a paragraph about it to assert the notability of the youtube video which I and others think is not legitimate. Could you have a look at it? Thanks. ArthurWeasley (talk) 04:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC) Interesting Mushroom ArticleHi Casliber! This article may be of interest/use for your efforts to work on mushroom related articles, i.e. if there's a Mushrooms in popular culture or something? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 19:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
XD is better :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I've started working on this article about a wonderful vampire novel. The article is a complete disaster at the moment (WIP), but I thought you might be interested in helping out. If you have read it, the plot summary needs major work! If you haven't read it, now there is a reason to rush out and buy the book. :) Awadewit (talk) 18:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Benzo articleHi Casliber, I am writing to in regard to the benzodiazepine article which has been hanging on good article review for some time now. I was confused and thought that Doc James was the reviewer but he has said that you are listed as the reviewer. I was wondering if it has reached the standard of a good article yet. I do have ideas for improving the article to reach featured article status after good article status has been achieved but at the moment I think that it has reached good article status. If you disagree I would welcome comments on what remains to be done.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 17:55, 17 May 2009 (UTC) I forgot to say and perhaps a bit of rude of me not to that if you are busy don't rush yourself. :)--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 00:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC) Mac PenguinHi Cas, I gave the article one more read through and tweaked some things. Some comments:
Other than that, it reads pretty good to me. I'm gone for 3 weeks starting tomorrow, ttyl. Sasata (talk) 06:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Neurosurgery and light constructionYou Australians are such bad-asses ([9]). The only missing touch would be if the physician had proclaimed: "That's not a craniotome... this is a craniotome." MastCell Talk 15:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Can you do anything here? Sasata is going away YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 05:27, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
fundamental issues for all of wikipedia brought up at ADHD Arb which you draftedCould you please look at the Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ADHD page. [[10]] Issues have been brought up which implications for all of wikipedia. Thank you, --scuro (talk) 04:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC) Epsilon OrionisThanks for protecting this entry. The person who kept putting in their pet star name was becoming a nuisance. Skeptic2 (talk) 10:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Casliber. I noticed you're name at WP:PRV. I was wondering whether you could peer review the 1995 Brazilian Grand Prix article for me, leaving you're comments here. If you could make any comments at the PR, that'd be great. Kind regards, D.M.N. (talk) 17:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC) An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Man In Black/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Man In Black/Workshop. For the Arbitration Committee, An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Man In Black/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Man In Black/Workshop. For the Arbitration Committee, DYK typoThere's a typo in one of the DYK hooks on the Main Page. In the third hook on Shirley E. Flynn, there should be an of after history. Could you fix it? Shubinator (talk) 14:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
CotorowegtryI am operating a legitimate multiple accont and do not want to make this public so how can you help he?Cotorowegtry (talk) 20:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC). Benzo featured articleHi Casliber, would you be opposed to me nominating the benzodiazepine article for featured article? I have finished doing my final tweaks to the benzodiazepine article now.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 03:10, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I understand that you are a busy man Casliber and I do appreciate the time and effort you put into wikipedia. I have made a leap of faith and nominated the article. I have made changes to the article which you suggested on GA review page and also did a bold edit by cutting one section out and moving it to the benzo misuse article. If you find more problems with the page I am sure that they can be resolved during the review process. I imagine any problems would be relatively minor but even if major I am willing to put in the effort to get the article up to featured article status. I look forward to the review although a teeny bit worried about those thingies! :)--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 08:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC) User talk pagesThere was a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Right to vanish#User talk about deleting user talk pages of contributors. There doesn't seem to be very strong consensus to do so (any longer). For what it's worth. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC) Featured editors?!Hello! Please note: User:A Nobody/Featured editors. Anyway, if you have any suggestions, ideas, it would be appreciated as I think you might figure into at least two of those potential categories (more than 100 supports, number of DYKS?). Best, --A NobodyMy talk 02:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC) I'm afraid I don't have any ideas for that one! Awadewit (talk) 04:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Retirement againCas, I think you have to find someone else to make the map. I am retiring from wikipedia again, for reasons spelled out at my page. I might make a occasional edit as I did before, but I am not going to stay here as long as some abusive admins are allowed to have their sysop bit. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 16:25, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Cane toadWe can do it........ I've done some. "You can do it!!!!" "Come on!!!!!!!!!!" "Yes We Can!!!!!!!!!" Ah cheesy Chrysler ads with Barack Obama and Arnie YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 06:40, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Cas, I'm not sure who's watching Schizophrenia closely these days, but these sorts of additions can quickly deteriorate the article if someone isn't constantly on top of them. Do you have that source, are you able to verify? Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC) (facepalm), we-ell, not as bad as the fun and games at lion and vampire recently I suppose.... Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:52, 29 May 2009 (UTC) Could you please send the page contents into a subspace of my userspace. I was using the shortcuts, as were various other people, and I would honestly like them back.— Dædαlus Contribs 20:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Rejecting "Locus of dispute" as writtenIn the "Tang Dynasty" ArbCom case, the "locus of dispute" factfinding should be rejected as written. A new, better locus of dispute should be adduced. I write to encourage you to re-visit this because the first and last sentences are fundamentally flawed. NO to 1st sentence. The case originated when Teeninvestor rejected any and all inquiry relating to WP:V, WP:Burden and WP:RSUE, alleging vandalism and disruptive editing instead. This persistent confrontational strategy is endorsed and encouraged by those voting in support Newyorkbrad's locus of dispute. These votes effectively disregard Tenmei's locus, Teeninvestor's locus and, most importantly, Teeninvestor's restatment at Summarizing "more or less the entire dispute". This obfuscation marginalizes even the attempt to pursue a strategy of collaborative editing; and for this very practical reason, I could not disagree more with this sentence NO to 3rd sentence. In the specific context of this case, it is procedurally unsound to adopt the expanded scope proposed by Teeninvestor and Caspian blue. One of the few areas of agreement acknowledged the initially limited focus of our case when it was opened. I could not disagree more with this sentence. In support, I highlight a crucial fulcrum or pivot between "A" and "B" below:
In this instance, Tenmei's paraphrase of Coren's moderating analysis was posted on the talk pages of all arguably interested participants at Talk:Inner Asia during the Tang Dynasty. The "out of control" accusatory phrasing was repeated in diffs on the talk pages of PericlesofAthens and Arilang1234. This suggests a deliberate strategy rather than a merely transient outburst. In these pivotal diffs, Teeninvestor cannot feign to have misunderstood my writing. These are plainly Coren's paraphrased words; and yet, this modest effort to frame collaborative editing issues was immediately converted into a contrived hostile encounter. This destructive pattern is reflected ad nauseam on the evidence and workshop pages. Despite the cumulative attacks, the edit history confirms my participation focused on issues, but this outcome tells me clearly that I was wrong to take the high road. In voting to support this awkward "spin", ArbCom's counter-intuitive judgment effectively affirms that the contributions of Teeninvestor and Caspian blue were above reproach and I was not. This alchemy is difficult to digest. ArbCom rewards what is bad and denigrates what is good. --Tenmei (talk) 19:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC) Party?I noticed that at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Man In Black/Workshop, you've added a number of comments to "Comments by parties" sections. Since you're not listed as a party to the case, and since you've apparently recused yourself from involvement in it as an arbitrator, perhaps you meant them to go in the corresponding "Comments by others" sections? Deor (talk) 22:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
SorryI was looking off your userpage to see how you can collapse tables so that I could create a userpage for my friend. I didn't know that the edit button linked to that page. By the way, how do you show the diffs? Sorry. Wireless Keyboard Click! Clack! 14:01, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
An interesting editor ...I've just encountered an interesting editor who seems to be rather zealously tagging and deleting with nice concise policy references, only he's misunderstanding those policies. Where editors are actively working on pages, they are trying to work with his criticisms, but he doesn't seem to get it. I suspect he feels bullet-proof: they are working on the article, their opinion is therefore invalid, they must accept his criticism or be guilty of not being willing to hear it. I don't think he's realised his own opinion of his own opinion is also invalid. It just so happens he's hit three editors of some maturity all at once, and all (co-incidently?) Christians. I'm curious to see what happens. One editor User:Muzhogg is new. He's got tremendous patience and humility, but is asserting himself none-the-less. Another is User:Johnbod, who can look after himself by now, interesting head-to-head. Then there's me, of course, an irresistable force is in the process of discovering he's met an immovable object. His current approach is "actions speak louder than words". He's not replying to my responses to his comments, and expressed an unwillingness to do so. Anyway, this confident chap's handle is User:Hrafn. I'm sure he means well, but I kind of run out of nice ways of helping people see outside their own box if they insist on staying there for too long. I'll take a break from interacting with him for now, and go back and revert him mercilessly in a week or so, he may not even notice. I'm not asking for help here, you're helping way too many people already. I'm just passing on a name. User:Hrafn, decent chap I'm sure, but the type who doesn't take kindly to his PS feel free to make this message self-destruct. Alastair Haines (talk) 14:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Frill-necked Monarch
Template-y thing
…is protected; undo fo’ a bit an’ I fiddles wit’ it
Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Given that this article consists of only (i) vague and unattributed praise of the book from the book's own blurb & (ii) unsourced praise of Goldberg, what material do you consider it contains that is worthy of merging? HrafnTalkStalk(P) 07:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Formal Mediation for Sports LogosAs a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC) RFAR/ObamaHey. I'm watching the RFAR proposed decision for the case and I'm obviously a little bit peeved about how it's currently panning out: i.e. how relatively lightly Stevertigo seems to be getting off for starting this kerfuffle, or alternately, how hard you're coming down on me and Scjessey. I'm actually here to ask you why you think the 1RR/week would be such a good idea on me. It seems a bit punitive for, as the FOF shows, one edit-war and the prevention of disruption elsewhere (and a bit of incivility, but we both know that sanctioning just for being a bit snarky is not a good idea). That, and you should already know that as a content writer and someone who takes an interest wrt fiction it would make it basically impossible to edit Doctor Who articles for the next series and a half because I'd have to jump through hoops just to revert silly IPs who include obviously inappropriate content on these pages (seriously, find me a Doctor Who episode article that hasn't had to be protected for a week or so after transmission, and besides, editors often go above three reverts trying to combat the wave of not-vandalism-but-also-not-appropriate material). The only reason I can think of for such a restriction is to create the perception of impartiality: well, it doesn't seem to be working when the same sanction is proposed for people who were disruptively editing and for people who were trying to uphold BLP. Sceptre (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: WP:GANGreat to see you coming up on my watchlist editing Banksia articles. I've been too busy in real life to do much here, lately; I've made only one edit of any substance in the last nine days. :-( But I am still lurking when I get the chance. When real life pressures ease, I'll get back into it, and when I do I'll be happy to push against B. prionotes for a while. B. sessilis isn't ready; the ecology section in particular needs work; I put a to-do list on the talk page a while ago, which will give you any idea of what I think it is lacking. Every time I come back to the article, I am drawn to the numerous redlinks in the taxonomic arrangements, and end up going off to write articles on infra-generic taxa e.g. D. ser. Ilicinae... which, if you think about it, is actually moving the B. sessilis article in the right direction, albeit in a small way, because FAs are supposed to have a minimum of red links. Even though it might seem that I've forgotten this article, it is still one of my pet projects. Aside from the ecology section, Banksia cuneata is looking nice; that might be worth pushing towards FA some time. Hesperian 13:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Birds June newsletterThe June 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
Brought in line with your recommendations. :) Cliftonian • talk 14:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
GuaiaberoHi Cas, What do you need on it. I might have just annecdotal stuff from my contacts in Phils, but other than that! I imagine that you have heard that it has been pretty much established that they nest in termite mounds?--Steve Pryor (talk) 15:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Guaiabero follow-upCas, I still have the text to this article in BirdingAsia 8 (because I was one of the proofreaders before publication): Three nests of the Guaiabero Bolbopsittacus lunulatus N. T. B. ROSELL II, R. OCON, C. S. MALLARI, L. ROBLEDO & I. MAPUA I will have to search my HDD, and find it. Will send it on to you through your e-mail (if still valid), though I don't know if I can attach files directly though the e-mail function from the wiki. Steve--Steve Pryor (talk) 08:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Eupoecila australasiae
LTFCHi. Saw your note. I've only had time for a quick flick through. It's well on the way. A few things jumped out:
Hope that helps. PS "moniker" is a horrible informality in an encyclopedia article, although I love the word personally.
Seems to be over 1500 characters absent the guff at the top. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Buff-faced Pygmy-parrot
Thanks for the message. I responded on my own talk page. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Planning to archive some threads at IP placenames discussionAs I said here, I'm planning to archive a few threads at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Israel_Palestine_Collaboration/Placename_guidelines if there's no objection. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 02:20, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Banksia benthamiana
Dave ArnesonTalk:Dave Arneson/GA1 :) BOZ (talk) 16:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC) Hi Casliber. Quite some time ago you did the GA review on Kelly pool. There was an issue with the lack of a history section. I have spent numerous hours researching the game since then. The article now has an origins section, and I believe I am the first person in modern times to have discovered the information detailed in it, weaving together various early 20th century sources providing information on the game's origins. This would not have been possible, of course, without the advent of digital, searchable newspaper archives, which by the way, are wonderfully accessible through ancestry.com though their search function is very hard to work with). I corresponded with Michael Ian Shamos (curator of the U.S. Billiard Archive and writer of the billiards encyclopedia we rely on for much information in articles) and he wrote back that it was an important discovery, confirming to me that this really was heretofore unknown in modern scholarship. I have also expanded various portions of the article; especially the game's long connection with gambling.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Nicobar Bulbul
DYK for Guaiabero
Are you aware you undid results of AN and AFD discussions almost immediatelyAre you aware of this discussion? Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Need an admin to restore a merged article You appear to have undone the results of an AN thread that was meant to correct a GFDL violation. You also appear to have immediately reversed another admin's changes without discussion when the edit summaries noted an AFD. What's up? You may want to comment at the AN.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 05:38, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Expert rating needed: scale 1 to 10How bad is the Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology? On a scale of 1 to 10, Cas thinks? Alastair Haines (talk) 11:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
RosellaI have put the Pale-headed Rosella in the birds for identification series for more comments. user space cruftHi. First, you seem to have missed my notes about the #Template-y thing that’s protected so that I can’t help you… Anyways, see
Your user page is rather like Rlevse’s and I could/(will; BOLD) nudge yours in the same direction. You up for more than a nudge? Something mostly new? Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Lord of the Flies unprotectionHello. I noticed Lord of the Flies has been semi-protected for over 13 months. I thought I'd go and request unprotection, but the page said to take it up with the protecting admin first, so here I am taking it up with the protecting admin. —JAO • T • C 21:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Ireland pollI have blanked the poll at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration/Ireland article names community poll as the direction that's being taken seems to be going elsewhere just now and the only contributions on the talk page are coming from one involved user questioning my good faith. I am willing to help out if anything is needed, but I'll leave the page for you guys either to delete or hand over to the new moderators however you decide. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 06:37, 10 June 2009 (UTC) URGENT YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 08:24, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Just a note for your DYK - the hook ref appears missing full citation details unless I've missed something. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 11:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC) two digits in refsI could understand if you changed "423–428" to "423–8", but why "423–28"? Is there a convention I don't know about? Hesperian 12:45, 10 June 2009 (UTC) 423–28
Some shameless thankspam!DYK feedbackHi there. I've been an occasional contributor and reviewer at DYK. Today I made my first attempt to follow the procedures for moving material to Prep area 1, including generating credits, and removing the items from the discussion page. I would appreciate feedback from yourself or another regular as to whether my actions were correct. Can I also anticipate three things: there's only one US item out of seven, because most of the older noms that had been reviewed were non-US; I went up to seven hooks rather than six to get the box looking 'full' on the main page; and I know something is supposed to be done for the image, but I wasn't confident of what, so I haven't done anything. I'd really appreciate an explanation of that bit of the process. I'm posting this message to Dravecky, Casliber and Royalbroil, so whoever's around can ping me at my talkpage. Thank you! hamiltonstone (talk) 00:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC) Hi there, just a quick nudge that I've replied at Talk:British people. :) --Jza84 | Talk 14:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC) DYK for Nicobar Bulbul
DYK for Pale-headed Rosella
Do you have some time to copyedit The Historian? It needs some more polishing before GA. Awadewit (talk) 18:50, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Blake (????)Can you put a year in that Blake reference please? It was the first thing I looked for (because I wanted some idea which revision it was discussing). Hesperian 01:59, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: awardThanks man. It means a lot to me. ChrisDHDR 10:59, 14 June 2009 (UTC) this needs some work ? Earlypsychosis (talk) 11:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi mate, You may have seen this is now up for FAC. I've been asked to have an independent copy-edit done on it, and I remembered you had a look at it before. Want to give it a go? Thanks, Cliftonian • talk 13:40, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Cheers fella. :) – Cliftonianthe orangey bit 15:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
My evidence section is too long. What now? Hi Casliber, I'm a participant in the ADHD Arb case. Since you recused yourself, I thought I should ask you what I ought to do about my evidence section. My evidence section is too long; it's around 1200 words. It would be less than 1000 words if I deleted all the of the brief descriptions I used for each dif that I present, but I think they are useful because they make navigating my evidence easier. I am also finding it hard to part with any of the content. What should I do? Sifaka talk 01:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
DisturbingI find this disturbing. You're gaining ground too quickly. Must...create...more...articles. Guettarda (talk) 21:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
SockpuppetryHi, I seriously do not know hot to deal with this when suddenly someone accuses you of something and I feel that personal good will is in danger. I have been accused of it and my subordinate has already posted an explanation for the same. Help is needed. Warm regards Pushkraj Janwadkar Pushkraj.janwadkar (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC) Your help is needed here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pushkraj.janwadkar Vertical.limit (talk) 16:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC) PingYou got mail. Jolly Ω Janner 14:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Your BarnstarI wanted to let you know that I attempted to get the Albert Einstein article to FA but after a very distasteful experience with the FA process I have abandoned work on. I have done a lot to it to get it up to status and if someone is interested they should be able to get it to FA status relatively quickly. Most of the remaining work is related to cleaning up and pruning down the references.--Kumioko (talk) 14:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors AssociationThe Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring (and reliably sourced) contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are here - suggestions welcome. If you wish to be elected, please notify me here. If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them here Discussion is here.Peter Damian (talk) 19:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC) User:JatlasHi Casliber, I'm wondering if you might be willing and able to explain to Jatlas something that I've been trying to get across for some time without success. Xhe's gotten into the habit of citing primary sources in support of claims that various Medicinal mushrooms have particular medicinal properties. It's not that review sources are unavailable, xhe just doesn't use them. See the lengthy discussions at Agaricus blazei for background. Thanks,LeadSongDog come howl 22:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Banksia sphaerocarpa var. dolichostyla
May need to remove your nameHi, I see that you have withdrawn from ADHD investigation as you had an edit dispute with scuro on ADHD article, well noticed it a week or so ago but only noticed last night that you have not removed your name from this page. Just thought that I would let you know. :)--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 21:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC) DYK Hook BarometerHey there Casliber, I saw your question about having a "Hook Barometer" that you could put onto your userpage, I saw how Gatoclass already pointed you to the queue page, but in case you wanted to actual bot updating template to put on your userpage its Wikipedia:Did you know/DYK hook count ({{Wikipedia:Did you know/DYK hook count}}). Hope this helps and All the Best, Mifter (talk) 03:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC) HelpHi Cas, It seems my winning personality has earned me a devoted fan and stalker; I am wondering if you can give some assistance. Here are various diffs for your enjoyment, in various accusatory colours: 1, 2, 3, 4. There's a history of tendentious, unproductive edits (e.g. here), but the attacks against me are becoming a nuisance and an irritant. Would a block request be in order? Eusebeus (talk) 19:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
>NB: This is also why GA and FA status are good, as they (to me) function as a a'flagged revision' or 'stable version' of sorts, a place where there is a locus of consensus. Still haven't had my coffee and it is 8am here and the confounded busyness of a saturday beckons ...ugh. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Harm is worse than you thinkI applaud your decision on Obama articles but it is not enough. There are other editors not mentioned and some got off too lightly. The mess with Obama hurts Wikipedia. I used to contribute until about a year ago because some Obama people were just too nasty. Suggest a good edit and they jump all over you. Many people not listed have a clear political agenda (only positive things and oppose all neutral or negative things for some; only negative things and oppose all positive things for others). One trouble is that people write something and have a reference. But there is no editorial consideration of what goes in the article. As a result, there is more positive stuff and negative stuff is censored because more people are disciples of Obama than haters. This mess also hurts Wikipedia that I've decided only to read Wikipedia, not add to it. If I see something that is poorly written, I think "why help?". There is no appreciation for helping but swift attacks by people who have a political agenda. Then they stalk you in the other articles. The solution to Obama hasn't been reached. ArbCom has taken a long time but just nipped a few people. A real solution would be to have professional reviewers, even English and History teachers to act as referees. This would be done only in exceptional cases, such as the Obama article and only for a limited period, such as 3-4 months. Until then, I don't write for Wikipedia. DYK for Moluccan King Parrot
DYK for king parrot
Major_depressive_disorderThis is an incredible article. Really well done, Cas. As you said at the FAC, it is one of the site's finest. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 12:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
names and evidence?You asked to name names and evidence for the Obama article. If one cannot see that there is fighting and incivility and POV pushing, then they are incapable of making a fair decision. There are lots of bad attitudes there. Search the archives of the talk page and you can see that when good suggestions are made, the people get their heads bitten off. Then some aggressive editor archives (hides) the discussion or collapses it into a box. Furthermore, I cannot provide evidence that I or others don't want to edit. But you can see that there are billions of people in the world but 99% don't edit. Rather than demand evidence (only misfits have the time to collect and wade through diffs), you should find a way to ban all but the most civil and the most objective editors from that Obama article. SynthesisIn my view of synthesis, people don't seem to understand that synthesis is the adding of one's own views and then putting them forth. Not only does that override the original sources, it takes all of their information and bends it to the writer's own perspective. Thus, they cannot be reliable as they no longer have the direct relationship to the source. The problem with places like the literary encyclopedia is that editors go about and write all sorts of stuff that -seems- great, but when you look at reliable sources much of it is easy to dismiss. People are naturally opinionated and subjective, and relying on other sources for information and sticking to that helps to neutralize any problems that would arise. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Thirst (1979 film)
Please delete user/disc pages; warn jayron/redpen/mufkaHello casliber, If you could please delete my page and page history, I'd be much obliged. I requested speedy deletion on 1Apr for reason 1.6. jayron deleted it, then acted as if s/he did me a favour. I feel jayron shouldnt have been the one to delete it initially as s/he and I have negatively interacted in the past. Followups from jayron included an unneccesary block; followed by telling me to get a yahoo email so that I may contact wiki admins! Wiki is all about anon editing : as such I didnt and wont get an email account in order to communicate as it is not required. Since then jayron,redpen, mufka have been repeatedly editing my page. I blank my page they restore it. This has been happening since April, so for 3months now. I bet if I changed their pages they'd posting threats of "i'll report you" and/or "you will be banned". It is quite easy for me to get a new ip address but I dont think Ive done anything wrong, so I wont change my ip address. If my pages needed to be restored /reverted, I definitely think those three arent the ones who should do it as they/I have a convoluted history. If you could please delete my page and page history, I'd be much obliged. MagpieNew magpie image; File:Cracticus tibicen -Queensland -Australia-8.jpg. Just in case you can use it in the article. Snowman (talk) 22:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Request for mediation not accepted
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly. TroutedWhack! You have been trouted because I hadn't seen the button before (by your username) and wanted to press it. Coming to the meetup next wednesday? ;-) Privatemusings (talk) 05:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC) DYK for Eucalyptus crebra
A question for youRegarding WMC, his edit summaries -- and use of admin tools, in blocking while he says he was inebriated -- are increasingly antagonistic. I particularly note this edit summary. I had accidentally misspelled his name, and he replied "I can spell, can you" in the edit summary, and left a similarly snarky message below my statement. If this was an isolated incident, I'd simply let it slide, but it's not. Another example is this edit summary, in which he writes, "this is a f*ck*ng wiki. it allows links. which work best if you spell things properly" to an editor who had dared not wikilink a username he was asking about. Following so closely on the heels of his claiming that he blocked CoM while he was inebriated (and when there was no consensus at ANI to do so), this is very troubling. What is your view on this situation? Unitanode 04:07, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Somewhat related.. regarding this reply to you by CoM, I will challenge you to find any harassment by me towards CoM. I've about had it with him plastering the same accusation with my name everywhere he touches on WP. I've also had it with his usual pattern of attack/run/blame everyone else for "picking on me". I can not believe that this is being allowed to continue. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here 04:42, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 How long are you going to let him get away with this kind of soapboxing that's an insult to the integrity of everyone else here? [14] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 07:50, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Big StarI'll help out soon. At first glance the big problem is POV; the article is blalant about how important and how underappreciate the group is (which is a common perception among rock music critics, to be fair), right up to the section titles ("Failure of first album" and so on). Talk plainly and let the facts and sources speak for themselves, that's my Wiki philosophy. By the way, didn't you review something of mine in the past? I remember working with you in some review capacity before and I remember it being a pleasant experience. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:19, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
new article Care programme approachFYI (but mainly for UK mental health staff) Earlypsychosis (talk) 04:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC) Occupied/Disputed TerritoriesHi, Casliber I wonder whether it will be possible to add the "Occupied Territories" v "Disputed Territories" terminology dispute to the existing Arbcom measure requiring a decision to be reached on the use of "Judea and Samaria" etc. at IPCOLL, or whether you have any other suggestion on how to create a strongly mandated solution that reflects Wikipedia policy. You may have noticed that I tried to put a proposal forward at IPCOLL but that the level of participation in discussion on that is very low. I feel it needs a centralised discussion as there is a long-running dispute at Talk:Israel on this matter. Meanwhile at Golan Heights there has been an RFC which, to my mind, reached an unsatisfactory conclusion where the "occupied territories" terminology used by the UN and the vast majority of the world including Israeli allies such as the US and UK has been placed on a par with "disputed territories" as used only by the right wing of Zionism. The closing admin there has since been accused of bias, given their user page having boxes showing support for Israel. I certainly wish to escalate what I regard as a very poor decision that fails to reflect WP:NPOV's guidance on how to handle matters where the vast majority of sources side one way. So could you make suggestions on how to deal with this, thanks?--Peter cohen (talk) 12:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
RuffHi, I saw your post on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sweden so I decided to look for some sources and I found this (Google Translate version here), which explains why the bird got its Swedish name "brushane", and that the females have a different name, "brushona". It also says the bird has disappeared from many southern provinces in Sweden due to the draining of marshes in the beginning of the 20th century. Is any of that worth using? TheLeftorium 15:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
(ec) PS: Say...you're not any good with russian, finnish, danish or dutch? ;) Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
CivilityI am extremely interested in the civility poll and in civility in general as it contributes to collboration; but I am traveling right now so it may take me awhile to comment. Thanks very much for the notification.(olive (talk) 02:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC))
Magpie recordingHi Cas: I may have a recording of Oz Magpie which I can upload, but I'm in Alaska at the minute and can't check 'til mid-July when I get home again. I'm pretty sure I made a recording last October—though there's always the possibility I only thought about making a recording! :P MeegsC | Talk 12:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Civ v. NPAHey Casliber: Thanks for the poll, I think that sort of thing is very useful – I hope it achieves something, if nothing more than sorting out where we are now. I wondered about something, though: I’ve noticed over the years that there has been a natural tendency to conflate WP:CIV with WP:NPA – discussion on the poll page seems to be falling prey to that as well (I know mine is). Is it worth making a distinction – are you, in fact, making a distinction? I had always read the policies as saying, loosely, that CIV was mostly a tonal issue, and NPA was mostly a name-calling issue. Thanks again, feel free to drag this over to the talk page there. IronDuke 17:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
FCDWThe Solar System WikiProject also just reached its 50 FA milestone, do you think there is anyway we can add this to the Birds dispatch? Sandy is away so I figured I should contact you. ceranthor 23:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Papuan King Parrot
Coming 'round
Hah, thanks :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC) American Gothic HouseThanks for the quick review! I've been pretty busy and had only a chance to take a glance a few days ago, but I hope to set some time aside tomorrow (US time) to dig up the citations and prose I'm looking for. :) Thanks again. --McMillin24 contribstalk 04:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC) WikiProject Medicine - Psychiatry Task ForceA task force that you suggest back in late 2008 has passed and is ready to be created. Since you are the original philosopher of the task force, you have first chance to create it or let someone else do it. Cheers! Renaissancee (talk) 05:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Concerning an FoF in the recently closed AMIB caseGiven that it was ruled that AMIB's blocks of myself and User:MalikCarr were incorrect, is there any way they could be expunged from our respective records? Jtrainor (talk) 11:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Rome Wasn't Built In A DayCool tune! You are right about its soothing properties. I noticed you dig Magical Mystery Tour, that happened to be Dr. Winston O'Boogie's fav Beatles album as well. I agree, it deserves more airplay. So Roll Up and Enjoy!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 19:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Get crackinghttp://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/03/2615874.htm Hesperian 07:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Botanical questionHi Casliber, I saw your edits to Zanthoxylum americanum - thanks! Your removal of the author name from the lead section begs the question: what is standard botanical practice (in general, not just Wikipedia) for when to use the author abbreviation and when not to do so? Can you point me to something to read about that? LadyofShalott 16:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Offer to userify deleted articleThanks for your offer to userify a deleted article. Are there any other options you can think of to restore articles? I only ask because I am concerned by the idea of users "userifying" articles to protect them from "deletionists". It seems almost un-wiki like to work privately on an article! Still, if you think that might be a good option then I would certainly take you up on it. Frei Hans (talk) 09:24, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Stray being reviewed template at GANHi Casliber. There's a stray "being reviewed" by you at WP:GAN in the Chemistry/Materials Science subsection. It was under the Boron nitride article which I just finished reviewing. Just thought I'd give you a heads up. Diderot's dreams (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Editing restrictions a.k.a civility paroleI asked a question on the talk page of WP:Editing restrictions, to which I've yet to receive a reply. Now that the civility poll is exploring similar issues, I wonder whether a section exploring the enforcement and efficacy of civility paroles might be appropriate? I'd certainly welcome the view of Arbs on this. Would you object to me adding a section? Kind regards --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I've been keeping an eye occasionally on this article since you're one of those people I "stalk" because I find their edits really neat to check out :p. My primary concern at first is definitely those two {{citation needed}} tags. I'll give the article a quick once-over. Circeus (talk) 15:28, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Not that you asked me, but I'm going to stick my nose in anyway. My thoughts would be
Some of the language is a little stilted - overuse of passive voice maybe?
Guettarda (talk) 18:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC) (wakes up and rubs eyes).....I need a coffee first I think, this requires brain cells...Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC) PS: To Guettarda, I did mentally toss a coin between you and Circeus and was goingto cross-post, but needed to catch zeds last night, yer input is much appreciated :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Hamilton Deane
Offer to userify article accepted
Hi Casliber. Thanks for your offer to userify the article Telepathy and war. I am relatively new to "userification" and wondered if you could also answer a few questions.
Thanks again. Frei Hans (talk) 08:23, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
fyi, I'd say that Frei Hans is looking at a likely indef block soon, given all the shite on his talk page and his disinterest in anyone's advise or responding to the open RFC/U. Be silly to undelete that article only to not allow him to do whatever with it. There's a current AN/I thread, too. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Sirius at WP:TFARI've nominated Sirius at TFAR for July 20 or August 1st. You may want to note your concurrence. Smallbones (talk) 15:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC) Plant sourcingYo Cas, I take it you're into the Australian flora, but I was wondering about the USDA site for U.S. plants. It seems to use a javascript, so I'm finding it difficult to include a link to a particulat plant's page. But I think it's a very useful and informative site. I'm also wondering if any concerted effort has been made to upload the photos and illustrations from there systematically. They seem to be public domain with attribution requested. Is that something a bot could do? Lemme know, wouldja? Thanks. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:52, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Proposed merges for Food and DrinkBased on your recent participation in several Food and Drink related merge discussions, I would like to point out several open discussions that might interest you:
--Jeremy (blah blah) 05:11, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks"Don't you know that monkeys are vegetarians??" YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 05:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC) ACPD pages createdI've created two initial pages for the ACPD:
Please add them to your watchlist, stop by, and so forth. The latter page has a couple of logistical issues that we should discuss sooner rather than later, so I'd appreciate if you could find some time to comment on them. Thanks! Kirill [talk] [pf] 13:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC) Wikipedia Loves NatureHeya. I'm trying to arrange a ranger-led slog through Everglades National Park. I've asked for it to be off-season in November and somewhat specialized since I assume I may be a bit more informed than most who go on tours in the park. The idea led me to think of the Wikipedia Loves Art project, where Wikipedians go to museums to help their abilities to expand and create art-related articles. What if there was a Wikipedia Loves Nature group to go to protected areas and do something similar? I don't know how to create such a thing or if it would be a good idea or what, but if a few Wikipedians who are interested in nature also join me in my slog, there are quite a few articles related to such a trek that might be expanded. I'm asking your fungus and bird-filled opinion. I'll also ask Guettarda and Ruhrfisch. Let me know if you're interested or have ideas. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 18:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
latest news  G'day Cas - so here's some news for you... Kirill's just resigned from the arbcom, and Rlevse posted this in response over at his talk page;
I replied;
as the 'other' arb on the council thing, I guess you're sort of in a hot seat, so thought you'd like to know. I think I got coffee before you this morning, so I'm half an hour ahead :-) Hope you're good regardless.... Privatemusings (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
This is a dumb move by Rlevse, if the intention is to say to the community "well sod you then, we tried and we're now taking our ball away". I'd urge you not to follow, but listen to what's said in the RFc and adapt. On that note though "scale is too big for changes to be effected by consensus only, and some organised group" is dangerous. My understanding was the committee was going to be a small think tank to examine previous ideas and formulate advice and ways to move things forwards. Your RfC comment looks like it's conceived as everyone's worst fears - an organised group to effect big change - I'm not sure that's what you meant is it? --Joopercoopers (talk) 22:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Vested interestCasliber, you have a vested interest, being both an ArbCom member and a member of the special committee devised to "advise" ArbCom. I would appreciate your acknowledgement of this conflict of interest. —Mattisse (Talk) 22:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
BewilderedI'm perplexed, to say the least about the above notification. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#ArbCom_Double_Resignation.3F initiated... ceranthor 22:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
RequestWould very much appreciate your thoughts/input to User:Buster7/Incivility. No rush...I see your busy!--Buster7 (talk) 08:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC) RequestHi Cas, would you, or one of the other Arbs involved in creating this Council, please consider posting some details on the RfC talk page of exactly how it came about? I think some transparency is needed regarding how the decisions were made, and in particular who invited the members, and how they were chosen. For example, you said that "we" (by which I take it you mean the ArbCom) expected a backlash, so it would be interesting to know who decided it should proceed anyway. I think transparency is very important here, because the situation has caused a loss of trust, which is unfortunate and needs to be repaired. I'll post this request on the RfC talk page too. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 16:36, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Groucho Marx, etc.
Casliber, you weren't quite the first person at the RfC talk to suggest that jealousy motivated the initiative's opposition. Yet you did so under color of authority, which places those of us who have sincere wikiphilosophical qualms at a disadvantage. In response, I have posted an invitation which for clarity am repeating here: feel free to salt this page. Any person who would tank a good idea simply because they weren't invited into a position of power is someone who shouldn't be entrusted with administrative tools. Durova275 02:25, 13 July 2009 (UTC) Your noteI can't guess what they'd differ on, because I have no idea what the people you invited think is wrong, and that is part of the problem. The point is that the ArbCom is acting beyond its remit. It was elected to resolve disputes, nothing more. In fact, this particular ArbCom was expressly elected as a backlash against the previous ArbCom appearing to assume too much authority. Good governance can't simply be a goal. It has to be a practice and a state of mind too. Here, now, we have a chance to show that we respect good governance, not only in principle, not only for the future, and not only when it's convenient. If such a think-tank is to exist, it needs to be entirely separated from the ArbCom, its members must say what they want to achieve, and then they must stand for election. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 03:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
NoticeDear Casliber, the discussion at User_talk:John_Vandenberg#Renewed_harassment_by_User:Jack_Merridew is perhaps of relevance to you as one of the three mentors. You told him to leave me alone. He didn't. We ended up with ANI threads suggesting as much. He still hasn't. In fact, he outright says I really am "a nobody" on my talk page and mentions me in an AfD I haven't even commented in, falsely saying I reflexively argue to keep "everything", even though I have nominated or argued to delete dozens of articles now. Your warning, the ANI threads, the fact that he was arbcom sanctioned, etc. has not caused these insults to stop. I honestly do not think anything less than a block would get him to stop already. Heck, even though he mass renominated a slew of articles I days before argued to keep, I still have resisted commenting in their actual AfDs. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 05:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, Casliber, Harry Levin is apparently persona non grata on the proteaceae page, although Levin has a logical and rational argument that idiomorphic similarities of disparate, distant Australian and African species bear important witness that the Proteaceae ranged Gondwanaland from Australia to Indo-Madagascar to Africa to South America prior to the Gondwanaland Ice Age 300 million years ago. The barb-wired Proteaceae page is an example of how the botanical community reacts to those who have the audacity to challenge the current dogma of Cretaceous origin of the angiosperm. Levin isn't speculating that flying saucers transported this species. Failure to footnote the existence of alternative theories or hypotheses is to close the blinds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikems (talk • contribs) 20:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC) This is a simple notification that I've asked you a question at the link above. Basically, I don't understand how Coren's accept rational, and therefore also don't understand your endorsement of it. I've given a similar note to Coren altering hi to my question. Apologies if I've broken protocol or anything. Thanks, Verbal chat 23:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer OlympicsI have nominated the article Rio de Janeiro bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics for Per review. Could you review it? Felipe Menegaz 01:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
*A* previous case?I object to this. I haven't been subject to *a* previous case. I've been subject to several. See User:William M. Connolley/For me. Please correct your statement :-) William M. Connolley (talk) 07:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Happy Bastille Day!Dear fellow Wikipedian, I just want to wish you a Happy Bastille Day, whether you are French, Republican or not! :) Happy Editing! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 17:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC) |
- ^ Letter is script and looks like a Russian и.
- ^ Maimonides, Guide for the perplexed, Book III ch.48. Can be viewed online at http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp184.htm