User talk:RedWolf/2008 Archive

Thanks for uploading Image:Tom Petty The Last DJ.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 08:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:VanHalen 1984 fcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:VanHalen 5150 fcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Iron Maiden Killers.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Iron Maiden - Brave New World.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Issues, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 10:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello RedWolf! I want to ask you something about merging articles. I recently proposed merger of List of the highest peaks in Pakistan into List of mountains in Pakistan but got no response on the discussion page for about a week. So, what should I do now, bcz once before when I got no response on merging of two articles for a month, I merged them but my edits were reverted and I was given a warning by a user. So can you guide me what to do in this case and please also tell me what to do with the talk page of the merged article. Thanks! --SMS ^Talk 07:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't have a problem with the merge. Without knowing the article, hard to say why you would be given a warning before. When you are done merging the article text, just redirect the article and its talk page to the merged to article. RedWolf (talk) 03:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, RedWolf
I saw that you begun Marie Byrd Land and contributed to Mount Sidley. Now, I'm asking you: How can Mount Sidley be in M. B. L. as stated in the article (and other mountains in this area too), when M. B. L. is located at a completely different location? This question originally derives from the German Antarctica Portal of which I take care for some weeks. I couldn't find any possible reason, could you help me? Thank you--RedSolution (talk) 00:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The USGS GNIS page makes that claim. RedWolf (talk) 06:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems as if I'd gotten it - I think that all those coordinates in Wikipedia state East instead of West (concerning mountains). I gonna change it now.--RedSolution (talk) 18:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Category:Rush (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 18:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of Rumic World cast members, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of List of Rumic World cast members. --Eruhildo (talk) 04:51, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• List created from CFD consensus. My comments posted on the indicated talk page. RedWolf (talk) 06:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been adding some infoboxes to some of the mountain articles. Over the last few years I've noticed that most of the elevations given in articles and infoboxes I have not worked on seem to refect data from Peakbagger.com or Summitpost.com. So far I have followed this proctice most of the time. These elevations are it seems always at variance with the elevations give by the USGS who seem to be quite proud of there elevation data. I'm looking for guidance as to which data should be used. Thanks in advance. --DRoll (talk) 18:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. This refers only to articles pertaining to US mountains.--DRoll (talk) 18:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, I have noticed the elevation discrepancies with the data given by USGS GNIS. I have tended to side with Peakbagger or SummitPost as it is actively maintained and is almost certainly more up to date than what you would find in GNIS (or at least that's the impression I get anyways). I think the elevations from those sites are typically taken from up to date topo maps. Apparently the most accurate elevation data on U.S. peaks can be found at NGS although most tend not to bother trying to find the peak there. You do raise a good point which I guess the WikiProject has not discussed in any detail as to whether we should "trust" the GNIS as being accurate and use that as the "source of truth" rather than relying on those other sites as we generally do now. We do tend to rely on the GNIS elevation for peaks in Antarctica, due in part to it being the best organized system (or at least that I know of) with public domain information on features in Antarctica. RedWolf (talk) 06:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• • Thanks for the advice. I'll look into NGS. --DRoll (talk) 09:49, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have noticed you making changes to a number of mountain articles so that the coordinates appear in the title area. The preferred solution (as I understand it) is to use the {{coord}} template and use the "display=inline,title" parameters. Is there a particular reason why you are using {{coor at d}} instead? RedWolf (talk) 06:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Question about which coordinates system to use. To quote Docu, "It uses 6 characters and 7 templates less." Anyway, if I add title coordinates to the {{coord}} template and use the "display=inline,title" parameters, I am using 18 more characters than simply adding "at" to make it {{coor at d}}. Though I personally like using the second for the reasons Docu describes, in the last edits, I don't recall switching templates. I only did {{coor d}} to {{coor at d}} (like 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) and then one time adding "display=inline,title" to {{coord}} (here. Note that {{coor d}} is different than {{coord}}, and that I am adding title coordinates based on the existing templates. Sorry if I sound confusing; and you can respond on my talk page if this doesn't help. Spencer^T♦C 15:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I ran across this article and it might qualify for deletion. Perhaps even speedy deletion. There is already and article named Frenchman Mountain that refers to the same peak. I marked Sunrise Mountain for merging but it seems to contain nothing but original research and is very poorly written. I really don't think there is anything worth saving. Any advice would be appreciated. --DRoll (talk) 02:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. They are different peaks. --DRoll (talk) 00:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to replace your Sherbrooke Lake image in the Field, British Columbia article with this photo of Field. I think it's more representative of the Field townsite, and will be of greater interest to the wikipedia users. BTW, that featured image of Alpamayo is amazing - nice work. Mtobey (talk) 17:30, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I have moved the lake image to Sherbrooke Lake (British Columbia). However, the current PD license claim on the image you uploaded appears to be suspect. RedWolf (talk) 01:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rush, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Black Falcon ^(Talk) 17:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated List of Italian American mobsters, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Italian American mobsters. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Doc^g 21:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Back on Oct 16, 2004 you suggested that the article Mount Charleston should be move to Charleston Peak on the discussion page for that article. I think you were right. All the references use the second name. I doubt if there is any real debate from a research point of view but I don't know how the locals would feel. I guess you have to be an admin to do this sort of thing properly or I would just be bold and do it myself. --DRoll (talk) 09:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You marked Image:Giuliani crime rate.gif with pd-usgov, but the work is clearly mine, and not that of the US government. The data is that of the US government, but the figure is my intellectual property. In addition, I wish you had not marked the edit as minor. Look, not a big deal, but just please remember that the data that support an image and the image are not one and the same. Pdbailey (talk) 23:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Well that was almost three years ago and I certainly don't remember my exact rationale for tagging it as such. However, there was very limited information on the description page and I probably made an educated guess. Back then, image tagging was not as well structured as it is now. Had I come across the image now, I probably have slapped an untagged image notice on it with the possibility of it being deleted. Well, actually one of the license checking bots probably would have done that. Live and learn. RedWolf (talk) 04:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RedWolf, I'm sorry, must have woken up on the wrong side of the bed a couple days ago. Pdbailey (talk) 19:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced contents may be removed at any time. You did not provide any sources for your statement about the elevation so they were undone. Do not re-add your statements unless you can provide reliable sources. Thanks. RedWolf (talk) 02:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Making sure I click the right button may help avoid a premature load. I was initially looking at elevation points through Google Earth, then I remembered Peakbagger.com has more accurate surveys for world peaks. As for the 10,397-foot elevation already posted on there for Parícutin, as sourced from the Smithsonian Global Volcanism Program and some other sites, there is a possibility that it could be attributed to adjacent Cerro el Brinco...located at the foot of Cerro Tancítaro, the highest point in the Michoacán-Guanajuato Volcanic Field. I'm still trying to find out its actual elevation. Volcano World actually has this 10,397-foot (or approximate) elevation for both Parícutin and El Jorullo, which I'm well aware isn't correct. El Jorullo is much lower. Parícutin, as sourced by Peakbagger.com, Encyclopedia Britannica and Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia along with some hard copy maps and the close measurements from Google Earth, is given an elevation of only 9,101 feet. For now, I'll just mark the discrepancy in elevation between sources.

If you'd like, I can create a summarized article for the Michoacán-Guanajuato Volcanic Field and include most of the major features within that region. I'm sure that down the road, there will be more significant activity. Mld74 (talk) 22:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a Kuntaw page which is a simple redirection to the Kuntao article. I'm just mentioning it here because I see you had deleted a same-named page for copyright violations and wanted to reassure you that this is different. I'm sending this note to Lupo as well since he made a similar deletion. HarmonicSphere (talk 7:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I have nominated List of Final Fantasy cast members, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Final Fantasy cast members (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kariteh (talk) 14:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• If you had cared to view the page history, you would have discovered that this article was created as the result of a CFD. In any case, do with it what you wish, I have no further interest in that article. RedWolf (talk) 00:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mmh, I would reply with something informative (like, mentioning that the content of the article has already been included in other relevant articles), but since you believe that I didn't "care to view the page history" and that I didn't see you name there and that I simply chose to notify you randomly out of a billion users possible, I'll simply shut up. Kariteh (talk) 07:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the previous RedWolf account on Wikinews, please register ASAP. --Brian McNeil /^talk 08:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I have grabbed the account there. Thanks for your help. RedWolf (talk) 17:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Nixon greets POW McCain.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ferrylodge (talk) 05:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Estevan (disambiguation), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estevan (disambiguation). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? DigitalC (talk) 11:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RedWolf. So in the relevant Categories the Dru is now below the Aiguille du Midi. How does that work then? Best wishes. Ericoides (talk) 19:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The default sort key was using "Du Midi" and not "du Midi" (don't know why it was that way if the article name uses du Midi) which resulted in "Du Midi" coming before "du Dru" since the uppercase D is numerically less (ASCII code) than the lowercase d. I have changed it to use "du Midi" and now it appears after "du Dru" in the category. RedWolf (talk) 21:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Ericoides (talk) 07:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Namche Bazaar els.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. BlueAzure (talk) 23:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your constructive comments. Let's see what I can do.imars (talk) 09:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i think there were in the colonial era three mount merapis at one stage central java and one east java ijen plateau and the marapi that you have been disambig ing - but cripes my source is under a large mount of paper at the mo - but hey 2 is enough :) SatuSuro 15:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason why you're deleting projects on mountain talk pages? I just restored projects on the Mounts Kinch, Somolenko, Overill and Filtzgerald talk pages Black Tusk (talk) 18:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I really do not see the usefulness/value of adding mountains to the Geography and Canada wiki projects. Why have two other wiki projects (which by definition would have massive coverage) try to re-assess 6000+ articles (and growing) each? Seems to be way too much extra work for relatively no added value. If you wish to discuss further, I suggest moving this discussion to the WikiProject Mountains talk page. RedWolf (talk) 16:42, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because they are related to the subject. What I was doing was adding projects to the relating subjects and access the projects when they were all tagged. Deleting projects will most likely cause problems because the geography and other WikiProjects I added will not have anything to work with since almost every topic has its own project. If you look at other articles they still have the child and parent projects included. They are not necessarily redundant. Black Tusk (talk) 17:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi---could you please comment on Talk:Shiprock#Reiteration? You don't need to read the whole discussion; the issue right now is whether the First Ascent/Easiest Route info should be in the infobox, or should be censored because climbing is currently illegal. You can guess my position. -- Spireguy (talk) 12:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I removed the prominence information when I found that I was using the wrong calcualtions. An editor, who I believe is revising some of this info., corrected me on the definitions. I was using a vertical rise calculation when looking at the topo. map as opposed to the "key col" as I understand it. I'm hoping to put the correct info. into these boxes shortly. Sorry for the confusion. jcalz (talk) 15:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok. Thanks for the update. RedWolf (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Summerside (band), an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Summerside (band). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Hoponpop69 (talk) 05:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Nope, not me. The history may say I was the first to create it but it is misleading due to page moves. RedWolf (talk) 05:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reopened the discussion regarding summit elevation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains#Summit elevations. I hope your can participate in the discussion. Thanks. DRoll (talk) 00:36, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I created this template to standardize the appearance of bivouac.com citations. I borrowed from {{cite gnis}} which I just found. Please take a look at the new template and let me know what you think. --DRoll (talk) 06:55, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like a good idea to provide some kind of low level protection to {{cite bivouac}} and {{cite gnis}}. Thanks. --DRoll (talk) 06:59, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Looks good to me. I had found {{bivouac}} before that and had started using it but I guess for consistency it makes sense to add the cite prefix. As for protection, once there are hundreds of articles using it, someone will come along to protect it as a high usage template. I could do it now but I would be heavily biased in doing so at this point so I will hold off. RedWolf (talk) 00:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well it replaced all the occurrences of the template bivouac with cite bivouac in the article space and noted on the bivouac page that it was deprecated. The two templates differ considerably in the way they are coded. The new template uses {{cite web}} internally. Coding this way will insure that the the new template will always generate the same kind of output as cite web. I realize that this was a rather big step for a user to take without discussion somewhere but I thought that since the template bivouac was not used more than fifteen times in the article space that my action was within reason. Of course I am willing to discuss this and take any remedial action that might become necessary. Thank. --DRoll (talk) 05:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove the Mount Mitchill link, and why did you label your edit "minor? Thanks. —David Levy 14:27, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really do not see the point of posting the main link under "see also" when it is already at the top of the page. That is not the purpose of "see also". RedWolf (talk) 03:03, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The link is to Mount Mitchill, not Mount Mitchell. But thank you for demonstrating the likelihood of someone confusing the two and arriving at that page.  ;-) —David Levy 08:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Ah well, my oversight. I stand corrected. RedWolf (talk) 01:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here we are..

..now it's up to you. Take it as a gift from GER. Sorry for the partly bad english & Good hunting the vocabulary mistakes etc. ;-) --

Thanks for the great translation effort. Moved to User:RedWolf/Worksheet for copy edit. RedWolf (talk) 18:48, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I now have substituted the deleted photo by another modified photo from the north face. I actually have no idea why the first modified photo from North Face was deleted. You? Copyright violation? For reasons of CC-By- = non modifiable?

Regards --80.145.210.53 (talk) 20:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm a bit puzzled as well by the switch. I don't really see a problem with the original image. It is a modified image but was licensed under the same license as the original image. I will ask the editor about it. RedWolf (talk) 00:07, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pls. feel free to use them anywhere around the Everest articles. --80.145.187.72 (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

for the "Did You Know"-Article on main page from germany. :-) --170.56.58.148 (talk) 09:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC) (otherwise writing as a 80.145.mmm.nnn IP)[reply]

• Thank you. I of course must give the utmost thanks to the German Wikipedia for the original content as well as to the translator(s) who did an exceptional job. RedWolf (talk) 02:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from Germany for the kind flowers. :-)) BTW some efforts else as it was not only translating but also editing the photographs of the North Face & the Kangshung face from space. Front page - there also is a similar thing in the GER WP - "Artikel des Tages" (article of the day) which mostly is a recently elected "excellent!" article of the featured articles program. (& the 1924 articel actually is "lesenswert" // (worth wile reading.. ..weahh weeping - my english.. ;-))) I tried to motivate some people to put the german article also on the GER WP front page but there is a heap of mountaineering enthusiasts being enthusiastic for the work itself & alone. Nobody coming out of it's username or IP lurk mode. ;-) kind regards to the EN language brothers. BTW There is also the 1922 article.. A rough translation wanted? To smoothen it afterwars.. ;-))) Yess OK - there are no real secrets stories like this really fascinating M & I thing.. but this "The Other George" story of George Ingle Finch.., chemist & experimentator to the ox bottles &a strong mountaineer going up to 8325m w. bottled ox.. world record.. --80.145.251.244 (talk) 19:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, the work done on the photos was excellent, really helps the reader in visualizing the routes. I would definitely be quite interested in copy-editing a translation of the 1922 article as well. I found the 1924 article a very interesting read and while as you say, the 1922 expedition may not have the intriguing Mallory & Irvine angle to it, I think it would make a great companion piece to the 1924 article. When the translation is ready, just copy it into my Worksheet and drop me a line. Thanks. RedWolf (talk) 06:52, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here we are. ;-) Again: many exculpations from my side for my lousy english & best wishes to fit it up while copyediting & Good luck. --80.145.188.203 (talk) 09:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many THX for copyediting the 1922 Expedition article. Great work! & have a nice slide switchover (?) to 2009. We will have fondue (beef deepfried in fat w. spicy sauces) with the family. And we will see TV, once per year only: Freddie Frinton performing the butler of Miss Sophie in "Dinner for One" :-) It's "Kult" in Germany. -- 80.145.206.43 (talk) 02:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• No problem, the translation was a good start. It makes a great companion piece to the 1924 expedition. Happy New Year to you as well. Can't say I will be having fondue but I'll try and find something festive to celebrate the arrival of 2009! :) RedWolf (talk) 22:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]