User talk:Smartse/archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Smartse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Congratulations on a strong showing. Someone will be along shortly to drop off a bucket. If you're lucky, you'll get a t-shirt too. Now go forth, and do good unto the wiki. –xeno^talk 15:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Woop. Thanks for the pleasant comments everyone (I'm not gonna be thankspamming). SmartSE (talk) 15:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

129/0/1 is pretty impressive - -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations. Spill on aisle 5. Do you have your mop? . - Hydroxonium (H₃O⁺) 16:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I had to dig around in my archives to find it, but her's your crappy t-shirt. :) Feel free to drop by my talk page if you need anything. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey there...congrats! --Perseus, Son of Zeus ✉ sign here 16:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations on your new job! Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations from me as well. Feel free to borrow some code from my monobook, blocking is so much easier with a dropdown menu:) ϢereSpielChequers 17:24, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Woohoo! Now try out one of those civility blocks. The aftermath on ANI is great fun. If you like, I can insult you for real. All the best, Drmies (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Well done, and well deserved! First Light (talk) 05:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Congrats!!!! --j⚛e decker^{talk to me} 08:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. I've did some mopping yesterday and the main page is still intact! Now, who do I email my bank account details to, to set up the paycheck? SmartSE (talk) 10:26, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Me me! Congrats, and if you need any mopping help/advice, drop me a line, along with your bank details. GedUK  20:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! - just to let you know that I didn't !vote because I knew I wouldn't have too, but I was there all the time. I hope you'll stick around and continue to take an interest in the process that got you there. Best wishes, Kudpung (talk) 07:05, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Late as ever, me..... Congratulations. Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:00, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations for becoming an admin!

Wayne Slam has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

WayneSlam 19:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Yay, it got through. :D Grats. --Obsidi♠n^Soul 06:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, it's here. Wondered whether "he" is OK, or is it "she", or perhaps you prefer not to be explicit. Tony (talk) 07:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Looks good, made a small tweak. 'He' is correct... funny how everyone at RfA managed to 'smell' that. SmartSE (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Sexist of me to assume. Tony (talk) 13:34, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Not really - it's unfortunately a safe assumption to make. SmartSE (talk) 14:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the archiving on my talk page. [1] I had wondered why things werent being archived, but hadnt bothered to do any checking. Active Banana (^bananaphone 16:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem. SmartSE (talk) 16:55, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Smartse this is Mlpearc from ACC I have received your request for User:SmartSE could you confirm that you are requesting the "doppelganger account" here on your talk page, and I will create, or you can come to ACC and send it through admin's have ACC rights. which ever. The account is on hold pending your response thanx. Mlpearc powwow 18:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

That's correct. Thanks for your help on this - I've tried to do it myself but it always turns back to smartse when I try to put smartSE into the box! SmartSE (talk) 09:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done Check your email for temporary password :). Mlpearc powwow 15:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Cheers, still can't log in for the same reason as above, but I've tagged it from this account. SmartSE (talk) 15:41, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

No, I didn't mean to tag this for deletion; I was just trying to clean up pages in user space I'd used for template development, and must have missed the redirect to this real page! Thanks for your actions. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I insulted you on my talk page, and left a hopefully productive comment on the DYK page. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

In an article I am writing on the termite Coptotermes gestroi, User:Cwmhiraeth/New, I am trying to refer to the main page on termites, specifically to the part that refers to the different castes that exist. I have tried using

and various combinations including "[ ]"s but I cannot seem to achieve what I want, which is a link and the simple phrase "Social organisation in termites".

Can you help? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) As a "Main" link is supposed to be identifying the actual name of the article/section in question, I think it should simply be {{Main|Termites#Social organization}} (with a space rather than an underscore in the name). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I'd been annoyed by this before too and had never worked it out. However, the details at {{main}} show you can be do it using {{Main|Termites#Social_organization|l1=Social organisation in termites}}.{{seealso}} or {{further}} might be more appropriate though, as {{main}} is more generally used when you have a summary style and then links to the more specific articles, but it's not too important. (Thanks for the stalk Zebedee) SmartSE (talk) 20:04, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, that's neat - I've learned something new today :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I've put them all in for the moment and will investigate how they work. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:14, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

You seem to have blocked IDontVand4L1ze (talk · contribs) for a user policy violation, but I really don't see any major violations of the policy in that name. Also, you wrote on the talk page "Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username," but this person was vandalizing both a mainspace article and another user's talk page. Could you explain? Thanks, Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 23:30, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, I reckon that it comes under a disruptive username, when combined with their contribs, but maybe you don't agree. I thought this was the best action to take to minimise disruption though, in part because accounts wouldn't generally be blocked for two instances of vandalism. I've changed the template to make it clear that the username wasn't the only issue - the one I used was a standard one from twinkle, and there doesn't seem to be one for disruptive usernames that could be used instead so far as I can tell. SmartSE (talk) 23:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

{{Uw-vaublock}} might be a nice template to use in these situations since it is also a vandalism-only account. →♠Gƒoley↔Four♣← 23:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Greetings,

Regarding the below deletion:

22:58, 5 February 2011 Smartse (talk | contribs) deleted "Robert Young (gerontologist)" ‎ (G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion: still no sources to address WP:BIO concerns of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Young (longevity claims researcher))

1. It's clear that DavidinDC was behind this deletion:

1. (cur | prev) 23:03, 5 February 2011 Smartse (talk | contribs) (46,203 bytes) (→Repost of Robert Young (gerontologist): c) (undo)
2. (cur | prev) 18:59, 5 February 2011 David in DC (talk | contribs) (45,858 bytes) (Speedy proposal) (undo)

2. Your "rationale" for deletion is incorrect. "Still no sources" is certainly not true.

http://www.globalaging.org/health/us/2006/longevityclues.htm

Perhaps you meant "not enough sources," but that's not what you said.

3. I realize that there was some discussion here, but I can't see it. I think this page should be undeleted and taken to "deletion review."

It's more than clear that DavidinDC, who is involved with JJBulten in pushing an anti-supercentenarian agenda on Wikipedia, is not an objective or fair editor, at least in regards to this subject.

Personally, I did not re-create this article, but I know that my life is substantially different now than in 2007. Thus, the G4 deletion argument is invalid.

For example, I've won a national award:

http://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwger/6113.html

I've had books published:

http://www.amazon.com/AFRICAN-AMERICAN-LONGEVITY-ADVANTAGE-Comparison-Supercentenarian/dp/3639105702/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1296951618&sr=1-1

If an objective, third party editor wants to delete this, fine. But DavidinDC has made anti-gay comments and is clearly biased against science in favor of his own ego. G4 was not the appropriate policy in this case. Ryoung122 00:10, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

The anti-gay slur against me is unfounded and reprehensible. RY may have forgotten, but he retracted it.David in DC (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, like I said below it's irrelevant anyway. There's no need to take it any further. SmartSE (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I would like to know why you deleted the entry on Robert Young.

The article was listed for deletion. In the preamble, it was stated that if anyone wanted to keep it, they should enter a {hold it} and place a comment.

I did so. Then, in contravention of Wikipedia policy on {hold it}, you immediately deleted the page with no discussion or debate. Why? Cam46136 Cam46136 (talk) 03:43, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Cam46136

(talk page stalker)Kindly read WP:CSD#G4; you may find it informative. To Smartse; there's an ongoing arbitration case on this topic (longevity-related articles), so everything that happens in this area for a while will be magnified infinitely more than it should be. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:05, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, sorry for the slightly delayed response. I've had another look at this and still feel that this was the correct decision to make. There were a couple of extra paragraphs present in the recent version, that were not in the deleted version, but I do not feel these were sufficient to make the article not "sufficiently identical and unimproved" (G4), since one was completely unsourced and the other went no way towards addressing the original concerns of the AfD - that there were no sources directly addressing the subject. That's the crux of the issue and why I still think that was the correct decision to make. As you've commented on other issues I'll try to address these - a) who added the speedy tag is irrelevant to the decision - I reviewed it and agreed. I've had some involvement with this before, but do not consider myself involved. b) There wasn't a {{hangon}} tag on the page when I deleted it and regardless, the points made on the talk page were not convincing, making claims that were not based on sources. Even if hangon was in place, it clears states that it is not binding and that pages can be deleted if they meet speedy criteria. The article had been up for four hours and tagged for ~ 3 so my decision to delete it was not "immediate" and if there were sources available to demonstrate things had changed since the AfD, they should have been easy to add. If as Robert has said "my life is substantially different now than in 2007" and there are "multiple, independent sources" to demonstrate this, then you should initiate a deletion review to challenge the original AfD, showing that "significant new information has come to light". If you are still unhappy with my decision and this explanation, then I'm happy to post at WP:AN and ask another admin to look over it as well. SmartSE (talk) 12:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Smartse, you've got a good feel for notability and COI issues. Could you have a look at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nicholas_Hagger_(2nd_nomination)? Would be interested in your view. Cheers, --JN466 06:46, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Done. Cheers for the pointer. SmartSE (talk) 14:57, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for popping by. --JN466 17:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I have marked Japan's space development as having multiple issues and have done some initial improvements myself. It is a mess, the references need sorting and the English is fairly incomprehensible in places. I guess I shouldn't have touched it at all because the more I looked at it the greater the problems I saw and it is really pretty substandard in its present form. I'm sure you will know what to do with it! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

You do manage to find some tricky examples! As pointed out on the talk page it appears to be a google translation of the Japanese article which is why it is so hard to read. I left a note at the spaceflight wikiproject to see if anyone might be able to fix it up. SmartSE (talk) 14:59, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:59, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello SmartSE. As I said in my comment on the Nicholas Hagger AfD page I do want to improve the sources and would like to take you up on your kind offer to email an article/articles for your advice. What is the best email address to reach you? Thanks. Sanrac1959 (talk) 11:14, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

You can use smartsewiki [at] gmail.com . As I said though - I need to see things like interviews or long articles that have him as the topic. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 11:36, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much SmartSE, I am getting something together and will email this to you, but it may not arrive until tomorrow. Thanks again. Sanrac1959 (talk) 12:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but I don't need a copy of everything - you could have a million tiny mentions, but they wouldn't add up to anything, but two reasonable articles that address the topic as in WP:BASIC would be enough. SmartSE (talk) 12:30, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Just emailed you 56 images with covering explanations. With many thanks. Sanrac1959 (talk) 11:21, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I knew there was a reason I voted for you. . How on earth did you find out that fr.wiki was using Wikiwix for archiving? I would honestly like to know. Thanks for finding that. - Hydroxonium (H₃O⁺) 13:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hehe thanks. I don't know, probably from using fr:Méphédrone as somewhere to find references for mephedrone. I'm always somewhat surprised by the lack of crosstalk between projects, obviously languages make it difficult, but this is an example where it would really help if we communicated more. Annoyingly, I can't think of any francophones that I've come across here that might be able to help. Thanks for starting the discussion btw - had been thinking about how it would be a good idea for ages, but never really thought about doing anything about it! SmartSE (talk) 14:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

That's very clever. Thanks. I looked at the history page for the French Wikiwix project you listed. I clicked their version of the "Contributors" link to find who had worked on the project the most. I visited their userpage and it had a babel userbox listing advanced english (EN 3). So I left them a message with a link to our discussion and asking for help. I also left a google translation in French just in case. Let's hope it works. - Hydroxonium (H₃O⁺) 15:00, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah, likewise - very nifty indeed. I remembered that User:Bouchecl is French-English bilingual so might be able to help if asked, but fingers crossed, Dodoiste will come help out. I could also probably persuade some francophones I know in RL to contact linterweb if need be. SmartSE (talk) 15:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Stupid me. I didn't think to look to see if fr:Utilisateur:Dodoïste has a page here at en:wiki, which they do — User:Dodoïste. And they're active (>2000 EN edits) and were here just the other day. Plus they're involved in translating articles. I'll remember next time. Anyhoo, thanks again for all the help. - Hydroxonium (H₃O⁺) 17:31, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Smartse, I'm a Campus Ambassador in the Public Policy Initiative and found your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Online Ambassadors and was wondering whether you'd be up for mentoring User:Vince005, one of the students for Prof Gen's Environmental Policy class. I'll watch this page. Thanks! Dcoetzee 22:21, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Sure thing. I saw that class and thought that it's relatively up my street in terms of interest so that sounds excellent. SmartSE (talk) 22:25, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Great :-) Please just go ahead and leave a message on their talk page and add the {{WAP student}} template, something like this: {{WAP student|project=WikiProject United States Public Policy|course=Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Courses/Environmental_Policy_spring_2011_(Gen)|coursetalk=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Courses/Environmental_Policy_spring_2011_(Gen)|mentor=Smartse}}. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you for your help! Dcoetzee 00:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		In grateful appreciation for your brilliance in finding a solution to the WP:LINKROT problem that has plagued Wikipedia for years, I hereby award the "What a Brilliant Idea!" Barnstar to SmartSE. The man-hours and cost you saved the Wikimedia Foundation is inestimable. Thank you so very much for contributing to this project. I sincerely appreciate all that you do and can't thank you enough. - Hydroxonium (talk} 23:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. - Hydroxonium (H₃O⁺) 23:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! You deserve a lot of the credit for making me think about it in the first place though. I sure hope we can get it to work though - it certainly looks hopeful at the moment. SmartSE (talk) 23:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi! My name is Meghan and I am working on a Wikipedia project for my class at Indiana University, Bloomington. My group is focusing on adding information about pesticide regulations in the United State. I saw your profile and I thought that you would be a great mentor for me for this project. Thanks! (Meghan.lyn.fischer (talk) 01:26, 8 February 2011 (UTC)) MLF

Sorry for this. I did get an edit conflict, but the diff only showed my edit adding a comma, so I just copy-pasted my text into the edit window. I guess the diff was wrong; weird. Ucucha 14:55, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

No worries, things have been being weird all day. SmartSE (talk) 15:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I was just reverting their other edits and getting ready to warn them again/go to AIV and you beat me to it. Thanks. :) - JuneGloom Talk 17:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

No probs. When someone add 600Kb of HEHEHEHE it's just asking to be blocked ASAP. SmartSE (talk) 17:17, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean with this edit and "[e pluribus unum] right to freedom of expression"? The source doesn't mention "e pluribus unum" and e pluribus unum has nothing to do with freedom of expression. --Espoo (talk) 23:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't actually write that myself and don't understand the actual latin, I'm afraid. Another editor had added it to loads of company articles (Visa, PayPal etc.) in a "these are evil companies" way so I removed them all and copied it once into the WL article. Please clean it up if you can. SmartSE (talk) 00:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

I am a graduate student doing a wikipedia project this semester. I am planning on creating a wikipedia site for "high refractive index polymers." I noticed that you deleted a website for this recently and was hoping to get some insight as to why you removed this page. Thank you for your help.Cddwumich

Hi Cddwumich, welcome! It's good to hear you're doing a university project using wikipedia. I deleted High Refractive Index Polymers the only content in the page was "user : touchlee" and it therefore qualified for deletion as having "no meaningful, substantive content". There is nothing to stop you recreating it, with something in it, but it might be best if you create a draft in a sandbox and then seek feedback from somewhere before making it go live. Let me know if you have any other questions. SmartSE (talk) 01:33, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Smartse, we have been trying to update the Pop Rocks page with correct infomation about the brand, history, etc. We intend to correct some information and update it. We are Zeta Espacial S.A. (Barcelona, Spain), owners of the Brand Pop Rocks. We purchased it long ago to Kraft Foods and are distributing the brand in the US through Pop Rocks Inc (Atlanta, GA). However, both times it has been reverted back to old information. What can be do to prove that the information provided is more correct than the previous one? Thanks for your response. If there is any piece of information that you may consider as a publicity, let us know, it is only our intention to give accurate and correct information about OUR brand, and the current text was written by other people. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.35.154.17 (talk) 12:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. SmartSE (talk) 14:28, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Just created a new user account, instead of changing the username. Would it be possible to post HomeSun under new username? What would be your advice. Chaiks24 (talk) 15:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Probably not. You'll need to read WP:ORG first to ensure that HomeSun is notable. Most small companies are not and this was the reason the article was deleted. You'll need to find newspaper or magazine articles that discuss the company to include it. If you work the company, you'd also need to read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that Wikipedia should not be used as a vehicle for promotion. SmartSE (talk) 15:06, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I would like to know as to why was TradersStudio page deleted. Please let me know what was the reasons for its deletion? Sincere thanks once more.

This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.

• 13:04, 8 February 2011 Smartse (talk | contribs) deleted "TradersStudio" ‎ (Multiple reasons: Speedy deletion criteria a7, g11)

I am unable to find any logs or discussion. However, when I saw the reasons as per "a7" & "g11" could you please clarify the above? I am unable to get as to how you say it is as per the following:

a7: No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content). There are other similar companies like TradeStation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TradeStation), MetaStock (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetaStock) Others are also there as mentioned here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_analysis_software

g11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. It was not any promotional article. It did not have a logo like the TradeStation page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TradeStation) as using a company logo without permission would be copyright infringement. Besides, it had more information than the MetaStock page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetaStock)

Please help and guide me as to what went wrong so that I can rectify the same. My aim is not to point out other pages but just to inform you as to how I had based the TradersStudio page on. Also, I thought there is a 7 day notice before deletion of any page, please correct me if I am wrong.

Moreover, if it is possible to move it back to my own userspace to make it a better article before going live.. please do so.. Sincere thanks and apologies once more..

Sincere thanks and apologies once more. Ruthiecameryn (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message. The page was deleted for the reasons you've listed - that there was no mention of why it is a significant product, and because it looked like advertising. To be included in the encyclopedia, topics should meet our general notability guideline which requires "significant coverage in multiple independent sources" - for example articles in newspapers or magazines. You're right to point out that there is a lot of other crap here and I can see why after looking at those articles you wrote yours as you did. I've checked though and it appears that they have received sufficient press coverage to be included, but I don't think that TradersStudio has yet. We have several different methods of deletion, yours was tagged for "speedy deletion" which means that there is no debate and it can be deleted immediately, but if you claimed it was significant and it was not overly promotional then it would be discussed in a deletion discussion which lasts 7 days. I've copied the deleted article over to User:Ruthiecameryn/TradersStudio for you to work on if you wish. SmartSE (talk) 21:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Smartse, what are the chances you have online access to the journal Archives of Natural History? I'm looking for doi:10.3366/anh.1983.11.2.233 It's based across the pond, so I figured you'd be my best shot... Sasata (talk) 04:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Belay that request... I clicked around some more and found a cached version in the all-seeing Google! Thanks anyways. Sasata (talk) 04:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Smartse! Please consider providing a second opinion regarding discussions between editor Mathstat and myself, at User talk:Mathstat and at Talk:Distance_correlation. You may delete any inappropriate comments made by me. Thanks! Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz  (talk) 10:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Kiefer, I've had a look, but I'm not sure what the problem is... let me know if anything still needs to be done. SmartSE (talk) 11:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about the question, if I were you.

The pages' histories contain the information, which is now deleted by mutual agreement.

I had raised a COI-concern on the article talk page rather than on the user page or by tagging the article(s). (In the future, I think that a private e-mail would be better, in almost all cases.)

I had been concerned about a pattern in the bibliographies of half the articles edited by the editor. On balance, these are reasonable and good-faith additions, imho, rather than the kinds of additions which we previously encountered in statistics, via *dst*t (shudder)---perhaps the similar names made me hyper-alert?

Again, don't worry about this.

Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz  (talk) 14:55, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Smartse. You have new messages at Hydroxonium's talk page.
Message added 16:05, 11 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The newsletter of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program – Volume 1, 28 January 2011 This is the second issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed. Userboxes and profiles - Add an ambassador userbox to your page, and make sure you've added your mentor profile! Be a coordinating ambassador - Pick and class and make sure no students fall through the cracks. New screencasts - Short videos on watchlists and a number of other topics may be useful to students. Updates from Campus Ambassadors - Ambassadors are starting to report on classroom experiences, both on-wiki and on the Google Group. Other news - There's a new on-wiki application for being an Online Ambassador, and Editing Friday #2 is today! Things you can do - This is just a sample; if you're eager for something to do, there's plenty more.

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello! Not a big deal, but noticed that the page title for the Hastert Center is different than the official name of the organization -- http://www.wheaton.edu/hastertcenter/. A while back, the "comma before and" was removed, while that comma actually appears in the title. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synthality (talk • contribs) 19:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I did that before I had heard of the Oxford comma! I've had a look at the article again and realised that it is not sufficiently notable for its own article and should only be mentioned in the Wheaton College article, as it already is, so have reidrected the article to there instead. SmartSE (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I just wanted to take a minute to say thanks for all of your help with Arnold Worldwide's Wikipedia entry. Your guidance and proofreading made the process much simpler and more understandable for a new Wikipedia user. I cannot speak highly enough of your work and assistance. Take care. Vacassel (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I've deleted all that forum style discussion, it was getting out of hand. I hope you understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 08:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Yep totally agree. SmartSE (talk) 11:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:43, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey SmartSE! This is just a quick reminder: please be sure to add {{WAP student}} (for an example, see User:Sfofana) the user pages of your mentees. And once they are working on articles, be sure to tag the talk pages with {{WAP assignment}}. Cheers--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 18:52, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I notice you were the blocking admin of 199.44.252.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). This IP has been actively blanking their user Talk page to hide WHOIS info and warnings. As I understand the policy, this by itself is not strictly prohibited, since it's a Talk page, although it's definitely frowned upon. However, in combination with the personal attacks and other userspace vandalism of the past few days, I have to presume bad faith. There's nothing current or frequent enough to take the IP to AIV, but is it worth going to ANI over? Cheers, --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 01:04, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Alan, I don't think there is anything to do at the moment as they are not currently being disruptive, but I'll keep an eye on them and reblock them if necessary. I don't think that there is any need to discuss it at ANI, since the edits were obviously vandalism. Give me a poke if you notice more vandalism from them and I haven't blocked them. SmartSE (talk) 15:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your various tweaks to Somerset Levels. I knew species naming was going to cause an issue & took advice which suggested capitalising the names, but I'm happy if consensus says differently.— Rod ^talk 15:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

No probs. As you can read for yourself the whole issue is a bit of a minefield, but Mink and Otter stood out as looking a bit wrong. There could be more that should be decapitalised (the vole and beetle) but I'm not entirely sure on the covention with them. One other thing - why have the vole and mink got their binomial in brackets, where no others do? You can probably get rid of them IMO. I'll try to have a read of other parts of the article at some point. SmartSE (talk) 16:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Please see the comment I left at User talk:Emd001. I think they're an example of the relatively rare COI editor who can follow our guidelines. The matter of permitting coi editing has been much discussed, and the conclusion has always been that it is not flat-out prohibited, Among the reason is are that some people do it well, that most people have some degree of COI about what they edit, and that in any case we cannot actually prevent it. What we can prevent is that the encyclopedia should have the usual sort of bad articles produced by it. I've found that a sizable minority of PR people can learn to work properly with a little assistance, and a few even make sure they learn how ahead of time. The wording of WP:COI is a subtle compromise that has held up fairly well. I'll be glad to discuss this further-- but either on my talk p, or let me know there, for I may not see it otherwise. DGG ( talk ) 16:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I received your message on my first wiki contribution last week but I didn't reply you because being busy and I couldn't find how to reply for a long time. I am currently a graduate student in evolutionary biology, and will continue to contribute to wikipedia. Than you!

Per request at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Transwikification I moved back the page you moved in userspace. Why did you do this and why didn't you create a proper reason for that move? mabdul 18:38, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I replied there, it's not that simple unfortunately. SmartSE (talk) 19:42, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Technically, my statement you corrected here was correct, just not really meaningful :). Thanks. - 2/0 (cont.) 02:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I have replied to your concern on my wall with a question. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:32, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. We don't have the expand template any more, so I don't know what the best tag for that is. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

David Oxley is a blatant hoax. You accidentally told Kamkek it was not and declined it. --173.49.140.141 (talk) 22:36, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Well obviously I disagreed as to whether it was "blatant" or not. There does appear to be a David Oxley who was an actor that fits with the dates in the article: [2] and I thought that this was sufficient for it not to qualify under G3. Out of interest, how are you certain it was a hoax? SmartSE (talk) 22:49, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

This message is going out to all of the Online Ambassadors who are, or will be, serving as mentors this term.

Hi there! This is just a friendly reminder to check in on what your mentees are doing. If they've started making edits, take a look and help them out or do some example fixes for them, if they need it. And if they are doing good, let them know it!

If you aren't mentoring anyone yet, it looks like you will be soon; at least one large class is asking us to assign mentors for them, and students in a number of others haven't yet gotten to asking ambassadors to be their mentors, but may soon. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello... I found you through Adopt-a-user. I'm a newbee trying to avoid making an ass of herself and I'd appreciate some hand-holding. I'd like to help contribute in areas where I have something to offer, but I need to learn the local dialect. I chose you in particular to contact because some of the articles I could help improve could raise conflict of interest questions. For example, my mother is Sylvia Earle, a high-profile marine biologist, and her entry could use some polishing. I could help with this, but it wouldn't look good for me to be the person doing the editing, even though I'm not the daughter mentioned in the current version of the article as being in business with her.

One thing I noticed in looking at the history is that there was previously much more extensive info on her that was deleted because it was copied verbatim from another site and removed for copyright reasons. It would be good to include more detailed info, without violating copyright. By the same token, some details in her bio are less than encyclopedic in nature (e.g. future speaking engagements). As an overly enthusiastic newbie I deleted the latter, then reversed it out of an abundance of caution over COI accusations.

In short, because my mother is a high-profile individual, I want to make sure that her page is accurate, current, and encyclopedic in nature, and would appreciate whatever help I can get in that effort. There are a number of other people I know and care about whose wikipedia entries I would like to help maintain for currency, accuracy, vandalism reversal, etc. without running afoul of COI issues.

I'd like to contribute in other ways as well, but don't want to screw it up.

Thanks

Gale GGM42 (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Gale, I'm sure I can manage that. Firstly, thanks for seeking advice rather than diving right in (that wasn't supposed to be a pun) as it makes it easier for everyone. Whilst you do have a conflict of interest, our guideline does not prohibit someone in your position from writing an article about someone they know, it just means that you need to be extra careful to follow the correct procedure. The main things to worry about are that you ensure that everything is based on what we call "reliable sources" so that information in the article is verifiable - meaning that a reader can check everything out for themselves if they wish. A quick glance at Sylvia Earle shows that isn't the case at the moment so hopefully you/we can improve that at least. Related to that, you need to be careful not to do what we call original research, which is using your own personal knowledge about your mother. The first step to improving the article therefore is to find high quality sources to use - try searching google news, and google scholar to try and find articles that directly discuss her, I assume that she has retired, and often something is written when scientists retire so finding that would be a good idea if it exists. As to actually how to edit, it's reasonably simple and I can give you some more tips later on, but the cheatsheet has the basics. Let me know if you need to know anything else. SmartSE (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Retire? Her? Not until she's been in a box for at least 10 years! She's busier than ever! She is very active in marine exploration and conservation, which is one reason her bio will benefit from ongoing updating. The risk, if I am the one making those changes, is the appearance that I'm tooting her horn rather than just stating facts. She was named treehugger.org's 2010 person of the year, for example. She's the subject of a documentary scheduled for release this fall. That sort of thing. So I wasn't sure whether I should even touch it, even though I do feel I can adhere to relevant standards & policies. Also, what about info sourced from her own organization's website?

Many thanks!

Gale GGM42 (talk) 05:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Haha, I see. Like I said, there is no problem with you editing the article, particularly if you are open about it as you have been. If you'd prefer not to directly edit the article, you can write up a version in what we call a sandbox which can be reviewed by other editors, before it is moved into the article. You can source some information off her organization's website, but it is better to use material from the media where it exists. I've had a quick search and found this book about her, the same here, a mention in this one (I can't actually read it) this in Nature and this in The Guardian, this in the NYT, Time etc. That was from only 10 minutes of looking, so I'm sure there will be more out there - I can see why you want to improve the article now! These are the sort of sources that you should use as the basis for the article and if you use them correctly, there is no reason that the article you write will be any different from what I would write. We have a peer review system for articles and there are some here that are biographies of scientists, you can take a look at these to give you some idea of the style of writing and what you should include. I'd encourage you just to jump in and start writing it in User:GGM42/draft and I can carry on giving you pointers as you go. SmartSE (talk) 10:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your advice! I have my work cut out for me! I'm curious about the various ways bio pages are broken into sections. For example, some have a separate section for personal life, some don't. In my mother's case there seems to be some overlap in the content of some of the sections. It tempts me to try to really create a more coherent structure for the whole article. Maybe you could suggest some examples of well-organized, high quality bios of living scientists of her stature, since there seems to be so much variation between articles. Also, some of the more reliable sources I can cite are not available online (books and articles). I may need help citing these correctly. Guess I need to sit down and start that draft.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by GGM42 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Smartse! Thank you for being my mentor. I'll contact you if I'll have any problem that I won't be able to solve by myself.

I picked this topic: City and County of San Francisco Environment Code. I think it's interesting and there is still nothing on Wikipedia about it. Probably because it was approved last December.

Thanks also for the first tips. Vince005 (talk) 07:09, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Vince. Before you start writing about the City and County of San Francisco Environment Code you might want to make sure there are sufficient sources that have discussed it. I've had a look myself but can't really find anything that could be used. I may be wrong there though, but feel free to drop me a note once you've done some research if you want me to check what you've found. I noticed your comments at Talk:Wind farm btw - they look like they would make good additions to environmental effects of wind power so be bold and add them! SmartSE (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Smartse, you are right. Also using LexisNexis not much has been published about that. That's why I prefer to focus on just one part of it: 2010 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). Through LexisNexis I've found articles on the San Francisco Chronicle and on other newspapers. 98.210.133.16 (talk) 21:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Cool, that looks as if it should be interesting. There are a fair few articles in google news too, if you haven't already checked there. Drop me a note when you've started on it. SmartSE (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi SmartSE, I see that you are Vince005's online mentor, so I thought I should let you know that I've tagged his article, 2010 California Green Building Standards Code, for a series of copyright violations. While Wikipedia policies don't condone that, I imagine university and course policies don't either; I've notified Vince005 about the copyright issues on his talk page, but I figured I should let you know since you're his online mentor. OCNative (talk) 04:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I had already told them about it months ago but they didn't take any notice of my advice. I haven't had any time to edit it myself either unfortunately. SmartSE (talk) 16:09, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: your comment at DYK: would it be better, do you think, if I cited it to the text of the sketch, which is linked? (Although WP:When to cite says that it's assumed that in articles on fictional works, the plot is sourced to the work.) Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

There was nothing whatever wrong with your deletion; please don't take my undeletion of Rare Disease UK as in any possible sense a criticism. rather, I made the choice to rewrite the articles involved--Ido that once or twice a day if I can. I left a very full explanation for the user, mainly to urge her not to bother getting otrs permission for unusably promotional material. Maybe she'll earn.— Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)

Fair enough, you have more patience than myself. Thanks for letting me know. SmartSE (talk) 12:12, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for catching disimprovements such as this. Anybody can revert immediate vandalism, but it takes special dedication to catch the sort that has already been "legitimized" by subsequent edits of respected users. I had noticed this one and wanted to revert it, but you beat me to it. And I missed the other one. — Sebastian 22:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but the same IP has made crazy comments over at Talk:WikiLeaks so I knew it was worth checking up on what else they had done. SmartSE (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Alecton discoidalis.

Hello Smartse, it is very good cooperation with you. Lets make other insect-gastropod interaction article(s) DYK hook(s). I have uploaded images for the firefly Alecton discoidalis. I think that people usually do not know, that fireflies feeds on snails. --Snek01 (talk) 13:29, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Snek, thanks for your note, I agree it is a good idea to collaborate on hooks and that sure sounds interesting! I'm a bit busy at the minute working on this at the moment and am going to busy IRL, but I will try to find the time to make a long enough article if I can. If I don't have time, Stemonitis and Cwmhiraeth are interested in insects and might do it instead. I'll keep you updated. SmartSE (talk) 16:09, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Smartse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.