User:Maproom/archive 6

Kava link

Hi Maproom, can you help me understand the specific reason the link (described below) is not allowed ? You were kind enough to direct me to WP:ELNO and when I asked the editor for clarification he/she did not respond --"Regarding Kava- "Strains and Origins", Thank You. I went to WP:ELNO and see numerous potential reasons for reverting my edits. How can we find out specifically which one(s)? This was to provide a link/citation to the free, on-line Hawaiian 'Awa Book.75.233.157.82 (talk) 18:37, 20 March 2014 (UTC) as you say, the policy outlines many reasons why the link should not be included. What you need to do is identify why it should be included. But neither the fact that it is "free" nor the fact that it "is online" are reasons it should be included. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:56, 20 March 2014 (UTC) The reason it should be included - it is the source of the information regarding Hawaiian 'awa (kava) contained in the article. It seems it would meet these criteria- "Is the site content proper in the context of the article (useful, tasteful, informative, factual, etc.)? Is the link functioning and likely to remain functional?" Thank YouKahua (talk) 17:57, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

A very short reply, until I am back at home with good internet access.

I think the link itself was OK, but the way you cited it, as an internal link in the body of the article, was unacceptable and looked promotional. Incidentally _ it is usual to post at the bottom of users' talk pages, not at the top. Once I am at home instead of using a smartphone I will move this thread. Maproom (talk) 11:23, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much . I look forward to understanding this.Kahua (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

WP:ELNO is about what links are acceptable. I have no opinion on whether the link in question is acceptable. However, the way the link was incorporated in the article was definitely wrong. For guidance on how to cite sources, you should read WP:CITE, rather than WP:ELNO.

Here is the sentence of the article, before you edited it:

Winter explains that ‘awa, especially of the Hiwa variety, was offered to hula deities in return for knowledge and inspiration. [pg. 34, Hawaiian 'Awa, Views of an Ethnobotanical Treasure, 2006].

Here it is with the link that you added:

Winter explains that ‘awa, especially of the Hiwa variety, was offered to hula deities in return for knowledge and inspiration. [pg. 34, Hawaiian 'Awa, Views of an Ethnobotanical Treasure, 2006], here is the link to this publication---[url]http://www.awadevelopment.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/awabook-web-part-1-of-2.pdf[/url].

Here it is with the same link, added in the way that conforms (more or less, I am not an expert at this) to Wikipedia's recommended style:

Winter explains that ‘awa, especially of the Hiwa variety, was offered to hula deities in return for knowledge and inspiration.^[1]

Whoever first added the "Hawaiian 'Awa" reference did it wrong. You made it worse, incorporating a long url into the text of the article, along with unwanted [url] [/url] tags. The correct method of adding a reference adds only a superscript number in square brackets to the visible text; this links to an actual reference in the "references" section of the article. At least it does if the article contains something like this: {{reflist}} at the bottom - as this reply now does Maproom (talk) 12:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for helping me understand this, whether someone adds it correctly or not. I wish all Wikipedia correspondence was as civil and clear as yours.Kahua (talk) 18:15, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

You asked a simple clear question, politely, and I did my best to answer it. There's actually a lot of civility on Wikipedia. It's just that the uncivil discussions go on for longer, and get noticed more. Maproom (talk) 18:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you! re. Energetically modified cement

		The Civility Barnstar
		...for displaying civility during the energetically modified cement incident, based on my reading of previous entries on the article talk page. You conducted yourself there in a manner certainly worthy of admiration, given the persistent incivility I observed. Azx2 18:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Talk:Pacific Title & Art Studio

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Talk:Pacific Title & Art Studio. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Pacific Title Archives. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Pacific Title Archives – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. -→Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 14:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

It was not I who created it — but I am happy with the resolution. Maproom (talk) 15:57, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

A cookie (biscuit?) for you!

Thanks for replacing the map image for Jeju City - the previous "floating 2 km somewhere SE of mainland" version was not very helpful. Jmg38 (talk) 03:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Maproom

The technical parts are a concern yes. I almost didn't find the response you left to my question. I found a Thank you button for one editor and couldn't find it to say thanks to you. I get lost on here.

I do have reputable magazine articles for Ms. Fontaines. 2 INSTYLE magazine and 1 Marie Claire. Marie Claire's was not available online. The INSTYLE articles Have been located online. Would photographs of the Marie Claire issues suffice? How do I add them? Are they added in links with the link button or do I have to use certain another method. Is that what a reference is and what is the difference between a citation and reference? Which is most important and how is it laid out on the page?

I will look for articles that relate to James Duvals action figure for Donny Darko Bunny. They have to exist somewhere.

So for example IMDB has a whole slew of articles listed. Some of them exist online. Various Articles Instyle Magazine In the case of the articles that can't be found online what do I do?

Thanks for your assistance Maproom. This novice can use any assistance offered. Venus2211 (talk) 07:14, 9 May 2014 (UTC)venus2211

Venus2211: I shall try to go through some points one by one, in order.

• I know nothing about Instyle magazine. The link you have given is for a page in Hungarian. An English-language source would be better, but a source in Hungarian may be acceptable. It seems that Ms. Fontaines is better known in Hungary than in the US. This seems odd to me; if it is correct, it may be worth mentioning it, and the reason for it, in the article.

• I know very little about Marie Claire magazine, but from what I have found today it looks to me like a reliable source. But photographs of issues will not be acceptable (they would be a copyright violation). All you need to do is to give a reference to the magazine, giving date, and preferably volume or issue number and page number. I'll try to give an example of how to cite a reference, using an unrelated newspaper I happen to have to hand. "On May 6 2014, Freddie Starr was informed that he would not face prosecution over accusations of sexual abuse.^[1]" This will enable anyone with access to a good library to check that The Times really said what I am claiming. I added this citation by clicking the "Templates" item at the left of the blue bar at the top of the edit panel. I also made sure that it said {{reflist}} near the bottom of the page.

• The IMDB link you give is in fact a link to this talk page.

Maproom (talk) 08:04, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Helpful. Thanks

That response is very helpful. I will work at it. The link for IMBD is Various Articles for Ms.Fontaines. Instyle and Marie Claire are very big magazines. Getting articles in them in any country. They are world wide. The article translates to english there is an option for that. Ms. Fontaines did several interviews out of the Los Angeles Film Festival for INSTYLE and MARIE CLAIRE and then they reached her again asking to do more articles. I heard about it on several radio shows Ms. Fontaines was a guest on. The readers of INSTYLE and MARIECLAIRE wanted more of Ms. Fontaines. We don't know why fans become fans they just do. I am a fan for many reasons. Does twitter count as a fan base following? Ms.Fontaines has over 15,400 followers. Ms.Fontaines Twitter Followers I cannot locate the page I started editing for Ms. Fontaines. Where can I find it so that I can build upon it and make the page work? I hope to get better at finding things on here and not be so lost. Thanks Thanks Thanks Venus2211 (talk) 08:31, 9 May 2014 (UTC)Venus2211

That IMDB link does work. You should use it to choose some references to use, preferably ones written in English.

Twitter is not accepted by Wikipedia as a source for a subject's notability (or for anything else).

The article you created has been deleted. A Wikipedia admin might be able to restore it for you, but I cannot. I recommend that you create a new article in your "sandbox" at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Venus2211/sandbox&action=edit , and work on it there until it is ready to go public, so that it does not get deleted again. Maproom (talk) 10:16, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Periods inside quotes

Regarding your edit here, I believe it is standard US practice to put closing periods (or some other punctuation mark) inside the quotation, regardless of whether or not the quotation is so punctuated. See or for instance. You should probably self-revert per WP:ENGVAR. SpinningSpark 00:15, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

That's interesting. I had thought that you were right; or rather, that you would be right if "Lobster" were a quotation rather than the name of a publication. But I checked in en:Wikipedia's style manual, and found "place all punctuation marks inside the quotation marks if they are part of the quoted material and outside if they are not". Maproom (talk) 06:40, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

I stand corrected. Glad I decided I wasn't quite sure enough of that to revert you, and now I see that it wasn't even a quotation in the first place. Happy editing. SpinningSpark 09:57, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Graphics Lab request

Just letting you know it's done. Hope it looks good, if not let me know on my talk page and I'll tweak it some more. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 22:06, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! It looks good to me, and I have used it to replace the old one on the en: page. We'll see how things work out now. Maproom (talk) 22:14, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Deletion reasons

Maproom, pages are never speedy deleted on notability grounds, that is not a valid criterion. Nor is being unreferenced. Deletion for lack of notability must go to an AFD debate. Certain types of article (mostly people and companies) can be speedy deleted if they make no credible claim to importance, but this is a much easier standard to meet than notability. SpinningSpark 13:12, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Trustmark Park may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• = Dale and Associates Architects, P.A.<br>([[Jackson, Mississippi|Jackson, MS]])<br>HOK Sport] <br>([[Kansas City, Missouri|Kansas City, MO]])

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:24, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 5 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Heinz Field page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Are you alleging that RunNroll is a sockpuppet at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AjoChhand Machine? If so, I agree, and have requested a sockpuppet investigation. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I am not alleging it. I am providing evidence, from which other users, like you, may draw inferences.

I am a Bayesian. When all I knew of RunNroll was his activity in the deletion discussion, I thought he might be a sockpuppet, but probably not. After I had looked at his edit record, and found

1. One previous, but recent, edit
2. to an unrelated and thoroughly uninteresting article
3. which consisted of randomly changing one digit

my degree of belief in his sockpuppetness became much higher. Maproom (talk) 17:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Help Desk

I removed the content about President Reagan and lead azide because the help desk did not look like the right place for the posting. Should I not have done that? Feel free to revert my deletion if you would like. Thanks Piguy101 (talk) 19:50, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

I think that the OP was contesting the accuracy of the article. He posted in block capitals, in the wrong place, without mentioned what article he was writing about, and in language which was hard to understand. But I still think he had a right to make his point. Maproom (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm...I'll add his post back and remove yours. Piguy101 (talk) 20:14, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Here's a lc version: (Maproom (talk) 20:18, 13 July 2014 (UTC))

The subject of lead azide lateraled to a quip, about Ronald Reagan (then president), being shot by bullets with lead azide and coated-aluminum - which is false. The testing for any adulterants (poisons) or devastating compounds was negative. The applied description by wiki is a lie - unsubstantiated - and should be removed/revised. Lead azide used as this trauma-enhancing tool would have made a softball-sized cavity within, shattering the two-lobed lung, pericardium & muscled chambers at-entry. Virginia jackrabbits were all-over-this, so do not distort, or allow distortion of this terrible event into a humpty-dumpty tale.

 Done I changed it. Thanks Piguy101 (talk) 20:20, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Future meetups

Hi, thanks for coming to Oxford 18 last weekend. At the meetup, some people were asking of a good way to find out about future meetups in other parts of the country. Visit one or more of the following, and "watch" it:

• At English Wikipedia:
  • MediaWiki:Gadget-geonotice-list.js (for masochists; includes non-UK events, and a few that are not meetups. UK meetups are listed no more than four weeks in advance)
  • Template:Meetup-UK
  • Template:UK Wikipedia meetups
  • Wikipedia:Meetup/UK
• At Meta:
  • m:Meetup/UK/Footer list
  • m:Template:Meetup list (includes non-UK events)
  • m:User:Redrose64/geonotice (this page is the smallest)
• At WikiMedia UK:
  • wmuk:Events (includes events that are not meetups)

Then, as events get added, you'll find out through the watchlist of the relevant site. The next Oxford meetup is on 17 August. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Blocked by mistake

Hello, Maproom. My name is Luis and I work at Sistema FIRJAN, in Brazil. I created this account (Luis Claudio da Silva) in order to edit in my name, since Bernardo was in charge of the Sistema Firjan account (already blocked). Now I am the one responsible for that same account, renamed by wikipedians Luis at Sistema FIRJAN in order to maintain the previous editions. Note that this DOES NOT go against any WP policy, what was already discussed with other WP EN editors in a Talk Page that was deleted (don´t know why). I am sure you can retrieve it, if necessary. But in short, what we discussed was about the specific guideline Username policy. I invite you to read it, specifically this part, which says:

"However, usernames are acceptable if they contain a company or group name but are clearly intended to denote an individual person, such as "Mark at WidgetsUSA", "Jack Smith at the XY Foundation", "WidgetFan87", "LoveTrammelArt", etc.".

Having said that, I conclude you have blocked the account Luis at Sistema FIRJAN by mistake. Hence, I kindly request you to unblock it as soon as possible. Thank you, Luis. --Luis Claudio da Silva (talk) 22:17, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Maproom: I don't see you involved with that user, so excuse me barging in here.

@Luis Claudio da Silva: I just checked, and the account Luis at Sistema FIRJAN (talk · contribs) is not blocked at this time. If you're having trouble editing from that account, you'll need to follow whatever instructions you're given there to request clearing of the block or autoblock. We can't diagnose it further from here. —C.Fred (talk) 22:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Indeed I am not responsible for blocking "Luis at Sistema FIRJAN". I am not any kind of admin, and have no power to block anyone. And now that I have read Wikipedia:Username_policy#Promotional_names more thoroughly, I have learned that names like "Mark at WidgetsUSA" are acceptable. I apologise for stating that "'Luis at Sistema FIRJAN" was unacceptable. Maproom (talk) 22:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Verification, creds, links

I have several books including two anthologies I edited, won two NJ State Arts Council Fellowships, one in prose and one in poetry, won the Kinereath Genseler Award for my book Panic (also a BOTYA finalist) with Alice James Books, and there are a ton of links to my work on line. A quick search pulls these up. If they need to be linked on the page, then that would be great, but calling the page into question is inappropriate as my creds are in line with many other poets' pages:

some Books and anthologies I have written or edited:

http://www.blacklawrence.com/rigger-death-and-hoist-another/ http://syracuseuniversitypress.syr.edu/fall-2013/room-and-the-world.html http://alicejamesbooks.org/ajb-titles/panic/ http://www.blacklawrence.com/speech-acts/ http://www.ugapress.org/index.php/books/index/sense_of_regard

Reviews or comments on my work:

http://www.wordforword.info/vol18/Pollard.html http://thelinebreak.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/laura-mcculloughs-speech-acts/ http://thepotomacjournal.com/issue9/laura_mccullough.html http://contrarymagazine.com/2011/laura-mccullough-speech-acts/ http://www.guernicamag.com/daily/laura_mccullough_reading_recom/

Interviews of me or by me:

http://nanofiction.org/weekly-feature/interviews/2013/10/five-questions-with-laura-mccullough http://tcjww.org/2014/02/10/interview-laura-mccullough/ http://www.poetsandartists.com/laura-mccullough/ http://realitysandwich.com/389/what_men_want_interview_laura_mccullough/ http://poems.com/special_features/prose/essay_hicok2.php http://poetsonadoption.blogspot.com/2011/04/laura-mccullough.html

Radio or Videos of me or me interviewing other writers:

http://www.leahbrowning.net/Apple/Fall_2009/Laura_McCullough.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LAYKLSZVWo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfTrWCIJ8_4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15sRlWAN2fU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP0hTQee-9w

Examples of poems online:

http://goodmenproject.com/author/laura-mccullough/ http://www.tupeloquarterly.com/everywhere-i-havent-been-anywhere-by-laura-mccullough/ http://solsticelitmag.org/author/laura-mccullough/ http://www.leahbrowning.net/Apple/Fall_2009/Laura_McCullough.html http://www.versedaily.org/2014/aboutlauramccullough.shtml https://www.aprweb.org/poem/speaking-malagasy-isle-vanilla http://www.anomalouspress.org/8/26.mccullough.bowie.php http://www.diodepoetry.com/v4n2/content/mccullough_l.html http://www.drunkenboat.com/db18/laura-mccullough http://www.fishousepoems.org/?artist=mccullough-laura http://referentialmagazine.com/contributors/m-o/laura-mccullough/ http://www.connotationpress.com/a-poetry-congeries-with-john-hoppenthaler/2010/february-2010/307-laura-mccullough-poetry http://anti-poetry.com/anti/mcculloughla/ http://www.pebblelakereview.com/archive/2009_v6_1_health_wellness/poem_SweetSick.html

http://www.2river.org/2RView/11_4/poems/mccullough.html http://www.wordriot.org/template.php?ID=743 http://baltimorereview.org/index.php/fall_2013/contributor/laura-mccullough http://www.tarpaulinsky.com/Summer03/LMCunt.htm

http://www.madhattersreview.com/issue13/fiction_mccullough.shtml

I teach in these two writing venues, one an annual conference, the other an MFA program:

http://www.sierranevada.edu/academics/humanities-social-sciences/creative-writing-mfa/mfa-faculty/ http://wintergetaway.com/poetry-faculty.html

Other things I have written that appear on Web:

http://www.blacklawrence.com/title-as-invitation-poetry-contests-as-dinner-party-by-laura-mccullough/

http://www.cortlandreview.com/features/14/spring/mccullough.php

http://hub.gmnews.com/news/2006-04-06/Front_page/028.html http://hub.gmnews.com/news/2006-04-06/Front_page/028.html

How to resolve this? Lmccullough (talk) 20:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Adding twenty references like the above is not going to help. They confirm that you and your poetry exist, but that was never in doubt. What is needed is evidence that you and your work are notable – please click on that blue word to find what it means here.

You could provide such evidence best by finding a few – about three – references to established reputable published sources which write about you. I can't help you with that, I am a scientist, and while I have heard of The New York Review of Books and The Times Literary Supplement, I have no idea what other sources are respected. But I do know, from having observed other discussions on "proposals for deletion", that long lists have a negative effect. They mean that those judging the article click on a few links, decide that they are not compelling evidence of notablity, and don't bother with the rest. It is more effective just to present the most compelling few references.

Incidentally – I suspect that an apology for your accusation of sexism would be well received. But I won't presume to advise on that. Maproom (talk) 10:12, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

not sure who and how to post, but trying to resolve this.

( Deleted message, which was a copy of the previous one. )

Lmccullough (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Andreas Kaplan-related sockpuppet investigation notice

Hello, you are receiving this notice because you made a contribution at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andreas Kaplan (2nd nomination), now closed. Subsequent to the closure of the AfD, a related sockpuppet investigation (define) was opened. If you are interested, you can view or contribute to it. Thank you. — Brianhe (talk) 03:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Please tell me your real name and an email address I can contact you on. Be very careful who you cast aspersions on... Adam Neira World Peace 2050 Founded April 2000 AdamNeira (talk) 09:42, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Help Needed

I need help again. A new user 322Q4K has come out of nowhere claiming to not know much about Wikipedia nor Bacula nor Bareos, and he has put incorrect text into the Bareos section of the Bacula page. He has also restored at least one of the prior Bareos publicity links. I would like to see all his text in the Bareos section reverted to the simple and clear statement that I added about a month ago. I have reverted his text once, which he quickly put back, and he has written on my talk page accusing me of a number of things (obviously unjustly in my opinion). He has also appealed to Wikipellia for help. For someone who claim that he is new to Wikipedia he has quickly become very experienced. If you can help by either reverting his text as you did with the previous IP 37.24.150.154 (possibly him), I would appreciate it; or alternatively suggest how I can best deal with this without getting into an edit war. I have written on his talk page as will as on the Bacula talk page. Thanks. KernSibbald (talk) 13:08, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

The last edit you made to remove the registered trademark symbol is correct according to the Wikipedia rules, so I am not complaining or contesting it, but their rule does seem to be in conflict with US Law, which permits (and I think requires) the first reference to a trademarked name to be followed by the trademark symbol. I clearly see their rule, but do you know why they have such a rule? KernSibbald (talk) 13:20, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

I do not know why they have such a rule. Wikipedia generally goes to great length to obey US law, while ignoring the law of other countries, as with copyright law; so I assume the people who decided the policy know what they are doing. Maproom (talk) 16:45, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Teodoras Daukantas

== Maproom ==

message

Wikipedia has identified me as a major contributor to the Teodoras Daukantas article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teodoras_Daukantas and agrees that I have a close connection with its subject.I am prepared to justify that claim .Wikipedia indicates that the Teodoras Daukantas article may requirecleanup in order to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly a neutral point of view, (September 2014), I joined the Wiki Lithuania Project talk page as a participant . 

That query to the talk page allowed me,the event handler,to add my name as participant to the Wiki Lithuania Project as the major contributor mentioned in message posted September 13, 2014 at 16:52 . If this in fact is the case,I thank the talk page source for a forthright and timely intercession . I assure the Wikipedia  source that I am on task with the above mentioned clean up up of the Teodoras Daukantas article to include a valid Teodoras Daukantas Image even if it is of Lithuanian origin.

n.b.

 I could , however  use help in validating a proper image for Teodoras Daukantas that would justify the Wikipedia criteria for proper uploading to the Wiki Media creative commons page without the fear of copyright infringement.In that regard I have attached a link to a WordPress web site @ http://gvdaukantas.wordpress.com/ substantiating a claim that the individual I have nominated , Cabinet Defense Minister Teodoras Daukantas meets the criteria for notable inclusion to the Wikipedia Free Encyclopedia site under the General Guidelines for notable individuals , Teodoras Daukantas article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teodoras_Daukantas .--Zckjsrbn 22:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you !

Added by Zckjsrbn (talk • contribs) 21:21, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Zckjsrbn 22:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:South Yemen

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:South Yemen. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

FYI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User:AdamNeira. Thank you. --Chefallen (talk) 19:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks – but I'm sure the guys there can handle it. However I was amused by this. Maproom (talk) 21:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:OpenOffice.org

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:OpenOffice.org. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

2014 Jadavpur University protests

Hi, I have tried to consolidate the article. It was full of repetition. Can you please have a look? Thanks.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I see that other editors have already made big improvements. I have done a little more. Maproom (talk) 07:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on User talk:Bostonscribe/sandbox

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User talk:Bostonscribe/sandbox. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of extinct mammals

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of extinct mammals. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Neil deGrasse Tyson

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Neil deGrasse Tyson. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) Media Viewer RfC

You are being notified because you have participated in previous discussions on the same topic. Alsee (talk) 17:59, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Franklin graph

added a link pointing to Truncated

Nielsen N.V.

added a link pointing to Consumption

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Julian calendar

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Julian calendar. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2014 Ebola virus cases in the United States

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2014 Ebola virus cases in the United States. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Prehistoric Bajada "hanging" canals of southeastern Arizona

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Prehistoric Bajada "hanging" canals of southeastern Arizona. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

I started a page move request in Talk:Prehistoric Bajada "hanging" canals of southeastern Arizona. --George Ho (talk) 03:08, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Tarot card games

If you mean that those "ordinary playing cards" referred to are the ones of 1425, I would appreciate if you rewrote the whole passage. As it stands, at least I can't get it to reasonably mean anything else than the "ordinary cards" of today (or today's English-speaking world). May be easy to overlook that if you are an expert, but most of us aren't. 83.253.13.90 (talk) 22:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

You are right. I shall work on it today. Maproom (talk) 08:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Much better now! 83.253.13.90 (talk) 12:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Epilepsy

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Epilepsy. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Artificial intelligence

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Artificial intelligence. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Metacompiler

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Metacompiler. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Metacompiler

Thanks for the grammar corrections.

Question on the advertisement deletions. I do not think the link to the meta II tutorial is an advertisements or does it link to one. It is hosted on but is a tutorial on META II metacompiler that teaches it's use. The site it is hosted on is a commercial site. The tutorial has to do with Dr Neighbors doctoral thesis. He used Meta II in his research. The tutorial is freely available open source under a BSD license. The link was not mine. I moved it into the history. Under META II. It was originally in the main section talking about domain-specific languages. It has been there sense Nov 8 2010, originally put in by an unregistered user.

The Meta 5 system incorporates backup of the input stream and enough other facilities to parse any context-sensitive language.

I bolded that to emphasize the progress of metacompiler advancement to be able to parse any context-sensitive language. An important feature that not many compiler building systems can do today. The SDC developed metacompilers disappeared into obscurity when the SDC projects were classified top-secret sensitive technology. Meta 5 was part of a government project not generally available to the public. It was found in the CWIC ACM paper. There ACM papers that were published before the top secret classifications an archive of SDC papers stored in a library.

Is all bolding wrong? What is the proper way to do the above? The backup feature was historically a milestone.

In my view, there was no justification for the bolding. Also, the inclusion of direct external links within articles is not approved. Maproom (talk) 08:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your RFC response. But how can I make it clearer?

I am fairly new to editing here. I made the RFC after Damon threatened me with vandalism of the topic. Should there be sections for "for the change" and "against the change" or something like that. After doing the RFC (actually wrong, copying a template from another RFC. Didn't clear the id. Sorry still learning) I found others that had those sections. And some that do not. Anyway the RFC is over the defining feature (which I did not realise came from forth sites when I made made the RFC. (Only becoming apparent in Damon's responses and references to Forth sites):

It seems unlikely that you were "threatened with vandalism". Maybe you were accused of vandalism; if so the accusation was wrong. Your edits may be misguided, but are definitely not vandalism.

I think your response is in agreement with my proposal.

I have a tentative metacompiler sandbox version: Metacompiler change you might check out. I added a section on Forth as you suggested. After checking around I find that forth is not accepted as a metacompiler by those teaching compiler courses.

I wish to remove the, Forth rhetoric that a self-hosting compiler is a metacompiler. That is being stated as the defining feature of a metacompiler. It is actually linked to forth sites. Historically there have been several metacompilers that did not compile them selves. Contrary to the defining feature claimed. When I proposed a change that would remove those claims is when Damon responded calling me names and threatening to report for vandalism if I changed it.

I have placed the McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms definition there that refutes the statement. But did not delete the forth definition. I wouldn't wont to get reported for vandalizing the subject. So I have just added to the topic with references. Hard to claim vandalizing with good substantiated references.

Damon has been here a long time. He claims to have a Masters degree in computer science. The following from metacompiler gives some doubt.

A metacompiler is defined by a set of grammar production rules defining itself, written in its own specialized language. The metacompiler translates this grammar definition into the executable form of itself. Usually the grammar reduction rules are intermixed with semantic translation rules. Defining itself and translating itself this way constitutes the meta-step that sets a metacompiler apart from other compiler-compilers.<ref name=forth1/><ref name=forth2/>

Besides it being forth site rhetoric, the links are wrong. The first sentence is techno gibberish. grammar links to Formal grammar. production rules links to Production (computer science). They both are links to description of generative grammar descriptions. They both describe the process of a formal grammar and how it generates valid strings of a language. Many metacompiler take top down analytical grammar rules. In the meta II or treemeta manuals "production rules" output strings to the output file. Usually machine or assembly code of some sort. They are not part of the grammar rules.

I linked "Defining itself and translating itself" to History of compiler construction#Self-hosting compilers

Thanks for you time and trouble. --Steamerandy (talk) 07:52, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

I shall keep out of the discussion in future. I was summoned by the "request for comments", and formed the impression that the article had been edited by a Forth user, pushing a different use of the term "metacompiler". I contributed to the discussion, and then looked again at the article and made some edits based on my understanding of Wikipedia policies (and not at all on my knowledge of the subject). Maproom (talk) 08:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Climate change denial

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Climate change denial. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Robert Peter Gale

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Robert Peter Gale. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Vagina

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Vagina. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Odell Brewing Company

I noticed that you put a COI message on the page I manage. What do I need to do to have that removed? The article is unbiased and it does not violate any Wikipedia rules. Please let me know what needs to be done so that message can be deleted. Thanks. Tmarcello8483 (talk) 15:25, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

You have stated that your username "refers to the marketing and communication coordinator for Odell Brewing Company", and you are a major contributor to the article. You therefore have a conflict of interest. I suggest that you wait for other, impartial, editors to improve the article and remove some bias from it. Improvements which they may make would include

1. Removing direct external links from the content of the article
2. Reducing, or maybe deleting, the "Philanthropy" and "Sustainability" sections
3. Greatly shortening the list of beers
4. Adding references to reliable independent sources which establish the brewery's notability.

Maproom (talk) 15:50, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

My title is attached to my username because I read that it was a rule to clearly state if you are associated with the page in any way. I respectfully disagree that the Philanthropy and Sustainability sections are biased or too lengthy. All facts are attributed to outside sources. Our beer list is also pretty important - as we are a brewery and we brew a lot of beer. We have a list of more than a dozen references, half (or more) of which are outside sources. Please reconsider the disclaimer. Tmarcello8483 (talk) 16:43, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

The disclaimer states that "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject" – which is true. I suggest you leave it to other, impartial, editors to decide on the importance of all the beers in the list, and on the relevance of the "Philanthropy" and "Sustainability" sections. Maproom (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

That could take a really long time. The disclaimer also states "It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view" - which is not true. The article is unbiased. If you see something that is biased then tell me to delete it and remove the disclaimer. Tmarcello8483 (talk) 17:08, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

It could take a long time - but there is no deadline. And the disclaimer is principally about your connection with the subject, so for you to continue making edits will reinforce the need for the disclaimer to remain. Meanwhile, I see that User:ukexpat has made some improvements. Maproom (talk) 17:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey there, still no change on the COI message even though the awards list was condensed and the biased language has been removed. Anything you can do yet? Tmarcello8483 (talk) 20:24, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Climate engineering

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Climate engineering. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Lodi, New Jersey

Hi there. A few days ago I left a long rationale on the Lincoln Park, New Jersey talk page about the improper use of links to categories. I also discussed it at the help desk. I then noticed you had made an to the Lincoln Park article to correct the problem. I was hoping the editor who had added it would appreciate the advise of others. Unfortunately, I'm now trying to make the same change to Lodi, New Jersey, but am encountering the same tenacious editor. If you could lend your opinion I'd appreciate it. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:55, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edit added a series of unsourced notables to the article for Lodi, New Jersey. I appreciate your good faith efforts to intercede here on behalf of this disruptive editor, but the only way that you were able to reconcile the list and the category is because they were both present, and they will regularly drift apart as entries are added to one or the other. Trying to solve the non-problem of cross-referencing the list of notables with the corresponding category by creating the much bigger policy violation of adding significant unsourced content only magnifies the disruption by User:Magnolia677. Wikipedia policy requires that all such entries be accompanied by reliable and verifiable sources, and without these sources such edits will be systematically removed. Alansohn (talk) 17:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Hey Maproom, I'm awfully sorry to have sucked you into this. I've had such a difficult time making edits to New Jersey since I focused my efforts on that state about a month ago. You know, that editor must have called me "disruptive" about a hundred times. I tried to get some help here, at the title "New Jersey isn't owned by one editor". You can see the frustration User talk:John from Idegon has experienced, and the nastiness Alansohn he has placed onto my own talk page. Yesterday I added history sections to Johnsonburg, New Jersey and Hainesburg, New Jersey. I'm sure you'll agree these were far from "disruptive". Within minutes, he had to start messing with them. The problem is, the New Jersey articles are sadly missing these sorts of edits, and I have to wonder if the reason is because so many editors have been intimidated and scared away. Sadly, it seems more and more as if New Jersey is indeed owned by one editor. Thanks again. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:24, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

As of the writing, there are six unsourced notables in the article for Lodi, New Jersey. In the absence of sources I assume that there is no objection to removing these unsourced entries, in accordance with foundational Wikipedia policy requiring reliable and verifiable sources. As this would create a discrepancy between the contents of the list of notables and the corresponding category, I assume that no one would have an issue with reinserting the link to Category:People from Lodi, New Jersey. Unless there any other suggestions as to how to clean this up now and guarantee that going forward there is never a discrepancy between the category and list of notables, I'll be happy to reinstate the status quo ante. I'll wait until tomorrow to clean this up. Alansohn (talk) 22:04, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

If you consider the lack of references worrying, then you can find references and add them, or just add {cn} tags. I do not understand your apparent wish for the article to have two different lists of notables. Maproom (talk) 22:23, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Let me get this straight. Alansohn insists on inserting a category he created called "People from Lodi, New Jersey", into the notable people section of the Lodi, New Jersey article. Then, when Maproom culls names from the category list, and adds them to the article, Alansohn gets upset because the names are not included along with a reference. Why is this? I suppose because Alansohn fears that some of the names in the category might not actually be from Lodi. And sure enough, he's right. Rich Skrosky is listed in the category, though I have been unable to find a single reliable source linking him to Lodi. You can see what a silly idea it is to include a link to a flawed category within a notable people list. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:01, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

No, I don't see the logic of removing the category. As far as I can tell, every single standalone list article for people from a place has a corresponding category listing people from that place. So List of people from Chicago includes Category:People from Chicago, Illinois and List of people from Newark, New Jersey includes Category:People from Newark, New Jersey. Articles for places without a standalone list may -- or may not -- have a corresponding category .Lodi, New Jersey does have a category, while Hardwick Township, New Jersey doesn't. Adding the category -- where it exists -- reminds editors to add entries from the list to the category and from the category to the list. Without the category link, there is no way to know that. The original rationalization for deleting the category link was that the list in the article would always match the category, though that's far from the truth. Now the argument is that we shouldn't have both because the category is flawed. As an editor who has created and populated these lists and as an editor with a genuine interest in seeing that content has sources, this is exactly the aid to editors and readers that I'm trying to create. Take a look at List of people from Chicago and confirm that it matches up one-for-one with Category:People from Chicago, Illinois and that List of people from Newark, New Jersey directly lines up Category:People from Newark, New Jersey. They don't and so what; No rational person would argue that the Chicago or Newark category should be removed from the list article, claiming "what a silly idea it is to include a link to a flawed category within a notable people list". Per WP:CLS, lists and categories are designed to exist separately and help editors build the list from the category and the category from the list. That's what I'm trying to do here, and it works well in populating both the lists of notables AND the categories. I fail to see why anyone would object to that. Alansohn (talk) 00:34, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Alansohn, if you go way back to this comment (where I originally sought an experienced editor to provide some reasoned insight to my discussion with you about adding categories), I instructed you that "a list is not a category". Alan (may I call you Alan? I mean, I speak to you more than to my next door neighbor), on Wikipedia there is a difference between a list and a category. Furthermore, there are different kinds of lists; some are standalone, others are embedded. And they all serve different functions on Wikipedia. Please take a moment to learn the fundamentals before wasting all our time. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:06, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Objectivity/DB

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Objectivity/DB. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Removing the NPOV label on Immigration Reform

In response to a question I posted on the Wikipedia help page (December 7), you suggested that the UK section of Wikipedia's immigration reform page lacked neutrality because it referred only to efforts to assist immigration and not to calls for restricting it. I have now revised that section of that page (and made similar revisions to other sections too). When you have a few minutes, could you take a look at that page, and at my remarks on the associated "talk" page, and please let me know if you think further revision is still needed in order to justify removing the NPOV tag? Immigration reform is an inherently neutral phrase. "Reform" seems to imply a more pro-immigration stance, but, in reality, the major anti-immigration groups (in America at least) also use it to advance their viewpoint. The leading U.S. anti-immigration lobbyist, "FAIR," uses the phrase in its very title: "Federation for American Immigration Reform." I added a link to their home page just to underscore that point. Actually, as the Wikipedia Immigration Reform page already states at the opening, "reform" in this context really just means "change" (whether pro- OR anti-immigration in intent, or neither or both). It would be different if there were a label on Wiki's Immigration Reform page saying that this TOPIC is inherently controversial. That I would quite agree with. But the NPOV tag suggests that the Wikipedia article is itself biased. I see no reason why this controversial issue cannot nonetheless be discussed neutrally. I hope you will agree that, with my recent edits, that that is now the case for the immigration reform page. But if you don't agree, could you please suggest where additional revisions might be called for? Drewkeeling (talk) 08:24, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, "reform" is something sought not only by the good guys. I have responded on the article's talk page. Maproom (talk) 14:29, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Medicine navs

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Medicine navs. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:SupremeSAT(Pvt.)

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:SupremeSAT(Pvt.). Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

The feather barnstar

		The Trenchant Remark Feather Barnstar
		You have been struck with a feather, in recognition of your excellent comment here. Bishonen | talk 01:11, 18 December 2014 (UTC).

Please comment on Talk:Oseltamivir

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Oseltamivir. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Euclidean algorithm

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Euclidean algorithm. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.

I'm really not trying to be a PITA -- just want someone to help correct the misleading redirect.

Thank you for understanding.

Bohemian Gal (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Queries re article "Doye Agama"

Thank you "Maproom" for editing the article "Doye Agama" in the "Views" section. I am so much happier with the edited version. Diakonias (talk) 00:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Electronic cigarette. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 28 December 2014 (UTC)