User talk:Kerowyn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User talk:Kerowyn/Archive 1 Apr 2005-Aug 2006

[edit] PUT IT BACK!

on lost ship of desert please put back the media timeline i tried the undo and it said no. im not sure what to do to undo what you did. im dislexic so it was very hard to create that list in the first place. (thank the lord for spell checkers) The article you will note is listed under american mythology and folklore so much of it will be things like "someone said" or "people claim that" that is what folklore is storys that change with each telling The Lost ship's uniquness is that it is well Documented folklore. the purpose of the Media Timeline was not so much a reference but to show How the Stories about the lost ship changed with each decade of people telling about it. that is why only the stories that could be found through the internet were listed and the verbal variants were left out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.81.151 (talk) 09:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please consider

"The deleted material you refer to...". This is a quote from your last message to me. Here is how the syntax should be: "The deleted material to which you refer....".

With intellectual integrity, please do consider that you are not qualified to be an editor of anything. You do not even know our language. --wterrell

[edit] reply

My "rant" as you refer to my note, is concerning the deletion of information, prime source material, and pictures that have previously been approved, on the page for Steyr Mannlicher M1894. --wterrell

[edit] your definition of 'encyclopedia'

Is this wiki to be encyclopedic or not? You seem to want to reduce it to short summaries instead of being encyclopedic, extensive, detail, and referenced. And you are editing areas in which you are not an expert.

As a favor I have corrected the spelling on this page. You should review your qualifications to edit an encyclopedia if you cannot give attention to detail and accuracy (ergo: your spelling).

[edit] Cleanup by month

I spend most of my time in cleanup-by-month. There are a number of people working on these, I believe. (Someone is updating the counts, I think there's a bot now). Towards the end of each month there is a big press to close out a month that is down to just a few entries, but newer months have a lot of entire (thousands). I'm all for more people working on cleanup but there's 17,000 articles waiting for cleanup, I don't know if we can make a real dent. The other problem is deciding when they are cleaned up enough. (And we're behind on closing taskforce articles, which is a different problem). RJFJR 14:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] East Coast Swing

I'll see what I can do. I tried to avoid that because I didn't want to get into a controversy about what ECS is (there are many different interpretations of the term). While I know quite a bit about the dance, most of it doesn't come from published research (which is a problem that has been discussed on the Dance WikiProject since that holds true for many other dances as well). I will see what I can put together though. --Cswrye 06:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mayerling and Mayerling Incident

Just looked at the articles and the edit histories. Good work. Sorry I haven't been around much; I've been busy both with school and with my own wiki. I plan to help out more, but not before November 14th, 2006. If I contribute before then, consider it a bonus! :-)

David P. A. Hunter, Esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 09:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copy/paste moves

Please see WP:MOVE -- it's generally much better to use the "move" button (assuming you're using the default skin, it should be at the top of your screen, along with the discussion and history tabs). Thanks. Luna Santin 21:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

These two, for example: [1] [2]. Unless I missed something, they look like c/p moves? Sorry if I'm in error. Luna Santin 21:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Cleverly hidden, they are. :) I was honestly reading Wikipedia for years without even noticing the talk pages, heh. Happy editing. Luna Santin 21:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Janeway

Well, if a single source can corroborate multiple sentences in that section, then no. But, right now it's unsubstantiated and vitriolic (and this from the perspective of someone who thinks Voyager is a wretched series). I dropped in all those {{citation neded}} tags to point out the various claims scattered around there. It's uncited non-NPOV; if no one can drop in some means of verifying the claims in that section, then it/they should be deleted. --EEMeltonIV 01:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Granting even that it's vitriolic (and it is less so than previous iterations; you're right), it still lacks verifiable citations. --EEMeltonIV 02:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

The lack of any sort of reliable third-party source is the entire problem. From Wikipedia:Verifiability: "The burden of evidence lies with the editors who have made an edit or wish an edit to remain. Editors should therefore provide references. If an article topic has no reputable, reliable, third-party sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on that topic" (or part of an article, e.g. the bulk of the controversy section). --EEMeltonIV 03:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Um....

in the Hyde biography...it doesn't mention the fact he stars in "Last Quarter" with Chiaki Kuriyami from "Kill Bill Volume 1".

pink bunnies rule the world 23:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Sachi

[edit] September Esperanza Newsletter

[edit] AfD Nomination: Harold Berman

--Eastmain 03:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image licensing question

Someone left a question for me about image licensing and I'm not sure of the answer. Could you look at this and give me your opinion? Or do you know someone who would be good to ask? So far I don't know and the first person I asked didn't really know either. Thank you. RJFJR 17:06, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please check an answer I gave

Can you check my answer to a question left on my talk page about using a temp page for a rewrite? I've answered it but I'm not positive my answer is complete and correct. Thank you. RJFJR 13:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. RJFJR 13:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] November Esperanza Newsletter

[edit] Cleanup Taskforce

I added 2 articles to your desk. One is fiction, one is history. Both are problematic in that they might almost be ready to close or need extensive work. I need an opinion, please. Please look at them and accept, reject ask for reassign or determine if they are ready to close. Thank you. RJFJR 14:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup Taskforce

I added Vasai-Virar to your desk. The first thing it needs is a rewrite to clear CV. your opinion would be appreciated. pelase look at it and comment, accept/reject, or let me know and I'll reassign. Thank you. RJFJR 17:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox Hospital upgrade

I've have some proposals to upgrade functionality and wider (less US-centric) scope of the Template:Infobox Hospital (with then a merge in of the UK-centric Template:Infobox NHS hospital). I think the additional optional parameter names are as generic and succint as I am likely to get - but I would be grateful if you could have a quick glance at the list of parameters and let me know if there are any obvious problems in the proposal. Thanks, yours David Ruben ^Talk 00:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for comments - I've mainly replied on my talkpsge. Additional location parameters would be optional and allow for the template code to apply automatic wikilinks and List of Hospitals in .... In UK a single Medical School may make use of hospitals from a number of different NHS Trust organisations, and not all of an NHS Trust's facilities will be involved in student training - so there is no automatic 1-to-1 equivalence. Classification parameter re US emergency/trauma level will indeed need to be dropped entirely in due course. :-) David Ruben ^Talk 03:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] League of Copyeditors

Dear Cleanup Taskforce member,

I noticed that you've listed yourself as a member who's interested in copy-editing. I'm a member of the League of Copyeditors, a project dedicated to managing the sizable backlog of articles needing a copy-edit. We're always looking for new members, and you'd make a great addition to the project! We've started a participation drive for the remainder of February. If you're interested, you can help clear the backlog by adopting the following goals each week:

• Select an article to copy-edit from the backlog. After your copy-edit, list the article in the ready for final proofread section.
• Select a different article to proofread from the ready for final proofread section.

Thanks, and happy editing! BuddingJournalist 07:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, no problem! In the future, if you ever find yourself making copy-edits to an article as part of something else, feel free to list the article in our proofreading page to have one of our proofreaders take a look at it. We also accept copy-edit requests from anyone needing help, so keep us in mind. BuddingJournalist 00:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John Carr

Ridiculous though it may sound, I had it in mind to reference most of that list. I'll put stuff back as and when I do though. Some of it did look a bit dubious though, and the article certainly looks better after your trimming. Regards, CiaranG 23:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean reference as in placing sources in the article or using Wikipedia as a source? I only kept the things that had a wiki-link attached to them, since those might be notable enough that a mention is worthwhile. We certainly didn't need the man's entire CV. Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 00:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I mean reference as in placing sources in the article. Not all of them were worthy of mention anyway of course, it looks like it was pasted in from somewhere, but a surprising number of them are. The existing wikilinks are not a good guide as to which ones either. CiaranG 00:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source for Burkitt's theories

Could you please tell me the reference where you found that Burkitt believed that squat toilets might be protective against Appendicitis? I'd like to mention it in the Squat Toilet article, which includes several theories on the benefits of squatting.

Thanks.

Jonathan --Jonathan108 17:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that you restored the language about "dismissing" the toilet theory, and said it has never been supported. This puzzles me, since the fiber theory has never been supported either. All the "evidence" for the fiber theory was from epidemiology. Fiber was just the interpretation given to the geographic prevelance of appendicitis. The toilet theory has as much right to be considered, and the fiber theory has as much right to be dismissed. But why would anyone dismiss a hypothesis that has never been tested and which does not contradict any known facts? That seems unscientific. Please explain or revert.

Thanks.--Jonathan108 18:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The long article in the Medical Journal of Australia says that "Dietary theories, notably an inadequate fibre intake, have been advanced to account for the geography of the disease, but it is clear that diet can not fully explain the epidemiology."

The article shows no awareness of the toilet theory, and certainly has not "dismissed" it. Unless you can show evidence that the theory is "known", has been discussed (and dismissed), I believe that your wording is misleading.

When I brought awareness of this theory to Wikipedia a couple of years ago, it was considered by the MD-editors like JFW and Alex.tan to be like something from outer space. It has been completely under the radar and has never been given any serious consideration by health practitioners. 99% of them have never heard of it. --Jonathan108 12:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting giving Burkitt's theory more space. The version which you recently changed took the same amount of space, but was more accurate. The new wording says:

"Most health practitioners accept Dr. Burkitt's first cause as a contributing factor, but dismiss with the second one, which has never been supported."

This wording is incorrect for 3 reasons:

1. It states that most health practitioners dismiss the toilet theory. You have provided no evidence that this is true. I have never seen anything in writing dismissing the theory (or even discussing it.) Your recent comments to me said that "most health practitioners wouldn't agree with it." That is not a fact, but an opinion -- one for which you have provided no justification.

2. It states that the theory has never been supported. This implies that it has been tested but has failed the test. It would be more correct to say that it has never been tested. That would be a more neutral point of view.

3. It implies that one can dismiss a theory which has never been tested simply because it has never been tested. This is contrary to the scientific method, the whole basis for medical advances. A hypothesis can be challenged if there is evidence contradicting it, but can't be challenged simply because it has never been tested.

--Jonathan108 02:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revert of University of Colorado at Boulder

I have reverted your change to University of Colorado at Boulder with the school colors. The official school colors are Silver and Gold. Your changing the colors despite the note to see the talk page was not appropriate. The talk page contains a link that certifies these are the school colors. This was clearly a bad faith edit on your part for completely ignoring the note and failing to see the talk page first. I stopped short of giving you an official vandalism warning because of your edit history, but failing to see the talk page is a serious problem, especially considering the note you changed. --MECU≈talk 02:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

My apologies then. I must have clicked to view revisions that included an edit to change the colors. This has been a sore point for me and it appeared to me you had changed it, and the note with it. I humbly apologize. --MECU≈talk 05:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I really feel bad about this, especially since I went off on you, and to your further credit, you replied sanely and calmly. If there's ever anything I can do to make it up to you, like some chore on Wikipedia, please let me know. I really think I owe you for this terrible error on my part. --MECU≈talk 14:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I still live near Boulder and work there. I'm planning on going to the CU Spring football game on April 14th so I plan to take images then. I'll take a bunch and post them all so you can go through them and pick the best ones perhaps. My photography skills are the best, but they should suffice. Thank you for your kind understanding. --MECU≈talk 20:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I hope I have completed my penance. I believe I got all the important places. The "back" side of Norlin is dark because the sun wasn't in the right spot but you can still make out the text on the building. Thank you very much for understanding. MECU≈talk 17:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boston, New York

I removed Sullivan Expedition from history, it never reached this part of NY. Thanks for trying anyway, Stepp-Wulf 01:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] sig test

[[User:Kerowyn|K [[User:Kerowyn|<font color="violet">e</font>]] [[User:Kerowyn|rowyn]] ''^{[[User talk:Kerowyn|Leave a note]]}'']] 00:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[[User:Kerowyn|K[[User:Kerowyn|<font color="green">e</font>]][[user:Kerowyn|rowyn]] ''^{[[User talk:Kerowyn|Leave a note]]}'']] 00:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[[User:Kerowyn|K<font color="orange">e</font>rowyn ''^{[[User talk:Kerowyn|Leave a note]]}'']] 00:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Kerowyn _{Leave a note}

Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 00:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC) Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 00:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please re-register

[edit] Cleanup Taskforce

There are two articles on your desk. Please look at them and deteremine if they are ready to close, need more work or are outside your area of expertise. Please let me know if you would like them reassigned or are ready for more articles. Thank you. RJFJR 16:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

Could you take a look at the intro to List of Linux distributions? The rest of the article looks fine to me and I'd remove the clenaup tag except I dislike the intro but don't know what to do about it. Maybe you have some good ideas. Thank you. RJFJR 15:19, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for improving List of Linux distributions. I've closed it. RJFJR 20:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup Taskforce

Please feel free to assign yourself tasks from the list of unassigned tasks at Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce. Arranging assignments is too much work for me to do by myself. We have a large backlog of unassigned tasks and there is probably something in there that will interest you. RJFJR 22:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A friendly reminder

		Edit summary reminder
		Hello. I noticed that your edit to USS Colorado (BB-45) did not include an edit summary. Please remember to use one for every edit, even minor ones. You can enable the wiki software to prompt you for one before making an edit by setting your user preferences (under Editing) to "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary". There is also a tool you can check to see your current usage of edit summaries. Thanks, -MBK004 04:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)