User talk:TCO/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about User:TCO. 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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

not sure, if this is what you were looking for File:A water droplet DWR-coated surface2.jpg;File:Water droplet at DWR-coated surface1.jpg.Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:13, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Those are beautiful. THANK KEW! I like the first you list (#2) a little better, not sure why. If you wanted to go "above and beyond" (no need), could add a little bit of commentary in the file description of the materials used for creating the image. Also, you would know better than I, but I urge you to submit it for an FP. I feel strongly that our current FPs are strong on naturalistic images, and "photography", but a bit weak on illustration of scientific concepts for...articles. Even thoough this is just a drop of water on cloth...it will go in 5 articles and illustrate a fundamental concept of nature. And we DID NOT HAVE anything covering this before. [/editorializing]. TCO (talk) 23:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I am happy you liked it. The material is a shell of a jacket 65% polyester and 35% cotton. It is all I know about it. If you want me to add this info to the description, I will.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:41, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

No, not that helpful. I'm more after the composition of the water repellent. Thought you had sprayed it with Scotchgaurd or the like. If you don't know or if it is the original coating applied, just leave it blank.TCO (talk) 23:43, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Mila, thanks a lot (I was asked to make such a photo but had no time at all). Consider this: take two photos, with and without DWR, either in one shot, or combine two images of the same material. This is because some fabrics are already made hydrophobic. Also, take a smaller shooting angle - it is more important here to show the angle between the droplet and the surface than the surface structure. In science articles such photos are always taken strictly from the side, not from top, but then they look ugly, like a drawing, thus some tilt might be Ok. It is worth getting this image right, if you have time for it. Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I basically agree with all that, but I was too nice to say so, being happy to take what I could get. Can see my request over at MatSci's page. At REI or Dick's or whatever, just ask for DWR or the like and they will give it to you. My preference would be a fluorine containing one, not some green substitute, if that exists, as the fluorine will work better in terms of being more repellent and is more the industry standard. Although it is in the polar bears...and in YOU. s' true. Anyhow, even if you don't want to mess with it more, this helped me out a lot. Can't beleive we were so lame not to even have a picture like this. is so easy to do.TCO (talk) 00:05, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Materialscientist, may I please ask you to explain to me what you mean, when you say "Consider this: take two photos, with and without DWR, either in one shot, or combine two images of the same material"? I mean, if material is the same how it could it be both DWR and not DWR at the same time? Please forgive me for asking such silly questions. When you explain to me what images you are looking for, I will do my best to take them. It will be nice, if you could link me to an example of an image you are looking for. Best.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:32, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

File:A water droplet DWR-coated surface2.jpg has a graphically appealing surface. Thus I would try this kind of surface (or there might be nicer ones) without DWR. If the water is repelled from it then this surface was likely pre-treated by the company and thus another one, more hydrophilic would be better. Then I would apply DWR locally, place one drop of water on the treated part and one drop on the untreated part, and shoot these two drops at a low angle. If it is difficult to apply DWR locally then I would use two pieces of the same material, with and without treatment. Here the angle is close to that in science articles, but I guess the substrate will look ugly at such a low angle. Here the tilt seems larger and the surface looks fine. This image also illustrates the possibility of cropping the substrate, to add some background for color variety. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 01:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for explanation. May I please ask you what do you mean under "apply DWR locally"? You mean I myself could apply DWR? How? The image I took was taken on pre-treated material. I did nothing to it. Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

The weather is foggy today. I'll try to take some more shots with a different angle, when the sun comes out, but of course summer in San Francisco is usually fog and more fog.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Mila. I prefer San Diego to SF. Can surf without a wetsuit 8 months out of the year. There is some June gloom too, but not as much.TCO (talk) 15:53, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

So you are a surfer, great for you! This is one thing I missed on that I wish I did not. Here's one more image, in which I worked with the angle. Please take a look before it is speedy deleted :-) If this is the angle you are looking for I could try to do a better job tomorrow or in the next few days, but I still do not understand what does it mean to apply DWR locally. Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

A nice and unusual red color there .. Why should be speedied? Our durable water repellent article says DWR can be applied by a company or a DWR spray can be bought in a local shop (this is what TCO said, I believe). It is always nice to show differences (with an without DWR, on a hydrophilic material). Materialscientist (talk) 23:53, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Because one of the images I iploaded yesterday was speedied (see not a nice red link in the beginning of the thread?). Is this angle OK?Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

<indent>Angle seems Ok in File:File-Water droplet at DWR-coated surface1.jpg. Exact copies could indeed be deleted, but not otherwise - let me know if it was not an exact copy, and if you want to have it restored. Materialscientist (talk) 00:06, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

It was not an exact copy. It was an absolutely different image. If you could look at it, and you believe it could be used somewhere, somehow, like in a gallery for example, you may restore it. If it is not useful, I do not need it of course. Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Technically, it should never be deleted, and you should not be bothered with deletion of such images. I think the deleting administrator mistook it for File:A water droplet DWR-coated surface2.jpg and won't make a big deal out of it - that image looks better to me. Materialscientist (talk) 00:29, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually both images I uploaded last night were nominated on deletion right away, but TCO was able to save one :-) So what image you like better for the articles the one from yesterday or the one form today?Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:40, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Mbz1: I like the first, blue, image better. Think this is scientifcally enough valid, and very visually pleasing. I put it in four articles. I urge you to put in for an FP, as I feel that it has high EV. And I "heart" EV.TCO (talk) 00:44, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I understand the first image is more ecstatically pleasant, but I believed the second one has a better EV because it has been taken under a different angle (more from the side). Thanks for encouragement to nominate it on FP. Maybe I will later on.Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:37, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I will add the side view to the contact angle article. For the chemicals articles, I think the blue is better. TCO (talk) 01:45, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

You'd better add my image from today to an article :-) I tried so hard.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:59, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

contact angleTCO (talk) 02:00, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, you've done good work in moving the discussion forward. Your last post suggests that you're being induced to pity individual editors ("Do no harm"). Well, any change is going to harm someone's interests if they've become used to a system for years and are not seeing the big picture; that should not stop us putting the health of the DYK process and the main page above this. Tony (talk) 05:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

HA! Thanks for coming by. Seriously an honor, man. Let me do this. Take a look at the last couple days of hooks and articles and see what I think of them. OK? I just need to take some time and get input. you are way too far ahead of me in experience of the quality level. I'm theorizing out of my ass since it is fun to socialize on the net and less fun to read, think and write.

I am sympathetic to the idea of people doing something constructive and enjoyable and maybe feel bad to "knock the sand castle down". After all, for the people who want to, there are plenty of opportunities for those people who choose to do so, to write GAs or FAs. Even FAs on very core topics like fluorine. Someone racking up DYKs on spider species is not affecting me try to make that element article strong in content and presentation.TCO (talk) 05:24, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I think a widely advertised RfC that the turnaround be twice a day or three times a day is in order. The reviewing resources cannot cope with more than that unless they ignore most issues, and reviewing is what helps the nominators to move on to produce quality. I think it should more overtly see itself as a teaching zone, apart from its other functions. We have the opportunity to put the sand castle on a better footing rather than knock it down. <fontcolor="darkgreen">Tony (talk) 05:38, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Well...restricting total DYKs (5 or 10 in a career) would at least make it really about the people who are working on their first sticker and such. It would make it explicitly about teaching.TCO (talk) 05:48, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

If you did an RFC, I would make it for reduction to 2 shifts. 3 shifts is just tinkering. TCO (talk) 05:48, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm really tired. Sleep...TCO (talk) 05:48, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'm certainly happy to help out. I noticed that T:DYK had some discussions regarding quartering the number of hooks per day, I assume you're looking for some number crunching to support (or oppose) that suggestion? I'm afraid I don't work using bots, I just analyze data, the information I gained from the previous RFAs was pure graft. What sort of analytics were you thinking about? Worm^TT · (talk) 20:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

A bot would help to gather more data. There are 30-40 DYKs per day. So, 1000 a month, and 12000 a year. But maybe there is some way to do the problem, by random sampling instead. With some sort of normalization for that (my mind boggles at the stats though.)

1. I guess, I would like to understand how much DYKs are really a new user province and how much they are a clique. Some things could be the average edit count of a submitter, the tenure of a submitter, some sort of Pareto measurement ("80% of DYKs are by 20% of submitters...won't be those numbers but express it).

2. I'm a little curious to see if there is any signigicant favoritism of certain users in terms of "good time slot". But this is pretty minor and not a big deal. May not warrant the work.

3. Maybe some other examinations, that would need to be a bit more sampling based and qualitative. Brainstorming:

A. select 10 articles at random and see amount edited afterwards (I guess in bytes, or just subjectrively if tiny cut and pastes give the wrong info). To see if the articles get any traction (looking for template driven churn).

B. average length at publishing (this might be automatable).

C. Average google hit counts

D. Some qualitiatve measure of quality (I guess could write out some specs or descriptors. GA-ready (there are articles at that level, even if not rated that yet), B, C, Start (probably rate them ourselves, not use project, although that could also be an option).

E. Some sort of categorization of topics (are certain areas favored)?

TCO (talk) 20:58, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not against bots - but I don't run one and haven't looked into requests as yet, certainly not against the idea.

1) New users vs clique - the difficulty is showing the edit count at the time of submission. I was quite lucky with RfA, the edit count is posted to the talk page. When I put in my first DYK, I had less than 400 edits, I'm now well over 6k, it's a big difference. If you were just to look at the past few months, you may get a more accurate picture.

2) The good timeslot thing shouldn't happen (and I say "shouldn't", I'm sure it does sometimes) since you shouldn't be moving your own hook into the prep area.

3) Edits afterwards sounds like a very sensible idea - anecdotally, I've found that the more hooky my hooks (and generally they were quite hooky, the more they would get click throughs and the more edits happened. Google hit counts is an interesting idea. I'd suggest a decent sample - say all hooks on the first day of the month for the last year? we should be able to get some good metrics from that.

I'll have a think about it - it may be a little too much work without a bot. Worm^TT · (talk) 21:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

One day per month would be good.TCO (talk) 21:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I think some useful control variables which may be easy to quantify, and which are of interest in and of themselves would include:

• Article length (character count)
• Number of images (maybe the bot could just count the occurrence of the word "Image" or "File" in the raw article text - you'd get some measurement error but hopefully not too much and it might be possible to spot it)
• Pertaining to recent discussion - did the hook or the article title (or both) have diacritics in it. It would be interesting to see if articles with diacritics get more or fewer views than comparable articles without.
• Number of views when featured, using this [1] - that's somewhat different from google hits and it may be more relevant here.

I would also love to collect some data on FAs and GAs - been doing it by hand by a bot would definitely speed things up.Volunteer Marek (talk) 10:04, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I think that listserve that piotr gave for wiki research might be a good one as well. I know there are people collecting info and publishing papers on wiki and all. For DYK, the thing kinda needs a bot, unless you sample. You're talking 10000+ articles per year. I need to concentrate on couple FAC reviews for next few days...so if you want to move it forward, feel free. See here, for some initial discussion with the bot suppliers [2]. I told him I would get back to him.

If you're that hard on your own articles, you'll never get them to FAC. [3]. I think you killed this one, which would otherwise have made it. Perfection isn't going to happen. Nor does making FAC means an article is now forever "finished" and can't be improved or edited ever again. WP is never finished. SBHarris 16:17, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

You could be right. Let me cogitate a bit on how to balance quality versus progress. And how to be a team player (am very concerned about discouraging a good guy). It's not an easy switch for me to throw...or something I have all figured out. But I will try to think about it.TCO (talk) 16:35, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

In addition to feeling bad for R8r, this comment makes me think of Indian Camp, which has the same topics in the story itself and which I am in the middle of writing a long review of...:-( TCO (talk) 19:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Do you have some sort of problem with me? If so, I was unaware of this, and I wish you would have discussed it with me in person, rather than attacking me on a talk page behind my back.

In any case, I would kindly ask that you redact your insulting remarks about me at the WP:RFA/C and WP:RFA2011 talk pages.

I mean what did I ever do to you? Hm? Did I express my disagreement with one of your oppose !votes one time and that's your way of getting back at me?

Oh, and on a side note, the RfA Clerks proposal is purely a maintenance/housekeeping venture, similar to the numerous other systems of clerking that aren't considered "junior admins". It would have no effect on comments or discussions. Various 'uncivil comment removal' aspects of the clerking role were originally discussed, but the concept was pulled entirely-- at my suggestion. Which is ironic, considering I'm supposedly the "poster boy" of "silencing opposes". If you completely read the discussions, you would already know this, saving me the time it takes to reply to your comment.

Again, please redact those comments, and if you actually have legitimate complaints about my behavior at RfA, please do discuss it with me. However, no one has ever done so in my years at RfA, and looking back through my own comments over the past several months, I can find nothing that constitutes badgering or hassling anyone. Best regards, Swarm ^X 22:00, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I like you. I like mixing stuff in like that. I apologize.TCO (talk) 22:42, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I like both of you! I like the civil complaint and the civil apology!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:05, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

		The Reviewer's Barnstar
		For reviews at FAC, you know your stuff and wonderful to see you contribute your reviews, also for TFA Peregrine Falcon input. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:11, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

You might like to do some reviews at WP:GAN if it interests you. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:11, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, extremely kindly. I will go and take a look at GAN. I've never done one, but maybe good for me to learn how.TCO (talk) 15:49, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Carbon maybe nice as you love core articles and have shown an interest in Fluorine. If that interests you please read the WP:GACR first because a good article doesn't have to be to the standard of featured articles. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 21:42, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks man. Carbon scares the shit out of me. That is like the most important element. Indium is in the gun sights, though. I hear ya on the whole GA/FA thing. Realistically, I would probably just get it "as perfect as I know how to", then run it through all the review processes in succession. I find this more effecient than submitting it "early" to GA. P.s. You are into the pop music these kids are listening to. There is a radiohead album that is GA+, possibly going to FA. Might benefit from you. (I don't even know their songs, so not me.)TCO (talk) 21:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Just to be clear in the above I'm suggesting doing a review of Carbon which has alrady been nominated at WP:GAN#CHEM by User:Lanthanum-138

On the music, yeah, I've been quite involved in the business and doing the wiki articles just frustrates because 1) the editors involved have a misunderstanding about what a Single (music) is. 2) There is widespread over simplification of a release date(required in the infobox) using WP:SYNTH and unreliable sources which reflect only some countries/ or some retailers and/or in some formats. Plus also some reliable sources are ignored because they don't have direct editorial oversight(ironically the editorial is not required because they are 100% accurate). Anyhow, I did have a while of updating such articles but it's not fun. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 22:29, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, if you are into OK computer, then maybe you can help those guys? No push. Just wondered if you would like it. I don't even know the band.TCO (talk) 22:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

OK Computer is a classic but perhaps overrated(in my view) british album. It's already GA, but note the release date in the infobox is not directly referenced and in the release section three seperate dates are given. Typical messiness. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 22:57, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

OK (computer, ha, I pun!) Um...I donno. Just looking for places you could help and enjoy yourself...like in reverse. Maybe we could do one together. Or...something. What kind of music would you like that I like? TCO (talk) 23:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

You work well on content and reviews. I tend to work well on a specific but easy tasks, like in the past I've assessed 2000 chess articles. Typocheck all FA/GA/A articles and most of the B articles also - around 10,000 articles. Making general turtle templates and adding it to 300+ turtle articles. On and off for 12 months now, I working on identifying completely unreferenced BLPs and an unintended spin off of complete unreferenced articles, plus one with BLPs with 'risky' words. I can do these task with WP:AWB, but it takes a long time to process tens of thousands of article so I'm in the process of getting new articles done with User:TedderBot/NewPageSearch Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm. I have an interest in some gnomey DKK stuff, but was thinming of a bot. But to be honest, some of the tasks require a person to make a bunch of evaluations. Hmm. P.s. Does Mall-man not luv me anymore.  :-( TCO (talk) 23:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean gnomey WP:DYK stuff?? What is Mall-man? *confused*. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Please disregard the Mall-man comment. As far as DYK, I have an idea to do a sort of project to measure how the program is working. Would be quantitative and qualitiative. The qual parts would need some humans. TCO (talk) 23:43, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Sounds interesting. If you fancy a DYK you could do Provan Hall, I created it recently and there is plenty to add from the attached sources, but would have to be quick, 4 day gone so far. I'm on holiday henceforth, back next week :) Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 00:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

If the image is of any interest, I might try to do a better job. Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Mil, I will add it to the fluorite article. It has more use in that article than in fluorine. For flourine, I really prefer more an image that shows the overall cubic faceting (see Occurrence.)

I think having a scale (ruler or some object for reference) would make the thing more useful...can't tell how blown up it is now. I'm actually curiious what it was you were photoing? And the reason for the close up?

P.s. Don't you dare get sensitive or take this as mean criticism. You are a great photog and Wikipedia legend. I am just an evil troll, that spent 2 years being permabanned.TCO (talk) 18:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure what you were banned for, but I doubt you are a troll. From my own experience I know that most of the times content contributors get banned by a trigger-happy administrators because trolls complain about them. Trolls are easy to recognize. They either never write an article or write very few, they watching articles about themselves like for example Troll (Internet), they breed and multiply on administrative noticeboards, they seldom get blocked or even warned, but, if somebody will dare to say to a troll that it is a troll, it will threaten to retire and demand an apology. For as long as I have known you, I have not noticed any of the trolling behavior I just described.

You could critique my images for as mach as you'd like. I am a so-so photographer with a good camera, and, if I am a Wikipedia legend, I am an infamous legend, I am afraid :(

About the image, I took closeup because I did not see other closeups. Of course I should have added a scale, but I am very lazy.

BTW you may call me simply Mila, not Mil :-) I know "Mila" will give you a spelling mistake, but it is my name.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:11, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Mila!

Now you've got, but probably from the effort of spelling my name properly you forgot to sign :-)--Mbz1 (talk) 00:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, okay, maybe my comment was a bit melodramatic. I'll accept that characterization.

But I will also let you know that I was simply venting some frustration, and I will also ask you a question: Do you believe it's worthwhile to keep good Wikipedia editors around? If so, doesn't it make sense to pay attention to why they leave, and make sure we don't create an environment that drives them away?

Anyway, I love a good bit of sarcasm as much as the next human, so cheers. Scartol • Tok 22:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I am on your side, man. And appreciate you semiputting up with my silliness. Peace, brah!TCO (talk) 22:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks you, thank you and thank you for your support with the FAC. I really feel secure when someone understands the situation that I'm going through, and feel sympathetic for myself. I feel a bit frustrated that Nikki and Nimbus are bringing up points, some of which are out of my control and against my will. I know full well that they're doing that in absolute great faith. I've got a question, if a reviewer brings up points, is the nom obliged to take them onboard and make the corresponding changes? Again, many thanks for your understanding. If you need anything, please pop by my talk page. Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 07:07, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Of course you don't have to do what the reviewer says. You are the captain of the ship. If someone comes up with something that you agree with, fix it. If not, don't. Maybe even if it is kinda minor ("don't care"), then just appease them. I wouldn't trash a data table, though, unless you agree the other table is better. I would maybe just take a little time to think about items that you disagree with, rather than firing back speedy like. Gives you a little more time to reflect and probably makes the person who made the crit, think you are reflecting on it, not just defending.

Nikki finds a lot of nits and she'll probably have a good feel for if something is a complete mess in terms of refs. but I honestly don't see her support much. I would really just take her comments as "to dos", like a peer review and not worry about that more. I don't see her engaging in the content.

I gotta sleep now. Don't do anything radical. Just hang in there.TCO (talk) 07:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

You can chat to me at [4]. Bookmark this link. Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 09:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd say keep the Vcite format, since it sould take so much time reverting to the old style. Thanks mate for your support, appreciate it. In light of your effort, I'll be asking for your thoughts in the future. Cheers! Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 05:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries. The fun thing about helping is now I know the topic a little. Please make nicey-nice with Nikki and tell her Vcite to stay and please re-look at it. I think everyone is pulling for you and we can get this thing off the ground!TCO (talk) 05:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Something on composite materials or even the Dreamliner could interest me. Like a little bit of a chemistry connection. See if anything strikes you.TCO (talk) 05:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey TCO, I've got good news – I've managed to revert the reference formatting style back to template:Cite from template:Vcite. Since you helped with the article so much, for which I am sincerely grateful of, I'd like you to look over it, one more time. To reply to the Dreamliner comment, I am thinking of nominating it for GA, after doing some prep work, of course. Interested? Just join in. I've got something in store for you. Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 12:32, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Would be an honor to work with you on another. Serious. Good move on the cite revert. Glad you were able to figure that out. Please do this.

A. You, read (actually inspect each line of displayed text in Citations section) and check to make sure that it is all working. The templates can be a black box and lead to errors that one doesn't catch. Gotta check that the fly by wire is really working!

B. Request Nikki re-inspect. She does a great job of it and is a kind heart, in the end.

C. My quick skim.

1. Ref 64 not showing.

2. You are getting a double period several times when S.A.S. is at the end of a section. I suspect this is wrong and you need to clip a period. But find out what the rule is.

3. My personal preference is not to have (PDF) after we already show an icon that is PDF (redundant). It's no biggie and some people like it though.

4. Not sure that the web archive pdf thing is actually a pdf. Seems like it is a webfile of a pdf. And really an htm file. I think the reason for letting people know something is a pdf is in case they don't have Adobe Acrobat on their computer. But since that file is already an htm, it solves that problem.

TCO (talk) 17:58, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey TCO, I responded at User_talk:Spencer#vote_yes_please. Happy editing, Spencer^T♦C 03:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

• For your viewing pleasure:
• File:2011-06-28 163444.png
• File:2011-06-28 163349.png
•  – Ling.Nut 08:40, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you explain what you're seeing and what the issue is? Not trying to be dense, but just to understand. Also, what type of computer are you using, a laptop or some sort of Ipad or something?TCO (talk) 08:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I use a laptop myself and see the stuff fine. Also, do you get a scroll bar? HAve issues at other sites, other than wiki?TCO (talk) 08:47, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

• The images go right off the textual part of the screen. I can see the images just fine. i use a PC; my monitor is small.  – Ling.Nut 08:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

It's a desktop? Or do you mean PC versus Mac (I am on a Dell laptop myself).

How big is the monitor?

When you say, "go off the text part of the sceen, I don't get you." Do you see everything, or get a scrollbar, or the image makes the text get smaller in width? What is the problem with "going off the text part of the screen". Do you have issues with other sites or just here?

I gotta sleep now. Could you answer the rest of the questions? TCO (talk) 09:05, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you show an entire screenshot please?

• Those are entire screenshots. :-) Yes I have a scrollbar, and the size of your images forces me to use it. Another capture File:2011-06-28 165756.png  – Ling.Nut 09:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I gotta do chores now. Talk to you tomorrow.  – Ling.Nut 09:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

HOW BIG IS YOUR SCREEN?TCO (talk) 09:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

• I'm sorry to make you feel frustrated. I honestly was in a hurry to run and do a time-sensitive chore. Moreover, I don't know how big my screen at work is. I suppose I could get a ruler and measure it. I wasn't trying to blow you off... Also, I'm gonna delete the last image, now that you've seen it. It serves no other useful purpose.  – Ling.Nut 13:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi TCO,

Please see my message regarding the shortened lead at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Rwanda/archive1 under "TCO's comments". Basically I have made a proposal on a subpage and would like you and others to review it. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 12:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi TCO,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Painted Turtle Distribution alternate.svg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 2, 2011. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2011-07-02. howcheng {chat} 17:01, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, How. I think it would display better at full width, with caption below. Basically, how we do it in article. I will take it any way, but I think wider better. Wasting all the space to the left with the key seems like a waste, we lose all the ability to read the text for the political geography.TCO (talk) 17:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

TCO, can you email me at some stage, please? Tony (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Can we IRC? HERE: [5] (one to one would be direct) Am already regretting my OTRSes to Wiki, what with the hounds at Wikipedia Review. Totally trust YOU. The issue is me and all my class clown games over the years on teh Intertubes. TCO (talk) 18:26, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I was in the room; you were. How does it happen? Tony (talk) 18:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		Thank you very much for your tireless work, particularly on the recent FA candidate Airbus A330. If only everyone was as understanding as you are... Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 07:37, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Very cool. Thought I would need to wait until after the victory celebration. TCO (talk) 09:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Nah, you deserve it right from the word "Go". Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 09:41, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Bigger while live, and how much better is that!? Tony (talk) 12:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't get the joke, but that picture needs to be at least doubled.TCO (talk) 13:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hurricane Rick, you said "Non-notable storm". IT IS NOTABLE. By its intensity in mb, Rick was the second most powerful storm ever recorded in the EPac basin. It was even forcasted to have it's intensity beat Linda's record. Hurricanefan25 (talk) 16:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

You're right. I'm wrong. Struck oppose and added a comment. Peace? P.s.TCO (talk) 18:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, what I want to say is clear, it's in the title of the section :) But there are some more words I want to write.

I was originally uncomfortable with subsubsections in Compounds section (it's R8R Gtrs), in order they looked so incomplete. I expanded then a bit, added refs, and they seem OK to me now. (Also, economical data for fluorine is hard to find, see also here) I fixed some of your issues, but not all. I'm planning to come back in early August, to start FAC in mid-month. Possibly (unlikely but still possibly) I'll be back later. Please help the article while I'm away. I thought to be able myself before July starts, but I had less time than expected, plans changed, I'm leaving. No Internet until August, 5 at earliest

P.S. If there's something you want to write to me, go ahead. I'll be back for a day or two in July, (1—)2.--R8R Gtrs (talk) 14:05, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I saw that you added the non-metal halides. Nice section of content. I actually wanted to give you some space (not be stealing your work). That's why I stayed out of it. But I will come back and just give it a copyedit (content is right on, just want to brush up a couple how you say things). I will work, since you asked! Have fun with real life stuff and keep learning your econ and English! TCO (talk) 15:40, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I can do the economics from the 2008 Italian usage paper and from Greenwood. It's really more about a graphic that shows the value chain, than the details on pricing. But there are also comments easily made on which countries produce more, etc. You'll see. It will not be spammy, but helpful. And for the non-chemist, this kind of information really more enjoyable. Compounds is really the most technical and most "chemistry" section. But I think it is easily skipped over by a general reader, because it is so clearly sectioned...and then the "normal person" still finds lots of interesting things on ecoomics, environment, applicaitons, etc. And then for the chemist, we've been adequately complete.

P.s. I got drawn into helping an FAC for an article on the A330. It's a young submitter to FAC and want to help him get the article over the hump...so need to work on it first. TCO (talk) 15:40, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, thanks :) But I don't tend to own articles, easily taking criticism and other contributions, just to make you know, I'm pretty OK with anyone else. This additions would be sweet, I wanted to add it myself, but haven't done so as had no data. Ullman's encyclopedia is useless. It has obvious mistakes: while giving 17,000 tonnes in total, it says 6,000—7,000 are for UF6, 4,000—6,000 for SF6 and 2,000 for other. Even at the maximums (maxima?), 7+6+2 is still less tan 17. And number for UF6 is of serious doubt... That's why I didn't add it myself. And I'm fine with the length of Compounds section...I like it now more than the previous one, honestly :)

Of course. We don't have a deadline. When I get back in August, we'll see what we'll have. Just try to help as you can, please :)--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:57, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

	The Eloquent Handshake
	Seems to work without problems ;-). Can you give me browser/OS information?Did you fill in all the fields? I used "An award for you" in header, "The Eloquent Handshake" in title, and "Shake hand.jpg" in image filename. Eloquence* 22:42, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Windows 7, IE. I have been successful with kittens and food. Filled out all the spaces. Tried it with you and another person. Got the message "Something went wrong when retrieving the image. Please try again." in red.TCO (talk) 22:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Could you try it using a sock account without admin or developer permissions?TCO (talk) 22:46, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

	Make your own
	I'm a complete non-everything, but I managed it quite easily. Malleus Fatuorum 03:38, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Shake your manly hand! Hmm...maybe it is operator error? Need to reboot myself. TCO (talk) 03:41, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

	Yeah...
	I should've seen that coming. I'll take it in the sense that was intended. :-P And I probably would if someone else sent me one, too... BenRG (talk) 05:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

	You Asked For It
	You asked for a non-admin, non-developer, normal person to send you a make your own, using that handshake file at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) GB fan (talk) 21:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I've only just started seeing you around places (FPC, FAC, MissMJ's talk), and yet your talk page archives go back to 2008. Have our paths crossed before without me realising or have you recently changed your username? Best, Matthewedwards :  Chat  22:49, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

I was permabanned for trolling. They let me back after 2 years because I promised no more hitting. TCO (talk) 22:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

OK. Re your question on the talk for the clickable map, images aren't yet clickable. It will be a good day when they are. Until then, we are left resorting to the image mapping or other methods explained somewhere at WP:ACCESS. They all rely on coding within the article, though. There is one other option: Commons allows either clicking or onmouseover hovering areas of images and having tool-tip popups, but that still doesn't show up when the file is viewed through Wikipedia, only at the Commons file page. Matthewedwards :  Chat  20:55, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I can probably do "half a loaf" by at least including the code within the file discription. For some images, special caption in file description may also have value (I have an example). I'm fine putting it out there and letting it be dinged. At least it floats the idea of different ways of thinking of things.

Since you commented a couple weeks ago, would you mind taking another look at the cirrus cloud article and its associated FAC and commenting as to whether you think it meets the criteria? Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I skimmed it and gave a little feedback. I don't plan to spend the time to really work with it more, so would not take me as a hurdle or an opportunity. That said...you need to get some good people to go over it, help it, and give it thumbs up/down. T Gilmour does not count. Atmoz and probably German Joe do. But get a few more. And it is (haha) fluffy in the prose.  ;-) I do honestly wish you the best to improve it!TCO (talk) 20:08, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments! I'll try to address those prose issues! :) This is my first FAC, so I'm kind of unsure as to the proper procedure and how to get the prose into an almost-perfect state...but I guess it will come with practice and time! :) Anyway, thanks. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:21, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Could an admin that is a bit of a IARer, please give me a one month break please? Talk page off and all. No wiki-drama-mamaz honest. Just got some things I need to do and spend less time on the net. TCO (talk) 16:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up on the FAC situation for Manhattan Project. That article has been on my watchlist for about forever, but I seldom visit it because I get overwhelmed by the geopolitical POV and misinformation that I have often found there. Time to take another look, apparently! --Orlady (talk) 19:13, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the kind words on my talk page. Busy busy busy. Cheers...  – Ling.Nut 13:20, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Good luck. Hang in there. You can get it done (whatever it is)!TCO (talk) 13:27, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Just look at this. Saint-Gaudens was a genius.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, even just googling around a couple coin sites, came across the comment that this was a "great coin" and the 10 dollar one was not.TCO (talk) 02:32, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

This was the original version, it proved impossible to coin and had to be watered down. But yes, the ten dollar is very much second fiddle to its big brother.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense. Just looking at it, thought it was very high relief. TCO (talk) 02:40, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

It certainly is, although perhaps that image makes it look higher relief than it is. But as I now have all three reliefs in the article, the reader can judge for himself.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:47, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Ever heard of the Pugachev's Cobra? Ever heard of a Sukhoi, or a MiG? Ever heard of "Foxbats", "Flankers", "Fulcrums", or Fullback"? Do you know what they are? Do you know what the Soviet aerospace industry is like? Do you know who the Americans really fear? Do you know how much headache it caused to the West? Do you know how much attention the fighters are getting? If the answer is NO, then there are clearly some catching up to do. During the next few days, I'll be working on the MiG-29K, Su-34, Su-35 and Su-37. I want to bring them all up to the same standard as the Su-33. If you want to participate, please come along and help out. Don't be hesitant. Give the Soviet aerospace industry the recognition it really deserves. Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 11:42, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Is that like the Shelby Cobra?  ;-)

TCO (talk) 12:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

LoL, kind of cute. But the Pugachev's Cobra is different from the Shelby. Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 23:53, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Why a snake, I've got a phobia regarding snakes. Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 23:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Just thinking of all the word plays. There's also

TCO (reviews needed) 00:08, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I can't imagine that paint would be the best program for it. I'll be honest, I'm not that up on this stuff myself- my usual approach is this :) J Milburn (talk) 00:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I've replied on my talk page, and will continue to do so for this thread. Thanks, J Milburn (talk) 01:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Would you like to review my article Canoe River train crash, presently at PR? It is the third in my Diefenbaker series. But if you haven't heard of Macdonald, doubt you've heard of Diefenbaker!--Wehwalt (talk) 00:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Sure thing. Try to get it by end of Sunday.TCO (reviews needed) 00:53, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I was hoping to save that he became Prime Minister for the final words of the article. Can we simply say that it became an asset to him in his political rise?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

That's good enough. I just want some "so what" for the lead.TCO (reviews needed) 18:34, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, I just got home so I'm trying to juggle a bunch of stuff today, but I"ll look over the edits. Always need to have someone else smooth out one's prose bumps. BTW, I found no public domain images along the lines you suggest. I looked for contemporary images. They are out there, but the sourcing is very uncertain. One is credited to the Canadian Armed Forces, which by now would make it PD-CANADA but I don't think that credit stands up to serious scrutiny, I think they just grabbed it off their website. I may be going to that area in September, and I would of course get images. I understand about the so what. I wrote this article because I was annoyed that someone hadn't already written it. I agree, more needs to be said about the "so what", not only in the lede but to explain why this crash is significant, beyond being a vote winner for Dief.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

And Chamberlain siad that Churchill's text could be best edited with a pair of scissors! (a little advertising for my Rise of Neville Chamberlain, which gets few hits.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:56, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Go look at pretty pictures. Less skull sweat than all this Harbrace book from HS teacher writing shiznet. ;-) TCO (reviews needed) 20:00, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Why is that word a problem? I've changed what you edited only slightly, but I think "transfer to the Korean War" can't stand, I think it is necessary to state they were going to Korea. They were some of Canada's best troops, actually.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:58, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

It's no biggie, boss. Do what is needed. At least, then just say "deploy" instead of "deploy for transfer". Gotta be some single verb that says they were shipping out.  ;-) I thought deploy has a connotation of a 6-12 month hitch. And Korea in 1950 was "hot", not something with troop rotations. I thought reader understands that the Korean War takes place in Korea and troops headed to Puget Sound would be catching a ship to go there.

Let's say they were some of Canada's best troops, in article. (Did not know that and it makes the story even more compelling.)

And I MEANT it when I said I didn't care about my edits being changed. I just hope they were some use and glad did not require just hitting the revert button (but it's there!)TCO (reviews needed) 13:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I think the difficulty is they had only been ordered to Lewis as yet. However, going to Korea followed going to Lewis as night follows day. I'll dig through my sources and find something nice about their special forces status.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Hej TCO!

I remember that you like science fiction. Have you read any of these fellow's books?

Just read the description of one character, Jack Shaftoe ("he who fucks shit up").

To quote, Tony the Tiger, "They're great!!!"

:-)

Another bonus is that many of them are thick, and so the perfect evening reading during the summer or during WikiBreaks. I'm about to take one, myself.

Cheers,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Glad you are of good cheer. Peace.TCO (reviews needed) 13:26, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I should have known! :) How about David Lodge's academic trilogy Changing Places, Small World, Nice Work? or Frederik Bengtsson's The Long Ships (Röde Orm)?

They sound kinda "hard", to be honest. I tend to like simpler stories from the 1940-1980. Glad you are happy though.

I read American Gods. It seemed a bit foggy to me, although it wasn't actually bad. TCO, my days of doing plot descriptions for Heinlein novels was a long time ago. When I was casting around, looking for a place on wiki.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:54, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Even foggy myself, I still recognized your writing style. (positive comment.) I disliked AG and did not bother after a little bit into it.TCO (reviews needed) 16:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

If you are bored, maybe do a peer review here. I've had some clashes with this guy before, basically because he has fixed ideas of what content is/is not relevant to a song article but in this case he is specifically open to anybody outside of the music section reviewing, so figure it deserves a shoot. Only if it's interesting to you of course. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 18:26, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

You got it man. I have stayed away from that scene, but it will good for me to read through one. Plus the guy is looking for a brutal outsider. That's me. :-) TCO (reviews needed) 18:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Have fun  :) Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 19:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, shouldn't you state how many points Painted turtle would get for the consideration on the page? Regards Hekerui (talk) 19:25, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't really look at the points. If someone cares to total them, fine.TCO (reviews needed) 19:28, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I've hidden your edit summary from the Talk:Main Page revision history. In the future, please simply revert inappropriate edits without attacking their authors. Thank you. —David Levy 09:51, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I'm trying to understand why you're objecting to moving File:Stover at Yale book cover image.jpg to commons. Though the file was initially deleted, that decision was overturned. You yourself provided the OTRS for this image, available at Ticket:2011030910014184. I've re-added the {{mtc}} tag to the image, because your objection to it didn't seem to relate to a policy. If you still feel that the image should not be uploaded to commons, I will request a third opinion. --Gyrobo (talk) 15:04, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I know that image well and the deletion history is very tangled. I would not move to Commons as we don't even have history well captured here. Just leave it be. There have to be better things to go after. (Note: I am not "anti-Commons". See my file history. But this is a practical one, where it will cause issues. Please find something else to get done. 'pedia has lots of work needed. Having some "theory versus practice" debate will be no fun.

Yes, if you are adamant on proving some point and moving it, please do get more opinions. I understand your theoretical point and have made my practical objection. At this point, if you want to prevail, get some more peeps and then if they back you up...well I'm just full of it.  ;-) (Peace.)  :-)

TCO (reviews needed) 15:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I've listed this discussion at WP:3O, and started a section at File talk:Stover at Yale book cover image.jpg#Move to commons discussion. And I'm still not understanding your objections. Either this file is free, or it's not. You yourself filed an OTRS ticket on it; your only comments, both to me and to another editor, have not been descriptive on this matter. I would be more inclined to take your viewpoint if you explained the history that led to it. --Gyrobo (talk) 15:47, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

thanks for getting the third opinion. I've stated my point regarding practical impact (I forsee the history getting mangled...it already is/has been mangled! (there are 4 relevant pages or documents and NONE was on the file when you tagged it! Moving to Commons makes one more link in the chain.). If you still don't get it, there are two likely possibilities: (1) I don't have a valid point...or (2) you are doing a poor job considering what I said. Let's let the 3PO dictate it.

P.s Please don't post about that image or this issue any more at my talk page. You can do what you need in file space, etc. without needing to come here any more. TCO (reviews needed) 15:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! I've been mulling over criteria for what I feel would be acceptable for recall and I'd like it to where only a select few editors I trust can ask for my recall. I'd like you to be one of those editors. I've outlined the process here. If there is any reason you would not like to be on this list, for example maybe you object to recall or perhaps you don't want to deal with the drama involved, could you please let me know?--v/r - TP 18:40, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

It's an honor, staff sergeant. I think recall is fine and I'm not scared of these cats.  ;) Would take it seriously, not my usual joking around. You'd have to screw up pretty bad for me to want to yank you. Something like paid pushing of a product or a political candidate. Or just turning systematically mean or sloppy. I would not want you to stop moderating because of an occasional difference or even an isolated act of emotion or a "bad night". Take care...hope all is well with you!TCO (reviews needed) 18:47, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I was reading through the commentary on your turtle blurb then I came upon a word indicating that all of this is about female dogs. So that others are not confused as I was, I suggest you redact that word.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:45, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough.TCO (reviews needed) 17:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Saves endless boring talk.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on July 20, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 20, 2011. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 03:13, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I offer my heartfelt thanks for your loyal support during the FA candidacy of Airbus A330. Without your words of encouragement and helpful edits/advice, I don't think I would have lasted another second in the professional FAC environment. Thanks

Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 09:16, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks kindly, man. Heck...I was worried you might be mad at me, for saying the thing would pass when it didn't. Was also a little concerned that you might get discouraged. Let's bring it back soon? I really think it's pretty close now, but we should probably get one more prose expert (not a part of the Aviation project, but a top "civilian") to go over it, so that we can say we did it (and improve the thing as well). I think then after that we need to drive the reviewers in to look at it. NOT canvassing or project pile-on. But just driving well-respected eyeballs to evaluate and (hopefully) support.TCO (reviews needed) 09:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I plan to give the article arrest, although I have no intentions at all to leave Airbus A330 the way it is ei, it must get the Star! First, I'm working on the YF-23 to see how it goes in the FAC, and then return. In the meantime, I'll go over it and see how much I can fix. Also, do you mind being co-nominator with me for the A330's *fourth* FA candidacy?! You've fixed the article enough to have legitimate claims that it's yours. ありがとう Sp33dyphil ^{"Ad astra"} 11:23, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I think that doing the YF-23 first sounds like a very mature plan. I hope that you are learning something from all this work! (Try to spot all the Nikki complaints ahead of time, ha!)

I think for the A-330, really, one more pair of eyes is the way to go. A Sandy-recognized prose detail sharpie. Not just for political reasons, although it will help, but also someone like that really will help the piece and find a few more things to fix. Very cool of you to make the offer, but I think you should keep the sole credit, especially as I did not research any of the sections. You can still have my support and help.

We'll collaborate on one in the future. Let me think about what.TCO (reviews needed) 12:43, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Our webby friend has a distracting black line above his head and to her or his left (bars in tank), could this be removed prior to main page appearance. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 09:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Good catch. Agreed. Really shows up strong, now that the left side was so photoshopped. I will get the right side made even more shopped as well.TCO (reviews needed) 09:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi TCO, could you take a look at the new blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#August 17 and tell me what you think? Thanks Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:42, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

For what it's worth, if you took offense at my suggestion that you might have remembered a discussion in which you took part then I'm sorry.

Regarding this:

I'm concerned after seeing you nominate a bunch of templates for deletion because you disagreed with their style (and got roundly defeated btw) that you are trying to "work the system" or get things in "policy" to support your style views. I'm sure you are a good guy or think you are a good guy (AGF, blabla), but maybe take a step back and consider how much you are helping build things versus how much having Internet battles you try to win.

If I wanted your advice on my participation on TfD I'd ask for it, and not on MoS talk. The public contributions list is not there for people to go trawling through unrelated discussions looking for ways to attack editors they happen to disagree with. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 15:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to swing by and thank you for the review of "Indian Camp" - also was extremely grouchy at the time, so.... Anyway, I noticed an image of a bookcover on your page, and having had problems with covers like that, thought this very long conversation might be helpful, should you ever need it. Would be happy to provide the bottom line, if necessary. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:23, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Mine went through a PUFD and they said they were OK with the angle. That it was to show two different parts of the book (iow a valid way of showing the spine). I wasn't even there to fight it, happened while I was out permabanned. I'm not going to sweat it give the community said it was fine. Someone else tried to go after it saying it was not definitely shown to be original art work, but that ended up being ruled OK as well. It's obviously had a lot of tussling done on it...TCO (reviews needed) 19:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I think it's one of those gray areas that people aren't sure about. I actually saw the conversation here about moving it to commons - not a good idea imo. It might not survive there. The image I had in "Indian Camp" didn't survive, at all. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I knew I was going to screw something up :) -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 01:35, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah baby! I know I'm super late, but is there anything that needs doing in the next few days? I've been swamped; I don't think I will have much opportunity to seriously edit for quite some time, but the next few days before picta's front page appearance are open for me. --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:16, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

It's fine.TCO (reviews needed) 02:27, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, TCO. I notice that you're interested in promoting media files to Wikipedia:Featured picture, etc. I'm no photographer, but sometimes add diagrams to articles about zoology and paleontology. I see that Wikipedia:Featured_picture_criteria says "It is a photograph, diagram, image or animation which is among the best examples of a given subject that the encyclopedia has to offer". Do you think the colour-coded diagram of a jumping spider at Portia_fimbriata#Body_structure_and_appearance has a chance? How about Template:Annotated_image/Porifera_cell_types or the lead pic at Cambrian substrate revolution? Al of these are annotated using Template:Annotated image, which I use a lot - the template's page explains its advantages, and Template:Annotated image/doc/Samples shows some tricks it can do. --Philcha (talk) 10:50, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I think better diagrams are important for Wiki and that we all need to get better at them. That said, I don't know that much. Part of critiqueing stuff is to try and learn. Similarly, you should toss something into FP and just learn from the experience.

Of the three, the spider looks pretty unfeaturable for multiple reasons. Also, I'm a bit concerned that template is leading to worse looking images (prominent key). I would try with one of the other two.

Would run 'gram through Graphics Lab wikidesk first and ask for any improvements prior to FP (and credit the helper). They may want it converted to svg and helper may have other upgrades. The seafloor thing would benefit from labeling it as seafloor (took me a while of looking at it to realize that it was not just ground on shore). It has the impressive look and complication to be an FP, but could maybe use a very careful go-over to ensure that it is clear and efficient info transmission. The seal diagram is a bit clearer although the key seems big compared to the content and maybe colors could be better (not sure, just an idea).

TCO (reviews needed) 14:07, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi, TCO, thanks for the comments. On that base I won't pursue this, as I'm more enthusiastic about article content. --Philcha (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Just toss one of the two I mentioned into the FP queue and learn something. Upgrades on the visuals are low work for huge payoff in terms of the actual reader experience.TCO (reviews needed) 14:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

I replied to you at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tyrol5. Regards, AGK [•] 00:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

You're right, normally we wouldn't use a US coin as a scale for a photograph, but it looks like that's the only free image available of the animal period, let alone one with scale. There's a photo with a person holding a specimen for scale floating around Google Images, but I've been unable to track down the provenance. --Danger (talk) 17:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

No sweat. You could use a dollar bill. Believe me, even in North Korea and the most remote places of the world, they know what the greenback is. (Not just saying it to be anti-PC, it's really true.) We should probably just use a ruler to keep the Brits and other Coca-colonization complainers off our backs.  ;-) TCO (reviews needed) 17:53, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but I don't exactly have an L. carlae on hand to take a photo and they're not particularly common. I suppose I could dress my cornsnake in a threadsnake costume... --Danger (talk) 18:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

You're not rising to my bait! I might have to move on...;-) TCO (reviews needed) 19:22, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Ames Process pressure vessel lower.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:54, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Ames Process pressure vessel remnant slag after reaction.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:54, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Ames Process uranium biscuit.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:54, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Regarding your comments at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Two Oceana National Anthems, I have added both to the country articles, but neither composer has an identifiable article. You are required to change your own vote.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I think they would have let you change it, given I pre-arranged it, but oh well.TCO (reviews needed) 08:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you also clean up your vote at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Three versions of Amazing Grace‎. It needs to be bolded.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I thought tigers were bold. Jonathunder (talk) 15:04, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I am topic banned at WP:FS.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

TCO,

Given your comments at the other national anthems you might want to comment at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Three European National Anthems. I just added the anthems to those country pages as well.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

There is an annual summer lull at FS. No FSC noms were logged between the following dates:

11:03, 29 May 2007 — 11:07, 16 August 2007

15:18, 25 May 2008 — 15:14, 10 July 2008

09:15, 27 April 2009 — 18:52, 25 July 2009

17:50, 25 June 2010 — 18:54, 27 August 2010 --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Good insight and nice analysis. I wonder if FP (or other content processes) have a lull as well. Leaving that point aside, how do you feel about the merger. I was just throwing it out as an idea, not wedded to it. Just wondering if the 'pedia benefits more with separate desks or together.TCO (reviews needed) 21:23, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Awww...this kitten is saying "Drmies is really sorry for just having out-WikiLoved you unless you have more than 18 in which case the next WikiLove message will have a pitbull snarling at you." Isn't that sweet?

Drmies (talk) 01:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

You're cheating. I didn't feel love come through. Let me kiss my kittycat that is laying up against the laptop IRL.  Done. She mewed.

That's wild. Did not know there was a ladderboard and I was so far up it. I think I was just an early adopter. The crusty shellback types were all afflutter about it. Think they still want to date link!

P.s. I had one that I wanted to do, but my account would not create ones. Pretty on topic one actually (handshake picture)

TCO (reviews needed) 01:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• That's sweet, a kittykat next to a laptop. That's got to be pretty warm on one's lap, though, but I imagine the double purring is nice. I got two dogs here, panting besides me. They want to go for a walk. And, ahem, I'm pretty crusty--go look at the ANI archives when the announcement was made, haha. As for the rankings, I'm being visited on my talk page, sometimes, by a fossilized rodent expert who apparently knows tons of rankings and chastised me for being #6 on this list--I should be #3 now. Bwuhaha! Drmies (talk) 01:43, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harold Pinter/archive1 which helped in the process of getting this article to FA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments on the cirrus cloud FAC, which recently passed. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

[6] Isn't the point of RfA to see if the community trusts you enough? --Σ ^talk_contribs 21:25, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

It is a fair question to ask the candidate to look into his soul.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't sure how it would work out, tbh. I guess it is open ended enough to have some hope for insights to creep out. And it does test sophistication of thinking a bit (like, well, no offense...your question is one of those on/off wiki policy attitudes that seems to not reflect and understanding of how people interact). That said, I did not ask it just to put the fellow on the spot. Not sure it was a useful question or not, really. Did not totally get a feel for the fellow. that said, nothing negative crept out and with others I have gotten negative inferences at times (like I really think there are some mean vandal hunter non content creators out there, accumulating wiki power and the like). anyhow...long way of saying I don't know if it's a good question, but wanted to try it and was not meant to trick or vex the candidate, other than the mild amount needed for a (little bit) tougher question.TCO (reviews needed) 21:45, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

A fair segment of the community thinks at least some admins abuse their power. It's fair to ask potential admins questions on the subject.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:11, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

It's kinda difficult not to watch nic picking on Painted turtle. It's like I can't watch but I feel unpulsed to watch anyway. Malleus has explained before how crazy having an article on the main pages makes him. Step away if it drives you crazy. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 01:34, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I hear ya babe! Actually just the personal concern is touching! Right now, I feel like all the edits have been cnstructive. Either real upgrades or kinda 50-50 things. And I am in a "man is good" mood right now. Very peaceful. And a day from now I can retweak it and no one will care/notice! So I'm not going to edit war it. Really, I should go through the whole thing one more time, now that I've been away from it for a while. Think time and distance would help with another swingthrough. I'm working on another one right now.

Head is hurting a bit again. Had to go to ER a couple days ago. They checked and I don't have caratoid artery blockage. So, who knows. Just not able to edit at volume as normal. Hope you are all well and all yourself!TCO (reviews needed) 01:40, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

My head hurts from editing sometimes. Maybe an issue with eyesight in my case. Life is great anyway! :) Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 01:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Main page experience would not be complete without some vandal edits. Nice improvements to the article(even from IPs) overall so far. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 08:55, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

	The Reptile Award
	P. guttata would like to congratulate you on your successful efforts in increasing awareness of the beauty and wonder of reptiles. I would too, but with less of a lisp. Danger (talk) 02:50, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Very cool. Thank you. Article was a labor of love.TCO (reviews needed) 02:57, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations on the painted turtle featured article today!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.TCO (reviews needed) 08:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Did_you_know#Articles_created.2Fexpanded_on_July_20 - thank you again for your contribution. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, man. I can handle any rework the DYKers want. Those burbs are pretty tight so I doubt they put an attribution in there, but you can mention to foundation when it's slated to run and then also send them the hit numbers for the article. That's how I've kissed ass in the past. People like to know it.TCO (reviews needed) 15:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Not sure if it's a balanced view(of reliources) but common box turtle can refer to Terrapene carolina or Terrapene carolina carolina. So if true, it's both a source of much confusion and a hatnote is required. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 00:27, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Please add a hatnote or a sentence. I assume we are OK with the DYK blurb with simple words, not Latinate? Rather not bog it down. Let article expalin.TCO (reviews needed) 00:40, 21 July 2011 (UTC)