User talk:Casliber/Archive 27

Hi Cas, could you say when exactly you learned that The undertow was back as Law, and when exactly you told the ArbCom? SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 05:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I told arbcom in the last two days. I can't remember exactly when he told me but it was several months ago at least. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Cas, I think you need to come clean about the details of this, and how it evolved. If, for example, you told the ArbCom before they'd been told by others, which was on September 29 according to Risker, that speaks in your favour. If you waited until they already knew, that suggests you told them only because you guessed you were about to be caught. Or did you tell them because they asked you directly? My worry is that you're answering questions only when asked (here, for example), rather than just explaining what happened.

Also, can you say why you deleted The undertow's user and talk pages after you knew he'd gained another admin account? SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 06:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(a) I told them after they had been alerted, but as far as I know no-one knew that I knew. I spoke up spontaneously at that point and hadn't been asked directly. (b) The reason it was deleted was a matter unrelated to WP (long story and not my place to tell), and the issue with Law being admin didn't come into my head at that point. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, regarding (b), it very much is your place to tell, because you're the one who deleted the pages, and you're being asked why. Socks often want their pages to be deleted, because they offer clues to the previous identity. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 06:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Cas, sorry to see your edits to the committee pages. For what it's worth, I'll reiterate that I think you're a good guy and have done a stand up job as an administrator and an arbitrator outside of this one incident. I'm sorry to see it work out this way for you, when the folks I think bear heavier responsibility have not met any consequences at all. Anyway, chin up and don't take this too hard. Nathan ^T 14:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I think it is a blessing in disguise actually and I feel better already. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Am giving up CU and OS. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Cas, I know that in a site as large as this that it's entirely possible that you're not even aware that "I" exist - I do. While I am sorry to see things going down the path that they are, I appreciate your integrity, maturity, honesty, and efforts here. I wish you the very best both here and in R/L, and I look forward to working with you in the future. — Ched :  ?  16:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I second this. I expect to see more articles on birds and dinosaurs at FAC soon ;) Karanacs (talk) 16:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I too feel very sorry about this, and I wish you all the best going forward. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Bummer, but you did the right thing by apologizing and resigning over a murky issue instead of prolonging it. You set a memorable example there. And I'll always be grateful for your semi-protection of the humble spud. Even tho we still don't know whether most of the nutrients are in the skin or not. Novickas (talk) 17:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I wish you'd stayed. You did a fine job, overall. And I've been wanting to tell you: The 1978 remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Many say it was better than the original (Wikipedia says they do). But even better is the '51 book by Robert Heinlein that the original The Body Snatchers seemed to be a knock off of, The Puppet Masters. Great pulp fiction with a fun kicker at the end. (I'd comment at the thread at WR, but they won't let me.) --Noroton (talk) 17:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm okay. I'd need a 27 hour day to do arbcom justice :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm sorry to see you go, Cas. I've stricken your votes on the Noloop motion to dismiss, which I trust is agreeable to you. Regards, AGK 20:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wot a palaver. Still - you're best off getting out of it. I don't think being a judge is as simple as just being a good man and it's too many plates to keep spinning.Fainites ^barleyscribs 21:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• We are none of us perfect, and we all make mistakes, but the good that we do when we do it, and the good advice we give, and the strangers we have helped, are our silent memorials. You have also these last few hours provided a few drops of dignity in what appears to be a murky matter, no matter what accusations regarding failings of character have been made. I would thank you for all the good that you have provided in your ArbCom efforts, and hope the misjudgements you have made will not blight your continuing presence in the project. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for trying hard to achieve the best outcome, and for doing the right thing in resigning with honour when it was evident that you'd erred in earlier judgements under difficult circumstances. It does you credit, and I hope that in the long run it will work out for the best for you. Sorry it worked out this way, your actions are very much appreciated, dave souza, talk 22:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take it easy. I've seen some admins harbour and encourage banned users to revert for them. In any case, being free to write might be the best thign that happened. I hate personality politics. At the end of the day, only the content (NPOV or racial propaganda or whatever) counts and their impact on the reader (possibly brainwashing) which has a long term effect. Nobody remembers the rubbish 10 years later but a few guys' mind might have been changed by an article (for better or worse). YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 02:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• You're doing the appropriate and honorable thing by fessing up and resigning, and this only increases my respect for you. I voted for you in the ArbCom elections and would do so again if you run in the future. In the meantime, whatever you do, get some sleep. Rivertorch (talk) 03:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Anytime, for some insane reason, you might wish to return to the meat grinder, or should want OS or CU back you shall have my full support along with my respect, for what little that's worth these days.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) (talk) 03:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I think you did the right thing - but that is what I have come to expect from you. :) Besides, article-writing is so much more fun anyway. Who needs the arb business? Awadewit (talk) 03:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Illegitimi non carborundum UnitAnode 04:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I don't get it. You're being accused of sticking out your neck to help a screwup? You're a psychiatrist - it's your job description. :P You (will soon) have mail. MastCell ^Talk 04:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I am deeply saddened to see you step down. I think the ArbCom, and by extension the community and the project, has lost greatly. You have behaved admirably and responsibly; you have my utmost respect. Should you ever choose to stand for any position of trust in the future, know you have my support. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 13:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I understand why you felt it was for the best to step down. But I know that that the Community has lost an excellent arbitrator. FloNight♥♥♥ 13:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Separate from the latest drama-du-jour, to be on ArbCom is perhaps the most thankless, reputation-destroying position in this community, whether deserved or not. It's a shame. -->David Shankbone 14:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You were one of the few people both competent enough and self-sacrificing enough to take on one of the most unpleasant tasks which we have here. I know most people would never see me as being even remotely qualified for ArbCom, and, frankly, you don't know how happy that makes me. Good luck with going back to the regular work around here. And maybe at some point I could tell you about these strange dreams I keep having... . ;) John Carter (talk) 22:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thx all - See two threads below and follow the link to the RfC :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you review this for me? I ask you because I see your name on Wikipedia:Peer review/volunteers#Everyday life—Chris!_c/t 19:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean to rush you or anything. But I am wondering if you are going to review this for me. Thanks in advance.—Chris!_c/t 22:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Chris, been a bit preoccupied all over the place. Will take a look later today. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

.... for doing the honourable thing. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. A good start to addressing questions concerning integrity is to demonstrate it in action as you've done today. Regards,  Skomorokh, barbarian  04:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to thank you also. I doubt you have any idea who I am but I've crossed paths with you one time or another and have always had respect for you. This whole recent incident shook my faith in the project for the first time since I began editing almost 3 years ago. I've considered whether or not to leave the project, but your gesture has restored my faith that there is honor to be found here. Know that you've helped keep at least one contributor on the project by your actions. -- Atama頭 17:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers folks. ;) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh for Heaven's sake, let's get over it, move on - onwards and upwards - I thought you had a FAC to nominate and see through the process - get on with it - do something useful, Giano (talk) 20:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for doing the right thing. That action has restored a lot of my faith in you. Hopefully others involved in this mess will follow your example. Verbal chat 20:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• A Leader leads! You don't need 'the mop' to lead. Help us, the wikipedia community, get beyond this mess.--Buster7 (talk) 02:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments all --> a little something to set the ball rolling here while I figure what I am going to write about next. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all,

It's meetup time again in Sydney - hopefully you'll be able to come along for friendly chat and drinks about all things wiki - topics will no doubt include the Chapter - perhaps with planning for the upcoming AGM, the general state of wiki-play, and the traditional candle lighting to encourage the mythical flagged-revisions extension to make its way on to the wiki. At this point, I usually mention that sitting wiki arbitrators are compelled to buy everyone a drink, but one of our number has taken a rather extreme route in avoiding this duty - if you have no idea what I'm talking about then you're probably busy writing and maintaining articles - but come along anyways on the 21st October, from 18.30 til late, to find out :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 21:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind looking at this and this? Have I been unduly harsh or rude? I'm a natural "Support" reviewer, so I'm concerned that when I do oppose, I've put the boot in too hard. Thanks. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I often preface an oppose with a "sorry" in these situations, or use Comments instead but leave it pretty clear what needs to be done to fix. I think getting at least a stuck in to help him improve it would be a great gesture. I'll help as well. There are no gastropod FAs s it is a pacesetter...Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Amegilla bombiformis, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Xylocopa aeratus, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 12:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cas: I'm putting together the Oct. newsletter, and wonder whether we've given up entirely on a bird collab, or whether we can announce a new one in the newsletter. Let me know your thoughts...  :) MeegsC | Talk 13:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Might be best to say it is in a temporary recess. Hadn't thought about it much recently. he last listing I made was to give a choice between. Hang on.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it is now New World vulture...you could write that in late August, we suggested a couple of articles which'd complete either one of two Featured Topic jigsaw puzzles, this and Procellariiformes..and someone also nominated the important chicken. People have started thinking about some broader articles to work on as well. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tamarix aphylla, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:29, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Keep up that rate and I might just not beat you to 200. I don't think that would be right at all! :P Ottava Rima (talk) 02:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/new users#Journalists constructive criticism is welcome, I can tweek it, removing sections, etc. I tried to explain the situation as best as I could, but there is always ways to make your ideas better and more effective.

Thanks for the wonderful idea, and taking the time to propose this, how do you feel your proposal is different than the dozens that have come before you in RFCs and on WT:AFD? Ikip (talk) 17:03, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for posting the RfC - I think this is a very important issue. What do you think about setting up a Wikipedia:Wikivoices podcast on this issue? Awadewit (talk) 18:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation, or was this directed to Casliber? I saw that page before. I think this is mostly a en.wikipedia problem -- maybe I am wrong. I can imagine that wikicommons is suffering from the same problems with photos, etc.

Personally, my voice is really not radio, or even skype quality. :( Ikip (talk) 23:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a general invitation, but I wanted to start with Casliber, since he posted the RfC. Wikivoices does en.wiki issues, btw. Awadewit (talk) 23:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Okay, I am happy to do a wikivoices thingy Awadewit. To Ikip, what happened to the Journalists' section? It seems to have disappeared. I was thinking of alerting some outside journalists as well. Note that User:Jaranda and User:Alkivar have now retired, as has the person responsible for deleting Shayne Hayne first time round. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: "what happened to the Journalists' section?"

I used an anchor tag on the page. A hidden tag, using {{Anchor|Journalists}} A more expanded journalist section is here: Wikipedia:Notability/RFC:Reevaluation#Journalists Ikip (talk) 19:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thyreus nitidulus, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks ... Do think about one for Halloween! Victuallers (talk) 18:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Inon Zur, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (see the pageview stats(?)) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks ... Do think about one for Halloween! Victuallers (talk) 06:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didya see all the mushroom IDs? Many are Australian species, and I was thinking it might be fun to prep several for DYKs. I'll work on them over the weekend, and if you're interested/have time, maybe add what you can from your Oz books and we could co-nom a bunch. Sasata (talk) 16:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, one of them is now long enough. For a hook, how about something like "...the Australian mushroom Mycena nargan earned its named from a perceived resemblance of its cap spots to the eyes of the mythical Nargun?" ...but maybe you can suggest some less clunky prose? Sasata (talk) 01:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw this, sounds good too...it is quite a tricky one to get out succinctly. Entoloma rodwayi is tricky to expand. Casliber (talk · contribs)

Yeah, my sources are just about tapped on this species. I think I could push it over 1.5 kb by including some info generic to all Entoloma. Any of the other Noodlesnack species you want to try to get to DYK? Armillaria luteobubalina should be easy. Sasata (talk) 20:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that should be straightforward and I will try to start buffing later today. I was musing on something generic to Entoloma too. Will look at the others. Times like these I am jealous of the tassie folks, all those wet forests....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[2] User:Jack Merridew has been disrupting an legitimate attempt to handle personal attacks at a page he is involved in. The page is also an MfD of a page that Moreschi, his other mentor, has previously deleted and has made threatening comments over.

ArbCom has stated: "5. User:Jack Merridew agrees to avoid all disruptive editing." This is a serious matter and I would request you, as Mentor, to ensure that it does not continue. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although there is disruptive behaviour, it is from another source to the one suggested above. Verbal chat 15:43, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Verbal, this is the second time you have made the claim without proof. I ask you now to provide proof within WP:WQA which verifies that I am not to make the thread about false claims lodged against me or where an involved user can close the thread. You are not approaching this objectively or appropriately. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All this before coffee on a sunday morning...Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:55, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voila! C'est un tasse de cafe, pour toi! Hamster Sandwich (talk) 21:02, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

merci boucoups - qu'elle domage re un little headache above to read.... :/ Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to take him to ArbCom enforcement and point out his violation which will result in a year long block, or will you undo your mentee's inappropriate actions when he claims that an honest attempt to have a WQA discussion is "drama" and "disruptive editing", and closing the thread directly against what WP:WQA says is appropriate. The ArbCom statement was very clear that he was to involve himself in -no- actions like this, but is disrupting with many other people who know Moreschi. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you taken any action yet or will I be forced to contact ArbCom enforcement? Ottava Rima (talk) 13:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One lump or two, Cas? And help yourself to a calisson. Mathsci (talk) 05:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Is Jack an admin? I thought only admins are allowed to close threads they don't like and block users that dare to disagree with them. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pas forcement, mon petit chouchou. T'as pas envie de partager une tartine avec Cas ? Mièle ou confiture ? Mathsci (talk) 05:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

pas de emballage des cadeaux, pas de surprises mon chou. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aargh, forgivez-mois all, mon Francais est rudimentary....J'ai besoin de Francais/Anglais cahier or the damn babel poisson....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As one who knows where the poisson went, I can only say: next time, stick it in your ear. Pour encourager les autres. --TS 00:52, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a mischievous notion to find a DYK for Observations, systematical and geographical, on the herbarium collected by Professor Christian Smith, in the vicinity of the Congo, during the expedition to explore that river, under the command of Captain Tuckey, in the year 1816. Any ideas? Hesperian 23:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha, great plan. Maybe a very brief hook "...that xxx was an important botanical work of African flora" and discuss on the WT:DYK page or something...Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can have it if you want; I don't collect them. (but If you don't, I probably will go ahead, just for the fun of it). Hesperian 00:09, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... that Observations, systematical and geographical, on the herbarium collected by Professor Christian Smith, in the vicinity of the Congo, during the expedition to explore that river, under the command of Captain Tuckey, in the year 1816 became known as "Brown's Congo"?

Tee hee. Hesperian 00:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, okay...see my next edit. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well. That went down like a sack of spuds. Hesperian 03:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The term would be 'like a lead balloon' Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:38, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recall something about a drunken schoolgirl.... Hesperian 04:54, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dead in the water. A real downer. Nyuck nyuck. --Una Smith (talk) 23:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I'll forgive you for never finishing the peer review. It's almost dropped off the bottm of the list! Aaargghh!Fainites ^barleyscribs 15:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too late. It's gone.Fainites ^barleyscribs 17:15, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Observations, systematical and geographical, on the herbarium collected by Professor Christian Smith, in the vicinity of the Congo, during the expedition to explore that river, under the command of Captain Tuckey, in the year 1816 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Materialscientist (talk) 11:54, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To perhaps rescue the nom, I proposed a punny (pun intended) hook. --Una Smith (talk) 23:28, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you adopt me because I still need lots of help. Thanks! RuneScape Adventure ^Sign! 02:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt action to the nomination. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:50, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem -it was my pleasure :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh great one, could you maybe add the semi-protection-small template t the Moon landing conspiracy theories page? I semi-protected the page itself for a month, but have been timed out on adding to the template to the page proper each of the 20 or so times I've tried today. At this point, I think maybe the time has come to admit that that page doesn't like me. Maybe you can talk it into making some changes where I've been unable to. John Carter (talk) 19:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Easy-peasy. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just list a time for the podcast on this page and we'll get a group together! Awadewit (talk) 02:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This will be a little tricky. How long do we need? I need to create some time as wikipedia is encyclopedia non grata in our household :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:50, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably about 2 hours. Awadewit (talk) 16:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it'd have to be around 11PM Sydney time at the earliest. It is summertime here so as I write this it is 6.15 am. Maybe tonight? Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might be hard to get enough people that quickly and I would like to post an announcement at the RfC itself. Would the weekend work at all? that is usually a good time. Awadewit (talk) 19:32, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, late Saturday or Sunday night work for me too. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll post the time as 11 pm Sydney time. Awadewit (talk) 21:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably cancel, as it was hard to get people to sign up for that time. Perhaps there is a way to work out a time that is good for those in Australia and the US and the UK? :) Awadewit (talk) 09:00, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been in mortal combat for a while with eastern european keyboards and am about to retreat to vienna for some real zietgist (no i am not going to any jungian or freudian sights) and I have just dropped a small potential smell at the oz noticeboard - I do hope you might have some insights (I will gladly accept damnation or whatever - when on intercitytrains in europe i do feel quite immune from any possible internet issues as i have neither computer or iphone to connect with :) cheers SatuSuro 07:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was meant to ask your opinion about the issue at the noticeboard - but hey who cares - have to apologise for not keeping my word - was on a tour bus passing freuds favourite coffee shop - so much for firm resolves - wandered the art gallery in which nicholas roegs 'bad timing' (1980) started in - a film with far more fertile ground (imho) than the coffee shop site for issues of some analysis and therapy and 1980 soundtrack par excellence - cheers SatuSuro 20:03, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did see that one late in the evening I think. I was fatigued and it was one of those 'can of worms' moments that was going to suck energy out of me. I did mean to get back to it (if you only knew....) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologise - I understand fully - there are more important things in life than a bloody speciesist arguments from a dissolute west ozian in vienna :) SatuSuro 21:35, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fundamentally consider that the articles as they stand are fundamentally at odds with what wikipedia is about - and are fetish items similar to ball handling count (possessions) in AFL - however I am back struggling with the hungarian keybord again and considering where to eat - it can wait SatuSuro 16:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I recall finding nice ghoulash restaurants in Budapest :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 18:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yup great stuff was in one last night - moving across through transylvania in the next day or night or so - cheers SatuSuro 08:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My grandmother used to go on holidays to Sinaia - if you can, check out Peleş Castle and/or Pelişor. Brasov was okay too. I have roots in Romania so visited there one summer. Nice :)

Thanks for doing this, but I think point was to move myself from this award (where I am now there twice), to this award for doubles. I'm aware that this is all rather vain stuff, but I don't really like changing things relating to me so could you do it and change the image on my user talk page accordingly. Sorry to bother you over this trivial thing and there is really no hurry. Best wishes, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 15:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll fix it a bit later today, cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:30, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Entoloma rodwayi, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass 17:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

On October 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Boomerang (house), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 08:58, 17 October 2009 (UTC) 09:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Entoloma austroprunicolor, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC) 17:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Casliber/Archive 27,

I just wondered where we was up to with this article? Did it pass GA in your eyes? I do still agree with your suggestions, but I'm not really familliar with the Cornish language for example. :S --Jza84 |  Talk  20:01, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Holy crap! I had forgotten....(sound of rustling wiki-pages) now where was I...Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update, and award, AND the nudge about FAC! All my Christmases have come at once!

I still have loads on my to-do list yet! Thanks again, --Jza84 |  Talk  23:01, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dianella caerulea, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikipedia:Did you know 10:00, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

On October 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dianella tasmanica, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikipedia:Did you know 10:00, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I've been barely active at all recently, so I missed the whole fiasco over at ArbCom. Sorry to see you resign there, talk about making a big deal of something tiny. You would have had my support. Anyway, hope to see you over at WP:MED a bit more now. We should write an article sometime, let me know if you need any help with anything. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  20:43, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I'll ping you re an article sometime..Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of List of giant monster films at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Smartse (talk) 14:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jmabel has an id request on this. A. muscaria? Hesperian 23:53, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Sorry about inaction on cuneata front. I haven't forgottenhave remembered now about the map; and I want to chase down a couple of sources on conservation status. I'll get there eventually. Hesperian 00:17, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done and dusted. No problems, take your time to get it right. I am buffing Cockatoo...with some others on the more distant horizon...potato, Pied Currawong, Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoo...White-breasted Sea-eagle....and some more banksias! :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:21, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Iron chelate, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Bencherlite^Talk 07:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cas, whenever you have a moment, would you mind moving the Coral fungus article to Ramariaceae over the redirect? I'm doing some cleanup/expansion on Agaricales genera and noticed this taxon was being called by its common name for some reason. Thanks... Sasata (talk) 04:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

done...do you want to run for adminship any time soon? :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, sure, just as soon as I'm done my "list" :) Sasata (talk) 06:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? what list? Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The list of articles I want to write that just keeps growing... was at the bookstore tonight and bought "Field Guide to Trees of North America", an area I'm embarrassed to say I know little about. Did some poking around here and saw that many of the tree species articles need a lot of work... so the list grew. Also picked up a beautiful book on the Iridaceae family (Goldblatt & Mannin, 2008) that's part coffee table picture book/part scientific monograph, so now I have ammunition to work on that article. And so it goes. Sasata (talk) 07:11, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, tell me about it - I just bought a house with a huge garden, and this type of architecture which I have duly been reading about...Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am in deep trouble here. Help me. Please. I think I'm ok, and I'm fairly sure a good guy; step up. Ceoil (talk) 16:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm notifying you of my block as you were the one to implement the unban. If the full Arbitration Committee (or any others) need to be notified, please feel free to send out the appropriate messages or let me know to do so. Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I got the feeling it was heading this way. Yeah, I think posting something officially on an arbitration noticeboard is prudent given the unban was part of the ban appeal subcommittee. There should be a log page somewhere...I can't post on the noticeboard as I am not an arb anymore. I'd maybe ping Roger Davies, CHL or John Vandenberg. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you were due for one of these, so allow me the honor:

		The 200 DYK Medal
		Awarded to Casliber, as a "bicentennial" recognition of sustained high-quality content creation. Numerous Wikiprojects – not to mention citizens of the earth – benefit from your interesting contributions. Sasata (talk) 08:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Race ya to 300? Sasata (talk) 08:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're on. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 26, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Observations, systematical and geographical, on the herbarium collected by Professor Christian Smith, in the vicinity of the Congo, during the expedition to explore that river, under the command of Captain Tuckey, in the year 1816, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 20:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I think The Historian is ready for FAC. Let me know what you think. Awadewit (talk) 18:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A cursory look tells me it has polished up well since I last looked at it. Awadewit, go for it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:01, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is done. Awadewit (talk) 13:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

G'day mate,

Wikisource:Page:Makers of British botany.djvu/22 refers to a lost work of Aristotle entitled "θεωρία περὶ φυτῶν". In the page scan, that last omega has a circumflex, according to my understanding of what a circumflex is: an angle, as in â and ê. I went looking for a unicode code point for "lower case omega with circumflex", and I found one... but it looks like this: ῶ; i.e. the diacritic looks like a tilde. Yet Unicode is definitely calling it a circumflex. Any idea what's going on here?

Hesperian 13:00, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It should look more like a circumflex not a tilde. It is an elision of an omega and another vowel in the Greek dative genitive case. "Theory about of plants" the dative genitive has links to the Latin plural dative ending -orum. Need to find a link for you to read. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: If you look at the bottom of this page, the greek neuter noun telos, they've had the same problem as you and settled for a tilde...hmmm...I need to look around and find my lexicon later but I need to sleep now. (I was hoping to find something online but nothing came up) later. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Well I'll be...they are all right. I dug up my old Ancient Greek Accidence book and it is a tilde....anyway, it is a special character signifying the elision of the omega and some other letters. You're lucky...I did all this before coffee....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, as always. It's all Greek to me.... Hesperian 12:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for weighing in, I replied there. - Dank (push to talk) 19:37, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I read with interest your comment here. My estimate of the amount of time it takes any given "side" to prosecute an arbitration case is at least 7 full hours of totally unrewarding work. Even if you prosecute, the arbitration committee is capricious and incomponent, disconnected from any and all conflict disputes, and has little if any understanding of what regular-users, as opposed to superuser blessed winners of the mmorpg arbcom members have to go through in order to do something. Finally, if the other "side" of your dispute responds at any length and with any persistance, it has been demonstated that word-for-word continuation would be necessary, lest the "throw it down the stairs heaviest wins" methology that some arbitors have taken in the past result in a clear case being decimated by wikilawyering. If any of this sounds like nonsense, I was able to think of at least one glaring example of every negative thing I have said about the comittee.

Of course, anyone who comments like I just has instantly gets a cursed -10 ring of neverlevelingup, so the only people that do so are marginalized malcontents, who, as I suspect I will shortly, get responded to with "Why don't you run for arbcom, see how much time it takes." or "Join OTRS and you'll see how bad it is" and what not. That's why people don't step up to the plate, and why no one has proposed a procedure where stepping up to the plate isn't instantly squished. Hipocrite (talk) 20:01, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Considering workload etc, a full blown case is a very different thing to a well-circumscribed review of tool-use. We often discussed rulings and tried to be as fair as possible. I'd always try to measure sanctions against other sanctions perviously enacted to see that there is/was some consistency. Furthermore, the current crop have gone out of their way to try and see opposing POV - 16000 emails in 6 months was testimony to that. And they are also well aware of wikilawyering, believe me. Anyway, you have your view which differs from mine - conflict resolution and examination of user conduct is rarely pretty and no matter what you decide, someone is annoyed. Come one, think of it from the other end - we'd make a decision and get choruses of "too harsh" and "too lenient" in the one go. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:17, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just added 10k to the article and can keep going and going... Maybe we should start a to-do list on the talk page to focus efforts? Feel free to add a fact tag for anything in the article you think might get questioned at FAC, and I'll keep an eye out while I'm adding sources. Sasata (talk) 07:33, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, great work. Be good to get a high profile edible featured - will take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance your Carluccio (or other) book could be used to source the claims about the culinary desirability of the boletes in the "Related species" section? Sasata (talk) 22:57, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(snaps fingers) of course....later today :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:20, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another request: a google book search for "boletus edulis" & pliny turned up some interesting stuff like this and this. Might you be able to cobble up a couple of sentences from sources like these and put them in the article somewhere (where, I'm not sure); I'm thinking particularly about the Martial quote where's he's pissed that he got fed Suillus. I think it would be good to add some flavor; I'd do it myself but this is much more your area of expertise. Sasata (talk) 07:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, I have the other book. Will read it tonight. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:31, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Thanks for putting that in. How about a translation of the Latin quote? I'm not sure about the format for including translations of quotes, and whether a source has to be given for the translation. Also, I found this in one of my books (Roberts R. (2006). "The Fungal Pharmacy - Medicinal Mushroom of Western Canada" p.36):

Pliny recorded that "Glaucias thinks Boleti are good for the stomach." He also wrote that "these are good as a remedy in fluxes from the bowels which are called rheumatismi, and for the fleshy excrescences of the anus, which they diminish and in time remove; they remove freckles and blemishes on women's faces; a healing lotion is also made of them, as of lead, for sore eyes; soaked in water they are applied as a salve to foul ulcers and eruptions of the head and to bites inflicted by dogs".

Let me know if you come across anything like this in your travels (i.e. more specifically when and where Pliny said this), and maybe I can use it to introduce a section on medicinal properties. Sasata (talk) 15:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm on the topic of medicinal properties, I'm wondering about this: "...but later investigations in the United States did not support this.[70]" Does your book have a reference to support this claim? I haven't come across these US studies yet. Sasata (talk) 20:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your input and some publisher location-checking requested here. Sasata (talk) 09:37, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, Casliber! I've been working on the SENSOR-Pesticides article for some time now, and I've finally submitted it for peer review. I saw you listed on the peer review volunteers page, so I thought I'd ask you to take a look and the page and offer your edits, comments, and suggestions. Thank you! Mmagdalene722 (talk) 19:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Might have to wait 48 hours - I should really be doing my tax. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine - even if you can just find a minute to skim it over and offer some general suggestions, that would be wonderful. Good luck on your taxes! Mmagdalene722 (talk) 17:28, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber, I just wanted to thank you again for your help with the peer review. When my supervisor comes back from his honeymoon, I'll have him look at it, and then I'll submit it for GA consideration (but I'll try to find different reviewers for that :-). Thanks very much for your advice - I definitely appreciate it! MMagdalene722^{talk to me} 13:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. I'd be happy to take a look at it down the track too. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:55, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On October 31, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mycena nargan, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Halloween has arrived for DYK. Thanks! Victuallers (talk) 01:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On November 1, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of giant monster films, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you. Well done. Victuallers (talk) 01:28, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Casliber, thanks for the GA review. As you said, the articles on higher taxa of invertebrates are underdone on WP - which mirrors the distribution of zoologists, over 50% of whom focus on verbrates, a sub-phylum! I found Bryozoa one of the most interesting ones,as they seem to have taken colonial organisation further than any of the rest. 9 phyla done, dunno how many more I'll do - it all started as an effort to improve my basic zoology, in order to make more sense of some of the Cambrian explosion animals. --Philcha (talk) 07:40, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Casliber, many thanks for the barnstar. I've had some fun tweaking some of your medical colleagues - especially when another paleontogist and I moved Anus to Human anus, to save the blushes of innocent invertebrates, and then rippadded a new Anus with some paleo content to make it hard to undo the move :-)

I didn't get "Chapter 14 ..." - is this where you explain and I say "Doh!" --Philcha (talk) 13:22, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was just idly thinking of AA Milne and Winnie the Pooh chapter descriptions in this multichapter wiki saga....:) Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:23, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eeyore? --Philcha (grey furry ears) 17:51, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A request for comment that may interest you is currently in progress at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee 2. If you have already participated, then please disregard this notice and my apologies. Manning (talk) 08:20, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You received this message because you participated in the earlier ArbCom secret ballot RFC.

I looked on your facebook page manning and I know someone you know (one degree of separation - we-ell admittedly i don't know them that well) hehehe. Guess who. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:44, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you've seen this already, but just incase. Ceoil (talk) 23:10, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the good edits. I've gotten my head too deep in this lately and didn't spot some of the issues. Donlammers (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is always the way. We all miss stuff that others pick up and lead to plenty of "d'oh!" moments :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I neglected to thank you for the round of good edits leading to the GA satus. Among other things, it has taught me a lot about the styles preeferred here, which is good becauswe quite frankly I don't really have the time to read through all of the style articles at once. I will continue to hack away based on your final comments, and hopefully will eventually get this article in good enought condition for FAC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donlammers (talk • contribs) 01:43, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Franamax. I've done my bit, it's waiting for you now. By the time you see this, he should have some of his own work done. Thanks! Risker (talk) 01:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

<crossposted>

I have userfied and moved it to User:Virdi/CyanogenMod for you. Good luck improving it and getting the necessary sources. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you both, Casliber and Virdi, for retaining this article, with the hope that one day it can be reinstated into mainspace. It's a shame someone^[who?] had such a hard-on for the AfD, considering some of the fancruft junk on WP, but so be it. I'll watchlist the userfied version and see if I can improve it myself. IMO it's already full of useful, topical information (especially considering the latest flap), and I commend everyone working to keep it alive. — VoxLuna ☾ ^orbit_land   06:28, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chin up ;) Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Casliber - long time no see. As I consider you my Wikipedian mentor, I just wanted to get your comments on a rather ambitous article that I initiated on the Montara oil spill, currently very topical of course. Any comment on how to further refine this article would be most welcome. Cheers for now. Aareo (talk) 07:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ahaaa, interesting topic...Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:38, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed...it's a big one. Thanks for your suggestions. I need another favour with it. It seems bizzare, but the media reports that are saying that the well is "plugged" and "capped" are actually contradicting what the company is saying. It's a case of journalistic licence. The problem is that we have built this article up from media reports, and now if we want to tighten it up so it's inline with the facts it makes the article look inaccurate because it contradicts the media - who are the ones who seem to be factually wrong in this case. So anyway, someone reverted my tighter edits back to the media version. See the Montara oil spill talk page. Quite funny really. And any comment from you, on how I can handle this, would be much appreciated. Thanks again Casliber.Aareo (talk) 09:26, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, teeing up sources etc. can be tricky. Will try to take a look. The best way often is to say X source said X and Y said Y... Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:35, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have been sorting out the sources issue. It also got on the main pages news - which seemed to increase editing activity substantially (for the better generally). Actually tickled pink to see the article getting a high profile. Aareo (talk) 21:28, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, some impressive viewing stats! Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh, I think the issue has yet to be fully played out in the media: the impact on Indonesian fishers is still being sorted - doesn't look good. Also very interesting because of the way Australia asserts its' border in the north west region on local Indo fishers.Aareo (talk) 22:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is shaping up nicely BTW...Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On November 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hebeloma aminophilum, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Well done .... thx from the wiki and Victuallers (talk) 13:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've recently initiated an informal WikiProject which will, in theory, help to support the Wikipedia community and its volunteers. I'm looking for a few people to help me get it off the ground, so feel free to join up! Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:03, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think yours is broken. I'm just sayin'. Lara 02:24, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your input to The Beatles at FAC! With the current shortage of reviews I was starting to wonder if it would fall off the bottom of the list, but with Graham's vote of support things took off, and you were then instrumental in pinging other reviewers to get involved, including Wesley and Indopug and perhaps also Doc. With your supporting vote in place, and Doc's phenomenal impact on proceedings, things got a lot better! Many thanks—it's great to see this article regain its featured status, and the actions you took were key in achieving that. PL290 (talk) 13:44, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean to semi-protect the article? There hasn't been any vandalism. Regards, Aaroncrick (talk) Review me! 22:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I've been musing on all BLPs where there has been any controversy in the media. Google picks up glitches pretty quickly (in minutes sometimes), and I have seen many cases of slow reverts of vandalism (i.e. has lain around for an hour or so). Thus I feel BLPs remain a subject anyone can edit......as long as they have an account-which means they take responsibility for their edits. If you strongly query this, I will unprotect, but I think my action is sound (I am not holding my breath for flagged revs, and we can easily unrpotect everything when it comes along). Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a past WP:FOUR awardee you may wish to comment at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Four Award.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:18, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom courtesy notice: You have received this notice because you particpated in some way on the Mattisse case or the associated clarification discussion.

A motion has recently been proposed to reopen the ArbCom case concerning Matisse. ArbCom is inviting editor comment on this proposed motion.

For the Arbitration Committee, Manning (talk) 04:00, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you have time - Hypomyces chrysospermus needs a little more sourcing before it's ready for DYK. Ucucha 14:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have worked on the deleted article Nisha Kataria, which was nixed for lack of notability (no sources), and request that you take a look and see if it can be returned to the article space. Thanks! Diderot's dreams (talk) 21:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was suggested to me that I get adopted... So I looked through the list, and saw that you are active in med discussion/editing. I have something of an abbrasive personality, at least to some on WP, and thought you might be interested in showing me the ropes. Neuromancer (talk) 00:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure - my free time is a bit haphazard at the moment but I will have a look and make some suggestions. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Neuromancer (talk) 21:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cas, just in time for the next ACE's, I've worked a bit on my uContribs thingy-doo. It has a little more sortability and linkability and I've collapsed the sections so people don't run into an incredible wall of text.

I've run one for you, it's at User:Franamax/Ucontribs-2009/Casliber, clocking in at a cool 675 MB of wikitext. Can you have a look-see at your leisure, spot-check for accuracy, find nit-picky things to cavil at, whatever you can do to pick it apart?

Oh yeah, and thanks for that other thing, but I already said I wouldn't spam around about it. Most appreciated though. :) Franamax (talk) 12:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, no problem (to both) :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you so RIGHTFULLY point out..

Anyone can contribute to the "Wendy James" discussion page on her Wiki.

Will they..?

They might.

However this would mean they have to be RESPONSIBLE for what they edit or contribute..

(In the past there has been a tendency for quick registering then never "contributing" again or sticking around to justify/explain their words...)

Just "registering" ONCE to edit a couple of sentences and disappearing FOREVER will weaken their "argument" with Wikipedia..

(when people click their name and get "Page Not Found" that would be considered very damning for them..huh?)

And more than likely any "edits" (removals more than likely) they made would simply be re-instated.

"You cannot remove a person's discussion contribution simply because you do not like what they say.."

That is one of THE most widely used reasons given for re-instating discussion contributions isn't it..?

And of course REGISTERING just once to write rude phrases would kill their "argument" stone cold dead..

and of course there are only about 4 people in Sydney,Australia would be currently reading my contributions to the "Wendy James" discussion page in late November 2009 anyway..

As I said on my (VERY ARTICULATE) contributions having to constantly alter the main "Wendy James" article to make it seem more positive is very much the Law Of Diminishing Returns for anyone attempting it currently...

Lead cannot be turned into Gold no matter how hard you try..

Editors are well aware they could be JEOPARDISING their hard earnt "Editoral" privileges..

(Ironically because of their position Editors very often have much more stringent rules about justifying an "edit" than an ordinary contributor and so are instructed to think very hard indeed about making that edit and reminded Wikipedia won't play "favourites" with their own staffers..)

A lot of hassle and frankly for them a genuine pain in the ass..so edits are generally only reserved as "last choice" actions nowadays..

(it can be very difficult for them to have to put back their "edits and then publically apologise to the contributor..which Wikipedia would request if their edit is considered by senior Wiki staff hasty or unjustified..so you can understand the "mine field" around such issues on both sides..huh?)

For the sake of protecting the public image of someone who won't help they get back those privileges if they lose them permanently..?

It would have to be a "fan" of amazing loyalty and very few artists have the stature to attract that from the general public..

They may well be sacrificing a long cherished and enjoyable position for just one silly "knee jerk" reaction..

Most Editors do not "edit" Wikipedia lightly and it is highly unlikely anyone just spent years becoming an editor just for a UK pop star's short term benefit..

Which of course she will never thank them for publicly anyway..

Is it..?

Of course there are "people" who would love to erase everything I have written..

And of course 100,000's of other comments across literally millions of Wiki "discussion" pages for various reasons..

BUT..

Rightfully or wrongly Wikipedia have declared "discussion" pages a "permission to speak freely" area..

(within fairly liberalised reason of course..and that is a very wide church so infringements are very very rare indeed.)

Even more now as the creators of Wikipedia are currently ACTIVELY SEEKING any and all feedback about future Wiki rules and regulations..

As I previously said to AVOID their concept joining the "Coulda Been The Next Google" casualties from the past 10 years..

(Once again I doubt the owners of a potentially billion dollar on line franchise will consider comments on a pop star they more than likely have never heard of to be top of their agenda in November 2009 either..)

Thanks again for your INPUT and very clear reminder of the registration and responsibly rules of Wiki.

(I suspect that it may ironically have frightened off "those who wish to edit invisibly and with no comeback to themselves"…)

I have of course no idea if this was your intention or if you are simply "encouraging" challenging debate to my comments..

Either way.

Helpful.

My contributions survive another day.

(I suspect the link to the Towers Of London "discussion" page with it's rowdy but truthful comments left alone may have stayed the Wiki's Removal Hand..Precedent is an incredibly powerful tool in online discussions and the incentive for Wikipedia's lawyers to dig out their own rule book..)

Thanks again.

Wendtrut (talk) 19:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...good morning to you too. I am not sure where we're going with this one. Maybe let's discuss this on Wendy James' talkpage? Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:56, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Already on the 'Wendy James" discussion page..

Asked a question..

As for "where is this leading?"...

I wondering why you posted your "contribution"..

And who is was aimed at..

General public telling them they can contribute too..?

Wendtrut (talk) 20:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look again. I answered there. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I replied and as for the "leading" part I was making the point (as I have done on the previous contributions) that editors who "edit" from impartialty as they are supposed to tend to be pretty RARE around the Wendy James wiki and this has DRIVEN the public away (either rightfully or wrongly) thus the WIKI only gets (rarer and rarer) "contributions" from the staffers of Wiki..

Not healthy for the it and has resulted in the current obviously STAGNANT nature of it..

That was where I was leading to..

and of course you can DELETE this little conversation between us from your personal Talk page if you want..

Wendtrut (talk) 20:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, twofold message - thanks for the reviews and work again on both English Cocker Spaniel and English Springer Spaniel. Now that that I've finished buttering you up, could I ask a favour? ;) I've recently expanded greatly Russian Spaniel from a few lines of stub text to what it is now - I figure it covers all the bases and am agonising over nominating it for GA or not. Reason is that I'm worried it'll fall afoul of the same problem that Alsatian Shepalute had - that is that there isn't a great deal of truly original sources (at least in this case, in English) and I've somewhat exhausted the sources that are available, so if any queries arose I probably wouldn't be able to deal with them.

Anyway, I'd appriciate it if you'd have a quick look and give me your opinion if its worth a try or not. I know there's a couple of books out there (good old Google Books!) that mention the Russian Spaniel so I might put off nomination until after I've had a chance to track down those through my library.

Thanks, Miyagawa (talk) 00:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. It does look meatier than the Shapalute article in that there is a more substantial history and recognition by some (??) minor kennel clubs. I am intrigued as to why it isn't recognised by the bigger ones. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Managed to track down why on both the US and UK Kennel Clubs, essentially it's down to generations of dogs bred in each country as well as minimum numbers in the US. Also the American club may find the Russian Spaniel ineligible as it states that dogs created from combinations of two breeds already registered with them - however I believe that multiple lines were used back during it's original conception, so if documentation can be gathered from the Russian clubs to prove this, once the 500 dogs mark is achieved the Russian Spaniel will be eligible for registration with the AKC. Miyagawa (talk) 21:52, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When Netmouse signed up for the Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron/Members he mentioned this page: Strategic Task Force on increasing reader contributions Sometimes blowback can be a positive thing.Ikip (talk) 05:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool - the more cross-communication the better :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Casliber, please run for arbcom again if you can stomach the thought of being back on that committee. Whatever division might have existed in the discussion that led you to resign, would be remedied by your standing for election again. I personally think you made a perfectly ok call, getting private info from a user and keeping it private while keeping an eye on things. Having just one arbitrator know about something is certainly preferable to having zero know about it. Anyway, you brought much-needed common sense to arbcom and it would help the project a lot if you could continue. 69.228.171.150 (talk) 06:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thx and duly noted - who are you anyway? (email if you like) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed Seth Kinman. Your edits look very good. Smallbones (talk) 21:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, nice work on the western tall-tales type discourse :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:12, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On November 15, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hypomyces chrysospermus, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 07:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the triple crown. Extremepro (talk) 10:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, no problem, it was a pleasure :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if, having freed yourself of arbcom, you'd be up for joining a different committee? I reckon WMAU will be involved in some pretty exciting stuff this coming year, and it'd be great to have more experienced, smart, good looking and sydney based representation. Having said that, I'd support a funny looking bird watcher (ha ha ha!) - seriously, I think you could help a great deal, and I'd love to second you for a spot on the committee :-) Privatemusings (talk) 00:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(facepalm) let me think about it...Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have written a short article on a species of Oak leafroller moth at Archips semiferanus and have submitted it for peer review here. My main reason for doing so is to see if someone who is more experienced in Biology articles thinks it might be a potential GA. Would you mind looking at it (it is fairly short)? Or if you are unable, could you please recommend someone who knows Biology articles and could review this? Thanks in advance, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your helpful comments - I will rearrange the sections per your suggestion and look for information on the cause of the outbreaks. The Walker you linked seems like the right candidate, and the Bibliography in his article even lists two works on the right kind of moths in the right year. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just made a comment there and after i made my comment your support dissapeared. It seems i might have deleted your comment, but don't know how i could have done this (i was editing in a different section). I would ordinarily just add your comment back in, but given my confusion, just letting you know in case you removed it or something hanky happened.Bali ultimate (talk) 13:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weird...a purging thing? Anyway, I can see it there now so all good. Casliber (talk · contribs) 18:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Selamat pagi Bali ultimate, whoever you are. Love the quotes on your page, and your work on Timor Timur. Ayo!

Istri saya adalah orang Indonesia. Kamu berbahasa Indonesia? Alastair Haines (talk) 19:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Iyah, gue berbicara. Saya tinggal di Jakarta 10 tahun darapida 1993-2003. Tapi bahasa saya kasar sekali, nggak resmi (belajar di jalan. Guru2 saya jadi premen, kupu-kupu malam, macam2 seperti itu. Dengan hormat bung.Bali ultimate (talk) 16:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cas, I'm flat-out atm getting a submission together, but in the course of doing it, I was consulting a source that just happened to address an article I've done some work on. Time being of the essence, when this sort of serendipity occurs, I drop quick notes into Wiki. However, in this case, I'm documenting something here at your talk, to avert potential flare-ups. Since what I encountered addresses feminist criticism of Islam, it is relevant at the Misogyny article, which would fall into a category of articles User:Sandstein would rather I left alone. Bully for him! Of course, individual users like S are entitled to their opinions, but in this case I am obviously unmoved by the case he failed to make at the time of his request. Out of courtesy, I've left a note at his page. I left an earlier note at his page mentioning I was declining his offer that I avoid contributing in places he'd prefer I didn't, but got no response. I assume he's either recognised his own error or lost interest, and so I won't be pursuing the matter with him into the future. It's so hard to know for sure though, when people don't actually engage in dialogue...

Anyway, please don't feel any need to get involved, I just want to be accountable for ensuring that someone is informed. I've still got very little time for Wiki over the next few weeks, and it will be Jainism, Manuscripts and Butterflies for a week or so after I get back, though, ultimately, I have a little outstanding work to do repairing other articles I maintain. LOL, I might try to time that for some period you are taking a Wiki break. ;)

PS I think it might be today I find out whether our baby is a girl or a boy. How exciting this is the first time! :) Alastair Haines (talk) 19:53, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck on the baby. Sounds like a hairy topic which might need some independent ruling on, to be clear..(the article not the baby) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:56, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. The notes I dropped at the article, like pretty much all the things I contribute, are not actually controversial themselves, canonically sourced material, that's all. But a controversial topic, yes. I doubt anyone will challenge my edits, though. The only potential conflict is that someone (S) previously expressed his opinion that he didn't want me contributing. People being people, he may want to attempt to enforce his opinion. It's really twilight zone stuff.

Yes, I agree an independent ruling might be needed, but only if he wants to pursue being adversarial, and then there's the question of getting a competent ruling. Copyright issues are specialist issues. Independent ruling might also imply independent of Wikipedia in this particular kind of issue.

I hope S will just let it all pass by so I can enjoy a bit of time with butterflies once RL work is done; but soon I'll have plenty of time should the ugly head of Wiki-politics be raised by person or persons yet to be revealed. I guess I'm really telling you in case smart people think of consulting someone (you) who might know something about what I might be thinking.

Anyway, much more than enough said already. I'm rather enjoying my research atm and got to get back to it. Alastair Haines (talk) 20:45, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cas, dear ... something has to be done by someone about this article, or it should go to FAR. It's so long that vandal fighting it is very difficult, it always takes on undue weight issues, and it relies on primary sources. It needs work ! If you can't get to it, I'll FAR it in a week or so, but it needs to be trimmed and to rely on solid reviews according to WP:MEDRS. I'm tired of watching it, since no one seems to care :) Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:22, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will see what I can do. These high-traffic articles are like sandcastles on the beach. Fascinating as well as frustrating... Give it two weeks and then proceed to FAR if we haven't addressed it by then. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:56, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've really lost patience with that article :) It takes minutes to pull up a diff just to check for vandalism. Causes and Treatment need to be urgently summarized to trim the article, so that other work can begin. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Navigational popups are really helpful for looking at diffs on a long article (you just have to hover over the "diff" link and it'll show you a preview of the amended text). –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Casliber. Please reconsider. Thanks. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:26, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know it's back up at FAC as you stated an intention to undertake a review.Fainites ^barleyscribs 08:42, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Because Jack Merridew's unban motion is approaching a year and there are suggested proposals in Ottava Rima restrictions case, I'm contacting all of Jack Meridew's mentor's about doing a formal unban review. I don't think that it is wise to include anything about JM in the OR restrictions case because it will take the focus off of the core issues in the case. I think a separate unban review is a better way to handle the various issues rather a RFC (which will be open ended), and better than going to AE where arbitrators don't have direct means to alter the restrictions. I already had contacted John and Moreschi, will contact Jack to get the ball rolling. I'll likely start a subpage on site for JM and his mentors to work on any new motions, then place the motions on an ArbCom page, allow time for comments, and move to arb voting. Hopefully we can get it wrapped up well before I leave the Committee at the end of December. FloNight♥♥♥♥ 19:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

okay. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Page for Jack and his mentors to work on the unban review and any new motions. FloNight♥♥♥♥ 22:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a friend who goes mushroom picking with his father evey year. I'll ask him about it. I also have an Encyclopedia of Mushrooms that I will take a look at to see what comes up. Get back to you as soon as I have anything worthwhile. Tiamut^talk 07:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks Tiamut :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For you to enjoy - I did! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I saw. Rather funny :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:36, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are pushing the policy boat out here, but all credit for the willingness to take useful action.[3]. Might even catch on.--Scott Mac (Doc) 23:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is still the encyclopedia that "Anyone can edit", just that "anyone" must have the guts to take responsibility for editing some of these. If this isn't a clear-cut no brainer of the usefulness of preemptive semiprotection, I don't know what is. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Philip R. Bjork, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip R. Bjork. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. December21st2012Freak ^{Happy Thanksgiving!} 16:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that another editor and I have been referencing this article per Google Books searches. Thank you. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A benefit of having talk-page stalkers? :) Sasata (talk) 17:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, all this while I was asleep. thx all. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Philip R. Bjork requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. DarkAudit (talk) 16:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that another editor and I have been referencing this article per Google Books searches. Thank you. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:43, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you get a chance, could you check the lead on Ode on a Grecian Urn? Thanks. It came up at FAC with various people wanting various changes, many causing problems for others. Ottava Rima (talk) 04:59, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking care of sprotecting escitalopram. The Sceptical Chymist (talk) 15:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May I say that I feel that this blocking was rather harsh. I believe that the IP was making good faith edits, albeit unreferenced edits. I have analysed what was the subject of a small sequence of edits and reverts; see here and I find the IPs edit to be largely erudite. Please review the current block. Snowman (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block? I didn't block but I take it you mean semiprotection. Okay, given that there are more eyes on it now, and that the part of the information that the IP was trying to add is added, I will unprotect. My interest is piqued now. Need to look up some facts myself, and maybe getting this to Good status is a way of getting to a steady state. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I meant semi-protection. Snowman (talk) 20:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided an update at User_talk:TimVickers#Escitalopram and you may wish to provide an update too. Snowman (talk) 22:01, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		WikiProject Vancouver
		You have been invited to participate in Operation Schadenfreude to restore the article Vancouver back to featured article status.

- Dear FA Team member, we could use your help if you're available. Mkdw^talk 06:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Made it! Many thanks for your review and copy-edits. I feel happier knowing someone with your qualifications has given it a good going over, (even if your copy of Sadock is out of date). Fainites ^barleyscribs 17:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Casliber, I thought I'd ask you about this since you're an admin. Someone noticed some strange GA "quick-passes" by LittleMissWikipoo (talk · contribs) in the last few hours. The passes are all 2-3 sentences in which she "dispenses with the checklist" and says that the article "cannot be bettered." The profile looks like it was created today. It kinda looks like a puppet account to me, but I'm still pretty new here. Any thoughts? MMagdalene722^{talk to me} 19:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

looks like others have noticed too :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.springerlink.com/content/f22r726063l50761/ Hesperian 10:44, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting - makes for some dry reading. Hadn't realised it was 10 populations out of 27 which have become extinct since 1996.. :( Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I should have read it before posting here, in which case I wouldn't have bothered posting here at all: it is as boring as bat shit. Hesperian 11:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]