User talk:Sphilbrick/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Economics of global warming

Hello,

I obviously disagree with the recent changes you have made to the article economics of global warming, where you have deleted some of my edits. I have responded to your criticisms of my edit on the article's talk page. Since you might not be in agreement with the arguments that I have made, I have put a "dubious" in-line tag after sentence (3):

(3) Population and economic growth are the most significant drivers of food demand.

In view of your complaint that I had not given a more precise citation for sentence (3), I have put in a reference that takes you directly to the html version of the Fisher et al source:

Fisher, B.S.; et al. (2007). ""3.2.1.6 Land-use change and land-use management." In [book chapter]: "Issues related to mitigation in the long term context." In [book]: "Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz et al. Eds.]"". Print version: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., and New York, N.Y., U.S.A.. This version: IPCC website. Retrieved 2010-03-18. {{cite web}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)

In my opinion, this link is unnecessary given the reference that I have already provided in the article. But of course, it does no harm adding in the new reference. Enescot (talk) 22:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for improving the link. Obviously, I view it differently. What might be acceptable sourcing for an academic paper is not, IMO, adequate here. When it is reasonably easy to bring someone right to the document, as opposed to a page where one can find it with a little careful digging, I think we owe it to our readers to make it easy.

As to the style, I find the outline style not in keeping with the style of the encyclopedia. My focus the next three weeks will be on basketball, so I won't much time to discuss until April, but at that time, I'll see if I can get other to weigh in on the style. While you may have added some good material and removed some questionable material, my impression is that the overall article has taken a step backward. I'd like to see the best of both, but I don't want to work on improving the article until there's a broader consensus about style. The article gets very little traffic, so I may have to poke a few of the usual suspects to get them to weigh in. I want to be careful to do it without running afoul of canvassing, and I think an RfC is overkill, so I want to wait until I can put together a plan before proceeding.

You obviously have knowledge and interest in the area, so I hope you will join me in improving the article.--SPhilbrickT 00:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Feedback forum

Thanks for the heads up. Basketball is not my thing, but the shoe will be on the other foot when the World Cup kicks off in the summer (depending on how much coverage it gets on the US networks)! – ukexpat (talk) 19:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I understand. While I have not become a soccer fan, my boss still plays and is a serious fan. He is worried how he will get his work done once world cup starts. The place where I sit when I am in my office is in the middle of our Latin America unit - during World Cup, the conference rooms (with TVs) get booked and the offices are close to vacant. One of my colleagues is as serious about soccer as I am about basketball and probably will be going.--SPhilbrickT 19:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

BTW thanks for the other comment on my talk page, much appreciated. – ukexpat (talk) 19:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm just being selfish. If you were to get disillusioned and stop helping at RFF, I don't think I could keep up :)--SPhilbrickT 19:34, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

2009–10 Connecticut Huskies women's basketball team

Just wanted to say that you did some outstanding work on this article. Well done Maple Leaf (talk) 19:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not done, but ironically, not able to catchup because I'm out of town - went to Final Four, and now visiting relatives. Will finish some of the loose ends when I get home. You've domne some nice work on many other teams, now just hope that some fans stumble across them and fill them out.--SPhilbrickT 15:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations on getting to go to the Final Four. What a great experience that must have been. No rush on the WNBA draft picks, but if you can do the UConn page, that would be appreciated. Hope you have a great weekend! Maple Leaf (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't quite sure how to fill out the table, but I looked at another one and figured it out, so I got it done. Thanks for the congrats, it has been a fun week.--SPhilbrickT 16:40, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Stuart G. Bugg and the debating.net ref

Hi,

I am questioning the ref for the debating win, I have been unsure about debating.net for some time and back in Feb 2010 took it to the Reliable sources Noticeboard (see here) unfortunately I did not get much help, only one comment from a non-involved editor which questioned its editorial policy.

I don't think it is appropriate for me to remove the cite during the AfD, but if the result is keep then I would change it back to {{citation Neeeded}} unless you wish to go back to the Reliable sources Noticeboard, in which case would leave it in till a consensus comes back from there.

Ta

Codf1977 (talk) 10:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I added a note to the Stuart G. Bugg talk page - I think it helps clarify the issue, but I'm not saying it ultimately resolves it - if the article survives, we have more to do. Thanks for pointing me to the discussion.--SPhilbrickT 11:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks that's fine, I agree pointless to look now. For the record it was me who tagged it {{citation Neeeded}} Codf1977 (talk) 13:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Lexington Illinois

Yes I have made several very small edits. So so, I spent several hours on extensive edits of several paragraphs, lots of footnotes, etc. However, when I pushed save page rather than appearing as usual. A sign poped up that said something like user unknown , unable to contact site. They are not in any of mu list of edits. I can reconstruct the paragraphs but am afraid they will again vanish. Elkmilok (talk) 02:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

External links within userboxes

I have begun a discussion of the use of external links in userboxes at Wikipedia talk:Userboxes#External links within userboxes. In that discussion I quote your comment at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:LightSpectra/Userboxes/CM, and include a link to your user page purely in order to identify you. I hope you don't object, and further hope that you will contribute to the discussion. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 15:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. I wasn't entirely happy with the link in that user box, but it occurs to me that there may be valid reasons for external links from a user box, so we shouldn't simply declare that they are forbidden. I think getting community input is the right step.--SPhilbrickT 16:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Finister2.
Message added 15:23, 5 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

╟─TreasuryTag►Captain-Regent─╢ 15:23, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

No, not argumentative at all—just plain wrong ;) No prob! ╟─TreasuryTag►cabinet─╢ 15:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Adminship question...

Have you ever considered going through the gauntlet that is RfA? If not, is there a specific reason? I have seen you about, and have generally been impressed with what I've seen!

If you would be interested, let me know - I'd then look in more detail through your contribs and see where we go from there!

If you would not be interested, then just let me know (it would be interesting in that case to see your reasons, but not necessary!)

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 14:26, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Kelly Faris

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Enough is enough

Give me one good reason why I shouldn't grant you rollback. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha, happy to be able to fail that request. I don't seek out vandal fighting (think flagged revisions will be effective) so haven't asked. But I do run into some vandalism in the course of monitoring my watchlist, so sure. (Thanks)--SPhilbrickT 09:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Just as I suspected! Watchlist vandal-fighting is the way to go. Much more relaxing. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:35, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Page creation

Hello, thanks a lot for the information. No, I didn't know about it and I will propose just proposed it in es.wikipedia. I think that the approach is original and right now I only see advantages. Best regards! --Poco a poco...¡adelante! 14:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

The stone started rolling down the hill, let's see how it goes. I will keep you in the loop :-) --Poco a poco...¡adelante! 15:38, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the promise to keep me in the loop. While I had only minimal involvement in the creation of the Article Wizard (it looked like it was in good hands, so I didn't intrude much), I'm very interested in the evolution of how articles are created. Early on, the concept of WP:Bold made a lot of sense. Today, I'd like to see a little more work done on articles outside of Google indexed main space before they go live. At the same time, I'd like the see the hurdle of Notability reduced, while making it harder for stubs to get in. I'm just starting to formulate my thoughts, but allowing anyone to create draft articles fits into my view.--SPhilbrickT 15:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Sphilbrick for the welcome

I noticed the many pages about how to contribute to wikipedia are not actually tactical details about making a page but rather rules and regulations about limiting content on a page. It seems you guys are overly swamped with too many people putting up crap which is why that orientation. Anyhoo, have been reading ton(nes) of stuff to see how i can add a simple pic to a page and every time i think i found the steps, instead of telling me how to do it, it goes on ad nauseam about types of pic you shouldn't use, and obtaining permissions etc. etc. - without actually telling you specifically how to put the blasted pic live up there. somewhere there has to be clear simple text explaining this, can you direct me please? Thank you Witiger (talk) 16:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the Welcome, and ready if you are

Thank you for the welcome. The article (here) should be ready to be moved. Thanks again. Kilo w (talk) 18:28, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:FEED

I am a bit tied up IRL at the moment so my participation on Wikipedia, particularly at WP:FEED may be severely limited for the next week or so. One other place where one can find hidden feedback/move to mainspace requests is WP:RM. – ukexpat (talk) 01:09, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. When you get less busy (if your life is anything like mine,that's mostly a joke), I don't think WP is performing adequately in terms of feedback, and I'd like to brainstorm to figure out how to improve it.SPhilbrickT 11:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome! Ready to move the page =)

Hi Sphilbrick,

Thank you for your welcome =) I just checked in to Wikipedia again today. Thank you for your help in moving this article (here). And I am sorry if I make a mistake in the Wiki Etiquette since I am very new here =).

Momotaro86 (talk) 13:21, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Review?

Hi Sphilbrick, If you have a moment, would you be kind enough to read this article and review it? Global Alliance of Affirming Apostolic Pentecostals I would be most appreciative.BroWCarey (talk) 16:21, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I will. I'm not in town, and leaving to head home shortly, so it won't be until this evening. Give me a gentle nudge if you don't hear from me by tomorrow.SPhilbrickT

Much appreciated! BroWCarey (talk) 16:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Cleaning up after moving an editors subpage to article space

{{adminhelp}}

I'm working on cleaning up Category:Requests to move a userspace draft

Occasionally, I find an article for which a move does seem appropriate.

Example: Nusantara Development Initiatives

However, I'd like to clean up after myself properly, and I'm not sure what to do about the redirect on the user subpage:

Example: User:Momotaro86/Nusantara Development Initiatives

I could:

1. Blank the page, and assume that will generate a request for deletion
2. Put a deletion request template on the page
3. Leave instructions for the editor to either blank it or add the right template
4. Do nothing
5. Something else

However, none of these (except the not very well-specified option 5) seem right.

What is the correct next step?

(I did read WP:MOVE, and perhaps the answer is there, but it didn't jump out at me.)

I'll leave the "adminhelp" in case there are other views, but I'd think {{db-r3}}, recently-created implausible redirect, would do fine. JohnCD (talk) 21:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response. I was hoping for something that didn't mean I'm creating work for sysops, but I'll go with this.--SPhilbrickT 21:41, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

However you do it, an admin has got to do the actual deletion, and R3s are quite easy - all that needs checking is that it's (a) recent and (b) implausible. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 21:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reviewing Global Alliance of Affirming Apostolic Pentecostals and cleaning it up. In re: Notability, I used a page that described another denomination as a guideline. They had no more sources than this article does. On the page List of Christian denominations they don't want any denomination listed that doesn't have a wikipedia page on it. This suggests to me that each denomination is considered notable. When dealing with this type of thing, sometimes the only sources for info on a denomination will be the denomination itself, especially if it isn't one of the larger, older ones. That's my take on it. What do you think? I appreciate your feedback.BroWCarey (talk) 22:16, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Just a warning that your first point is the subject of an essay: Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. The guidelines for inclusion of articles have evolved over time, and oftentimes older articles either got in with different standards, or maybe just haven't caught the attention of a editor. I personally do not feel that more references are needed, but my personal belief isn't helpful if someone else tags it and a consensus concurs that more references are needed. My experience tells me that some editors will propose this article for deletion on the basis that it fails notability.

I'm aware that it is sometimes hard to find coverage in the general press. I have assisted another editor in a similar situation, but I have to report that I failed, and the article was deleted.

Finding an article in a national or local newspaper will be very helpful. Pointing out that another article does not have one will go nowhere.--SPhilbrickT 22:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I understand. Thanks! BroWCarey (talk) 22:31, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I replied...

Hi, I provided some feedback to the proposals. That is a great idea and I hope it goes ahead - often the newcomers to Wikipedia can be really important :) Chevymontecarlo 16:33, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Create Article on Terrain Gallery

Hi. I am a fairly new editor and have been working on an article about the Terrain Gallery that is now ready to move to Wikipedia. This article was originally part of a larger article on Aesthetic Realism and it was recommended by the mediator who is working on a rewrite in progress that the Terrain Gallery be split out into a new article. It is now ready to be posted. I pasted {{move draft}} at the top of the page and am hoping that someone can assist me in getting it up. I also think a BLP template of some kind should be posted on the discussion page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:BLP_others since there are living people named throughout the article. Thank you. Trouver (talk) 20:24, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks--yes, the article name is Terrain Gallery. If you could move it I would really appreciate it, because I'm not that technically oriented. Trouver (talk) 20:57, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

In answer to your questions:

After moving please add categories. --OK I WILL DO I'm fine with your BLP observation, but not sure which template is best, so I'll ask you to add that yourself. --OK I WILL DO Many people search for their article after it is moved—please note, if you try to search for it using the search option, it always takes some time, a few hours to a day, for it to show up in search. --SPhilbrickT 20:56, 23 May 2010 (UTC) I moved User:Trouver/Terrain per your request.--SPhilbrickT 21:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Trouver" THANKS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trouver (talk • contribs) 21:10, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your speedy reply. I have to go out of the house now but will finish the categories tonight, and also check out the "Did you Know?" and complete. Thanks for everything.Trouver (talk) 21:37, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

I went to WP help desk and found you had answered someone else's question about creating a new article, so I decided to write to you directly. My request would not be on your log because the first time I made it was just minutes before you answered. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trouver (talk • contribs) 02:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Re DYK: I think I have a good hook for this article. Could you nominate it? let me know if I should do anything. The hook I suggest is: DYT = that one of the first art galleries to exhibit photographs as fine art was the Terrain Gallery in NYC? Thanks Trouver (talk) 20:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

That's a good one. I had scanned the article and missed it. I'll be happy to nominate it. However, I am in NY at the moment, and would prefer to do it from my computer at home. Should be able to do it tomorrow evening. (You need do nothing at the moment, I'll do the nomination and monitor it - in many cases the reviewers ask some questions, if I cannot answer them, I'll come to you.)SPhilbrickT 21:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Re:Indexing question

The indexing is incremental, but the index on the search nodes is updated only once a day (early GMT). Thus, although the indexer caught up late yesterday, the changes got propagated to search nodes only today. I haven't extensively tested it, but it looks fine to me now. In any case, thanks for reporting! --rainman (talk) 09:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Providing a second opinion on the notability of an article

Hello Sphilbrick. If you could provide a second opinion on the notability of the article [User:Hamidapharma1/Botanical Wisdom|here] and reply on its [entry] on the Feedback Forum it would be great. I am still unsure with the criteria with the notability of new articles so if you could help me out that would be great, thanks! Chevymontecarlo 19:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Done.--SPhilbrickT 19:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you :) Chevymontecarlo 19:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

History of rugby union matches between Munster and New Zealand

Hi, thanks for reviewing my DYK nom. If you want to have a look at it again, I've trimmed down the hook and added a note. cheers GainLine ♠ _♥ 09:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I want to emphasize that I'm not an experienced DYK reviewer; I'm following the "propose one, review one" suggestion, and I've only proposed three. You trimmed down the original, but my character counter says 202. The Alt 1 is shorter, but grammatically, it isn't as clear as it should be what "it" refers to to. I found I could tweak the original and get it to 199. My suggestion is that if you find Alt 2 acceptable, you tweak the original to match Alt 2, I'll remove Alt 2, strike my comments and replace with a more definitive - "everything looks fine". Does that work? --SPhilbrickT 10:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Thats okay, I should probably review more myself! I actually prefer ALT2 and I'd be happy to go with that if you are? GainLine ♠ _♥ 11:07, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm very leery of editing other people's comments, but I'll take this as permission to do so.--SPhilbrickT 11:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

yeh no bother, thanks for the quick review!GainLine ♠ _♥ 11:24, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

UAA

Thanks for the message. I don't know what an "ordinary violation" is, but my usual practice is to report all corpnames on the basis that they are a blatant violation of WP:CORPNAME and should be blocked immediately. Most admins who patrol UAA seem to agree with this approach (there are a couple of exceptions). If the blocked user wants to request a change of name, they canm request an unblock to do so. – ukexpat (talk) 16:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. Feels a little Bitey to me, but I'll mull it over, in case I come up with a different approach.--SPhilbrickT 16:32, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I have slightly amended my comments at the CC Probation RfC

Hi. You endorsed my original comments, so I am advising you that I have amended them after a discussion on my talkpage. You may wish to consider your endorsement. Cheers, LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:51, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

FEED

Hi,

As you've noticed, I've managed to enlist a bit of help, to clear down FEED.

Further to the discussions on the talk page, the immediate idea is to try and ensure all the outstanding requests receive feedback.

Older ones, I am moving to the archive - only if they have received feedback, and appear 'done' as far as it goes. I am also telling each user on their talks that the feedback has been archived, etc. e.g. [1]

Some of the people helping have made mistakes, yes, but I think we're tracking those. It's great we're getting help.

Some of them are in IRC chat, discussing it; you could join with this if you wanted.

I'm absolutely not trying to step on toes; just trying to clear down the page, with a view to improving the process. Please see my comments and those of others on Wikipedia talk:Requests for feedback.

Do let me know if there are any problems. I really appreciate the good stuff you do in FEED, and I hope we can make the system better. If I am doing anything wrong, please let me know. Best,  Chzz  ►  21:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Xtcy3's talk page.
Message added 04:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Ecstacy ^Xtcy3 04:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Terrain Gallery

Hello! Your submission of Terrain Gallery 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! Yoninah (talk) 22:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I just went through the whole article, copyediting, reorganizing and cleaning it up. You do not need to quote the material in the references, just cite it. Often the explanatory note was exactly the same text as in the article! Now the only thing missing in the references are page numbers for articles in Art News, The Village Voice, and The New York Times which cannot be accessed on the computer.

Regarding the DYK nomination, the hook is very standard stuff for such an avant-garde gallery. Could you please suggest one or two different hooks which mention Aesthetic Realism or other philosophies which the Terrain endorses? Thank you, Yoninah (talk) 08:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

As nominator, I don't think I should be declaring that a DYK is good to go, but as you wrote the Alt hook, you might not be in a position to approve your own hook. I think we reached a great solution, with a vastly improved article and a good hook, I'd hate to stall here because others glance at this one and think it is being handled. I suggest that if you feel the article is OK, and two editors have endorsed the Alt hook, that you can go ahead and mark this approved. Does that make sense?--SPhilbrickT 15:27, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying here. The DYK reviewers often work together with the nominators to write the best hook; often we point out discrepancies or "tweak" the hooks to arrive at the best language. As I saw that you weren't coming up with a catchy hook, I suggested one, you approved it, and now it's approved and good to go! Yoninah (talk) 19:31, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks For The Notice!

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Doc Quintana's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Doc Quintana (talk) 19:35, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Cheers for the message

Hi there. I caught your message on my talk page - thank you.

I'm much less clear than I used to be on the definition, as regards the Football Wikiproject guidelines on which leagues are professional and which are not - that and, because I haven't been active in football topics for a long while, I'm not sure which are generally accepted to be included and which are not. However, the Somalian league is not listed amongst the leagues here as being fully professional, and therefore those who have played merely in the Somalian leagues are probably not automatically notable unless they have played elsewhere.

All the best. Bobo. 19:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at JohnCD's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JohnCD (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Reply

Hello! I left you a message at my talkpage. I feel bad for reverting your edit, even if accidentally, have a cookie: (::) Captain n00dle\^Talk 20:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I left another reply on my talkpage, just FYI Captain n00dle\^Talk 22:10, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Morning!

I added another bullet point to {{MovedtoMainspace}} about "adding links to your new article" and linked WP:Orphan. Just getting a third opinion that it's okay ^_^ Regards, Captain n00dle\^Talk 09:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Responded at your talk page.--SPhilbrickT 10:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Done! =D Captain n00dle\^Talk 11:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

{{MovedtoMainspace|cats=true}} {{MovedtoMainspace|cats=true}}

{{MovedtoMainspace|cats=[[:Category:Caprimulgidae]]}} {{MovedtoMainspace|cats=[[:Category:Caprimulgidae]]}}

Thanks, they both look good. Now if someone can just create a decent article so we can test them out!--SPhilbrickT 20:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

You have new messages (last change).

—fetch·comms 19:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Chzz and I are on IRC in #wikipedia-en-afc, discussing how best to merge {{move draft}} with WP:AfC--perhaps you could drop in for a bit? It's on freenode, if you have an IRC client, you can use this or if you don't, this. Thanks! —fetch·comms 20:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Terrain Gallery

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Help with my Hosa Tech page

Hi Shilbrick. Can you give me an example of how to reference? If I could just copy code from one article to my article, that would be most helpful. I did read some ways to citate, and included some reference tags in my article, but this must not have been 100% correct. I also took out some of the promotional wording and made it more generic. If I citate properly, will this be ready to publish? Thanks! Jmlnarik01 (talk) 15:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Will do.--SPhilbrickT 15:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Tried it, Couldn't Get It To Work :(

I ran through all the steps you provided, but it is displaying an error, that I can't seem to fix. Can you take a look and help me out, please. I would like to cite all the references in the external section so I can have this published for Hosa Tech today. If you could help me to have this done, I would be eternally grateful!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmlnarik01 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Hosa Tech References

Woo-hoo! I did it, and it makes sense. Thanks for your input and guiding me along!! I would love to have this moved. Do I need to put in another move request, or are you able to move it for me?

Thanks Shilbrick! Jmlnarik01 (talk) 01:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I will move it, but I warn you that many will view it as in violation of WP:PROMOTION. Make sure you make a copy of it someone somewhere, so if it gets deleted, you will still have it, if you want to discuss how to make sure it is acceptable. or maybe I'm wrong and it will be fine. --SPhilbrickT 01:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

You have new messages

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Chzz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:chzz/tb}} template.    File:Ico specie.png

 Chzz  ►  16:23, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Can I ask you a slightly off-topic question?

May I ask where you got the idea from your username from? it's just something I've been wondering about for a while. It's a bit unusual, but I guess when you look at usernames like Excirial and Chzz, or even my own username, it isn't so unusual. Not that there's nothing bad with unusual usernames. Chevymontecarlo 18:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

It's quite boring. My name is Stephen Philbrick. I go by "Phil" on online forums if I can get that name, but I was too late for that here. So I picked my first initial and last name. Like I said, boring. --SPhilbrickT 18:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I can cope with boring. I just got my username because I liked the car a bit. Chevymontecarlo 18:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I have a bad habit of thinking of you and ukexpat as my two UK go-to guys, then I remember what the "expat" in UKEXPATR means. For some reason, I think I saw that he knows little about cars.--SPhilbrickT 18:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Surprisingly, perhaps, "Phil" is possibly approaching usurpable; see SUL - last I can see is Nov '09 on FR. If you were interested in getting that name, it could be worth a try.  Chzz  ►  19:07, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I am interested. --SPhilbrickT 19:33, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

You may be able to ask (at wp:CHU/U) but you would never be able to TOTALLY get it on every WMF wiki (it would never be a fully unified account) because the account Phil on frWiki, frWiktionary and huWiki just have too many edits. It is possible those edits will also stop you from usurping here, but it doesn't hurt to ask. James (T C) 23:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)