User talk:Happy-melon/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Welcome!

Hello, Happy-melon/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  The Neokid talk 12:13, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Instant Runoff Voting

Thanks for pointing that out to me; I just thought it didn't seem to fit. There also seems to be a lot of cases where i.e. and e.g. could be used interchangeably, which is probably why in a more "formal" document like an encyclopedia, neither should be used and we should just type out the whole phrase. =] Peyna 19:48, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup resources

Creating Cleanup resources, which redirected to Wikipedia:Cleanup resources, was inappropriate. Per Wikipedia:Avoid self-references, pages in the article namespace must not redirect to the Wikipedia: namespace. The encyclopedia must be self-contained.--Srleffler 11:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Polarization

I removed the context tag you put on polarization. I can't see what you had in mind. Please leave a note on the talk page there if there's something I'm missing.--Srleffler 11:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, considering the text you put on my talk page, someone knowledgeable in the subject would immediately think of polarization. It's the most obvious distinction between electromagnetic waves and water or sound waves, which depends on the 3-dimensional (vector) nature of the EM wave. I understand your point, though, and you're right: the introduction fails to say with precision what polarization is. I'll see if I can remedy that when I have more time. Regarding the tone tag, was it that you felt the article was too technical, or did you have some other concern?--Srleffler 14:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello

{{Smile}}

Bhadani has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

--Bhadani 14:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Mythbusters 4

Mythbusters, at least in my region, is aired on the Discovery Channel. New episodes are aired on Wednesdays at 9:00 PM Pacific time with reruns being aired at various times during the week. If you have any other questions, just check out there main site at: http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/mythbusters.html --Winter04 01:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

List of cocktails

Hello. I responded to your very good questions at Talk:List of cocktails#Layout/style and also at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cocktails/Style/Measurements. I'd love your input, especially about the measurements. --Willscrlt 00:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Cocktails

Hello. As a person interested in WikiProject Cocktails, you may be interested to know that a name change is being considered from Cocktails to Mixed Drinks. Please add your opinions to the discussion and vote. Also, check out the recent changes to the WikiProject area. Consider becoming an active Participant. Thanks! --Willscrlt 08:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

Thanks for starting the infobox. Since it's not really your cup of tea, I went ahead and created the first draft of the infobox template[1] and left an explanation. I'm still working on it, and tags are subject to change, plus we need to move it to real template space, before it goes live, so please don't start slapping it up on pages yet. You certainly can (and probably should) experiment with it in your sandbox if you like. Everyone involved should put it through a few more samples before anyone decides it is finished. As for me, I'm off to bed now. Thank goodness today is a holiday in the U.S. :-) Bye for now. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 15:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

It startled me to see Snakebite (beer cocktail) was already infobox tagged. I thought I was posting tags in my sleep now! :-) How do you like? I just finished debugging it (I think). It's ready for prime time, I think. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 16:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Great job on adding all those infoboxes. I love it! :-) I also left you two or three comments[2] on the talk page. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 02:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The First Mixed Drinks WikiProject Barnstar

The WikiProject Mixed Drinks Barnstar is hereby award by Willscrlt to Happy-melon for his ongoing dedication and participation with our WikiProject and tireless tagging of articles with infoboxes. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 14:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Several weeks ago, I created this award specifically with you in mind as its first recipient. I waited a while to see if your interest was short-term, or long, and I see now that you are an incredibly diligent hard worker. So, I just want you to know how much I appreciate all your efforts (grunt work as you call it), and also to know that it has not gone unnoticed. It thrills me to see the daily list of new WPMIXInfoboxes that appear in my watchlist. It may seem like a little thing, but it really means a lot to me, and to the overall good of the WikiProject.

I don't mean to ignore your other contributions, either. You edit boldly, speak up when you see things that need to be done, and are an all-around great asset to have on our WikiProject. I would like to encourage you to join the two related bartending projects (one at WikiBooks and one I hope will eventually help coordinate between the two projects).

WikiBooks is a very different critter than Wikipedia. Yes, they both use MediaWiki software, but the focus is very different. I'm sure to run into some resistance from the status quo for my Wikipedian ways. It's hard to break Wikipedia habits and go with the different WikiBooks flow. WikiBooks is essentially a collection of text books (like for use in a classroom). In our particular case, it's a Bartender's Guide. So, forget everything about what Wikipedia is not when you are there, because that's, to some degree, what WikiBooks is. But not exactly. It's a little hard to describe, and I'm still mentally adjusting (though I've been an editor there for nearly as long as on Wikipedia, though much, much less active). Another difference is that linking is discouraged. The entire contents of the text book should be found in a fairly sequential order and without having to jump around between articles. You know, like when you read a book.

I feel that WikiBooks has been given the bad end of the stick for a long time when it comes to mixed drink articles. Anything that was determined was not Wikipedia-quality, has been dumped into WikiBooks through the transwiki process (which I still haven't figured out) that somehow keeps the edit histories intact for GFDL compliance. Essentially, it moves the article between websites. Anyway, as a result of that process, the Bartending Guide is in a much worse mess than the List of cocktails was when I started working on it. Partly that is the nature of the book format, but it's also a lot to do with being Wikipedia's dumping ground.

I think that parallel cleanup would be beneficial to both sites. I'm also a little scared of alienating the existing editors over there or of pissing them off with my bold new ideas. I think that it could be very beneficial, however, because it would help standardize information on both sides, and we could work together instead of at odds with each other. If this sounds interesting to you, please let me know. Better yet, sign up as an Active Participant there, too.

Congratulations again on receiving the first Mixed Drinks WikiProject Barnstar ever awarded. :-)

--Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 14:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Big discussions

Hi. Philvarner and I have various thoughts on how to restructure the entire mixed drinks and bartending section of Wikipedia, and that also squarely ties in with WikiBooks. Some of these are pretty sweeping changes, and as one of the most active WikiProject Participants, your input is really important. Please visit the Restructure Section to read, discuss, and hopefully help plan these important changes. Thank you. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 11:21, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Requesting article on Pegu

I went to the Mixed Drinks WikiProject page but didn't see a good place to request an article. You seem very active in this area. I was hoping to see an article on my favortie cockatil the Pegu. it's considered a vinatge cocktail but is becoming pretty popular again where I live (Hollywood, CA). I'd be happy to help expand it once created. thanks. Lisapollison 03:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for creating the article and infobox. I'm working on the article now. FYI, wouldn't a Pegu be considered part of the Sour family of drinks? I just saw the page on sours and now realize that maybe the Pegu should go there instead of having its own page. You would be the better judge. Lisapollison 03:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Requesting data on "Down Low" Cocktail

I got the recipe for the drink from a local Boston periodical called the Weekly Dig. A recent issue listed a series of interesting cocktails that I thought might make good contributions because they aren't commonly found in bar guides. [3] Hotspur23 22:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi there!

I just dropped by your talk page to let you know that I'm still alive and well. I also wanted to thank you for the greeting on my talk page. It is great to see that you are keeping the Project alive. I was worried about it, but I see it is in good hands. That makes be very happy. Thank you so much! Please keep in touch by e-mail if you need to reach me. Take care! --Willscrlt (Talk) 11:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Sea breeze (cocktail)

I've nominated Sea breeze (cocktail), an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Sea breeze (cocktail) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sea breeze (cocktail) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Sea breeze (cocktail) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Ravenclaw-bg.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ravenclaw-bg.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Gryffindor-bg.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Gryffindor-bg.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Slytherin-bg.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Slytherin-bg.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:26, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Hufflepuff-bg.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hufflepuff-bg.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Stadium dive.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Stadium dive.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --ST47Talk·Desk 20:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Harry's Legend

You didn't create a deletion page for Harry's Legend, so I will have to remove the deletion template. Come back when you create a deletion page.

By the way, I will vote against any request to delete the article. When popular websites like Something Awful profile the game, you know that it is notable. WhisperToMe 20:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Snape and past-tense writing

You might want to visit Wikipedia: Writing About Fiction, wherein it addresses how film and literature articles address points of plot in present tense. If you have questions about this, you can visit the Wikifilm or Harry Potter wikiproject for futher details. Keep on truckin'! - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 01:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to hold off on doing that major re-write, Hap, as I am pretty sure about writing in the present tense here. Give me a day to fidn the correct directive on this; frankly, that was one of the first things I learned when writing in Wikipedia, and as most other articles utilize that format as well, I've never felt the need to challenge it.

As for the reverts which removed some of your (and another contributor's) edits, understand that I tend to remove those things which Wikipedia or consensus doesn't allow us to include. Granted, when i am dealing with a large number of cruft edits, or bad grammar or factually incorrect information, I will try to preserve the one or two edits within , and sometimes I miss them. In the case of the edit yous described (which you might find easier to hyperlink in the future - as me how, if you are unclear how to do so), I believe I stated in te edit summary that the edit was to remove "cruft-eating, grammar and brevity edit". It also directly addressed the issues of verb-tense. I don't really find fault with it, but again, I might have missed something.

As I said, I will get back to you before the end of the day with a more accurate location of the advisement to write in present tense. As I wouldn't want to give the impression of offending you by reverting yoru edits back to present tense, I would ask that you allow me that time to do so. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:00, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Inspired by your rewrite of Severus Snape

Hi. Inspired by your rewrite of Severus Snape some days ago, I decided to try my hand at a rewrite of Igor Karkaroff, going from this version to this. I've made a small correction after that as well. If you have a few minutes, I would appreciate your opinion on the results; it is my first attempt at major rewriting for fictional characters. Magidin 17:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, and also for the heads-up on the punctuation-within-quotations issue. I appreciate them both. And yes, I'm not a brit. (-: Magidin 02:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi

I saw your message your sent me, and I wanted to know something. How long does it take for me to be inactive for my name to be moved to the inactive list? Thanks. BrianY 16:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Not offended at all, just wondering. BrianY 19:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Spells in Harry Potter

Just wanted to drop by to say thanks for your great contributions both in the AfD and in the article itself; references like the BBC ones you're adding are exactly what we need to keep this article. Thanks again! GlassCobra 19:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, I'm not too familiar with the differences in the new FICT guidelines, aside from a larger focus on secondary sources. What's changed about them? GlassCobra 19:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I was afraid of. This is definitely going to make things hard for people in fiction projects, like ours. Ugh. GlassCobra 22:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Emma Watson

Hi there, I just saw your input at WP:Potter about Emma Watson. As the main editor of the article, I think it is not a bad idea at all, and I saw you already did the correct thing, namely putting it up on WP:BIOPR. Use it as a base for a real thorough spit-and-polish-action, and then FAC will be realistic. I'll stay tuned in any case. —Onomatopoeia 10:50, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		You deserve to be recognized for the work you've done recently to improve the HP WikiProject participants section. It is appreciated. Thanks! Faithlessthewonderboy 05:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I saw that, which was actually why I decided to recognize your contributions. It seemed like pretty harsh treatment for someone who was just trying to improve the Wikiproject. We should be encouraging the editors who do that sort of "behind the scenes" work, not tearing them down. That's the sort of stuff that improves the encyclopedia for all of us, but few actually bother doing. Thanks again! Faithlessthewonderboy 20:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Suggested Reading

I would hope you read WP:AGF. Your particular goading of dissenting editors and suggesting that they are positioning their arguments for last is insulting, to say the least. Just because someone disagrees with you on original research doesn't mean you have to belittle them. David Fuchs ^(talk) 14:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Parodies of Harry Potter

It would have been polite to assess consensus for a merge before doing it unilaterally. I hope you're going to clean up all the redirects that this created, and sort out the internal references you've broken in the process. Gordonofcartoon 19:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware it's called being bold. I feel the approach that best encourages progress is to do something proactively, then if anyone has disagreements, to discuss them properly in the awareness that the onus is on me to sort out any issues that arise, and/or be responsible for putting it back the way it was if consensus decides I was wrong. Asking for consensus before doing anything engenders bureacracy, which Wikipedia tries to avoid. The only thing that requires consensus before change is policy. I'll be delighted to take part in any talk-page discussions which crop up, and I have already ensured that the redirects and WPHP banners are appropriately updated. If there's anthing I've missed I will, of course, be anxious to put it right. Happy-melon 20:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware it's called being bold

True, but that needs to be tempered by thinking through what effects that might have. Main trouble is, List of Harry Potter parodies already exists. There are a helluva lot, and it was convenient to have both the list overview and some separate articles for the major ones (Trotter, Grotter, Wizard People, and Henry Potty and the Pet Rock) because merging the whole lot, in full detail, would make far too long an article. Gordonofcartoon 21:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course it does, and of course it did. I am aware of the existence of the list, my first thought was to merge them all in there. Having decided, as you note, that that would produce too long an article, I chose the title "Parodies of Harry Potter" as a suitable substitute. By redirecting the old articles to the individual sections of the new article, no readability is lost. One thing I have forgotten, which I will correct now, is to place a "see also List of Harry Potter parodies" on the new page. Henry Potty was overlooked in my search for parodies, or it would have been merged also. I will now hold for any comments from WP:HP, but if no objections arise I will merge that also, as well as complete the alteration of internal links. Happy-melon 21:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Wizard People, Dear Reader - First I'll say that I don't mind using this in a list of HP parodies. If you had initiated discussion about it, and if good material wasn't lost I likely would have sided with you. In situations like these policy usually errs on the side of caution, encouraging the use of templates like mergefrom and Mergeto in the respective articles before being bold. If no one comments or consensus can be reached you are free to go ahead, but making big sweeping changes before discussion takes place is more difficult to resolve because some of the involved parties may start off with a bad taste in their mouth. That said being bold is a good thing, there are just established methods set up to deal with a merge. It looks like a few users were discussing a re-naming on that article, so you may have wanted to involve them on such a large change, or at least left a note in the talk page explaining what you did and why you did it. Hewinsj 01:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The current situation is untenable. There is no point in an encyclopedia having two articles on exactly the same topic. There are only two solutions to this; either Parodies of Harry Potter is broken up and the specific titles go back to their own articles, or it is merged with List of Harry Potter parodies. I would prefer the latter scenario, if only because it would stop people constantly nominating the list for deletion. Serendi^podous 07:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Snape edits

As per this edit, I agree with you. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Help

I really like how your page is arranged and I was wondering if you could explain how you framed your userboxes and how you put color on your page. Thanks, Shmooshkums 19:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help and advice! Shmooshkums 17:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Special Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		In recognition of your really useful edits to Wikipedia, especially Harry Potter-related articles, I award you the Special Barnstar. Keep up the excellent work! Lradrama 09:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Harry Potter parodies

The issue is citation. Much of the material in the original texts is unsourced. Breaking the article into bits will leave the material unsourced. Keeping the article as one will demand that the information either get sourced or ditched. While the pages were on their own, nobody really cared that they were unsourced; now that they're together, that's more of an issue. I don't want the situation that existed before; until we know the result of the poll, the articles should be merged. Serendi^podous 21:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

About AfDs, ProDs, Magical beasts (Harry Potter) etc...

Hey Melon. I had tentatively placed the article Magical beasts (Harry Potter) on the ProD watch list on the HP Project page for two reasons: 1) It was asserted to be so at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Minor_Harry_Potter_beasts (right or wrong, the intent and trend is clear), and 2) the article has been tagged with Notability|fiction|date=August 2007 for a month now. I agree it is not truly a scheduled Proposed Deletion per se, perhaps it is a Pre-ProD or Pre-AfD. Anyway, lacking any other place to put notice of an article if this sort that is likely to be next in line for a full AfD due to notability, I felt putting something in the ProD list was better than nothing, and if the "View AfD" link turned from red to blue shortly then we would know that AfD had been activated. Anyway that was my motivation for putting it there - sort of an IAR thing for the greater good as it were. If you have a better idea on where to put HP Project articles that are under threat of possible AfD or ProD in the near future, by all means let's set it up. I am sure there are other Project articles that have Notability tags on them, but nobody knows yet, and they won't know until they are on AfD or ProD, and then it may be too late to fix. In any case I understand why you deleted it out, and i am OK with that, I just wanted you to understand why I put it up in the first place.

On a secondary side issue, I think limiting the recently closed AfD list to only 4 articles is going to be a major problem - we have been getting multiple articles per day on some days, and I think the HP community needs to see what articles have been deleted, redirected, merged, etc., along with the reasons and links to the AfD debates, perhaps for at least a month - or even more. I know that would clutter up the page, as HP AfD's are apparently low hanging fruit for deletionists. But perhaps a scroll bar can be used on both the current and recent AfD's as was done with the "Good Articles" section off to the right, which currently shows 12 items, some hidden under the scroll bar. Looks like an excellent way to tidy up the page in general. Anyway thanks for your attention. --T-dot ( ^Talk/contribs ) 15:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

impressed

Whoa. Cheers! — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 13:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The barnstar

I am not really an artist-feller, but please go ahead and use them how you see fit. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

That lovely star takes pride of place in my vanity closet :-). Which Harry Potter article do you think needs attention now? Serendi^podous 17:16, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

An Order of Merlin for you, too

	The Order of Merlin (Second class)
	The Order of Merlin, the WikiProject Harry Potter Barnstar, is awarded by Fbv65edel to Happy-melon for tireless efforts in revitalizing the WikiProject and progressing articles in a forward direction after the end of the series. His work on the Emma Watson article, especially throughout her FAC, has also been unwearying.

--Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 18:12, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

WAF

Thanks for your input! Incidentally, I agree with the tweaks you proposed. Good idea linking to WP:BETTER. The change in nomenclature from "topic" to "subject" was G.A.S' idea, and while I don't particularly favour eíther variant, I see your point. Maybe G.A.S should give his opinion about that.

On a related note: You forgot to sign, and you didn't close the italics, which I boldly took care of here. — Dorf⁠, was: AldeBaer 20:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Emma Watson

Re:this- please don't get discouraged. Fix up the article based on the feedback you got, and take another go at it. Raul654 21:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Haven't heard from you, so I just wanted to let you know that I've removed Emma Watson from my watchlist for now -- when you are ready to work on the article again, just let me know, and I'll add it back. Cheers, Melty girl 00:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

WAF rewrite

WikiThanks

Thanks for the offer and the support so far!

There is no cabal:) As Dorf⁠ said on my talk page, we will try update WP:WAF one step at a time; the first step will be to have the intro accepted. Unfortunately there is no formal draft — only the initial discussions on my talk page.

I believe that after the into is accepted we will rethink our strategy and continue from there; probably on my talk page? The most important part will be to agree on the draft each time before submitting it to WT:WAF for consideration.

The best way to help would be to stick around, and make suggestions where necessary.

Regards, G.A.S 15:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

What G.A.S said. We haven't really been cabalising since posting the proposal to WT:WAF. Wherever we're going to continue with the next step (e.g. G.A.S talk page, if he doesn't mind the clutter), one of us will drop a note at WT:WAF, so interested people like yourself can join in. Incidentally, I believe the second, "public" part of discussion of the intro rewording proves our approach right: Imagine we hadn't already had something presentable as a basis for the discussion. — Dorftrottel⁠, was: aldebaer 16:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

From now on, I will reply on my talk page. There is an early draft of the policies section on my talk page. I would prefer it as part of each sections' lead, Dorf prefer a section near the top. It is at least a good starting point for the sections per the skeleton. I.e. justify - no. I do not believe that guidelines need justification, if it is required, we likely missed the point. G.A.S 17:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Debate AfD

Hey Happy-melon. I see that Poetry reading got swept up into this mass nomination, and I think that was a mistake. (It is the target of the redirect Poetry Interpretation). Please take a look at my comment in the AfD, and see if you are willing to remove the AfD banner from the Poetry reading article or whatever step is needed to sort things out. EdJohnston 20:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Adopt me...OR ELSE!!!

I could really use some help with more wiki techniques. I know a LOT of HTML, and I would like to learn more! Please contact me (ASAP!!!)!

The Only Girl Who LOVES Zac Efron 00:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Latin

Your "About Me" section is written in Latin, yes? Where'd you learn how to write it so fluently? I would like to learn Latin fluently but, unfortunately, I possess no talent for languages (Other than this one) :-D Scarian^Talk 21:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

LoCE

What browser do you use? Lara❤Love 17:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

IE7, and I've found the 'problem'. Essentially you nested an HTML table inside a wikitable inside an HTML table, which probably works fine on Mozilla, and works fine on my widescreen laptop, but goes all funny on my 768x1024 lcd. I've made a modification which seems to fix display on both my screens - how does it look on yours? Happy‑melon 17:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks just the same. Although, it looked the same on both FF and IE7 for me before, but it may be a monitor or resolution issue. Either way, it looks good now, so that's all that matters. :) Thanks for tweaking it. Lara❤Love 04:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: signature and templates

Thanks, I've noticed this before and just didn't use my standard sig in templages. Thanks a lot for the fix, I am updating it now! -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  02:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Wicked

Just a quick note to say... Awesome work with Wicked's "popular culture" section. I've been staring at it for months, not daring to change anything in case I get screamed at by a 13-year old... What you've done is perfect! - Dafyd 21:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Give me a shout if you need a hand with anything...! - Dafyd 11:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought that the columns would be similar to the tables, but I was getting annoyed by Act II being vertically centred half-way down Act I. Doing it with the columns seems to align it vertically, so my zen sensor is better pleased... I'll take a look at the synopsis - I'm not convinced it will stay short, no matter what we do to it... it seems to grow almost on its own accord. - Dafyd 22:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Project-Improvement Barnstar
		For past, present, and ongoing efforts to improve the structure and flow of the League of Copy-editors Requests project and page. Unimaginative Username (talk) 22:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

LoCE difficulty

Any chance you can solve this problem? Cheers. – Scartol • Tok 19:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

LOCE Templates, A Small Question

Hi,

You seem to be the mastermind behind the nifty new requests system, so I thought I'd come to you with a question. Here's the scenario: in an attempt to clear out old requests/help reduce the backlog (little by little), I am moving directly to proofreading outdated requests that have managed to become copyedited through outside efforts (either through FAC, FAR, peer review, etc.). However, since I can't attach my name to work that I didn't actually do (the LOCEcopy template automatically inserts username, etc.), when moving, I have instead manually typed text into the "review updates" section to reflect the situation, rather than use the "copyedited by" template.

My question is this: does me not using the prescribed template have any adverse impact on some other part of the system, or is it ok for me to just type text into the review updates section?

Sorry for the long post, and thanks! --Malachirality (talk) 04:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments aren't showing up immediately

When I click "Add Comments on a request" and save it, the new comment doesn't show on that article's request sub-page. However, it shows on the main League request page, so I've learned to trust that it will. Still, it's disconcerting not to see one's comment even in the Preview window, much less ih the individual base page. Any chance that this can be fixed easily? Thanks, Unimaginative Username 11:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in the Content review workshop

Hello Happy-melon. I've noticed the excellent work that you and a few others have been doing recently to streamline and update processes at the LoCE, and the dedication you have shown to improving article quality. As a result I would like to invite you to participate in a workshop that is currently underway.

From the main page there: The Content review workshop is intended to evaluate the various Wikipedia processes that assess and improve content. It seeks to clarify means and methods, reduce procedural overhead, and better attune processes outside of the mainspace with improvements in the mainspace. In essence, we are looking to overhaul what needs to be overhauled in order to meet the challenges and demands most article-quality processes are facing given Wikipedia's rapid and continued expansion. Although the LoCE is not a review process, it is intimately involved with article quality, and we believe some of its more experienced and active members would be a valuable addition to the workshop (I have also issued this invitation to Unimaginative Username and Galena11).

If you are interested, please take a look at the workshop scope on the front page then feel free to just drop in on the talk page and join the discussions there: having already examined the Peer Review process, we are currently taking a straw-poll as to the next topic to discuss. The list of subjects is at the bottom of the talk page here, but your input anywhere would be very welcome ;)

All the best, EyeSerene^TALK 16:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Template:Copyedit progress/Base

How is this page supposed to work? I have added a total element but hope I 'm not breaking anything. Is it meant as a feed to Template:Copyedit progress. In which case I con't see how that happens. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Make my (birth)day?

I was looking over possible adopters, because I am a poor lost newbie. I saw you have a Wikimarkup userbox, and was filled with hope that you can help me comprehend this strange new language. I love to read and write, but am intimidated doing it in this format. Finally, I noticed that you are returning to the land of wiki on December 13...my birthday! It would be quite a fine gift to find that you had visited my usertalk page and said hello, and even nicer if you would take me as your protoge. SkyllaLaFey (talk) 04:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

San Marino Calcio & Gavin Donoghue copyedit

Hi, can you please do me a massive favour and copyedit San Marino Calcio & Gavin Donoghue, and say that you have on the requests they are both on the unclassified section, as i know that you are a very established copyeditor, i would be grateful if you would copyedit them, Thanks.Sunderland06 (talk) 17:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Template idea

Hi, welcome back! Hope your break was pleasant. Here's an idea... OK, I know nothing about template coding, but from seeing what you've done, this should be easy: A counter, similar to a page-hit counter on a web site, at the top of the Request page, the Project page, and possible other LoCE-related pages, displaying:

"Copy-editing by the League of Copy-Editors has helped xxxx (number) articles to become Featured Articles, and yyyy (number) articles to become Good Articles. If you, or someone you know, would be a good copy-editor, help out! (link to Join page).

Should be easy: Scrape the FA or GA status from an article, scrape for a LoCE tag. If present, compare and make sure that the GA/FA date is subsequent to the CE date (possibly within some specified limit, say, three months or six months or something). If yes, the counter moves up by one number. Might be good publicity for the League and encourage others to join, by showing that this is a Project that produces tangible results. Unimaginative Username (talk) 08:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to WikiProject Musical Theatre!

Thank you for adding your name to our project membership list! Our goal is to make Wikipedia the foremost compendium of musical theatre to be found on the internet: hope you're up to the challenge! As a project member, you might like to add the project membership userbox to your user page, and maybe introduce yourself on our talk page.

If you haven't done so already, please add our main project page to your watchlist and perhaps browse our page of useful templates. When you have a moment, please take some time to review the article structure for musicals, which, after months of collaboration, consensus has decided as the best structure for articles on musicals. If you're curious about where to start, we've gathered a few suggestions in the Project to do list and in our tasklist.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask on the project talk page or on my talk page. Again, welcome and happy editing!

—  MusicMaker5376 18:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Signature

I've noticed LOCE pages have a problem with it. Interestingly, the problem doesn't go away even if I change my sig to plain one, the text seems to be corrupted even afterwards. On the bright side, I have not seen this problem outside LOCE, so it is more likely that the unique design of those pages is the problem, not my sig.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Template CSD's

I deleted one for you, by way of CSD:G7, but, the rest, you're going to have to take to WP:TFD, instead of speedy deletion. There are only 2 speedy deletion criteria, for templates, and, they can be found here. If you need any help with the TFD process, feel free to ask me. SQL^{Query me!} 16:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank You from Skylla

Thank you for your adoption! It is nice to have a hand to hold in the wilderness. My apologies for taking a few days to get back to you. I am usually online every day or two, but my December workload has made me a weekend-only Wikipedian through the end of the month. (Yes, I am an American who actually spells through, NOT thru ...I am an endangered species.) I will spend the next few weeks browsing the projects link you gave me. I also was solicited by the League of Copy-Editors, which I see you are also involed with, and may take a peek at that. With any luck I will have found something that truly calls to me by the beginning of the new year. Last, but not least, I would appreciate some assistance with my userpage. I still have difficulty making pages do what I want. I put two userboxes and the link to my sandbox, and they are all lined up horizontally across my page. I wanted my adoptee box on top, my oops box below that, and my sandbox subpage link at the bottom. I know it is frowned upon to edit another person's page, but if you would feel comfortable fixing mine I could then see how it needs to look in edit mode to get the end result that I desired. If you would rather leave me an example (or a how-to explanation) on my talk page, that would be just as helpful. With deepest gratitude, SkyllaLaFey (talk) 20:20, 15 December 2007 (UTC) Ummm, where the hell did this dotted blue box come from?!? I think I will go buy 'HTML For Dummies' VERY soon!--Skylla —Preceding unsigned comment added by SkyllaLaFey (talk • contribs) 20:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Edit count

Is there a way to track my current total of edits? Do I just keep count of them my-own-damn-self? Or is there an automatic counter that I just have not found yet?
Meanwhile, off I go, on the quest to find an article that screams for my (limited) skills to help it. I will attempt to Be Bold , and will let you know when I find my pet project.SkyllaLaFey (talk) 04:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Your bot request

Hi Happy-melon I wanted to let you know that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MelonBot has been approved. Please visit the above link for more information. Thanks! BAGBot (talk) 17:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Holmes.sherlock

Hi. Yes, this text is automatically translated to Arabic. There is nothing nasty in the text. The text quotes Jimbo saying that "all editors should treat each other nicely" and similar things. the text mentions several of Wikipedia policies like AGF. I believe it to be translation of some page on Meta but I can't decide which page. (The text is very badly translated.) If you need any further help, don't hesitate to ask me. --Meno25 (talk) 18:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

Saw you were looking, I need major help. --User: Cfarinella —Preceding comment was added at 17:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

articlehistory

Replied on my page, to keep conversation in one place. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Can You Adopt Me Please?

I'd really appreciate it. A pyrate's life for me... (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

San Marino Calcio & Gavin Donoghue copyedit

Hi, can you please do me a massive favour and copyedit San Marino Calcio & Gavin Donoghue, and say that you have on the requests they are both on the unclassified section, as i know that you are a very established copyeditor, i would be grateful if you would copyedit them, also i am going to put gavin donoghue in for GA when the copyedit is done. Thanks.  Sunderland06  08:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

It has been cleaned-up and do you mean the reference, lead and NPOV tags. Also i have left some questions on the san marino calcio talk page. Thanks for copyediting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunderland06 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

LOCE

I nominated an article for FA. I plan to see how an LOCE editor marks it up before deciding if I can offer similar high quality work. Thank you. Archtransit (talk) 15:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Merging of Death Eater article into Dark wizards

Hi there, I posted a proposal of merging the Death Eater article into the Dark wizards one to make a strong, consolidated article. As you know, with the Notability issues, some people have suggested the merging of DE into the HP Universe article, but I think that the Universe article is already long, and some information about the DE could be lost. If placed within the Dark wizards article, I think that there will be no reason to get rid of any information at all, and, what is better, is that both articles together have info that makes each other a more complete topic. For example, some of the information about minor characters that are not covered in the Dark wizards (like Selwyn, Avery, Mulciber) is contained in the DE article. I also suggested this because, after all, all DE are Dark wizards.

I made this draft to give us an idea of how the article may look like. I would be interested in reading your opinion in the Talk page or in the WikiProject :) Lord Opeth (talk) 01:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Skylla's Article

At the risk of admitting to having lowbrow sensibilities, I must confess to being an Alice Cooper fan. I was reading the article on him and discovered that his new autobiography, Golf Monster, does not have an entry yet. I plan to purchase the book this week and attempt to write an article about it. When I begin to try laying it out in my sandbox I will let you know so that you can take a look. In the meanwhile, I will probably take a look around at other articles on rock musicians' biographies and autobiographies to get a "feel" for what works. SkyllaLaFey (talk) 00:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

MelonBot 4

Just a note to say I like the look of MelonBot 4, and encourage you to develop it from a user-assisted script to an automated process. Good luck, anyway! Geometry guy 18:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello!

Received your bot message and have re-signed for the League of Copy Editors... only maybe we should be the League of the Scarlet Pimpernel? ("We seek him here..." etc.) Happy New Year, Shir-El too 04:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

RE:List of poker hands

I just recently promoted List of poker hands to Featured list status, congrats! I just wanted to let you know that your list started the New Year as being our first Featured List of 2008! Keep up the good work and lets make 2008 a great year for Wikipedia!
Gonzo fan2007 ^{talk ♦ contribs} 20:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

FACs

Hi -- I just wanted to let you know that having more than one simultaneous FAC is discouraged, at least until you have gained some supports on the first one. You may want to withdraw one, and resubmit it soon; or have someone else nominate it with you as a conominator. Also, a quick note: you may want to correct a spelling error: "defys" should be "defies". Good luck with both nominations. Mike Christie (talk) 21:52, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Copyedits

I'll be happy to copyedit; I'll start with the Emma Watson article first. --Malachirality (talk) 05:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Emma Watson

Everyone is rushing to help, I see. I just finished my copyedit of Emma Watson, and I see at least two others working on it in addition to Malachirality (talk). As I said on my talk page in response to your request earlier today, I'm going to be away from the Internet except possibly for brief periods until Saturday or Sunday. It appears that you have lots of other expert help, though. Finetooth (talk) 05:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Punch

can u adopt me? im gir.chihuahua —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gir.chihuahua (talk • contribs) 00:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you help me on a template ?

Hello, I am contacting you because you say you're a master at templates. I've got this one at User:Rosenknospe/Sandbox3, it's behaving strangely. Whenever the Year parameter is removed from a table, the last column is either not vertically centered or completely non-existent (as in, overwritten by the ShortSummary field). There's an example at User:Rosenknospe/Sandbox2; watch how the first table, which has no Year parameter, is broken, while all the other ones, which do have that Year parameter, are OK. Hersfold was close to banging his head on the wall at the sight of this. If you could be so kind and have a look at it, I would be very grateful. Thank you, merry Christmas :D Rosenknospe (talk) 11:53, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Just: wow. I knew I didn't really understand what I was doing when I stole the code from Template:episode list, but now I see I don't understand what I'm doing at all, so I'm very lucky I've found you. Thank you, thank you so much for rewriting the template, it gleams with polished excellence to my heathen eyes.

I have copied your code at User:Rosenknospe/Sandbox3 and tried to add more parameters, please feel free to have a look. I have added Race and Allegiance as you suggested, and also three "auxiliary" parameters that can be customised for whatever purpose a particular franchise would have. I have also altered the second format so that it also shows titles and episodes as I deal with characters who are featured in both movies and television, and also added quotation marks to the episode names because that's the offical formatting. It doesn't work (of course ;) but I don't have time to test it now, I'm just here for a quick session. I have no idea about other layouts right at the moment though, so feel free to add the ones that come to your mind. If we're (well, you are, actually) going to get that template working, let's do it so other people can use it as well.

I should really learn more about template code. Is there a tutorial anywhere ? Unfortunately I won't be able to be back online before Wednesday (It's Christmas time and I've got a family). Thank you again for your unvaluable help, and happy New Year ! Rosenknospe (talk) 17:23, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you again for your answer. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to work on it, I'll do it next weekend. Have a nice day. Rosenknospe (talk) 19:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Welcome

I am glad to see you have come around a little closer to my way of thinking. I am not surprised you find some of my edits too drastic, and I also readily admit that I do not have all the answers as to what makes a good wikipedia article. I am sure there is a compromise to be reached and that some of those "tooth and nail" sections can make it into the final version. As I stated on the FAC page, I am now done with my initial revision and would welcome feedback on the talkpage of my version of the article. Indrian (talk) 21:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Wicked FAC

Awesome! I've completed the FAC template and what-not - I've edited your comment to read "Co-nominator"...

I'll see what I can do once I get home - bizarrely enough I'm in London at the moment, and have just spent the evening at... Wicked!

Cheers, Dafyd (talk) 00:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Thank you for your hard (and mostly thankless) work doing all of the administrative tasks behind the scenes for the League of Copyeditors. Trusilver (talk) 22:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Template weight TfD

Hi Happy,
All instances of {{weight}} in the main space have been converted to {{convert}}. So many directly linked pages were your main objection. Now there are no more links. So perhaps you could reconsider your strong keep vote. Regards, 18:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

How dare You!!!!

YOU DARE OPPOSE ME HAHAAHAHAH!!!!! YOU SHALL BE CRUSHED!!! The Last Saxon (talk) 09:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops on my user page

I was rearranging my user page now that I've developed an addiction to userboxes, and I once again have a problem. The "My" in "My Sandbox" has wandered! I tried a few different things, such as <br> before the My, but to no avail. I tried putting a space before it to make my old friend, the mysterious blue box, corral my sandbox link out of the way. It only made matters worse. Any suggestions?Happy‑melon 23:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)SkyllaLaFey —Preceding unsigned comment added by SkyllaLaFey (talk • contribs) 19:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC) (I did try to sign this, but received a message that someone else was editing this page at the same time, and it stamped this as unsigned. Bite me Sinebot! Pardon my outburst, Happy‑melon 23:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC))SkyllaLaFey

Eek! I see what happened. If I had not received the editing conflict message, I would have assumed that it was something I did from the start, but the edit warning threw me off the trail. In regards to my user page; if you look at it, the word My is all alone on the left side of the screen before my userbox collection, and then below the boxes it says Sandbox User:SkyllaLaFey/Sandbox. In the edit screen it is all together, but I know that doesn't mean much. I am still getting used to how different things behave in their "raw" form when you are editing. An example: I discovered that to have my "language" boxes to the left of my "interests" boxes, I actually need to put "interests" before "language" in the edit screen. I instinctually assumed that Top to Bottom = Left to Right on the screen, and I now see that I need to eliminate many preconceived notions if I want to master the ability to edit and use markup. I'll be spending some time in my sandbox soon so that I can better control the outcome of my edits.SkyllaLaFey (talk) 18:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I responded to your response on my talk page. Henceforth, if it is a topic only of interest to me (and is very unlikely to be of use to anyone else visiting your area) I'll just keep the conversation on my talk page. And since your page has much more "traffic" than mine, it limits the number of people I get to make an ass of myself in front of! :) SkyllaLaFey (talk) 05:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Saxophone GA (again...)

I have added a response at the talk page. I also requested a second opinion, as it seems we could use one. Regards, Kakofonous (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, my requests are all done, but some of Kakofonous' aren't (eg the peacock terms stuff). If you could go through quickly and fix that up, we can get the article passed :) — Dihydrogen Monoxide 22:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I passed the article. Kakofonous (talk) 03:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Emma Watson

You're probably busy, but just in case you hadn't noticed, I did assemble a very short paragraph at the sandbox you kindly set up for me with the cut material. Let me know if that looks usable. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 10:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

In the last month, you have created a new WP:FL. From what I can tell, this is your first one. Congratulations! You may not be aware of WP:LOTD. We are experimenting with selecting Lists of the Day so similar to the current WP:TFA and WP:POTD features that run on the main page. I invite you to participate.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I want to help with LOCE

I noticed you're trying to get more editors involved at the League of Copyeditors. I'm not a copyeditor by any means, but I'm sick of having such a hard time getting copy-editing help. I want to help you get that project running the best it can. Just let me know what I can do. Wrad (talk) 00:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Here are some of my ideas, many of which may already be in place:

1. Maybe have a list of accomplishments on the main page, or at least linked to on the main page, listing all the articles the project is directly involved in guiding to GA and FA status.
2. Run a roll call? Maybe you've already done this?
3. Place the highest priority on those articles that are at FAC or nearing FA status, then to those articles nearing GA status, as well as articles about to lose FA/GA status due to bad writing. I don't think any articles not fitting this criteria are even worth spitting at for a copy-editor. I would even go so far as to say we should remove the copyedit tag from all articles not currently meeting this criteria. Wrad (talk) 00:18, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw you all over LOCE and figured it wasn't as bad as was being said. I still want to help, though. Wrad (talk) 20:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually pretty good at organization stuff and drumming up support. Is there anything currently going on in that direction that I could join in on? Wrad (talk) 22:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion re images

Hey there, I have a suggestion for you. Take a good long look at the debates at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content and recent pages at Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/archive_toc. Then decide whether it's worth trying to fix the images/rationales to please the opposer, or whether it's better to just remove the pictures in favor of attaining FA and having your hard work rewarded. Fair use madness can get pretty confusing, frustrating and time-sucking. --Melty girl (talk) 19:52, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah... probably a wise decision, though it's really a shame that copyright paranoia has negatively impacted the article. The passion of the anti-image crusaders on Wiki mystifies me; they sometimes seem to be opposed to images of whatever kind, almost in a puritanical sense. Meanwhile, the rest of the culture seems to understand the inherent value of images to illuminate a subject -- especially about a performer in a visual medium! I hope that they close your FAC soon; there are supports and no opposes, so I wonder what the deal is... --Melty girl (talk) 01:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

LoCE backlog

I was wondering if you could give me your opinion on clearing out some of the backlog. While some of these articles are still ripe for copyediting, the majority are not. I think it makes some sense to jettison some of these very old requests, especially when the articles have been edited hundreds of times since originally being listed. Although there is a new template in place to use for denying requests in the new system, these old requests usually don't even have anything related to LoCE listed on their talk pages, so it doesn't seem like the new "Copyedit denied" procedure is appropriate. What do you think about notifying the orignal requestors (via their talk pages, and/or the article talk pages) that their request has expired and will need to be resubmitted via the new system? We could apologize for the delay and direct them to the new system if they still want the article looked at. I'd be happy to chip away at such a task in order to clear the old lists, as long as I thought it was the right thing to do. Do you have any better ideas? SlackerMom (talk) 18:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I've deleted several old requests that were duplicated in the new system, but I wasn't sure I should delete the others. I understand the mixed feelings about not responding to requests. That's why I thought some sort of notice for the requestors would be good, to apologize for being so behind. I know there is a case to be made for evaluating them against the new criteria, regardless of how old the request is. What if, rather than deleting the requests, we just sent each requestor a notice asking them to reevaluate their request and post in the new system if they still want a copyedit? Then we could delete the ones that become duplicated, and there's a much better chance the still active requests will get some attention. I don't know...maybe I already said that...just thinking. Well, let me know which side of the fence you fall on, and I'm happy to bounce ideas around. SlackerMom (talk) 21:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Sending a note to each requester sounds like a good idea to me. To be honest, I had forgotten about the older pile of requests until SlackerMom mentioned it yesterday. Consolidation would be good, and sending a note might head off unhappiness on the part of people who diligently followed the old suggestions. If we send notes, would you like some help, SlackerMom? If you write a standard note, I would be glad to take responsibility for sending some. Finetooth (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it makes more sense to continue this discussion here. Please follow! SlackerMom (talk) 13:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Emma Watson photo removed

Alert: the infobox photo of Emma Watson apparently violated copyright and was removed from the Commons. Check the article's history for the link that explains it. --Melty girl (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Skylla's Article

Sorry I've been so quiet lately. I am a serious book addict, and well-meaning individuals keep leading me to temptation by putting other books into my hands! I read Golf Monster once through for pleasure, and am now slowly picking through it for research purposes. If you look in Golf Monster by Alice Cooper you can see the bare bones of what will hopefully become a real article. I wanted to ask you if there is a way to make the content box appear below the intro paragraph. Well... I hope you had a rejuvenating break, and I will be in contact (slightly) more often now that my article is truly underway. I will probably be a bit sporadic in working on the article due to the fact that I am also doing some work as a book reviewer for a local website. SkyllaLaFey (talk) 04:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Copyedit for Alpha Kappa Alpha

Left comments on this. Sorry for the delay! Cheers. Miranda 03:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Well the article made featured. But, I still think the article needs copyediting. miranda 01:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Fix Emma Watson citation links for your FAC

Go to the top of the FAC page and click "Check external links" -- there are citations that you need to fix before FA is possible. Cheers, Melty girl (talk) 01:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

LoCE Backlog - Thanks!

Thank you very much for the barnstar, although I think Finetooth may have done most of the work. The work you've done on this project is awe-inspiring, and I'm just hoping to be worthy of my inclusion in the same League as you! Looking forward to happy collaboration in the future, SlackerMom (talk) 13:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

hmmmm

I'm wondering whether to ask the FAC director and assistant about the status of the Emma Watson FAC. My questions are these:

1. Is a "slight oppose" consisting only of "not sure it should be FA and you could at least have screenshots" actionable in terms of the FA criteria? Screenshots are not required, and in this case, an anti-fair use crusader opposed until they were all removed. But could this be used to fail the nomination? If so, that means that opposing opinion holders can fail a nomination either way, and that's a real Catch 22.

2. Is an oppose based only on the wrongheaded assertion that verified straight-A grades on national tests for two years in a row must not be termed "good" academic achievement a valid oppose that could be used to fail the nomination, even if two other reviewers disagree? If so, that means that the prose of FA candidates should be worsened or twisted to please any individual's confused idea of any WP policy, something which undermines FA quality and the validity of the process.

Not sure whether it's a good idea to ask or not. What are your thoughts? --Melty girl (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmn indeed. To be honest I'm a little annoyed that this FAC hasn't been closed one way or another. If it passes, champagne all round, of course. If it fails, I'll renominate ASAP - I hope I can now count on your and Indrian's support, so that would make it appear rather more clear-cut and make the half-hearted opposes seem even less valid. Third time lucky and all that. But the longer it stays open, the more half-baked criticism piles on top of the legitimate (and actioned) comments, and the less like consensus it appears, even though (as you concisely phrased it) the only real opposition comes from a catch-22 and an Idontlikeit. It is starting to get to me a little though - I was worried that it would be passed on my wikibreak and some IP would steal the star, but it appears that's not going to be a problem :D. Happy‑melon 21:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

So true. I really think this nom was a victim of Wiki and life overload happening to Raul and Sandy. You can count on me third time around. But do you think I should ask now, or protest in the sad case of failure based on "I don't like it" and a complete misunderstanding about what constitutes neutral language. --Melty girl (talk) 21:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm honestly not sure, but I don't think it's likely to do any harm. I notice Raul's been active today although not on WP:FAC, so I'm not sure what to think. I'd feel very awkward asking myself, but as a convert to the cause, perhaps you can say something without too much of a conflict of interest. Happy‑melon 21:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll see if I can word it properly, probably later tonight and if I have any doubts, I won't ask. --Melty girl (talk) 21:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to add my disappointment at how the last few days of this FAC have been going and assure you that I would support on a third nom if the article were essentially the same as it is now. Indrian (talk) 21:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin

Hi. I just wondered if you've considered becoming an admin. You seem experienced enough, so I'd be happy to nominate you if you're interested. Regards. Epbr123 (talk) 21:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I was going to say the same thing, omfg. You ought to be one. --Niyant (talk) 21:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I've now created your RfA page, so once you've indicated that you accept the nomination and have answered the initial questions, the page can be transcluded onto Wikipedia:Requests for adminship and the nomination will begin. Take your time answering the questions, and try to be as thorough as possible, as some reviewers dislike short answers. You can see how other nominees have answered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship and in the archives. You should also read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship, Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. Admit to any conflicts you may have had, and avoid showing an immediate interest in admin activities in areas in which you are inexperienced. Once the nomination begins, avoid canvassing user talk pages for support or comments, as this will be frowned upon. Let me know once you've answered the questions, and I'll begin the nomination. Good luck! Epbr123 (talk) 21:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The nomination has begun. :) Epbr123 (talk) 23:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

About that notorious word "good"...

The enemy of "good" is suggesting a more reasonable way out. As nominator, you might want to take it or implement a "solution" of your own, so that the opposition could potentially be removed. Personally, I think it is an woefully sad and incorrect reading of what neutral language is, and another reviewer agrees with me. But you might want to engage. I'm stepping back from this unreasonable editor so as not to make the FAC page too long. I didn't end up having time to write to the FAC people, and I'm not sure if I will today. We'll see.

P.S. On the other issue, how is the fact that she's been quoted at least twice saying that she's a feminist somehow unverifiable and inaccurate?!?!? Ay ay ay. :( --Melty girl (talk) 17:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Someone clearly has an axe to grind. Feminism hasn't meant bra-burning for almost 40 years. And many political terms mean different things to different people. Hey, I identify as Jewish, and that means different things to different people, but would that mean it couldn't go in my WP bio if I were notable? Wow. Good luck dealing with this guy. --Melty girl (talk) 02:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Peer review bot request

Hi HappyMelon - following on from this discussion I'm planning to implement Gimmetrow's "archiving from the get-go" idea at WP:PR. I was wondering if you would be willing to get a bot to go through and tidy the peer review archives, i.e., starting with the oldest archive, move each peer review to the next available WP:Peer review/ARTICLENAME/archiveN subpage and fix any links? Geometry guy 14:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Congrats

Hey Happy-melon, congratulations on finishing the FAC on Emma Watson. I was extremely impressed with your patience during that long and no doubt frustrating process. Bravo! I was reading through the FAC, and I realized my final comment about boxofficemojo hadn't made any sense because I addressed the comment to you, when I meant to address it to Tony! I had meant to say that your interpretation about boxofficemojo's copyright was correct, but because I used the wrong name the comment didn't make any sense. Haha, sorry! But good work on the article! I hope the process itself doesn't discourage you from future articles. --JayHenry (talk) 18:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, that was certainly one of the most complex FAC's I have ever involved myself in. I am glad that your efforts were not in vain and that you were able to keep working with all of us to put something together that is worthy of that gold star. Many nominators faced with such varied objections would just throw up their hands in despair and walk away, but I am impressed that you were able to stick with it and get the article through. A well-deserved success. Indrian (talk) 19:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I must echo everything that Jay and Indrian have said. Kudos to you! Hooray! --Melty girl (talk) 22:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey Happy-melon, I know it's been a while with my being nearly inactive on the project -- the time really took its toll on me and I needed to catch up with my life, so I just have occasional edits here and there. In any case, I decided to stop by and I saw the excellent work you had done on Emma Watson's FAC and was really thankful for all the hard work you put in. Your commitment is absolutely incredible. I also saw that you were running for adminship, so I've voiced my support for you over there. Good luck, and I hope to be back when there's some free time to improve the rest of the WP:WPHP. Best, Fbv65edel — t — c // 03:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Non-free promotional discussion

Hello, Happy-melon. Since you recently contributed to the lively deletion discussion for Template:Non-free promotional, I thought I'd let you know that I've continued the discussion about this template at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Template:Non-free promotional. The result of the deletion discussion was to keep the template, but there are still some questions about whether the current template serves a useful purpose and how to prevent its misapplication. Please contribute to the discussion if you are interested. —Bkell (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Wicked progress

No problem. Don't be discouraged that the musical did not pass the FA review on the first try. The article has come a long way, and I think that now it is pretty close to FA quality in most of its sections. I suggest that you review the comments made at the peer review and the FA review. Sandy Georgia is one of the best article analyists on Wikipedia, and she and Raul basically decide which articles are promoted to FA. So, see if you can do anything further along the lines suggested in the peer review, especially the image issues that she has mentioned. You need a real image expert to come in and make sure the images are Kosher. Then, nominate the article again. This time, I think you may achieve the support you need, but the image issues raised by Sandy must be dealt with first. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of London Fog (beverage)

I have nominated London Fog (beverage), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Fog (beverage). 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. Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 19:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Preemptive congrats...

This might be the last message you receive as a normal user. Congrats on the mop! --omtay38 20:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

About your RfA

The admins' T-shirt. Acalamari 17:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari 17:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and you're welcome for the question! :) Acalamari 22:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedying Peer review redirects

Ack. Why would you delete the redirects? Won't it break all old pages that point to the peer reviews? --MZMcBride (talk) 21:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Last question: you're an admin; why are you not deleting the pages yourself? --MZMcBride (talk) 21:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you just don't tag them and then batch delete them... whichever. Either way, have fun! Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!

Wish I had known about your RfA; I would have offered my unequivocal support. Looks like you didn't need it after all! —  MusicMaker5376 21:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Happy editing! Burner0718^{(Jibba Jabba!)} 23:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Best of luck with the admin tools. :) - PeaceNT (talk) 16:27, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

CSD#T3 templates

Hello again. It seems both of us have created templates for CSD#T3. Yours is more like some of the current CSD tags, mine followed the scheme of some of the CSD:I categories, modeling itself after templates like Template:Di-orphaned fair use. I went through and tagged about 140 templates and notified their authors about a week ago, so the template I've been using is a little more high-use at the moment. Template:Db-T3-notice, Template:Old template, and Template:Db-deporph are what I created and implemented. Also see: Category:Deprecated or orphaned templates, Category:Deprecated or orphaned templates more than 7 days old, and Category:Deprecated or orphaned templates with invalid timestamp.

Personally, I don't care what the layout looks like, I'm really more concerned about another battle of CSD#T3. Feel free to modify / move / merge whatever you'd like, just be sure to leave redirects so my Twinkle script doesn't get screwed up. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

GR templates

You say that you'd write a fix for the GR templates if someone could find a full {{Cite}} for each option. Just wanted to let you know: since the sources used are all web sources, it would be better to use {{Cite web}}. For the six GR[number] templates, here are the links that they go to:

• ^GR1 — http://www.census.gov/geo/www/gazetteer/gazette.html
• ^GR2 — http://factfinder.census.gov
• ^GR3 — http://geonames.usgs.gov
• ^GR4 — http://geonames.usgs.gov/fips55.html
• ^GR5 — http://www.nima.mil/gns/html/index.html
• ^GR6 — http://www.naco.org/Template.cfm?Section=Find_a_County&Template=/cffiles/counties/usamap.cfm

I don't know what all items you'd like for the cite web template (I'm not familiar with it, generally using <ref> and </ref> instead), but these links are all that's provided, so if you have a chance, you'll be able to find what you want. If I'm wrong, and if this is unclear, please let me know. Nyttend (talk) 00:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your sandbox links on the TFD page: I just wanted to note that #4 has been updated on 31 January, and #6 is copyright 2005. It looks great! Nyttend (talk) 16:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The GR template deletion has been snowball closed. Can you now go through with the template work? Nyttend (talk) 15:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Politician fair-use templates TfD

As a result of this discussion all the templates were deleted, so this is just a friendly reminder of the merge proposal because images like Image:AlbertSaunders.jpg now do not have any licensing info. I also have a question for you in the TfD that may be relevant to the creation of {{non-free politician photo}}. –Pomte 15:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)