Leave a new message!I will reply and drop a note on your talk page unless I know you'll check back here. Please be sure to sign your posts with ~~~~ so I know who you are!
Saw your edits on Arabian horse (and left them there, see, I really don't "own" articles, I DO leave constructive edits alone!) Anyway, I had never heard of the right-left formatting thing, and was wondering if you could explain it further, I like to see images alternated on pages where there are a lot of them, and it seems consistent with wikiguidelines, but I sure would like to understand the formatting glitch problem so that the layout looks good everywhere. Montanabw(talk)19:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Montana! I've left you a typical ArielVerbosity reply on your talk page! Feel free to ask if you have any other questions, but of course, guidelines aren't set in stone, so they're just suggestions for improving accessibility for all readers. Cheers! Ariel♥Gold03:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply, I did read those image articles once, (Some of the images in the Arabian article were inserted very early on) probably never hurts to review, the only part I am still fuzzy about is when putting images on the left is a problem. Is it ONLY right under a === heading, or is it under any (==, ====, etc) heading, and is the only problem the thing of moving the heading over in an odd fashion? As for the rest, now yeah, usually when I deliberately oversize (or undersize) an image, it is for a specific reason, (usually that the default is too small to be usable) but so does the image itself also scale if folks use large type? For example, will an image scaled at 250px stay 250 pixels, or will it grow bigger if someone chooses a very large font? (Is there an article on the disability accommodation stuff?z I was a little concerned that moving some of the images took them a bit away from the text with which they were associated (mostly the Darley Arabian image, it was a 17th century image, but its new placement implies that he was somehow affiliated with the Crabbet Stud, which is not accurate), I've also tried to be nice about not tossing out images other people add, if they are good ones (the Sangusko family and King Wilhelm both started major Arabian studs, for example), though I do think the article is a little image heavy (yet, given that all images relate pretty closely to the text, hard to say they aren't helpful). I've thought about putting it up for FA status, but frankly, I am terrified of what a day of vandalism that would be if it got it. Thoughts?? Montanabw(talk)05:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Interesting. I personally loathe all right aligned image pages, but that's just a style thing, not a moral issue. (grin) As far as FA, yep, the meat-grinder of editing is also a worry, I submitted it once for peer review and got a standardized template answer and nothing more, that was real disappointing, though I did do some tweaks just based on that. Took a bit of work to get to GA status, which was mostly fun. Sometimes you put an article up in the general wikipublic, and what you get are the control jerks. Had a rough time helping get GA for Horses in the Middle Ages, someone just got weird about the citation stuff. As for FA prep, if there is anything that just glares out at you, give me a shout. May not have a lot of time to work on it now (currently dealing with someone who is insisting that every section of cowboy be sourced, just out of the blue, seems rather annoying when the information isn't being questioned) but will keep it all in mind and get to it eventually. Montanabw(talk)05:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you know, at first, I wasn't a fan of all right-aligned images on articles either, but more and more, I've come to prefer them, at least here on Wikipedia, just because it makes articles easier to read, and less distracting. Anywhere else, and I prefer to have a nice balanced layout. It is a style thing, and not a rule, but it is sometimes hard to remember not everyone's screen is 1600 resolution with a 22" widescreen monitor like mine, lol. Ariel♥Gold06:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering if you had an experience in adding the MediaWiki software to a website. I ask, becuase I am considering starting my own "wiki" for radio and TV stations and newspapers...a "MediaPedia", if you will :) Only problem is, I don't know how to load the software onto a website. If you would know how, or know someone who does, I would appericate any help you can give. Take Care...NeutralHomerT:C03:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ahhh, no I'm sorry, that's one area I have no idea about. You might ask at the village pump - technical board, while they probably can't help you do it directly, they may be able to give you links to off-wiki sites with helpful info. Hope they can! Ariel♥Gold03:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okie Dokie...Thanks! :) Oh, and in case you were wondering, the line about "thanks for your help (last night as well)", I sent the same post to David Levy first and he helped me on a Commons problem last night. that's what I get for copying and pasting :) Anywho, again, thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Take Care...NeutralHomerT:C04:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not terribly hard, especially if your webhost has Cpanel. All I ever do, is make a database, uncompress the archives (tar -xzvf archivename.tar.gz ), then go to what'll soon be my wiki site, and fill out the simple form there. If you have any specific questions, please, feel free to ask here, or on my talk :) SQLQuery me!04:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to say thanks and well done here, I'm extremely impressed by the depth and quality of your responses to this new editor. I don't think anyone could have possibly responded to the situation any better, and I can see from just a brief glance at that page that this is not an irregular phenomenon. So, thanks again, and please keep up the outstanding work. Oh, and just for the record, I'm a "he"! ; ) shoeofdeath (talk) 08:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ACK! My most sincere and abject apologies, I for some reason, read your name on the editor's talk page as "She of death", and I apologize. I shall go make changes to clarify that! (I know I always correct someone when they think I'm a "he", lol.) And thank you so much, for your kind words, I'm glad that my reply was helpful, and I hope that the editor reviews the information provided to them. Thanks again! Ariel♥Gold09:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, don't worry about it. I think you might be the first person to make that mistake, but I'm glad you did because it made me laugh! Thanks and happy editing, shoeofdeath (talk) 09:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just because some High School articles don't get deleted via the deletion process, doesn't mean that they are all notable, and there is no policy or guideline saying that all high schools, or all private schools, are notable enough for an entry on Wikipedia. Also, see WP:INN, as having another article similar, doesn't always mean that all articles on the subject have enough context or content to justify an article. All your submission said was "Vincent Smith School is a private school located in Port Washington. It is for students in grades 5-12.", with no reliable sources, just a link to the school's website. That's not enough content, or context to justify an article, and doesn't explain why it is notable. Many other private school articles provide reliable sources to verify the school's notability. It would probably be better to add the school to the current article on New York's Port_Washington,_New_York#Schools, if there is no third-party coverage, as it would be difficult to make more than an article stub out of it. Ariel♥Gold19:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Email received?/EVA list Name
Just a quick note to see if you received my email regarding the EVA article and the "list of astronauts by name" article? Thanks for your time. Rocketmaniac (talk) 02:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yes I did get the email, thanks. I think we need to move your other list into mainspace soon, I don't see any issues outstanding with it, other than coming up with a name. As for that huge long list, I'm a bit concerned, there are several editors on the Space project who seem to really be attached to having flags, and I'll be honest, I'm not entirely sure what to do. WP:FLAG to me, at least, seems quite clear, that emphasizing nationality without a good reason isn't a good idea, but at least in the case of that list, especially the ESA astronauts, nationality seems something valid. The issue for me is, that list is so very long, and all those flags loading slows the page down considerably, and I don't think they are really necessary considering the vast majority of the astronauts listed are either NASA or RSA, and thus, nationality is either a given, or unimportant in the historical context. I think to change it outright would end up in a content dispute, and I would prefer not to see that happen. I'm thinking perhaps asking somewhere (I'm not completely sure where to ask yet) for uninvolved editors who were involved in developing the MOS to comment on flags in space article use, because I think a clear guideline should be made for all articles, not just one or two lists. But, as I said, I'm not sure where or who to ask yet, I'm still sort of thinking about it. Let's focus on getting your other list up, we need a good name! :o) Ariel♥Gold11:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As for a name, how about "Cumulative EVA Time" or "Cumulative EVA Record"? I mean that the whole purpose of the list, it lists the astronauts with the most cumulative time doing EVAs. Rocketmaniac (talk) 12:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but it would need to be a plural, "records", and need to be "List of". But then the question becomes, should it be spacewalk, rather than EVA? Which term is a more likely search term. Probably both, so we could create a redirect for the other. What about something as simple as List of cumulative spacewalk records? (Okay I guess that's not so simple, lol) Ariel♥Gold12:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I think that will work. Since there is already a List of spacewalks and moonwalks, we need (or should) be consistant and stay with "spacewalks" not EVA. This is exciting, my first real article!!. Well, you made my ugly table much much better. My mom who is teacher (she says she's not a professor) at Georgia Southern University will be happy to see this thing go live. Thanks for you help/guidance. Rocketmaniac (talk) 12:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, would you like me to move it into article space? We can always move it later if we think of a better name, but it would be good to get it live. Ariel♥Gold12:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, it's me. Got a juicy one for you. I'm cleaning up Policarpa Salavarrieta which has an NPOV tag on it, only I go to the talk page and there's nothing doing; all I find is this text in the history page: "(This still has an anti-Spanish and sympathetic bias. That isn't acceptable, regardless of how justified such a view is.)" Since the article is about a Revolutionary heroine this tag sounds more than a bit anti-NPOV in itself (on a par with telling a pig farmer he can't mention bacon). So after I finish CU, what's my next move to get it untagged? Thank you, {sleep well}, (my turn now to get some zzz's) Shir-El too (talk) 04:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC) PS: Bright copper kettles/ and warm woolen mittens... PPS IS THERE a musical comedy portal????[reply]
YAY! I always like getting notes from you! That's quite the article project there, lol. You can clean up the issues with the article, and remove the tags yourself, once you feel they no longer apply. Then just make a quick note on the talk page explaining that you've dealt with the issues, and removed the tags, that's all there is to it. Tags are there to help categorize pages for editors to fix issues with articles, according to what they are interested in, but once the issues are resolved, anyone can remove the tags. Considering the fact that whomever placed the tag in the first place, didn't make any kind of note on the talk page explaining their reasons, I would tend to agree that the tag seems a bit unwarranted, but I also admit I didn't read the article through. I trust your work, and you can take care of any possible POV issues, and once you've done that, and the cleanup, you can dump the tags. Let me know if you want me to look it over after your done, the layout and stuff could use some work, just cosmetic issues though, so not a huge deal. As for the portal, I think the closest may be the Musical Theatre portal. You can see the entire portal directory here. ~*Hugs*~ Ariel♥Gold10:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'll try to live down your good opinion of me *~Cheshire Grin~*! Working too long on something makes it stale and me short sighted, so I learned to take a bite out of something, do as much as I can with it [image: terrier shaking hard], then give it a rest and start over later; which is why Eilat is "on vacation." I hope to nominate it for DYN after the next edit. I know Polycarpa is, to paraphrase, "the stuff legends are made of," so it needs extra care. Will follow-up and yes: when it's done I'd appreciate your take on it. BTW, may I interest you in an an apple kugel recipe? It is both the simplest and the only NO-FAIL recipe I know (tested it, I did) - or is that frowned upon here? Being an autodidact in cooking as well, it's my kind of Barnstar. See you soon, Shir-El too (talk) 03:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ariel, I'm just dropping you this note because I'm rather concerned about the way Dave has been behaving in relation to this article, which is in complete contrast to the way that you have been helping the editors to develop a good encyclopedic article. I was thinking of putting a friendly comment on his talk page reminding him about WP:BITE but I don't think he would take it the right way from me, because I get the feeling that he considers me to be an "enemy". I think there's a danger of discouraging a whole class of students from ever attempting to edit Wikipedia again.
