![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Northamerica1000. |
Contents
- 1 Edible jellyfish
- 2 Deletion review for Misty Edwards
- 3 Help
- 4 Barbara Hewson
- 5 A beer for you!
- 6 DYK for Swedish fruit soup
- 7 DYK for Experimental beer
- 8 DYK for Toussaint Coffee Liqueur
- 9 Request for protection of a page
- 10 premature closure of AfD
- 11 Arctocephalus pusillus
- 12 Orphaned non-free image File:Quick restaurant logo.png
- 13 This week's article for improvement (week 28, 2015)
- 14 Need your help
- 15 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
- 16 Today's articles for improvement weekly vote
- 17 Help needed
- 18 Introducing the new WikiProject Cannabis!
- 19 The Signpost: 08 July 2015
- 20 Jellyfish as food
- 21 Disambiguation link notification for July 11
- 22 Further reading
![]() Archives |
---|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20150712081323im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg/407px-Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg.png)
from clear refutation to mere vituperation
Edible jellyfish
I have just started writing a new article Rhopilema esculentum on a species of jellyfish that is eaten in southeastern Asia and I wondered whether you would care to collaborate on it. I shall be concentrating on its description, distribution and biology, and you could do its nutritional aspects, or what you fancied. It is also used as a folk medicine apparently. If you don't fancy joining me on its creation, I shan't be offended, but I can see from your DYK nominations that you like writing about food. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:38, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: Interesting stuff, and nice work expanding the article. I may contribute, but I'm not finding much coverage about the edible aspects of the jellyfish after several searches. North America1000 01:14, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
-
- Fair enough. I'll leave it a couple of days before I nominate it for DYK in case you find anything more. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
- N.b. See the new Jellyfish as food article I just created. North America1000 01:40, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'll leave it a couple of days before I nominate it for DYK in case you find anything more. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Deletion review for Misty Edwards
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Misty Edwards. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. The Cross Bearer (talk) 01:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notice. North America1000 08:23, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
- N.b. The close was endorsed in the discussion. North America1000 08:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Help
Please comment on Talk:Addanki#Discussion.--Vin09 (talk) 05:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not sure whether or not I'm going to contribute to the discussion at this time. North America1000 08:24, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Barbara Hewson
Hi, can you check out edits to the above, I don't want to be in violation of 3RR. Thanks Denisarona (talk) 07:19, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Denisarona: It appears that you are reverting vandalism in the form of the blanking of content. As per WP:EDITWAR, "There are certain exemptions to 3RR, such as reverting vandalism or clear violations of the Biographies of living persons policy". North America1000 07:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
A beer for you!
![]() |
Many thanks - I just wanted to be sure. Enjoy!! Denisarona (talk) 07:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC) |
DYK for Swedish fruit soup
— Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:55, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
DYK for Experimental beer
— Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
DYK for Toussaint Coffee Liqueur
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Request for protection of a page
@ North America , Sri Lanka Army Women's Corps must be protected from vandalism. talk to me.Farzana zardari (talk) 04:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Farzana zardari: The recent blanking of the page and edits were performed by one user, who I have provided a warning notice to on their talk page regarding their editing. The page has not received enough vandalism to qualify for page protection at this time, in my opinion. North America1000 05:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
premature closure of AfD
Why did you close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Azerbaijan–Bangladesh relations as no consensus? It was barely a week old. It should be allowed to be relisted unil consensus is achieved. —МандичкаYO 😜 05:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Wikimandia: I feel that the discussion received ample input, in this case with eleven users participating. As per WP:RELIST, part of the Deletion process page, "relisting should not be a substitute for a "no consensus" closure. If the closer feels there has been substantive debate, disparate opinions supported by policy have been expressed, and consensus has not been achieved, a no-consensus close may be preferable." North America1000 05:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- I really don't think there was sufficient input, and less than a week is not enough time to attract input. It was mainly the same people discussing it, and the arguments were silly ("You're saying these countries aren't important"). I really think this should be re-opened and allowed more time to gain consensus. Otherwise I'm just going to renominate it and this is rather a waste of time. PS pining @LibStar: for input on premature closure. —МандичкаYO 😜 06:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- For starters, you are incorrect about the duration of the discussion. Compare the timestamps between the time the nomination was initiated (17:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)) and its closure (03:13, 5 July 2015 (UTC)): the discussion ran for around ten hours after seven days had passed. I understand that you want the article deleted as per your input at the discussion, but as stated above, I feel that adequate input occurred there. You state that the arguments (plural) were "silly", but only provide one example (singular) above qualifying this stance. Furthermore, in the example you provided, the user also stated that the topic "meets WP:N", which is guideline-based. North America1000 06:13, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- So, little more than a week. Insufficient time to gain input. I don't "want" the article deleted but it should be deleted as it fails GNG - and as I said, Caucasus is one of my primary interests and I do everything possible to find sources necessary to rescue articles. They're simply not there. Everything James500 stated was also silly, including his referencing his essay draft on notability. What guidelines were followed showing the article met GNG? Simply claiming "Meets WP:N" without demonstrating how it meets N is worthless. You are very aware of what sufficient coverage is, as you do an excellent job rescuing articles by providing links that demonstrate that. I assume you found none in this case (or didn't even look). —МандичкаYO 😜 06:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- Also, per WP:DPAFD, part of the Deletion policy page, "After a deletion debate concludes and the page is kept, users should allow a reasonable amount of time to pass before nominating the same page for deletion again, to give editors the time to improve the page. Renominations shortly after the earlier debate are generally closed quickly. It can be disruptive to repeatedly nominate a page in the hope of getting a different outcome." While the discussion was closed NC, it has a net/default effect of article retention. If you would like to contest the the close of the discussion, consider posting a nomination at Wikipedia:Deletion review. North America1000 06:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- That's when a page is KEPT, not when an AfD is closed because of no consensus. —МандичкаYO 😜 06:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- The page states "and the page is kept", rather than "and the discussion is closed as keep". It's a bit ambiguous, but again, NC closes result in the page being retained. Thanks for opening the deletion review, through which more community input can occur regarding this matter. North America1000 07:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- It means only when the page is closed as keep. This has been discussed, I know, because someone accused me of being disruptive for renominating an article for deletion a few weeks after it was closed as no consensus. Multiple admins and experienced AfD people weighed in and stated such: see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive888#Disruptive renomination at AfD. I don't see how this is possibly confusing to people familiar with AfD, but maybe the guideline should be changed to "closed as keep" if people can't understand this. By the way, I really appreciate all the great work you do at AfD, so please don't take my challenging your decision as anything personal. —МандичкаYO 😜 07:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link to the discussion at AN, which I wasn't aware of. For what it's worth, the fact that another user questioned this attests to the slight ambiguity of the wording at the Deletion policy page. I would have preferred for an admin to have closed the discussion there, and perhaps for more time to have occurred before closing for additional input. Some users make points about waiting awhile before renominating an article with an AfD closed as no consensus (e.g. "It is different after no-consensus. In principle,they can be renominated immediately, but that is rarely wise, unless the reason for no consensus was lack of people commenting", "Are "no consensus" closes somehow less in need of improvement than "keep" closes?", and "if the page is kept because of a "no consensus" closure (even after considerable debate and two re-listings), then editors shouldn't have any time to improve the page. With all due respect, that doesn't seem to make much sense to me."). However, other users there state otherwise. Also, the indentation at that discussion is horrible.
North America1000 07:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link to the discussion at AN, which I wasn't aware of. For what it's worth, the fact that another user questioned this attests to the slight ambiguity of the wording at the Deletion policy page. I would have preferred for an admin to have closed the discussion there, and perhaps for more time to have occurred before closing for additional input. Some users make points about waiting awhile before renominating an article with an AfD closed as no consensus (e.g. "It is different after no-consensus. In principle,they can be renominated immediately, but that is rarely wise, unless the reason for no consensus was lack of people commenting", "Are "no consensus" closes somehow less in need of improvement than "keep" closes?", and "if the page is kept because of a "no consensus" closure (even after considerable debate and two re-listings), then editors shouldn't have any time to improve the page. With all due respect, that doesn't seem to make much sense to me."). However, other users there state otherwise. Also, the indentation at that discussion is horrible.
- It means only when the page is closed as keep. This has been discussed, I know, because someone accused me of being disruptive for renominating an article for deletion a few weeks after it was closed as no consensus. Multiple admins and experienced AfD people weighed in and stated such: see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive888#Disruptive renomination at AfD. I don't see how this is possibly confusing to people familiar with AfD, but maybe the guideline should be changed to "closed as keep" if people can't understand this. By the way, I really appreciate all the great work you do at AfD, so please don't take my challenging your decision as anything personal. —МандичкаYO 😜 07:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- The page states "and the page is kept", rather than "and the discussion is closed as keep". It's a bit ambiguous, but again, NC closes result in the page being retained. Thanks for opening the deletion review, through which more community input can occur regarding this matter. North America1000 07:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- That's when a page is KEPT, not when an AfD is closed because of no consensus. —МандичкаYO 😜 06:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- For starters, you are incorrect about the duration of the discussion. Compare the timestamps between the time the nomination was initiated (17:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)) and its closure (03:13, 5 July 2015 (UTC)): the discussion ran for around ten hours after seven days had passed. I understand that you want the article deleted as per your input at the discussion, but as stated above, I feel that adequate input occurred there. You state that the arguments (plural) were "silly", but only provide one example (singular) above qualifying this stance. Furthermore, in the example you provided, the user also stated that the topic "meets WP:N", which is guideline-based. North America1000 06:13, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
- I really don't think there was sufficient input, and less than a week is not enough time to attract input. It was mainly the same people discussing it, and the arguments were silly ("You're saying these countries aren't important"). I really think this should be re-opened and allowed more time to gain consensus. Otherwise I'm just going to renominate it and this is rather a waste of time. PS pining @LibStar: for input on premature closure. —МандичкаYO 😜 06:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Deletion review for Azerbaijan–Bangladesh relations
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Azerbaijan–Bangladesh relations. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —МандичкаYO 😜 06:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Arctocephalus pusillus
![]() |
Arctocephalus pusillus |
Arctocephalus pusillus ![]() |
Orphaned non-free image File:Quick restaurant logo.png
![⚠ ⚠](https://web.archive.org/web/20150712081323im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Ambox_warning_blue.svg/35px-Ambox_warning_blue.svg.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Quick restaurant logo.png. 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 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).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 28, 2015)
Mecca is regarded as the holiest city in the religion of Islam. Pictured is the Masjid al-Haram during Hajj, 2007. The following are WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selections: Previous selections: Party • Fat • Nightlife Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Posted by: EuroCarGT (talk) 18:00, 6 July 2015 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • |
---|
Need your help
Would you please come collaborate at Gabor B. Racz? I really could use an experienced copy editor. The way the article is being hacked on now may cause it to fail reassessment, and I sure don't want that to happen. Atsme📞📧 04:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Atsme: I may not contribute to the article. However, check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, where you can post requests for articles to receive copy editing. North America1000 08:28, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
Views/Day | Quality | Title | Content | Headings | Images | Links | Sources | Tagged with… |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
411 | 2.0 ![]() |
Offal (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources |
232 | 3.0 ![]() |
Takata Corporation (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Add sources |
1,533 | 3.0 ![]() |
Unmanned aerial vehicle (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Add sources |
2,097 | 3.0 ![]() |
Kombucha (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Add sources |
493 | 2.0 ![]() |
Dumpling (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Add sources |
211 | 3.0 ![]() |
Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Add sources |
268 | 2.0 ![]() |
Jerky (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Cleanup |
449 | 2.0 ![]() |
Soy sauce (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Cleanup |
234 | 1.0 ![]() |
Shabu-shabu (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Cleanup |
258 | 2.0 ![]() |
Arab cuisine (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Expand |
214 | 2.0 ![]() |
Brazilian cuisine (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Expand |
990 | 3.0 ![]() |
Religion in the United States (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Expand |
473 | 3.0 ![]() |
School bus (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Unencyclopaedic |
84 | 1.0 ![]() |
Red beans and rice (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Unencyclopaedic |
1,003 | 2.0 ![]() |
Bread (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Unencyclopaedic |
62 | 1.0 ![]() |
Sarson da saag (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Merge |
339 | 3.0 ![]() |
University of California, Davis (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Merge |
604 | 2.0 ![]() |
Porridge (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Merge |
897 | 3.0 ![]() |
Dog meat (talk) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | Wikify |
39 | 1.0 ![]() |
Culture of Louisiana (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Wikify |
28 | 1.0 ![]() |
Bread in Europe (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Wikify |
4 | 1.0 ![]() |
The Oblivion Society (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan |
5 | 1.0 ![]() |
Beef entrails (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan |
4 | 1.0 ![]() |
Gujarati Kadhi (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Orphan |
20 | 1.0 ![]() |
Tony Chachere's Original Creole Seasoning (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
10 | 1.0 ![]() |
Mickey's WaterWorks (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
29 | 1.0 ![]() |
Khoresh (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
8 | 1.0 ![]() |
Frenship High School (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
15 | 1.0 ![]() |
Pistolette (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
2.0 | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
19 | 1.0 ![]() |
PX4 autopilot (talk) | 0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
0.0 ![]() |
Stub |
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:05, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Today's articles for improvement weekly vote
- Hello Northamerica1000:
- This week's voting for TAFI's upcoming weekly collaborations has begun at Week 31 of 2015. Thanks for participating!
Help needed
Two edits which look like they need revdel - not sure whether anything else is needed [1][2]. I tried the IRC channel, but got no response - you were the first admin I could find that was apparently currently online. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:31, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- @AndyTheGrump: Thank you. See [3]. North America1000 01:43, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:45, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Aren't you going to revdel the posts? I think they should probably be, given their content. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:57, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- No. I have contacted the Wikimedia Foundation about this. Despite WMF being able to view revdeleted pages, no barrier should be in place preventing quick access to the content, per the serious nature of this matter. North America1000 02:15, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks again. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:18, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- No. I have contacted the Wikimedia Foundation about this. Despite WMF being able to view revdeleted pages, no barrier should be in place preventing quick access to the content, per the serious nature of this matter. North America1000 02:15, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Introducing the new WikiProject Cannabis!
Greetings!
I am happy to introduce you to the new WikiProject Cannabis! The newly designed WikiProject features automatically updated work lists, article quality class predictions, and a feed that tracks discussions on the 559 talk pages tagged by the WikiProject. Our hope is that these new tools will help you as a Wikipedia editor interested in the subject of cannabis.
- Browse the new WikiProject page
- Become a member today! – members have access to an opt-in notification system
Hope to see you join! Harej (talk) 20:57, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 08 July 2015
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation annual plan released, news in brief
- In the media: Wikimania warning; Wikipedia "mystery" easily solved
- Traffic report: The Empire lobs back
- Featured content: Pyrénées, Playmates, parliament and a prison...
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:52, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Jellyfish as food
For your article Jellyfish as food I propose to write a section on "Processing" as I have a good source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:58, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20150712081323im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Jellyfish_sesame_oil_and_chili_sauce.jpg/220px-Jellyfish_sesame_oil_and_chili_sauce.jpg)
- @Cwmhiraeth: Go for it! I'm taking a break from editing the article for a little while. Note that that article has been nominated (and accepted) at DYK (Template:Did you know nominations/Jellyfish as food), so please edit in accordance with DYK rules (e.g. all paragraphs having at least one inline citation). North America1000 08:03, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- OK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: Thanks for the additions. I'd like to see this article improved/promoted to GA status sometime in the relatively near future. North America1000 09:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- I will leave it at that. If you come from North America, as your username suggests, I would expect you to be tucked up in bed right now. However, looking at your contribution timings, I don't think you bother with sleep! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:21, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: Aah, instead, you should collaborate to help me bring this to WP:FA someday. Of course, I welcome your continued input to improve the article. Thanks again!
North America1000 11:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: Aah, instead, you should collaborate to help me bring this to WP:FA someday. Of course, I welcome your continued input to improve the article. Thanks again!
- I will leave it at that. If you come from North America, as your username suggests, I would expect you to be tucked up in bed right now. However, looking at your contribution timings, I don't think you bother with sleep! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:21, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: Thanks for the additions. I'd like to see this article improved/promoted to GA status sometime in the relatively near future. North America1000 09:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- OK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Jellyfish as food (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to National Geographic and The Telegraph
Fixed. North America1000 09:19, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Nomura's jellyfish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to The Telegraph
Fixed. North America1000 09:19, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Further reading
About the "Further reading" section in the Grateful Dead article: (1) That Wall Street Journal article is about the "Deafheads" -- deaf and hard-of-hearing Grateful Dead fans. So it's not a general overview of Deadheads. And as a further disadvantage, the website's not letting me read it online because I don't have a WSJ subscription. So, I would vote for taking it back out. (2) I would also vote for taking the Jon Pareles review of the Fare Thee Well show, quote and all, and changing it to a footnote in the Fare Thee Well subsection instead of an entry in Further reading. — Mudwater (Talk) 11:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the valuable input. Replied at your talk page. North America1000 12:21, 11 July 2015 (UTC)