Leave me a message/suggestion/notification and I will respond to you accordingly as soon as possible. Manderson198^(sprech)/_(contribs) 22:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Archives

November 2007

Just letting you know I redirected the articles instead. I think a merger proposal is premature since there was just a discussion about this that ended a few days ago and the consensus was to redirect. Hope that's ok with you. Eatcacti (talk) 19:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My source for the little article on Bonanza: The Return, a pretty bad TV-movie, was the Internet Movie Database. I saw the show when it was originally aired back in '93 but the article is basically just the barest description and a cast list, all of which is verifiable from imdb.com. I was surprised at how quickly you found the article since I'd just written it literally moments before. For the life of me, I don't know why I bother to write things like articles about horrible TV-movies like this one, maybe I'm just stalling rather than doing something more pressing and constructive but even less interesting, I don't know. In any case, I'm glad you noticed the article so quickly. I think the film itself, though, is so awful that you should just skip that one unless you're a huge Bonanza fan. Weirdly, Michael Landon, Jr. looks so utterly unlike Michael Landon that he'd never be cast as his son except for the fact that he is his son. Dirk Blocker, who is a miniaturized copy of his father, looks and sounds exactly like Dan Blocker, but was cast in the tiny role of an unrelated newspaper reporter, which is another reason this little series of bad TV-movies is not fondly remembered. Storyliner (talk) 00:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More Bonanza: The Return

Thanks, Manderson, no problem, of course. I doubt that there's much material about these films out there. Oddly, although I didn't like the trio of Michael Landon, Jr. Bonanza TV-movies very much, I do think about them occasionally, to the extent that I remember them at all. It's telling that no one connected with the films aside from the already-established character actors (Ben Johnson, Jack Elam, etc.) seem to have managed to further their careers since; the last one, Bonanza: Under Attack, was the last time Landon, Jr. appeared before a camera, according to imdb.com. I'd certainly enjoy it if anyone could turn up any further information, though. Storyliner (talk) 03:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

One Last Bonanza Musing

I wouldn't wish those sequels on anyone; more interesting is a 2001 "prequel" TV series that ran for 20 episodes called Ponderosa, with Little Joe when he was really little (a young child) and Adam Cartwright at around 17. The interesting part is that it's produced by Beth Sullivan, the same woman who did Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman, which I realized was a great show when I finally got around to watching it in reruns. When Ponderosa was running, I found myself wondering what it would be like if the show ran as long as the first series: the cast would be about the same age as the one in the original at the 1959 beginning of its run--would they be tempted to reshoot some of the same scripts with the new cast? What would the show look like? The main thing I suddenly realized was how great Lorne Greene's, Pernell Roberts', and Dan Blocker's voices were, and the new cast couldn't have competed with that, I don't think. Now actors' voices are largely homogenized, all sounding comparatively alike as we move further away in time from radio as the main source of in-house entertainment.

Anyway, thanks. I looked at your profile for a moment, by the way; zoology and chemistry. Fantastic. Storyliner (talk) 03:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Manderson, I'm curious about something: how did you find that article so fast? I think I'd just put it up moments before you found it. Thanks. Storyliner (talk) 03:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, I would've wondered about that. I never knew about that page; one of these days I'll have to read some Wikipedia instructions for a dramatic change.

And you're right, it is good to have a pal on Wikipedia. Storyliner (talk) 04:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have been documenting New York City Ballet on Wikipedia, or trying to, for the past few months: City Ballet has the largest rep. of any ballet company in the world.

Out of respect for the composers they've worked with, Igor Stravinsky among them, their choreographers often name their dances with the title of the music. Since more than one choreographer may make a dance to the same piece of music this results in more than infrequent ambiguity, and such is the case here.

William Christensen (and his brothers) were founders of the San Francisco Ballet. William went on to found Ballet West in Salt Lake City. He choreographed the first Coppélia in the US in the thirties, the first complete Swan Lake and the first Nutcracker in the forties.

The ambiguity arises in that Peter Martins, City Ballet's current ballet master in chief, has also made a dance to the same music. If one is to post an article on Mattins' dance, fairness demands that Christensen's also be (and good housekeeping says they should be cross linked.)

You write that you appreciate music; I do so as well, having a particular interest in the intersection of dance and music, and trust that you do not hold the former against me. Robert Greer (talk) 04:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S. The article is referenced to the extent that the Internet permits, NYCB's website and the University of Utah's library, the ballet predating the World Wide Web by nearly fifty years. May I refer you to various conversations concerning the pecularities of ballet on Wikipedia that you will find on my talk page?

Octet and other ballet productions

I do indeed have a profound respect for ballet and dancers in general. I was just making a note that that particular production may not be significant enough to have its own separate article (apart from the general article List of New York City Ballet repertory). I may be wrong, and am sure you have a greater knowledge of ballet than I do. I meant no disrespect, if that is what you interpreted my proposal to be.--Manderson198 (talk) 04:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User talk:DGG is a graduate librarian and Wiki. admin. whom makes a speciality of rescuing articles unjustly proposed for deletion. In the time that I have spent undoing the damage you've caused I could have written three articles -- and suggest that you might spend more time writing articles and less proposing deletion of others work in fields of which you are not knowledgable. I apologize for the ill-spirited nature of this reply but have had similar problems with other Wikipedians; you however appear to be far better educated than the rest and should therefore be held to a higher standard. Robert Greer (talk) 14:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I believe I saved the article from deletion by removing my prod, DGG just suggested to you that to have a stronger notability case, reviews of the production shoiuld be added. Anyways, case closed and happy editing.--Manderson198 (sprech) 14:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps you did, though DGG wrote, "tag no longer needed -- just add some reviews" (emphasis added). I was looking up the University of Utah information at the time that you tagged the article for deletion. Having found the reference I added that to the article but decided not to do any further work on it till the deletion issue was resolved.

This morning, case closed, I added the NY TImes review (reviews of dances made before 1981 are especially tricky to find, and dance has always been the most poorly documented of art forms.) You have thus embarassed me before the esteemed DGG (I am not writing sarcasticaslly.)

It really bothers me to be in such a bad temper during the holiday season, but you don't seem the least bit apologetic and don't seem to have learned a thing from this. Judging by the articles you've written, you may be an academic.

The first rule of academia is to stick to those disciplines in which you are competent, and you are proposing deletion of articles about which you know nothing. Wikipedia regrettably encourages such behavior and yours is assuredly not the worst.

But since you are educated, one would hope that you would hold yourself to a higher standard. Robert Greer (talk) 15:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think removing my own tag qualifies as apologetic...I removed it before I saw DGG's note. Manderson198 (sprech) 16:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But I also hope you understand why I placed it up for proposal-a play from 1958, redlinks for the majority of the cast, and no specific references. I thought it may be significant, but wasn't sure, that is why I used a proposal rather than a speedy deletion tag. Manderson198 (sprech) 16:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's a dance, not a play; do you know the difference?

And what has its date to do with its significance? Would you propose to delete Swan Lake? Hamlet?

Further, I should not have had to ask you to remove your tag; you should have done so of your own volition.

Had you checked the page history before doing so you would've seen DGG's change; which you then proceed to misquote.

Nothing you have written is in the least apologetic, but I nonetheless thank you for not proposing speedy deletion. Robert Greer (talk) 16:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't entirely think your crass remarks are necessary. I mistakingly wrote down play. Bottom line is, if you thought the play was significant enough to be listed you should have removed the tag yourself, or atleast had an objective party remove it for you. If you are oblivious to my apologetic connotation, then I do formally apologize. Please don't respond, as this matter is closed and this back-and-forth banter is not productive in the least. Manderson198 (sprech) 16:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

manderson, you did nothing wrong to prod an article when you had doubts about notability. the point of prod is to get the article improved if possible, or the existing notability clarified, and that has been accomplished. yes, time to go on. DGG (talk) 17:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I totally understand why you tagged Brian O'Connell for speedy deletion; its writing style is such that it seems like unmitigated nonsense. I was about to delete it when I traced back the "what links here" and found out that, however badly-written the article, the guy actually does hold world records. I just wanted you to know that I apologize for substituting my judgment for yours, 99.999% of the time you'd have been tagging one of the usual pieces of nonsense, and I'm going to see if I can make the article readable by cleaning up the nonsensical writing style. If you have a problem, I'm at your service on my talk page. Accounting4Taste:talk 04:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, frankly it surprised the heck out of me that the links checked out... it looked like the usual nonsense. I'm trying to make it a little more encyclopedic. Thanks for understanding. Accounting4Taste:talk 04:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there, and first off thanks for helping.

I reviewed the article Hopes Die Last and chose to remove the speedy tag. Notability may be found through touring and other Italian activities as per WP:MUSIC. I'm reluctant to speedy th.e article since it is a subject we may not know much about. A quick Google search returned a few minorly impressive hits regarding popularity. My issue is that it is hard to find an adequate way to research foreign bands. I suggest an AfD if you'd like to pursue this. Happy editing to you! Keegan^talk 07:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I too thought which that article is for speedy deletion, but I thought too if that aricle was in development (and because of this I placed thart tag in the article). It's okay for me your act.

Good Job for you! =D --Brunoy Anastasiya Seryozhenko (talk) 20:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see this all times in newpages, and whit this have thats which only write articles to offend someone, and "glorify yourselves"; I and all editors need be attent with this! =D --Brunoy Anastasiya Seryozhenko (talk) 20:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is your problem with the source I gave for this article? Cnet news is a respected source of technology news and Declan McCullagh is a well known journalist in the field.--agr (talk) 03:44, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No prob. I dug up the actual ruling and added it as a source.--agr (talk) 10:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool. Good deal. Manderson198^(sprech)/_(contribs) 13:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In response to your proposal to delete The Kazoo Funk Orchestra, I beg to differ...

According to the criteria for musicians and ensembles on Wikipedia:Notability (music), this band should be considered notable.

1. It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.

• Featured Article in the Evening Times (Scottish Newspaper) - Printed and Online
• Reviewed twice in Is This Music? (UK Music Magazine) - Printed
• Appeared in Art Uber Ales (Greek TV Show)
• Featured in the soundtrack of Trailer Trash (Skateboard Video by CREME Skateboards)
• Appeared on the Your Sound - Best of Term One compilation album released by King Tut's Recordings

2. Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country, reported in reliable sources.

• Toured the UK earlier this year (Glasgow, Edinburgh, London, Bristol, Chepstow, Sheffield, Inveraray, Dundrennan, Leicester, Fairlie).

Does this not satisfy the criteria? Pgrecords(talk) 10:34, 17 December 2007 (EST)

I believe WP:MUSIC also states:

• Please note that the failure to meet any of these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept.

You may be right, that is why I placed it under an afd tag instead of a deletion proposal. If you contest my tag please write why on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Kazoo Funk Orchestra. Manderson198^(sprech)/_(contribs) 15:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I changed my position on the AfD page, because I believe the band may be notable after seeing the new content. This AfD was not meant to be offensive, it is just used as a discussion tool. Manderson198^(sprech)/_(contribs) 17:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No offence taken, I'm relatively new to Wikipedia and got slightly confused at how fast things were happening. I hadn't quite finished the article and needed a rest. Pgrecords(talk) 12:56, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Hi M

first thanks for the assistance and guidance with the layout of the Burami Oasis topic I created.

I have noticed that several 'Goon Show' pages fail to disambiguate between two Larry Stephenses, one being a scriptwriter for the show and the other a sportsman unassociated with the show. I might be able to fix this myself, or at least start on the job, but I will need guidance on how to do this effectively. I have observed that the correct Larry Stephens is listed formally as 'Larry Stephens (scriptwriter)' which of course makes it clear who we want. But is there a way of linking to this page without having the bracketed word 'scriptwriter' appear behind the name every time it's mentioned?

cheers Yuctoborian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuctoborian (talk • contribs) 19:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you think that the redirect is incorrect please propose it for deletion at WP:RFD, but please do not blank it - it may be construed as vandalism. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 15:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A deletion discussion has just been created at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, which may involve one or more orphaned chemical structures, that has you user name in the upload history. Please feel free to add your comments.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:58, 10 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Manderson198! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

One or more of the files that you uploaded or altered has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it/them not being deleted. Thank you.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of MGA73 (talk) at 18:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC).Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Linalyl formate.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Leyo 13:48, 13 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Science lovers wanted!

Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 00:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most geography, wildlife and women articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 55 African countries, so should be enjoyable! Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African wildlife articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance. If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing any article related to a topic you often work on, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Might be a good way to work on fleshing out articles you've long been meaning to target and get rewarded for it! Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:56, 13 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Manderson198,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

I corresponded with you a bit around four years ago. If you're still active, drop me a line. Davy Crockett Swings Ol' Betsy (talk) 21:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Make that 13 years ago! Davy Crockett Swings Ol' Betsy (talk) 21:28, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]