User talk:W Nowicki/Archive4

Regarding the system bus article

Hello. I think the article is a great start, though limiting the article to a historical narrative, with links to other articles to tie other related concepts together and to cover related technical concepts might be too restrictive. One issue I have with Wikipedia is that it does not have any coverage about the application of system buses (or buses in that matter) to shared-memory multiprocessors. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, such an application of system buses was common, so I think that it is reasonable to expect readers to go to the system bus article for this information, this it might be a good idea to include this coverage. Thanks for taking the time to write the system bus article. Regards, Rilak (talk) 09:32, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi. When you wrote System bus, did you consult or copy from System bus model? It looks to me that you wrote it from scratch. The only similarity that I saw is the Null and Lobur reference, to which you added a Google Books link and page numbers. There's a question at WP:Deletion review/Log/2011 June 3#System bus model regarding whether an attribution dependency exists. Flatscan (talk) 04:15, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Specific language impairment entry

Just to apologise for taking out those links you had to reinstate. My first attempt to write for Wikipedia so am still learning rules. Don't want to be a vandal really. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deevybee (talk • contribs) 07:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

RE: More feedback

Hello, W Nowicki. You have new messages at Trevor coelho's talk page.
Message added 06:36, 1 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, W Nowicki. You have new messages at Trevor coelho's talk page.
Message added Trevor coelho (talk) 09:42, 2 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for your suggestions

I will def add more information to the Ophelia Lewis stub article. Thanks again for your help (BellaBeau (talk) 03:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC))

Talk:Joseph Medill

Hi. This edit had a minor typo in it that I've fixed with this edit. Cheers! --MZMcBride (talk) 19:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you please

comment on my article Bilkent Erzurum on my sandbox for the necessary changes?~Should I submit my article in this form?

Sincerely,Aysinpir (talk) 18:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For thoughtful improvements to networking articles including 100 Gigabit Ethernet --Kvng (talk) 01:48, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Luminescent solar concentrators

Hello, W Nowicki. Thank you for the nice work you are doing for encyclopedia Authors. I agree with almost all of your comments, but I only note that the references to the works of Professor Renata Reisfeld are justified because she is a professor of solar energy and working in this area since the 80's. (I work for the solar energy utilization only 4.5 years)

Should I send a second request after all the corrections according to your recommendations?

Thanks for review again, Levita.lev (talk) 09:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, W Nowicki, thank you, I replied you on my talk page. Levita.lev (talk) 08:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Front-side bus hypen

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Front-side bus. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Glrx (talk) 22:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

auto mdix

From the article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-MDIX#Auto-MDIX) I could not understand if auto mdix works only if the two devices have support for it, or if it works whenever one of the devices supports it.

If you could answer this, I'd be more than glad to fix the page. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.33.50.202 (talk) 06:38, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Replied on the Talk:Medium dependent interface page since it was anonymous. W Nowicki (talk) 20:25, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

More network-related articles

Since you are working on computer-network related articles, I thought I might mention a few more that you might be interested in working on. I've had some of these on my "todo" list for over a year and with my current workload, I'm not sure when I'll be able to get around to them.

We don't yet have an article for Media converter although we have Fiber media converter which could probably be renamed and new material for other media converter types added. There are two distinct types of media converters too. There are those with active electronics in them and those which are passive balun-type devices. Balun devices were common when converting certain types of coaxial networks to twisted pair wiring. (LocalTalk also used balun-type devices, although I'm not sure these are strictly "media converters"; Commons:Category:LocalTalk) The active devices have been extremely popular for converting 10Base-T/10Base2, 10Base-T/10BaseFL, etc. There are standalone devices and those which can be mounted into a modular chassis (often rack-mountable). AUI transceivers, (aka Medium Attachment Unit) including the vampire-tap type for 10Base5, AUI to 10Base2, AUI to 10Base-T, etc are also a form of media converter. MAUs were also available in multiport devices such as the DEC DELNI (File:DELNI.jpg) and many others. Most multiport MAUs are similar to 10Base-T Ethernet hubs (not switches), but some multiport MAUs are also Multiport repeaters. Also see Commons:Category:Attachment Unit Interface.

We also don't have an article for Network transceiver, although the really messy Transceiver article contains a badly written Transceiver#Ethernet section. In the days of 10Base5, networkable computers often had an AUI port, but the network transceiver itself was an external device (mentioned above). With newer network cards for personal computers, 10Base2 and later 10Base-T on-board network transceivers became common (and now a 100Base-TX network transceiver chip is included on most modern PC motherboards). There were also companies which made network cards which would accept a proprietary module to add either 10Base2 or 10Base-T as an option to an existing card (the connector was already present on the card). There were even dual-media cards available which could support a different media when the module was installed. Compaq had a unique combo Ethernet/Token Ring card which supported Token Ring once the module was installed. (I own a number of these cards, but I have no idea when I'll ever get around to photographing them.)

Hopefully not too tl;dr, but I thought I'd mention these and give a starting point if you feel like tackling them. --Tothwolf (talk) 12:49, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Indeed, I just was going to take a quick look at the 10 Gigabit Ethernet and 100 Gigabit Ethernet articles (since the last time I was employed it was somewhat related to those technologies). However, the more I look around, there are so many articles that need help, it is much more work than one person can do. It looks like many were edited by a mix of old-timers who relate personal anecdotes, and poor beginners who do not have a clue. I will try here and there but the task is daunting. Perhaps I should admit my other COI: I knew several of the Ethernet inventors, but have mostly lost touch.

Any help you can give would be appreciated. In particular, photos of historic gear are priceless for the articles which have no pictures at all. I generally find that Commons has fewer edit wars and other distractions. I am also trying to learn Inkscape so I can do a few diagrams where those are needed. The basic PHY layer stack detail diagram for example needs to be done. Besides the ones you mention, I ran across multi-gigabit transceiver which is very badly named since it discusses a bunch of network physical issues (e.g. a SerDes is often not part of the transceiver, etc.) Generally I prefer medium-sized artices with at least one citation per paragraph instead of a few huge ones and many stubs. I thought about merging several of the obscure 10 megagbit articles into a 10 Megabit Ethernet article, but not sure where to stop. I guess I might propose to merge multiport repeater into ethernet hub. At least it seems to me mostly the terminology is somewhat historical: they were called multiport repeaters when port count was small and coax was the medium, but as twisted pair took over, digital circuits got cheaper and denser, and port count grew the "hub" term became more popular. The downside would be that there were other kinds of repeaters besides Ethernet. But right now the repeater article has a see also to network hub which just goes to Ethernet hub anyway, and otherwise is just a cut-n-paste from a glossary. Sadly even repeater seems a cut-n-paste from the same glossary.

W Nowicki (talk) 19:34, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I've been working on some of these articles little by little for years. As for photos, I have an enourmous amount of "vintage" gear sitting on shelves but I don't have a way to photograph it. I've actually spent a good deal of time on Commons doing category maintenance for these type of photos. I would think multiport repeater could be sourced, but if not it could probably be merged there. For that fact, multiport repeater would probably be best left standalone since it should be covering arcnet and token ring repeaters too (a token ring repeater differing from a Media Access Unit in that a token ring MAU has no active electronics). --Tothwolf (talk) 00:58, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

X Series Page Updated

Hi Nowicki,

I've overhauled the X Series page - a massive clean up based on everyone's feedback. I'd appreciate you taking a look a the page and letting me know if I can take it live.

Trevor coelho (talk) 06:28, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Next Generation Mobile Networks

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

A little help

Hey W! Long time no talk. I was wondering if you know how to make a big discussion on discussing if or if not to delete a series of articles on the relatives of the Hawaiian pretenders I created a while back. I think they should be deleted, but I wanted to see other people's opinions. Thanks a whole bunch. And a late Happy Fourth of July!--KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:00, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh my gosh. Who is this woman? I hope you know. BTW I've deleted a few of the articles; they are here now. If you ever want to merge them into the more important articles, be my guest. I'm going to keep the main people from Kalokuokamaile down to Owana Salazar, and I'm going to keep her children's article since she will eventually die and her children will be the "next in line" and also her daughter was Miss Hawaii. I've actually have her and other Hawaiian royal as friends on Wikipedia facebook, so cool! I'll pick out some more later on and move on the the Kawananakoas. And.......

I'm also thinking of deleting all the pre-contact Hawaiian aliis I've created. See Talk:Alii Aimoku of Molokai. I know User:Viriditas and User:Mamoahina dislike these articles, and I know you tried fixing a few of them. Since most have very little sources other than Fornanders which are sometimes copy and pasted on and it also blends myths with actual history; I don't want people to get the wrong idea and believe it concrete real history. I would really want to know what do you think and if those can be proposed for deletions based on those problems. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:31, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Didn't notice you replied back until now. Sorry. Well I did a little research on Arago's picture. And I found out the queen is named Kaonoe. That name doesn't even sound familiar to me and there is no mention of any Queen Kaonoe in history. It might just be a French spelling of a Hawaiian name, so I thought maybe it's Kinau but she would have been too young and not queen yet in 1817...I'm probably not going to upload it if I can't find out who she is.

Anyway. I was wondering are you going to finish Henry ʻŌpūkahaʻia's article? I'm starting on Thomas Hopu's article; this I actually going to finish. He, in Chester Lyman's own word, is very interesting man. He was ʻŌpūkahaʻia and Humehume all rolled into one, serving in the War of 1812, captured five times in the war, converted to Christianity, help the missionary, assisted Asa Thurston, was the first Christian marriage in Hawaii, turned from the path and join Kamehameha III's entourage of pleasure seekers, went to California in search of gold and became a deacon at Mokuaikaua Church in later life. I might also start on William Kanui's article and them move to John Honolii. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:02, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Try linking and mentioning the other Hawaiian youths in his article.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:51, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

You should check Flag of Hawaii out. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 07:24, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reviewing Robert Emmet Odlum, and for your DYK nomination for it. I really appreciate it. Gildir (talk) 17:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Energy Efficient Ethernet.gif

Thanks for uploading File:Energy Efficient Ethernet.gif. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Renata Reisfeld

Shalom W Nowicki, Thank you for reviewing the article.

I have performed the following corrections: 1) I have changed the first paragraph as you advised; 2) The section "Honors and awards" is written in English prose now; 3) I have made corrections in "External link" section; 4) I have performed the part "References"; 5) I have updated the "Invited lectures", "List of selected publications" section.

I agree that you have removed most of the first paragraph.

I hope that I have made these corrections in accordance with Wikipedia rules. Аnyway I am ready to continue this nice work :)

I would appreciate very much if you could kindly remove the banner from the article top. With many thanks and best regards, Levita.lev (talk) 12:01, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reviewing the piece I have been working on for Michael W. Allen. I added a bit to it and think its very good now. Now how do I post it for public viewing? Sorry, as you can imagine this is the first time I have ever worked on Wikipedia and even though I have read all of the reference materials, its very overwhelming. BTW, I work directly for Michael and that is why I am re-writing his page. Thank you again!!! Ajpahl (talk) 14:45, 7 July 2011 (UTC)Amy, ajpahl

DYK for Robert Emmet Odlum

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blue Whale Clustered file system

You mentioned you find some additional independent sources about this. Could you post them there? Especially the one about the 2008 Olympics would help to establish notability. Cheers, —Ruud 09:58, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Re:Calcsys

Is the actual product's about page and download not a notable source? One can verify this should they wish using some legally free software released by Texas Instruments, and the files in the included archive. Andrei.computer (talk) 18:17, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

RE: LEAD_Technologies article

Hello, W Nowicki. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_July_7.
Message added 20:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development

Hi, I've seen your work here and although I appreciate your efforts, I am not sure that this is the way to go. As the article states, the FPs have a budget of about 7 billion/year. Most projects have budgets of around 1 million/year, some up to 5 million. A very conservative estimate then comes to at least 1000 projects per FP... That would make for a Gargantuan list. As it is, only those projects get listed for which people made an article. But as far as I see, only a minority of projects have created a WP entry, the vast majority apparently recognizing that this is inappropriate content for an encyclopedia. There are databases for this kind of projects, which WP cannot (and should not) try to replace or emulate. Just my 2c... Happy editing! --Crusio (talk) 08:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of National Benevolent Fund for the Aged

Hello! Your submission of National Benevolent Fund for the Aged at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! – VisionHolder « talk » 00:41, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for National Benevolent Fund for the Aged

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for cleaning up buried vandalism on Ethernet crossover cable Kvng (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for HyperSizer

Courcelles 08:04, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Traditional

I appreciate the improvements you've been making to technical articles. There's one edit that you've been making occasionally that rubs me the wrong way. It's a small thing but I thought I'd get it off my chest. You seem to prefer the word traditional over alternatives such as conventional, intrinsic, normal. I find the use of traditional out of place in these scientific articles that cover practices that have been in existence for a relatively short period of time. Traditional, for me, implies a longstanding practice (i.e. multiple generations) based on belief or ritual. Thanks for listening and keep up the good work. --Kvng (talk) 14:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

DSL lower case

Hi, I saw your comment at the requested move. In fact, Nageh has pointed out that there are grey areas in telecom terminology, when terms move from proprietary to generic, but people keep capitalising because they see it in title-case titles and it's commonly abbreviated with caps. It's pervasive. DSL should, by WP's guidelines and many others, be downcased. But not protocols, I believe. Nageh says it often comes down to whether a term refers to a set of solutions (downcase). Tony (talk) 02:04, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

W, I've raised the matter of the sorry state of WP:Manual of Style/Computing, at the Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#WP:MOS.2FComputing. The copyright issue, BTW, is not germane to the point I'm raising, but I do think it needs a mention in the MoS subpage. Tony (talk) 01:51, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Please elaborate more on what the copyright issue is. Thanks. W Nowicki (talk) 18:17, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I have a lively imagination, peaked by articles specifically on (hard-copy) books. Especially those that seem to list lots of info that looks pretty much like it's been lifted from the book. But my recent query (via MoonRiddenGirl) ended up just uncovering a fork/mirror, whatever they call it. Now I know what to look for. On a different matter, have you thought of dropping into featured pics to do a few quick reviews? Tony (talk) 13:01, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Your DYK nom for IPlant Collaborative

Hi Nowicki, I've reviewed your DYK nom at Template:Did you know nominations/IPlant Collaborative and there are still issues. Could you please see my comments and reply there? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:29, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

• Don't forget to double check. Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but not sure what it is I am supposed to "double check". I think this article has more than enough citations for DYK level. But as I said in the nom, I do not have memberships to get all the papers, nor do I think the DYK rules require that. I have other things to do so will move on. W Nowicki (talk) 23:46, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

• "Double check" i.e. see my reply. I have promoted the article to Prep 1 (great hook). At the nomination page, I was only requesting that a bit of text be cited and two references be given a bit more information (they looked like [www.example.com Example] when I checked). Anyways, very interesting hook and article and sorry if there has been a misunderstanding between us. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for IPlant Collaborative

Orlady (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Enabling Grids for E-sciencE

Hi, I see your argument about the redlinks, but if we go that way, then if I create an article on a non-notable subject, all I need to do is create a lot of links to it and it won't be deleted any more. Given that the article has not reliable sources about the project, there is not much to merge and it may be best to simply redirect it to European Grid Initiative. Do you agree? --Crusio (talk) 17:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Dear W Nowicki, since you're editing the European Grid Initiative page (thanks for your effort!), I have one thing to ask you - can you please rename the page as European Grid Infrastructure? That is the correct name of the organisation (see http://www.egi.eu). And this page: http://www.egi.eu/about/history_of_EGI.html has information that you might find relevant. Thanks, Sara 145.100.30.18 (talk) 08:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Egad, you are right. It seems just the design study was an initiative, while the thing created was an infrastructure. The distinction between individual research contracts and the overall effort is exactly the distinction I am trying to make. So should be able to move it to European Grid Infrastructure and be more accurate. W Nowicki (talk) 16:55, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the wonderful world of EU projects! :) Thanks for your work. The article is a nice summary of what EGI is (and was) about. Only one comment: can you add a sentence (on the purpose section) about what EGI actually does? (Provides access to HPC, virtualised and grid computing resources to European researchers and their colleagues.) I would do this myself from my wiki-account (yes, I'm a wikipedian as well!), but since I work for EGI I would rather not (conflict!). Cheers, Sara 145.100.30.18 (talk) 07:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Well the rules for conflict of interest do allow you to fix articles, just be extra careful about the neutral point of view and other guidelines. You could also login and leave a message on the talk page of the article in question. Individuals tend to have bursty periods of activity since we are volunteers (and sometimes the Real World interferes). Anyway I am still trying to figure out what EGI really is. EGI.eu at least seems not to be the actual infrastructure itself after all, but a consortium that supports it in some way. And of course we need to describe it without buzzwords nor neologisms. Will work on it. W Nowicki (talk) 18:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Timeport101/Verax_NMS

Hello W Nowicki, Could you give me some feedback on my article (it's about network monitoring software User:Timeport101/Verax_NMS). I'm writing it since almost 6 months. It was my first wiki article and I made some mistakes. Last time I moved it form my user space without waiting for review and I was punished for that (it won't happen again). Could you help me ? Timeport101 (talk) 11:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, replied on your page W Nowicki (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your help re:Paul Shoup House

I am indeed rephrasing the articles as I get time. If it helps to know, I have permission from the author to use the information from the NR application: but it shouldn't be verbatim, I understand that now. Thanks again for all your help: it's looking much better, thanks for the work on the references. Wjenning (talk) 23:19, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I originally found this article because of a question at WP:MCQ; Wjenning had gotten written permission to use the form under cc-by-sa-3.0(but I'm not sure why he needed anything more than proof of his statement that the form was a work for hire) and was trying to figure out how to prove the permission — from a purely copyright standpoint, there's no need to rewrite anything. For some reason, we have the OTRS template on Talk:Paul Shoup but not on the house's talk page; I'll try to find an OTRS volunteer to check the ticket and add the template to the house article if applicable. Nyttend (talk) 02:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Right, not a copyright violation, just uneeded work and generally not good style. More on Talk:Paul Shoup House.

I noticed later today that the "Criteria B" reference was deleted on the house by another editor. I don't know the proper etiquette about this : should I let the edit go, contact the editor that deleted it, or what? You're recommending that we include it (and I thought it made sense: as the key part about the houses NRHP application was about Paul Shoup, not the architecture: especially since all I can not yet confirm who the original architect was on the house). Your advice appreciated. Wjenning (talk) 03:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wjenning (talk • contribs)

Not sure what you mean. I tried to edit it a bit for what I thought was redundancy: clearly a place called "Paul Shoup House" was named for a person named Paul Shoup, and the fact that he has an article shows he was notable. No need to mention it so many times (but should probably wikilink in body as well as lead). I took listing details out of the lead because the listing should generally not be what makes a site notable, but the other way 'round. Something interesting happened there, so therefore it was listed. Very few NRHP listings are due to architects, at least the ones I wrote up are mostly about what happened there. And I generally like chronological order, so put it at the end. Certainly a matter of taste, but be careful of getting into ownership mode where you think an article is "yours". Like it or not, every article on wikipedia is subject to various edits by others, and reverting the work of others who try to help you can lead to alienation. More on talk page. W Nowicki (talk) 17:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm working copyright issues for several older photos. I'm not confident of the copyright status on the National Register Application: doing further research for appropriate photos. Will update one when I can. I do agree that the "neighborhood party" photo isn't most appropriate, but it's one I have that I took - and the Wisteria is characteristic of the home in this neighborhood. As the National Register listing is primarily relating to the family - I'm starting the research there, and will add to the description of the house as I can. Thanks for the feedback on how the article can be improved: please continue to review this page as it's being updated. Regarding changing the article : others in the talk threads recommended the change that was undone. I'm still learning about wikipedia: if there are multiple ways to do something, and different editors keep changing where things are located: how does that ultimately stabilize out? Wjenning (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Alas, Wikipedia never stabilizes :-) it is a constant work in progress. But generally bursts of activity and then people get distracted with real life. Will comment on photos on artcle talk page. W Nowicki (talk) 22:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

An honest inquiry: I had read during some of the style pages (can't find it now to reference it) : that one approach would be to organize the article based on more important info nearer the top, and less important stuff near the bottom. Was done this way so editors could just "draw the line" where the article had to end, as they made edits quickly before something was published. This was my intent when drafting the article. I have listened to you, and moved the info about the NRHP to the bottom of the page: more in the chronological style you suggested. Wjenning (talk) 22:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

NRHP Photo Contest

Just a reminder that the WP:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Fall 2011 Photo Contest

will start on Friday, October 21.

Smallbones (talk) 22:58, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Data mining / knowledge grid

Hi, about your addition to data mining: knowledge grid from university of calabria - while certainly not the sole effort on doing data mining in grid environments - seems to be reasonably relevant [1] (300+ citations, KDNuggets coverage). My main concern is actually where to place the section. IMHO it doesn't fit into the "process" section, which is explaining the KDD process. Actually it would fit best under "see also" along with many other efforts, but then the current article is proposed for deletion ... any ideas? --Chire (talk) 07:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Fancruft

Greetings W Nowicki. Rather than go off-topic over at SIBIS AfD, am replying here to your invitation to participate in getting rid of fancruft. As you will have noticed from my recent contributions I am no longer very active here at Wikipedia in English, but I can assure you that in my time I have done much more than my fair share here - and am, in fact still doing so - even more so - over at the Wikipedia in Spanish, where there is an even greater need for removing fancruft than here, as well as making myself many enemies by trying to convince regular users of long-standing to add even a single reference to articles. While Wikipedia in English is clearly a larger project, it also benefits from far more users keeping an eye on things (1,526 admins vs 139 - of whom only 90 are currently active according to the mindless stats. - but in fact only some 50-odd that can be considered in any way active; 5,560 reviewers vs some 80; 4,294 rollbackers vs 180-odd, including bots, etc.), so you'll excuse me if I leave the fancruft-fighting over here to others... I can assure you that it ain't for lack of interest but very much for lack of time. Regs., --Technopat (talk) 19:03, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Honolulu harbor

Can you move back it to Honolulu Harbor? Pearl Harbor, Channel Islands Harbor, and etc. for examples in which the h is capitalize. The moving button isn't allowing me. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:13, 19 October 2011 (UTC)