User talk:Olaf Davis/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Olaf Davis. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

I could use another pair of eyes on an article revamping that I'm working on. If you're willing, I'd appreciate the help. I'm the primary author of the Weather beacon article. The revamping is in my sandbox at User:SDC/sandbox#wb. The bulk of the article is a listing of the weather beacons that have ever existed. I had encountered a couple of these things in my travels and wanted to document all of them. I had expected the list to be much shorter than it turned out to be. So the list grew unwieldy and the footnotes too numerous (many footnotes are just links to pictures of the weather beacon). I wanted to turn the list into a table and include other information about the weather beacons in it, but now the table seems unmanageable. Are there any style guidelines? Any suggestions? SDC (talk) 18:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd be happy to lend a hand, SDC. I'm about to go away for the weekend and won't have much time for editing, but I'll have a look at your draft on Monday. If you'd rather find someone who can look at it sooner, feel free. Best, Olaf Davis (talk) 09:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm in no rush; I'm happy to have your help whenever you can give it. SDC (talk) 17:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Right, I've finally got some time to have a look at the page - sorry the delay was so much longer than I expected.

First of all, the table looks much nicer (and easier to use) than the existing bulleted list, so good job. It is fairly long - is that why you call it unmanageable, or is there another reason? Given the relative lengths of the list and the prose section of the article, I'd definitely recommend splitting the former off to a separate article called List of weather beacons. With that done I don't think the length would be too bad (there are plenty of longer list pages), and if the addition of more beacons makes it grow substantially in future it can always be split again into a list per country (though right now that'd result in either some very short lists or a messily-named "list of weather beacons in Europe and Asia" or something).

What do you think - would splitting the table off make it feel more manageable, or is more needed? I'm happy to give a hand with that if you'd like, and Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists may be helpful. Olaf Davis (talk) 20:55, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

The problems I have with my list are these:

• The table seems too long, and it's hard to find my way around in it.
• The table seems odd broken up into separate tables under country headings
• Only the American tables needs the jingle column. Would it look alright to remove that column from the other countries' tables?
• Is there a way to recruit assistance from Wikipedian photographers in the relevant cities? I hate putting links in the photo column; I'd much rather have photos. Also, most of the photos I have are daytime photos, and nighttime photos would be better.
• Many of these weather beacons were built by companies that no longer exist and are on buildings that have changed names. I'm not sure how to handle that situation (e.g., St. Louis) without getting too messy.
• Is it possible to express the color codes using colors instead of words?
• I don't like the state headings on the US table, but it makes it easy to navigate. Is it possible to have a collapsed table, where each state would expand if clicked on? It seems odd when only a couple of rows show up on the screen at one time.
• What's the best way to handle Sioux Falls, South Dakota, where all the weather beacons are small reproductions of the major one in the city?
• Is it ok to put ???? where I don't have dates? I know it doesn't look good, but I hope that if they are there, it will let people know that I didn't forget, but that I don't know.
• Is it possible to use a smaller font or have the table extend to be wider than the screen width?

I think I've tracked down nearly every weather beacon in the world that has ever existed. It's hard to know. I feel confident from my research that absolutely nothing comprehensive has ever been written on this subject. Again, any ideas you have are welcome. SDC (talk) 07:04, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

• Perhaps the collapsed tables for individual states would make the table a more manageable length.
• I still don't have any good ideas about the separate countries thing - I'll let you know if inspiration strikes.
• I think it would be fine to leave the jingles column out of the other tables.
• The best bet for getting pictures is probably to ask at the relevant WikiProjects - for example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney for the MLC beacon. I could give you a hand contacting them all, if you'd like?
• I'm not too sure about the beacons that have changed hands either... I'll have a think.
• Wikipedia:COLOR#Overriding_font_colour seems to show that colour names can be used in place of colour codes - I don't know how many different colour words it accepts, though.
• Help:Collapsing explains how to use collapsible tables. I've never used it myself, but if you can't figure it out easily I'll happily help you experiment!
• I think the current formatting of the Sioux Falls beacons is fine. Alternatively you could put a note on the main one - either there in the table or as a footnote - to explain that the others are reproductions.
• Putting a ? for unknown dates is probably fine. If in any cases you know certain dates it was active (say, you found an article mentioning the beacon in 1970 but didn't know how long before that it was made) you might want to write 'before 1970', in the manner of dates of birth and death.
• I've had a look for anything on font size or tables wider than the screen, but come up with nothing.

I think that attempts to answer everything... Would you mind if I edited your sandbox to try a few of these ideas out and see what looks good? Of course you could revert any changes you didn't like. Olaf Davis (talk) 18:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey Olaf Davis, I just wanted to let you know that User:Olaf Davis/DYKTemplate has been listed in Cateogry:Deprecated DYK templates, since I'm not sure if it is being used or not. If it is being used, please let me know so I can take it out of the category and make sure it doesn't get MfD'ed or anything. Thanks, Politizer ^talk/_contribs 15:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I do agree, it's just hard to walk away from opposes that you entirely disagree with. I know I'm not objective in these discussions, so I will take heed of your advice :) I'm not doing too bad, RfA is just a stressful arena. Hope you're well, also. —Cyclonenim | Chat  22:42, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Since you were active on the RfD you might like to comment on the Requested move to get Prayer mats back to their rightful place. Bazj (talk) 09:49, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'll comment there now. Best, Olaf Davis (talk) 10:33, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for visiting Questions of Truth. It is very helpful to have someone knowledgeable and completely independent editing the page. I would very much appreciate any improvements you could make and especially your views on two topics:

1. Should the information on the endorsements by William D. Phillips, Francis Collins and Martin Nowak go back in the article? I think they help the reader get a sense of the book, but I don't feel able to restore them because of WP:COI
2. Should User:NBeale/nclb be restored as Nicholas Beale? This was done by an occasional editor in the light of having writen Questions of Truth but a hostile editor moved it back to userspace (without an AfD debate).

Your comments would be much appreciated. Best wishes NBeale (talk) 21:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello NBeale. I'm fairly busy at the moment and can't spare a huge amount of time for Wikipedia, but I'll try and look at the articles if I get the chance. You may want to try filing a request for comment to get more opinions. Olaf Davis (talk) 18:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I fear people might think it was WP:COI if I filed a RFC, alas. NBeale (talk) 19:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you need to worry: if anything I'd expect people to appreciate your honesty in working so hard to avoid a breach of WP:COI. If you'd like, though, I'd happily file an RfC as a neutral party. Olaf Davis (talk) 08:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that's be great. NBeale (talk) 09:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I've posted the RfC - sorry for the delay. Good luck! Olaf Davis (talk) 09:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I have noted your offer to help with editorial issues on Wikipedia and would appreciate your comments on the next step that should be taken for the Kim Schmitz profile Talk:Kim_Schmitz. You will find extensive discussion on a revised version of the profile on the Discussion page. My current intention is to upload the revised content to the main 'Article' page within two days if no further comment is received in that time. --Tturner2009 (talk) 11:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I've replied on the article's talk page. Olaf Davis (talk) 18:41, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Olaf. I'm not sure about your early non-admin closure of Yale Sustainability. It seems like it you may have jumped the gun a bit. We would probably have had a better discussion with more input if you had not closed it. You may have a procedural point but it could be seen as playing the system. You might not want to be so hasty next time. --Salix (talk): 21:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I'm sorry if I did anything improper. My reasoning was that the nominator said there was already a consensus to merge, and no-one in the subsequent debate suggested deletion, so AfD was not the proper place for the article - if more debate was needed it could have gone to proposed merges. Could you explain why you think it might look like 'playing the system'? I thought I was acting in the letter and the spirit of WP:Speedy Keep. Olaf Davis (talk) 21:21, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

No worries. It looked a bit odd to see the discussion closed and then find that it had been redirected all within a couple of hours of the discussion starting. I've just noticed it was not you who did the redirect. --Salix (talk): 21:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, ok - I can see how my speedy-closing and then immediately redirecting might have looked a bit funny if I'd done that, yes. Olaf Davis (talk) 21:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

copied from Julian's talk page Hello. I just closed this AfD debate as a speedy-keep (and non-admin closure) since it seemed to me that it was actually a proposed merge, which doesn't belong at AfD (per, among other places, the first numbered point of WP:Speedy Keep). However, my decision has since been criticised by two editors (here and here), which leads me to doubt myself a little. Since I've seen you at AfD a lot, and obviously I'm eager not to repeat any mistake I may have made, I thought I'd ask your opinion: did I do something wrong? If so, what have I misunderstood about WP:Speedy Keep? Many thanks, Olaf Davis (talk) 21:36, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Your closure was fine in my opinion. Granted, I tend to a bit less strict than other admins with regards to following process at AfD. It never hurts to let AfDs run their full course, but in this instance I agree with you. Cheers, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks for your time and input. Olaf Davis (talk) 21:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Olaf, I dont know If you remind me, I wrote an article of Philatino and It has been removed. I stopped recreating It because I get tired of all the complications, but I really thank you for trying to help me. The matter Is that I just saw an article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystic_Stamp_Company, and I think that If my article was advertising and didn't had the URL of Philatino's web and was really the most objetive that an article who is talking about a company can be, what Is this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystic_Stamp_Company ??? I'm sorry Olaf, I talk with you beacuse you seemed to me like a neutral person, but I know that there Is people that pays to some administrators to write an article for wikipedia and don't remove It. Please, I feel really frustraded for all my unsuccessful attempts and It's just too much for me to find an article like this that isn't even being discussed..! Thank you again for all your help. Sylvia.Plath07 (talk) 16:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Syliva. Thanks for your message - I'm sorry it's taken a little while to reply.

I've looked at the Mystic Stamp Company article. You're right that at the moment it doesn't contain any decent sources - much less than the article you wrote did, in fact. I can understand why that would be frustrating for you. The article talks about two incidents in the company's history (its acquisition of the Z Grill and Inverted Jenny) which seem to me should surely have enough mention in newspapers and so on that they'd indicate notability. I wonder if you'd be interested in helping me look for sources to add to the article? Sources existing is a different thing from them being on the page of course - if we can find some we can probably improve the article a long way (there's also some language in it that seems much more promotional than encyclopedic and should probably be removed even if the article stays). If there aren't any sources to support the claims then the article would of course be deletable.

I don't know if you have any interest in that, but it would seem like a shame if your first and last experience with Wikipedia were such a negative one, after you were so eager to contribute. Let me know what you think. Best wishes, Olaf Davis (talk) 22:08, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Lacking reply, I've since made some improvements to the article myself. Olaf Davis (talk) 02:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

… for restoring the user's comment in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sacred Gin. You are correct that my removal of it was inadvertent (I just saw the strikethroughs and didn't scroll down far enough). Bad error, before I'd had my morning coffee. Deor (talk) 14:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. I was going to drop you a talk-page note as well but got called away from the computer. Olaf Davis (talk) 15:08, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Dear Olaf

Thank you for interacting with this page. There has subsequently been more very negative comment upon this page by anonymous user which I have removed by just edit and delete! Is there more I can do? I have contacted the user though their own ip (98.201.15.170) address talk page but don't expect much. Further negative comment can only damage the school and the education of our students. I would appreciate any advice. Thanks. Mike Weston, Head of School Mbweston (talk) 12:33, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello Mike. If the user continues to add this unsourced content and pays no heed to warnings then they can be reported at this page - an administrator will likely block them from editing if they show no sign of stopping. In the meantime, please let me know if I can be of any more help. Olaf Davis (talk) 15:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Not everything on the article is verifiable - "the school has a reputation as being one of the best in the North of Netherlands." There's no proof of that statement. So are positive, unverified statements allowed to stay, while negative unverified truths must be deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.201.15.170 (talk) 23:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

No, positive statements ought to be verifiable as well. Any controversial statement lacking sources can be removed by an editor who sees fit. Olaf Davis (talk) 01:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, its the only international school in the 'north' of the Netherlands! But I understand and completely agree that positive as well as negative comment should be verifiable. Mbweston (talk) 14:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate the AfD --> MfD move. I was a little asleep this morning :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:11, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! Olaf Davis (talk) 13:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

After your DYK suggestion, I checked out your page and noticed that natural broadening is on your to do list. That has been on my list for awhile now too, though towards the bottom. Have you collected any useful sources for that? I don't have much myself, other than a bookmark in Rybicki & Lightman. Also, I did not even notice the comment in small type you made. Were you a regular DYK checker in the past? I have been thinking about getting involved in that myself, but have not seen a clear set of guidelines anywhere for people interested in checking DYK nominations. James McBride (talk) 21:47, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi James. I found a couple of pages in one book at work, but nothing more substantial - it's been near the 'bottom' of my list in whatever sense it can be said to have one too... Maybe a collaboration would spur us both into action?

As for DYK - yes, I used to be a very regular contributor/checker there a few months ago. I haven't explored the pages in detail recently, but back then the guidelines were pretty sprawling and not very newbie-friendly. If you have any questions about the process I'd be happy to pass on what was the case at that time. Olaf Davis (talk) 19:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I seem to have completely forgotten to reply to this. I'll certainly let you know if start doing any work on natural broadening, as it would be nice to have some help, and likewise I'd be happy to assist you if you get things started. I think my project for the next couple of days though is to get a page up on interplanetary scintillation, since that term is dropped in the article on PSR B1937+21 without any reference to what it is. (Also, you don't need to let me know that you've replied on my talk page—I'll keep this on my watchlist.) James McBride (talk) 02:27, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'll let you know if I get to it first. Looks like a nice start you've made on interplanetary scintillation there! Olaf Davis (talk) 11:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

On July 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lazarus sign, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

{{User0|Candlewicke 12:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Julian. Lately I've been toying with the idea of getting involved in GA reviewing and I wondered how you'd feel about mentoring me. I should say up front that I'm fairly busy with real life other important things, so if you mind it being a slow / gappy process you should say no now. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 16:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC) copied from Julian's talk

Sure, I'd be happy to help! Would you like a more formal mentoring process, or would you rather just ask questions as you go? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Hmm, how about if I pick a nominee, draft a review, and post it in user space to get your feedback before making it 'official' - does that sound good? Also if you have any general advice beyond what's encapsulated here I'd be grateful to hear it. Olaf Davis (talk) 19:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure, that would work. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I've made a start on a review here. Perhaps you could check in every so often to make sure I'm not on wildly the wrong track or give any comments that come to mind, and otherwise I'll come to you if I have any questions.

Speaking of questions - if I find really small points, like grammar or a broken wikilink, is it fine to fix them myself or should I leave them and just mention them in the review so that the question "is Olaf secretly a major contributor to this article?" remains easy to answer? Olaf Davis (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, nevermind that question - I should RTFM. Olaf Davis (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Your review looks good so far. I'll take a peek every so often to check your progress. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

All your concerns are valid. Keep up the good work! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Olaf Davis (talk) 09:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

• An excellent review. To be honest, I wish I had the patience to examine articles so thoroughly.
• Reviews often last a week or more, so that's not an issue. It's better to provide a detailed and careful review over a longer period of time than rush through it.
• Re this, yep, that's acceptable.

Let me know if you have any further questions. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

And yet again,

Congrats but I am not surprised at the hits. For some reason, people seem to have a fascination with this biblical character. Did you notice Lazarus syndrome on this page? --BorgQueen (talk) 15:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I did actually, just after adding Lazarus sign. It didn't occur to me to use a picture of Lazarus - I searched in vain for a free one of the sign. Clearly we need to go and find other medical phenomena named after him! Olaf Davis (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Olaf. Good that you found me. Sorry if I am commiting some nube error by editing your page in this way. Harlandski (talk) 19:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

No, not at all - that's what it's here for! I must confess that nothing quite spells 'Noob' like, well, misspelling 'noob'. Olaf Davis (talk) 19:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh that is perfect! Like mispronouncing a swear word in the playground, or a teacher trying to be cool and getting the name of a band muddled! Harlandski (talk) 20:09, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I knew there was something like that out there, forgot to look, Thank you • S • C • A • R • C • E • 13:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! Olaf Davis (talk) 13:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my AFD. I responded on my talk page, but am not sure how to handle this type of behavior (or this user). It appears the same user has done the same thing with articles titled Bbfc.co.uk and Ifco.ie. These aren't advertising, like the other one, but still seem pointless. (Actually, the first one had a "speedy delete" tag, but was then overwritten with another redirect). Perhaps a few more warnings on the talk page, then bring it to ANI? I'm not sure how to handle this. Thanks! -Sme3 (talk) 20:10, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Re. the confusingness of AfD: you might want to look at Twinkle, a script you can activate in your preferences, which automates various tasks including AfD, RfD and the like. It makes a little 'XfD' tab appear at the top of the page and takes care of all the listings and so on with a couple of clicks.

Re. the redirects: I agree they seem pretty pointless. I can't imagine anyone looking up 'bbfc.co.uk' who wouldn't think to either search for 'bbfc' or just go to the website and find out who it belonged to! Speaking to them on their talk page is probably a good plan - though I'd go for a short friendly message rather than a warning template since it might be more likely to get a response. If they do refuse to discuss and the creation of redirects becomes distuptive you could go to ANI, but it's always best to exhaust conversation first. Let me know if I can help with anything. Olaf Davis (talk) 20:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I actually DID use Twinkle, I guess I just chose the wrong xFD! I realize I may have been thinking a bit harshly re: going to ANI (which is why I didn't do it). I did leave a friendly note on his talk page [1], but looking at the history of his talk page, I don't really expect much out of it. However, I'll practice WP:AGF and see what comes out of it. -Sme3 (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry - I suppose Twinkle doesn't help much if you don't know which X to choose, no! I think your note to him takes about the right tone - if he's not responsive (which I agree may be likely) ANI can come next. Olaf Davis (talk) 15:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Olaf! I've just finished translating a short article from Russian Wikipedia, about the Orok language. There was already a stub, which included an English reference, so I left that in. Could you possibly check and see that I have not committed any heinous crime? Thanks. Harlandski (talk) 17:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Harlandski. The article looks good - glad to see you're still keeping up interest!

I made two small changes to the page - one per WP:BOLDTITLE and one that just felt slightly more natural. A few other minor points that come to mind are:

• It says that 'Orok' is the Russian name but doesn't explicitly say it's the English one too.

Hmm, good point. Maybe I am splitting hairs, and Orok is the English name as well.

• The number of speakers in Japan is either 3 or 'uncertain' depending on whether you follow the infobox (and Lewis) or the text (and I assume Novikova)

Ah, thanks, I'll look into this.

• It sounds as though the language was unwritten until 2008, but I'd make that a little more explicit.

Yes, but I don't know if this is the case.

As I say though those are all minor - there are certainly no 'heinous crimes' that I can see! Good job. Olaf Davis (talk) 09:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Good to know - thanks for your help! Harlandski (talk) 21:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Olaf. I've got a few days at home next week, so am keen to get my teeth into a bigger project, namely Arbat, which needs supplementing from the featured article in German Wikipedia de:Arbat. I wonder if you could advise on Wikipedia etiquette: Is there any way of pointing out to other potential translators that I am doing this? It would be a shame to do all this work and then find out someone else has got there before me. Or is that part of the fun of it all? Harlandski (talk) 21:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I would leave a little message on the article's talk page saying what you're planning to do - hopefully anyone else planning major work will have watchlisted it and see your post. You could also do the same on the talk page(s) of the relevant WikiProject(s) - in this case WikiProject Russia - which should be linked from the article's talk. Between those two you should reach most people with an interest in the page.

Also, something you could do if you're interested in seeking collaborators is to go to the article and click 'what links here' in the left-hand toolbar, which will take you to Special:WhatLinksHere/Arbat Street. If there are any user pages on the list you could go and see if it's someone listing it in their 'to do' section. Olaf Davis (talk) 08:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Your advice isn't working. :( It's the thought that counts, though, and I thank you for that. Cheers, Dylan620 (contribs, logs)^{help us!} 02:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Bummer. Well, good luck finding something that does. Olaf Davis (talk) 09:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Olaf Davis. I'm posting to let you know that your name has been mentioned on a list of potential candidates for adminship on the talk page for RfA's here. If you are interested in running, or if you would like to make any comments, feel free to join the discussion. decltype (talk) 20:15, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey OD, I looked over this article after you removed the tag and had a couple issues I wanted to discuss with you:
The original author has created this article in the past and it has been deleted three times now as evidenced by his talk page: User_talk:Chrisu90.
The username is an obvious reference to himself: Chrisu90 = Chris Uscinski, born 1990. WP:AUTO
The notability claim has now been removed by the original author.
If this is no longer a A7 CSD, then its definitely a G4.
Thank you for your time, AeonicOmega talk 00:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi AeonicOmega. Thanks for pointing out the previous creations of the article, which I hadn't seen. However, G4 is only for pages which have been previously deleted via a deletion discussion, i.e. articles for deletion in the case of articles, so it doesn't apply here. Since the PROD has been removed I was intending to take it there, but I notice that the claim to have topped the charts has now been removed, making it technically eligible for A7 again. I wonder if the author can be persuaded to stop recreating it without invoking WP:SALT. Olaf Davis (talk) 12:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I've tagged it again for A7 and left a message at his talk page asking him to stop recreating it. Let's hope he takes the message. Olaf Davis (talk) 12:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I think third time will be a charm. Thanks! AeonicOmega talk 16:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey, just wanted to let you know I've been following your progress at Talk:Mercury-Atlas 8/GA1, and everything looks good to me. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Julian, it's good to know you're checking on me. I think I've more or less got the hang of this reviewing lark now... Olaf Davis (talk) 18:25, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Is {{underway}} now. Good luck! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Olaf Davis has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Olaf Davis's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Olaf Davis! Peace, Rlevse 00:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks Rlevse! I'm curious: what made you pick me, if you don't mind my asking? Olaf Davis (talk) 12:05, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I find users who seem deserving and put them on my pending list. Good contributions and little or no drama merits awards. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:12, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks again. Olaf Davis (talk) 10:46, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ciphers. I removed your speedy deletion tag from File talk:ABC pict.png. I don't see that the content was nonsense: it was a reasonable comment on the file associated with the talk page (though I have no idea if it was true or not). Besides, there's no real need to delete a talk page even if it does contain just nonsense - it could just be blanked. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 12:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC) Copied from Ciphers's talk.

Hi Olaf. Glad to hear your comment. i checked the page, and you were right about the content of the comment. In fact i agree with you that there is no real need for deleting a talk page even if it does contain just nonsense, however i use twinkel for csd now, and i find it a very convenient way to csd pages, warn users at the same time, and eventually have an admin check my review of the page. If there is a way to blank the page and warn the user in one shot please let me know. Best --Ciphers (talk) 06:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any such feature, but I've only used Twinkle for deletion tagging and never really investigated its other facilities. In cases of obvious vandalism you could probably use Huggle, but I don't know if it also has a 'that comment wasn't very relevant, see WP:Talk' feature. Good luck looking! Olaf Davis (talk) 09:25, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I can do this. Trackerwiki does not understand the basic rules and I don't have the time to correct his/her edits. It may need Admin intervention. Dynablaster (talk) 13:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's taking a bit longer than I hoped for. Thankfully, the two points left (I think the images are now resolved) should hopefully be nailed by the same source... when I can track it down.

I've finally got some free time, so I'm going to try dredging back through This New Ocean, and see if there's some overview text on things like public reaction. If not, I'll start casting my net wider, and see what turns up. I promise you something at least in the next 24h ;-) Shimgray | talk | 15:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Great, it would be nice to get the GA done this weekend. Well done again for all your work on it! Olaf Davis (talk) 15:44, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

It seems very tempting to do another of them, I must confess - the sources are all pretty much the same! But not for a little while at least ;-)

Thanks again for all your help. Shimgray | talk | 19:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

On October 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Leo Goldberg, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 09:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Mijn Nederlanse is ook niet so goed. Ik prate nan ouw taal van Oost Vlaanders in Belgium. Mischien kudde hij mij helpen mit DYN. Hoe dagget moet. Just the very basic, entry level is fine. Op de eerste plaats, I'm not that great with "tools, etc. I'm sure, early on, I will have veel foutjes. I do alot of random article editing and I come across some interesting tidbits. I would rather have a task to do than to get drawn into the many dramas and conversations available. DYN seemed to be a good choice. Any advice is appreciated. Bedankt as we say in "Stekese".--Buster7 (talk) 13:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Hallo Buster7. Het is wel leuk met je in het Nederlands om te sprekken. (Mag ik 'je' en niet 'u' op Wikipedia? Ik hoop wel!) Sorry dat ik zo langzaam was met dit aantword. Of course I'd be willing to give you a hand with DYN. I'll warn you though that I haven't been active there for a while, and I know there have been a few changes in how things work since I was. So, I could give you some pointers with the disclaimer that I might in fact be talking rubbish - but if you wanted to speak to someone more acquainted with today's DYK I wouldn't be offended! I could point you in the direction of some helpful editors I remember from my time there, if you liked. Olaf Davis (talk) 22:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Olaf, I've now moved the newby articles project from my userspace to Wikipedia:Newbie treatment at CSD. I'm thinking of doing a write up for the signpost, so it would be really nice to have an update on your two test articles. ϢereSpielChequers 23:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll get on it as soon as I get some time for editing - it should be within a day or two. Sorry to keep you waiting. Olaf Davis (talk) 12:55, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

No need to apologise, thanks for taking part. We now have 13 examples plus at least three on the way (including your two). ϢereSpielChequers 13:40, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Denialism, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denialism (2nd nomination). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.Unomi (talk) 06:06, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Unomi. Olaf Davis (talk) 11:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

RandomTime 22:36, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi there Excirial. I want to inform you that you were unwittingly part of an experiment of newbie treatment in which I participated under a different name. The purpose of WP:NEWT is to determine how experienced users would be treated if they were new users and created sub-standard but viable articles. The alternative account was LestWeBeScattered; you can find a description of my experience at WP:NEWT#Articles by Olaf Davis in case you are interested. Also, I want to apologise for having deceived you and used your time in this way, diverting it from real work on the encyclopedia. If I can offer my time and services for anything you need in return, feel free to ask at any time. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 22:16, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, i remember the mistake i made on that article pretty well, mostly because i felt particularly silly for tagging it. I had actually checked the article before tagging it, and having done so i found a couple of sources i wanted to add to it. At the same time i was busy working on Coreva, for which i needed an overview of the speedy deletion templates (conveniently listed under Twinkle's CSD tab). While busy with that task i forgot where i left my cursor and tapped the mouse, tagging the article, resulting in the nonsensical A3. I undid the damage quickly (At least, so i deemed it), and seeing this i doubted that the user would have seen the template before removing it. So i just made the improvements i had planned before proceeding to the next page and my coreva based activities.

My thanks for that reality check you gave me describing what the new user would likely have experienced. I have become so utterly accustomed to seeing a message box, and using the page history, that i forgot how this could actually affect a new user who doesn't have to know this. In retrospect it may have been more prudent to drop a short note on this mistag, perhaps even extending it a bit to give some pointers for improving the article. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 11:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, Excirial. I can definitely sympathise with that sort of click-in-the-wrong-place mistake. It's also very easy to see how logs of tagging work can disconnect you from what a newbie might think; I also sometimes tend to see templates, acronyms and so on as single units and sometimes forget what they looked like before I was familiar with them. It can take a conscious effort to remind myself I'm leaving messages to be read by an actual person!

Anyway, I'm glad you've taken this as a constructive 'reality check' - as the experiment was designed to be. Happy editing, Olaf Davis (talk) 22:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I am very sorry for the comment I left after your post on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of oldest surviving members of the House of Representatives. I had meant to post it in response to Borock's rhetorical question "Why would anyone want to know who is the oldest living former congressperson?"

Again, I am very sorry. Star Garnet (talk) 06:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, that makes more sense of your comment. To be honest I was more bemused than anything else at your apparent interpretation of my post, so no harm done. Thank you for your apology nonetheless; I appreciate it. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 09:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Could you please have a look at the DYK nomination for this article? Thanks, Ucucha 12:34, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

On December 6, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Myinsaing Kingdom, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)