User talk:Moni3/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Adoption

Hi Moni! You seem to edit a wide variety of articles and have a knack for getting them up to a very high standard of quality. I'd like to be able to do the same. I'm primarily concerned with learning how to figure out what would make an article better and how best to find relevant information for article improvement/expansion. So far, I've made relatively small contributions to psychology-related articles, but my interests extend far beyond that topic alone. Would you please adopt me? XL2D (talk) 18:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

If you're interested in improving articles to get them to Good article or Featured article status, I would be interested in assisting you. I can't spend time if you're more interested in the myriad arguments about who's right on the talk pages. There are precious few editors who stick around just to improve articles within their interests. I can help you with that. What are you interested in improving? --Moni3 (talk) 18:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Moni! Getting articles up to GA and FA status is exactly what I had in mind. While arguing on the internet is my first love, I've really come to understand that, like everything else, it has its own time & place: forums designed for that purpose. I've had my eye on the experimental psychology and logotherapy pages. I know they could be better, but am a little stumped as to how that could be achieved. Any advice? XL2D (talk) 15:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Both articles are short on citations and detail. You don't have to be an expert in the article you choose to edit, but you should be open to realizing who the experts are. Often, the first book I pick up on an article is only part of a story. By reading more, more, then more, I realize who the most revered experts in the field are (and who claims they are, and is full of poop). So, my first bit of advice is to read like a demon, and get your hands on anything you can. Go to your local library, and get familiar with the Interlibrary Loan department. If you live close to a college or university, go see what you can do to get a card to check out materials. The public library will be a drop in the bucket compared to what a university library can provide.

Once you've read two or three good-sized comprehensive books on the topic, you'll be able to see what the majority of literature covers. This will be your outline for the article. The material in the article should reflect what most of the experts have written about the topic. If ten books are written about Theory X, and two about Theory W, more material in the article should reflect Theory X. I have realized, since I wrote my first FA, just how far I have gone to get references. Before, I thought such lengths outrageous, but in baby steps, they become logical.

As you realize what you can add to the article, put a note on the talk page of the article saying you would like to expand it and you'll be working on it. That will alert editors who have been maintaining it that you have a genuine interest in the topic. Invite them to assist you. In five articles I've expanded to FA, I think maybe once has anyone volunteered to assist. This may be your show completely. However, it won't be uncommon once you start adding sourced information, for people to give you unsolicited advice. Take it. Balance it with what you know about the topic, and reflect it in the article.

You can expand bit by bit, or create your personal sandbox, write the whole shebang, and add it to the article all at once. I prefer the sandbox because I can write a lot, think about it, edit my language (that comes out weird sometimes), then post it all. I have more control with a sandbox, and I catch my own mistakes easier.

Tell me first how you feel about these steps, then we can discuss citations, prose, peer review, the GA and FA nomination processes, and dealing with other editors after you have written your expanded article. I look forward to working with you. --Moni3 (talk) 15:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for going into such detail Moni. It looks like I'll no longer have time to waste on YouTube or Gilmore Girls reruns. Pity.

Originally I'd planned on adding bit-by-bit, but your recommendation combined with WP:Deadline convinced me to get the articles up-to-par in my own sandbox. How would one go about creating such a thing? Heh, I mentioned on the talk page for experimental psychology that I'd be working on it, and am already torn between wanting somebody to share the workload with and having all the glory to myself. That probably makes me a bad person, but so does editing wikipedia at work. Cheers XL2D (talk) 17:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, you'll find people who appreciate your efforts and tell you it's a nifty article, those who nitpick it to death ("You need a comma after the third clause in the penultimate sentence."), and those who don't really care because they don't know the kind of work (and batshit insanity) that goes into working on an article to get it featured. However, don't expect too much glory. You might get a barnstar, but at the most maybe 15 other editors will remember you're the author of the article in question, compared to the thousands upon thousands of people who may read your article. (More than 100,000 people read To Kill a Mockingbird when it was the main page article on July 11, and none of them knew it was li'l ol' Moni who spanked that bad boy into shape.) You'll be seeking the assistance of a few editors in your journey, so it won't be all you. Once you realize how much work others put into your article, don't be stingy with the thanks or barnstars yourself. But don't give them away for nothing, either.

So, do it because you love learning about the subject. Don't do it because you want the praise, unless you're really good at praising yourself. And when you're overtaxed on logotherapy information, you can retreat to the Gilmore Girls reruns. They'll be there. Your sandbox awaits you. --Moni3 (talk) 19:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

If I was looking for praise, I'd start a religion ;) XL2D (talk) 16:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I do not recommend you add these to the TKAM article page or talk page, but I thought they would be fun to make. Scartol • Tok 19:38, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Dude, seriously. I lolled. I have to figure out how to use those without getting templated by an admin then blocked... XL2D, Scartol here is a prospective copy editor. He will rue the day he interrupted this advice with his hilarious nonsense. --Moni3 (talk) 19:46, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Pfff.. I'm ruing it already. Scartol • Tok 21:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

If you were an admin, you wouldn't have to worry about it... you could just unblock yourself ;-) ---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 06:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Chat with us

Hey there, Moni3! Awadewit told me you want to be part of the podcast conversation we're coordinating about writing and editing Wikipedia articles. If you're interested, please visit the scheduling page and indicate your preference. Cheers! Scartol • Tok 13:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

We've got a finalized date and time for the podcast chat, so visit the page and sign up to confirm! Scartol • Tok 21:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I know you watchlist important things, but just in case

Hi Moni. I made this post to Protonk, and he replied with this. I'd like your opinion(s) on my post, and his response. Is there common ground here that can be a bridge over trouble waters? Or at least, like a bridge over troubled waters? Keeper ǀ 76 18:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I need to slow down my archive bot. Protonk replied to my hypothetical scenario, now in my archives, here. Keeper ǀ 76 17:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

About hurricanes

Hurricanes suck and blow, by the way...^[1] Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 18:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Yer not just whistlin' Dixie there, neither. --Moni3 (talk) 19:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

And we're not the only ones who thinks that either... Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 23:03, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Gay Pride Images

Hey Moni - I took some last year, but didn't go this year. The ones I took are on Dyke (slang), Transsexual, and a couple of others. I don't think they are suitable for what need; let me know if you want me to snap one of the bar, etc. --David Shankbone 19:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, David. Was looking for large masses of people. Groups don't have to be identifiable. Just something to show how large Pride is now. --Moni3 (talk) 19:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I went image hunting. This is the best compatible-licensed shot I could find on short notice. Not free but possibly obtainable older shots: [2] and [3]. This isn't what you're looking for but it made my day. Maralia (talk) 01:42, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Beauty, beauty, look at you; wish to God I had it too. Nice work Maralia! --David Shankbone 18:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I'll concentrate on images some in a few days. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 19:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

José Sarria FAC

WOuld you mind swinging back through and seeing if the improvements I've made since the FAC opened lead you to change your opinion? Thanks. Otto4711 (talk) 23:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Otto. I'll try to give it a look-see before I leave. Thanks for the reminder. --Moni3 (talk) 00:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you wearing white?

Beautiful flowers for the beautiful brides...Congratulations, Moni! Karanacs (talk) 01:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Yay for lesbyterians getting married! Congrats! Bring me back some souvenirs from Castro. APK is gonna miss Jeffpw 21:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

YAY! (to echo one of my favourite Wikipedians) I'm really happy for you both, and I hope you celebrate in style. Is there anything you'd like to have knitted as a wedding gift — maybe a lacy white shawl or perhaps a Picasso-esque beret or a once and future stylish hat? ;) (Tragically, years of reading Marie Claire have done nothing to improve my fashion sense. :P) I'll be thinking of you with warm and affectionate wishes, Willow (talk) 21:38, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Best wishes and heartfelt congratulations !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't sure I was reading that right, but – congrats aplenty, most definitely. Scartol • Tok 21:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Always the last to know ! Although late to the party, the sentiments are undiminished. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you to all. It was a wonderful day and a wonderful trip. Thank you to the State of California and the fine gracious people in the Sacramento County Marriage Licenses office, who believe I have the good sense to know who I would like to marry. --Moni3 (talk) 14:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

checking if we're on the same page on and the band played on

First off congrats, remember to wear layers as we're a bit foggy and windy at the moment, since it is a bay area summer. Someone added a note about Hatians to band played on which I tacked a citation onto diff. I'm going off of the 20th anniversary, but I wasn't sure if you are using the same edition and if the numbering varies. I added a few page references to Haitians as an overlooked risk group with ch. 12 at st luke's new york (p. 124 for me) and ch. 13 at the CDC (p. 135–136 for me). Can you just make sure we match up page wise. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Optigan, I apologize for not replying right away. I was traveling. I also apologize for putting this article on a back burner. I was involved in some other articles. I will do my best to look at this one and give it a thorough read-over soon. I know you have issues with the criticism paragraph about Gaetan Dugas and I know I have to get to it. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 14:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

No need to apologize, you have a life outside of wikipedia and you have a lot of stuff on your plate on wikipedia. I've been barely making my way through the book, so no problem, if and when you feel like working on the book some more I'd love to help you in whatever why I can. I just asked about Dugas and the criticism earlier because I wanted to see what I should look at while I read through it that needed to be worked on and that was on the talk page. This was just a note to make sure that the citation I added matches your page numbers when you have a chance. Also I don't really get much chance to use that cliché in the literal sense. Thanks and don't worry about it. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you feeling lucky punk?

Moni, if you are interested, let me know... you should also read My essay on how to pass an RfA. I know that Sandy wants to co-nom if you choose to run (and that she doesn't like to have more than 2 noms when she co-noms.)---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 06:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Do it. Do it. APK is gonna miss Jeffpw 06:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, if you do decide to run don't transclude your RfA until you have 2-4 hours that you can watch it. People expect the candidate to answer questions (if posed) during those first few hours after an RfA starts.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 07:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd place a large amount of money on it getting through with a percentage of over 90-95%, FWIW..07:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Balloonman, Moni is traveling. Yes, I would co-nom, but after a less-than-optimal (but still succesful) recent experience, my terms are 1) no more than 2 co-noms, 2) no co-noms I don't know about (don't want to be on a ticket with co-noms who don't handle the RfA well), and 3) time to review and proofread the page before it goes live, so there are no surprises. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that she was travelling when I posted my RFA note... and I knew you'd have the above criteria ;-) What did you think of my Nom for her?---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 19:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Busy morning, haven't had a chance to look at it yet, like to get through my watchlist, and then focus on the more important stuff :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've had a look. Balloonman, you know RfA better than I do, but there are a few things I would do differently. Almost the entire first paragraph is about *me*, not about Moni. I would reduce most of the first paragraph to a couple of inline URLs, and less about *me* (SG). "I don't know how she would answer that question today ..." sounds like you're not sure about the person you're nominating; you should know if you're nomming her, IMO. The third paragraph is excellent. Also, what about the premature nom from EditoroftheWiki? Doesn't that show to those who have admin tools, even though the rest of us can't see it because it was deleted? Doesn't that need to be explained? And why did you link to her talk page discussion with him? That's unclear. If you address those items, I can write a complementary blurb, explaining Moni's work and character as I know her from interaction at FAC, on my talk page, and as I've observed how she handles conflict (with humor, and by not taking things too seriously). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, give me a bit to add my co-nom, and then be sure to carefully follow the instructions regarding signing, dating and transcluding, and make sure no one Supports before you've transcluded. Unsure if you want to drop Balloonman a note about any of my suggestions above ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it poor form to tell the nominator how to nominate? I thought it might be, so I didn't add to your comments. Otherwise, I agreed with you. --Moni3 (talk) 16:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Added mine, I'll drop a note to BM. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Moni, IMHO, it is never inappropriate to ask a nom to rewrite a nom. If you don't think it is accurate or accurately reflects you or for whatever reason, it is YOUR RfA. I hope you like the modifications... I did have to leave the "Pooped on a bot" quote because I love it too much ;-)---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 19:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

A note on process; I'll watch the tally updates (you don't need to do that), and if anyone gets off-topic or particularly nasty, BM or I will move it to the talk page as needed. It's usually best not to respond to every oppose, as that turns people off. If a specific issue comes up, a brief response is good, but avoiding the appearance of fighting with opposers is important. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:TFA/R

Moni, there's an opening right now if you want to add Ann Bannon; one point doesn't usually make it, but worth a try as long as no one else is asking for the slot. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

To Kill a Mocking Bird

Hi, you reverted my edits with the summary of restore article to state as agreed upon after FAC, numerous copy edits, and suggestions by other involved editors. I disagree with your edit summary which appears to be an attempt at censorship. Also, please point out where the state was agreed - the Talk page shows that you didn't respond to my suggestion on what could be supported by reference. You were under a lot of pressure at the time, so I didn't push it, but in the intervening period, you also did not respond. I've (re)started a discussion on the Talk page. Oh - btw, I changed name from Bardcom to HighKing! Thank you. --HighKing (talk) 12:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Who hasn't wanted to kill a mocking bird every now and then? They're such tossers. I'm a bit tied up at the moment, unfortunately... you know, looming tropical storm, people acting like they've never seen rain before, same old. I may even be spending the night at the hospital if the BF has to hold the fort down there -- he works in cardio and is on the crisis management team. Stoopid BF. UNF is closed and I was bored all day, so I made cookies and watched old movies. Can you tell I'm not an alarmist? Anyway, er, I will look in if/when I have a chance, but from a quick glance at the talk page, I think you've been more than reasonable. No way should that much detail be added to the lead in the first place (per WP:LEAD, common sense, etc), but I think that if the sources are reasonably reliable, then the current wording is more than adequate. Hope this helps, if only a little. Oh, and I hope you have a pair of galoshes at the ready! María (habla conmigo) 21:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Your RfA

Good Luck... I think you'll do fine... you are an excellent candidate... a few months ago, I didn't fully appreciate how seriously you took this project, and saw more of your humor... but I know better now.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 22:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey there Moni, just a FYI, not answering questions or taking the time to get the answer can really hurt you in an RfA. Otherwise capable people have failed because of them (I personally think they should be banned unless they are dealing with a specific question for a specific candidate, but alas, that's not in my power.)---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 00:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Good to know. I just checked to make sure there wasn't a question that I haven't answered, but I seem to have answered them all. I don't know what to respond to the taking the time to answer them. I much prefer a well-thought-out response than I do a hasty one. I know you're kind of "on the line" with this, but you know... just chill. It'll all come out good, whatever happens. They're getting me, in all my thoughtfulness and foibles. --Moni3 (talk) 00:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

So far so good... it's about where I expected you to be in the 80-85% support range.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 13:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Please clarify

I have concerns with #10 and #11. (#12 wasn't much of an answer, but I will understand it as referencing the other questions on the page.) But I have a feeling that most of it is just due to not more fully explaining. Would you please clarify, fill out your response? - jc37 01:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Done, I hope, to your satisfaction. If you are still unclear, how about presenting a concrete example and I'll do my best to reply with what I know. --Moni3 (talk) 02:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. They did help.

As for clarifying on my part: My biggest concern was one statement:

• "But for simplicity's sake, in a yes-or-no situation such as an AfD, XfD discussion, as I understand it, consensus is determined by majority rule."

Absolutely not, for several reasons. Though I suppose that it's easy enough to see how it could be perceived that way. Read the second sentence at WP:AFD, which points directly to WP:CON.

And in relation to #11, you seem very unsure about what steps to take and when to take them.

The latter I could chalk up to inexperience, and hopefully something you would learn "on-the-job".

But the first is something that I might oppose for. (See: User:Jc37/RfA/Criteria.)

You'll probably pass, so my concerns may be moot.

Anyway, my next step is to more thoroughly check out your contribution history.

If you have any thoughts/concerns/questions about the above, please feel free to ask. - jc37 02:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's true. I may not pass. I'm ok with that. What is more valuable here is that not only am I learning, but I hope to provide an opportunity for others to do that as well. It took my first five FAs for me to learn how to construct one from the ground up, including citations, MoS issues (that change frequently), and references. I just wrote my first article with ref notes the other day. It was quite interesting. --Moni3 (talk) 02:42, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

"It took my first five FAs ...". Now you're just showboating. Stop it. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Reminds me of the time I went to congratulate Cirt on his talk page for another FAC, after he had, like 17 or some ridiculous number. Instead I just said, "Gee, another boring bronze star. Ho hum." Someday I could change that to my 5th RfA. Ha. Err, no. This will be it for the challenge. I have articles to write and review. --Moni3 (talk) 18:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Hang in there; the WikiFossils may be all out of bullets now. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 04:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Followup

After going through your contributions, I have a question. In several places you have referred to yourself (alone) as a "committee" or a "majority". Could you explain/clarify? - jc37 00:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure to what you're referring. Can you provide a diff? --Moni3 (talk) 00:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I should have saved the links. I didn't realise it would be a recurring theme when reading at the time.

It will take some time to find (which I will do later), since I'll have to go through all your contributions (again). - jc37 00:49, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I appreciate your thoroughness. I'm not quite sure when I did that, but it was probably when I thought I was hilarious, if in fact I referred to myself as a committee or a majority. Perhaps I was trying to lighten a tense situation. If you think I was being serious, or the context of the discussion was serious, I'd be happy to look at a specific instance. --Moni3 (talk) 00:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

You did, and while I'm curious concerning the comments, I've decided that going back to find the links is just going to be prohibitively time consuming (I did it once, and I don't think it's worth doing again at this time.)

As I noted above, while my concerns may be moot as you may pass regardless, I'll go ahead and comment there. (Mostly I'll probably just copy/reformat my comments from here.)

Thanks for helping to clarify. - jc37 03:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what to put here, but it needs to be a new section

Best. RFA. Response. Ever.[4] Risker (talk) 05:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Worst. RfA. Opposition. Ever. However. —Giggy 08:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Is this fun, or what?! --Moni3 (talk) 12:52, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You are classy, glad to see you hold your head high. RFA is bullshit, adminship is bullshit, there are some WikiFossils that have a stranglehold on it, fear-based mostly. OMG, she's never done a NAC! How do we know she won't collapse wikipedia in on itself if she (gasp!) closes an AFD???? Because once something is deleted, we can never get it back!!!!1!1!eleven!11! Bullshit. You're going to pass by the way, don't withdraw. Keeper ǀ 76 14:23, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Why would I withdraw? It's like a circus without the clowns. Because clowns are creepy and make me want to punch them. Thanks for the note. I'm actually enjoying the opportunity to discuss these issues. I think it's interesting. --Moni3 (talk) 14:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

And this is why you will make an excellent admin.... No gaming the system, no fragile ego, confident in what you know (and what you don't), and always willing to lighten the mood :) Karanacs (talk) 14:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

That hurts my gentle feelings, Karanacs. I demand you apologize. Kee kee. Just kidding. --Moni3 (talk) 14:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

My first read through that sentence, I thought you said "that hurts my gentile feelings, and thought, "Oh, no she didn't". So glad your feelings are merely gentle. And what do you mean "circus without the clowns?" Surely I'm not the only one that can see the clowns. (don't respond to that - agreeing with me that there are clowns at your RFA will be like pouring water on a Mogwai, THEY WILL MULTIPLY...). Keeper ǀ 76 14:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Er, I think I'm going to have to oppose over that comment... there is a reason why I chose my moniker---nine years of freaking out little children... er, I'm not sure if that came out right...---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 13:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Agree with everything above, and glad to see that you're dealing with what can be an unnecessarily fraught process in the right way. Giggy's right, the opposition is, how shall I say it, of dubious plausibility. Don't ever change, whatever the outcome. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I won't. :) Thanks. I am enjoying the journey more than the prospect of arriving at the destination. --Moni3 (talk) 18:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Which is why I was willing to nom ya... I like atypical candidates who show the ability to communicate and develop consensus (to me those are the most important attributes of an admin). You have the experience, may not be in the standard areas, but heck... they condemn people for going through admin coaching because it "prepares" a person by having them get involved in areas where they otherwise won't work. Then they condemn people for NOT going through admin coachinn taking explicit steps to prepare themselves.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 14:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Put that one in your pipe and smoke it; Wiki's most admired editor not only endorsed your RfA, he double endorsed it!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Wha? I'm not Wiki's most admired editor? Oh, right. My RfA. QED. --Moni3 (talk) 12:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Sandy, you are my most admired editor... after my wife of course---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 15:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

FAC: The Texas Chain Saw Massacre

Hello. I was wondering if you were interested in helping to promote The Texas Chain Saw Massacre to FA status, because it will be really great if it did reach it. The article could also use a few more reliable sources, but if you can help in anyway at all, that'll be great. Give me a shout if you are interested. It'd be greatly appreciated. Thanks, --EclipseSSD (talk) 17:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA

I thought asking this here might be more appropriate than asking you at your RfA. And yes, I have a good relationship with some of the people who blocked me, so don't think that I am setting you up with this question. I just want the honest truth and gut response.

In the following situation, how do you react: User:Ottava_Rima (me) is a known content contributor who has created many important DYK and worked on many important articles but also has a massive block log for edit warring and tendentious editing (which I obviously deserved). Right now, he is currently in a dispute between another user and they are arguing with each other over the topic tendentiously and causing problems on talk pages. How do you intervene? a) ignore their conduct and let it resolve itself, b) warn the user that their conduct is out of control and detrimental to the project, c) block the user for (insert duration here) time, d) same as c but make a mention of it on ANI, or e) fill in your own answer. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

P.S. if you want, I can move the question to the RfA if you want the response to be more public. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Ottava. I saw some of the ANI threads you've either been involved in or the subject of. Though I think I only saw an FAC of Awadewit's where she protested your frequent opposes, I didn't get into the details of any of the other instances. However, it appears that you are, on the surface (which means, as far as I have read, which may not be too far), knowledgeable about the subjects you edit. It would be very tricky. I would have to choose an e) for this because I would want to become intimate with the details of the dispute. There's honest content dispute and there's being bullish about getting one's way in the article. I get very involved in the articles I write, and as they are improved, their maintenance is very important to me. So I understand the stress involved in not only watching an article I work on get edited by someone else, but realizing that an editor is improving an article where I could not. It's hard to discern where content and emotion meet and diverge. I think if tempers flared and the editors appeared to be at an impasse that someone could step in and try to reach a compromise. Not unless someone involved became completely abusive should blocks be an option. And is there such a thing as an unimportant DYK or article? Let me know if you need clarification. --Moni3 (talk) 19:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

All DYK are important. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 19:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Mocking Bird

Please read. Thanks. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 20:50, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I thought you were trying to kill me personally with that edit. I will read. --Moni3 (talk) 20:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

How so? :) Or do you mean the before revert/compromise edit? Ottava Rima (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

So, all of the problems and long windedness, and it boils down to just needing to alter three words. Thats nice. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 18:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

As it does in most disputes on and off Wiki. Such is life. I hope it has been taken care of. --Moni3 (talk) 18:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I hope you didn't mind my interference. I just wanted to jump in to make sure there weren't any major problems. :) Good luck on your work in the future. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

No, not a bit. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 18:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

And here I looked at the title of this section and wondered why these two editors were making fun of a basketball player. Cheers. :-) Risker (talk) 18:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Ha! I don't know what to respond to that... (This is rare.) --Moni3 (talk) 18:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

If this Mocking Bird won't sing, maybe someone will buy Risker a Diamond Ring? Keeper ǀ 76 18:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA

Best wishes for your RFA -- Tinu Cherian - 13:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

... no experience in areas relating to adminship...not convinced she knows when to delete pages, block users or use page protection effectively...no reports to WP:AIV, or any other board to give an indication of where she’d block a user...not having enough experience in my eyes to use the tools correctly. How incredibly disturbing. Sorry about your RFA, Moni. It is cruel. --I'm an Editorofthewiki^{[citation needed]} 22:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Not at all. I knew I would get this opposition. Stretching minds is a bit painful sometimes, to the stretcher and the stretchee. As I offered in a recent discussion, it happens in real life as well, with much more severe consequences. The best is when we get to look back and say what we used to be. --Moni3 (talk) 22:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

This is the attitude I knew you'd have based on our conversation previously... which is why I was willing wanted to nom ya.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 15:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't know where else to put this, but I had No Idea that Wikipedia maintained a Patrol Log. "Marked as patrolled" does nothing to stop something from being "marked as speedy tagged" and "marked as deleted".  :-) Keeper ǀ 76 19:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

<facetious> Everyone on Wiki should be required to do new page patrolling for a day </facetious> just to find out how hard it is. Bloody hard, I couldn't stick with it, the Pollyanna factor knocked me out when I hit a situation where a young girl had been murdered and her divorced parents had dueling pages to rather obviously funnel support to their competing charities and continue their divorce feud ... over this dreadful murder of a delightful girl. Ugh, that was when I quit. This is where Slp1 (talk · contribs) shines. What does it mean in my patrol log, from the limited time I dabbled in there, that I accepted some articles that were eventually deleted. Do I get an F? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Only if "F" stands for "frozen waffles". "Marked as patrolled" is meaningless; you have no idea how many articles I've deleted that have been arbitrarily "marked as patrolled". There are some terrific newpagepatrollers, don't get me wrong, but there are also several npp's that mark as fast as they can, IMO, to "beat someone else to it" if for no other reason. I've seen attack pages along the lines of "Sally Jane is a fat slob she eats her own boogers, ha! Hi mom!!!" that were "marked as patrolled". (god, I hope it wasn't you marking one of those pages...that would earn an F for shur....Keeper ǀ 76 19:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Sally Jane is a fat slob she eats her own boogers, ha! Hi mom!!! was my first FA. Don't malign my work like that. I had that cited and everything. --Moni3 (talk) 19:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

And I cleaned up MoS and citations on that article, too! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:56, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll say nothing else here (Ha, yeah right...) other than that these two edit summaries are two of my favorites, ever. Mostly Sandy's. I can think of many "MoS compliant booger eaters", some of which I'd love to block, some of which I'd love to promote to adminship.  :-) I won't name names though.... Keeper ǀ 76 20:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

yummmmm, waffles. How many pages do I need to mark as patrolled before I get some? Karanacs (talk) 20:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

38 and a half, plus a trip to the frozen foods section of your grocery store. --Moni3 (talk) 20:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Epidemiology

You know I adore GrahamColm, but the person on Wiki whose field is epidemiology is Eubulides (talk · contribs). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Sweet. I'll ask! Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 03:42, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I could help out a bit on the technical side. For starters, And the Band Played On #Gaëtan Dugas as "Patient Zero" says "Andrew Ross pointed out the mistakes in his methodology in an article in the American Journal of Epidemiology" but doesn't cite the article. Do you have a citation or any other info about that article? Eubulides (talk) 04:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to find it. I have access to Lexis Nexis. I'm not sure about medical articles, but I'll do my best. If I can't find it, can I provide you with month and year? Might you be able to find it? Do you have access to medical literature? --Moni3 (talk) 04:11, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

It's Andrew Moss, and his 1988 letter to the NYT editor (which is itself already cited in ATBPO) cites what may be the paper you're looking for:

A.R. Moss, D. Osmond, P. Bacchetti, J.-C. Chermann, F. Barre-Sinoussi, and J. Carlson. Risk factors for AIDS and HIV seropositivity in homosexual men (American Journal of Epidemiology, No. 125, 1987, pp. 1035–1047).

Honestly, though, his letter to the editor itself contains an excellent explanation of the flaws in the prior study - it may actually be what you need. Maralia (talk) 04:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Editorials themselves contain good facts, but since they're editorials they're not as reliable as articles. I didn't want to hang my paragraph on a letter to the editor. --Moni3 (talk) 04:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The incorrect last name explains why Eubulides couldn't find it:

• Moss AR, Osmond D, Bacchetti P, Chermann JC, Barre-Sinoussi F, Carlson J (1987). "Risk factors for AIDS and HIV seropositivity in homosexual men". Am. J. Epidemiol. 125 (6): 1035–47. PMID 3646828. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the cite. I will look into it when I get a chance (I'm away from my library right now). Eubulides (talk) 04:55, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposals on Template talk:Sexual orientation

Hi, you've contributed to past discussions on the Template talk:Sexual orientation page and we are now in the process of noting which of several proposals might help resolve some current content disputes. Your opinion to offer Support, Oppose, and Comment could help us see if there is consensus to approve any of these proposals. It's been suggested to only offer a Support on the one proposal you most favor but it's obviously to each editor's discretion to decide what works for them. Banjeboi 23:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Benji, I can't make heads or tails of that conversation. What are people supporting or opposing??? What does it mean? Who's paying attention? Who makes the final decision? --Moni3 (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

India House

I know I still owe you feedback on Stonewall, but do you have any time to take a copyedit crack at India House? It's up for FAC and facing opposition. I did a copyedit not long ago, but it still needs some prose work. Thanks again for the great podcast! Scartol • Tok 23:41, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Scartol. I read about half of it last night after your note here. Couldn't get through it all, but I will leave a note on the FAC later today when I do. Thanks! --Moni3 (talk) 12:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

128-32

Just so you know, you are allows 2 more supports and one more oppose... if you finish with 128 supports and 32 opposes, then you will finish with my private prediction of how you would do!---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 15:02, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you win a bet? Are you betting for or against, like Pete Rose? Do I get a cut of any of it, because for money I might change some of my answers...j/k. --Moni3 (talk) 15:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't matter now... you have more supports than I expected ;-) I thought you had a good shot of joining the 100.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 05:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:Stonewall Inn September 1969.jpg

Image:Stonewall Inn September 1969.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Stonewall Inn 1969.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Stonewall Inn 1969.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The Ladder

I was referring only to the physical format and production values of the early issues, not to the content. Fans had presses (mimeographs, mostly) and experience in printing short-run publications at a low cost; and (being members of a persecuted minority themselves) many fen were sympathetic with the DOB and similar groups. Most of the early history of this stuff is buried in old fanzines, most of them not online, and many of them obscured by the necessity (until painfully recently) of keeping people's names out of the articles. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

In searching for "Ermayne" in back issues of The Ladder, I find two stories from 1960 and 1961, one on lesbian-themed films (that references Ackerman), and a story entitled "No Exit" credited to a Colleen Stein. (I might be able to email them to you if you wish.) However, this brings the issue with the weight of Ackerman's submissions to the magazine. I don't think the DOB article is appropriate. Perhaps a mention of the assortment of articles that were available in the magazine in the article for The Ladder (magazine)? The true names of pseudonym'ed contributors to The Ladder grows ever more... --Moni3 (talk) 17:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll see if I can trim it a bit (WP:UNDUE and all that); but my minority community is proud of our role in helping another minority community (with overlapping memberships), and I don't want to see the history buried again. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

No, I'm down with not burying history. However, I believe in the article for The Ladder there is more mentioned about contributions to the magazine in the History section starting with "By October of 1957... ". If there's nothing in that article about Marion Zimmer Bradley, there should be, so that would be a good place to mention Ackerman's contributions. If you would like to place Ackerman's info after Lorraine Hansberry's, I will add the info about Bradley. --Moni3 (talk) 17:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I did take all the stuff about fandom and the DOB out of the main DOB article and put it in The Ladder's article. I'll see what I can do about forry/LauraJean. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Had I all the time and boundless motivation to improve all the articles that need improving, The Ladder and the DOB would be FA. However, I have to sleep and eat and work at a stupid job, so sometimes they get put on the back burner. Both are ones I'd like to improve upon someday. Thanks for working with me. Let me know if you're interested in seeing those articles. --Moni3 (talk) 18:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Tell me about it! What do you think I did with my "lunch" today? --Orange Mike | Talk 18:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Beat the Crat Support

Congratulations... I told you that you could become an admin!---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 22:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, all I can say is that I'm quite glad that is over. Thank you for your support, Balloonman. --Moni3 (talk) 22:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem... we need more admins outside of traditional ranks... and I think people who show themselves to be trustworthy, deserve the bit, even if they never use the tool.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 22:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

New admin

Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has closed successfully and you are now an administrator! Useful Links: • Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide • • Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR • Your admin logs: • blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

If you have questions, feel free to leave a talk page message for me or any other admin. Again, congratulations! And double congrats on WP:100 — Rlevse • Talk • 22:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Rlevse. Reading all that will be done much, much longer before I do anything adminly. --Moni3 (talk) 22:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Moni3's an admin: trust is restored at RfA !

Party's at Moni3's house; pop the cork!

You go, girl! I'm glad to see you've set a new standard, by restoring the "trust" to the trust in admins. Just don't go meeting any quacks halfway to consensus on medical articles :-) All the best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Best wishes. Bearian (talk) 22:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

On this day of big sadness, I am so glad to see a little happiness come your way. It's admirable how much you care about the former - and how little you care about the latter. You got your head screwed on straight, lady. I'm awfully proud of you today. Maralia (talk) 22:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations Moni3, you will be a great administrator. Feel free to call on me if I can be of assistance at any time. Best, Risker (talk) 22:41, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, common sense prevailed and welcome to the admin ship! Good luck. Best regards. Woody (talk) 22:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad to see this worked out. You'll do excellent work with the tools, just as you've done up to this point. Keep up the fine work and don't be afraid to ask for help if you need it. Congratulations. Amazing how long a week can seem, huh? :) MastCell ^Talk 22:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

You may need these. Congratulations! and if you have any questions, find someone more experienced than I to answer them. :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:57, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations and well done. If I can be of any help, or if you need anything, feel free to ask! Gazimoff 23:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

My heartfelt congratulations on your recent adminship! —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) 23:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The best thank you spam I've ever seen is thank you spam that didn't appear on my talk page :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

(bows down) We're not worthy. We're not worthy. Congrats Ms. Moni! APK is gonna miss Jeffpw 00:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! Banjeboi 01:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats from me as well. Horologium (talk) 02:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Well done! — Realist² 02:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

hahahahahahahahahaha - whoa what a roller coaster ride that was..well done/ditto/indeed. 03:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RFA. Best wishes again ! -- Tinu Cherian - 04:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Cirt (talk) 05:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Moni3, glad to see sense prevailed.--BelovedFreak 06:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations...Modernist (talk) 12:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Warm congrats also from me...along with thanks for working on their article. I'm happy that your new duties aren't pulling you away from article writing! :) Willow (talk) 12:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh! How did I miss this closing? I thought it was today...congrats as well. Have you realized yet just how silly and unfulfilling the extra buttons really are? You will :-) That said, this community will hafta rip them from my cold dead hands...:-) Keeper ǀ 76 17:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Maralia (talk · contribs) told me she would punch me in the face if I stopped writing articles. Since I live in mortal fear of her, I'll just share with you how much becoming an admin is redefined my life and created an entirely new identity. I strut now fancier than John Travolta at the beginning of Saturday Night Fever. The Bee Gees play in my head all the time. --Moni3 (talk) 17:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL! I ♥ Barry Gibbs who doesn't? Keeper ǀ 76 17:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Sigh, Slight correction to the singular surname. As much as I'm sure that Barry Gibbs is an excellent hockey player, he just can't handle the falsetto of the musical magician... Keeper ǀ 76 17:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Now you are one of us.... Dum Dum DUM! Sabine's Sunbird talk 23:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

• No, she's now one of them. ;-) Congratulations all the same Moni3. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, Malleus. How about we defy categorization together? You can be the square peg, and I'll be the rhombus in a round hole kind of club. --Moni3 (talk) 23:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

In all seriousness I agree, MF. If you honestly think that M3 will suddenly turn into some process wonker, then you may as well throw me in that camp too. She won't, I won't. You now know of at least two admins that could care less about being admins. Hopefully there are more out there. And, honestly, I'll say again, as much as I find adminship to be nothing short of extra grief and headache, the tools are damn convenient, and they will be pried from my cold, dead hands. I wish I could give them to you malleus, I really do. Keeper ǀ 76 01:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Congrats, indeed! Ecoleetage (talk) 02:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations - here's your T-shirt to go with the mop (one size virtually fits all ;-) ). The new admin school is useful - ask if you ever have any questions, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations Moni, you deserved it. (Although why someone would be willing to go through an RfA just for a mop.....) If I can help, please let me know. If I had any thought that being an admin would go to Moni's head, I would have opposed. I didn't, she won't. Moni is an extremely level headed editor, and an all round great person. — Becksguy (talk) 07:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

congrats, congrats, congrats! I was waiting for you to pass. Good luck with those tools. --Lord₪Sunday 13:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Moni! I know you'll do a great job. Let me know if I can help you at all as you learn the tools. :) Aleta ^Sing 14:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

Congrats on your adminship! As one of your first tasks, would you mind moving All Hope Is Gone (album) over its redirect at All Hope Is Gone, since it doesn't need to be disambiguated? Thanks! Gary King (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, the talk page needs to be moved, however; Talk:All Hope Is Gone (album) to Talk:All Hope Is Gone :) Gary King (talk) 18:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Commons

Hi Moni3, I was processing deletion requests on the Commons and these three had to go (they're considered derivative works):

• Image:Moni3 pencil sketch Naomi Watts Laura Harring.jpg
• Image:Moni3 Mul Dr. poster representation in pencil.jpg
• Image:Moni3 pencil sketch Naomi Watts Laura Harring 2.jpg

I assume you have copies but, if you don't, let me know and I can temporarily undelete so you can grab them. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 20:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Naw. Poop. --Moni3 (talk) 20:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

Moni, I am very new at this but I would like to contribute. I saw your name on the adoption page and I would like to discuss the possibility of your assistance. I'm not sure where to go from here. Thank you Markj52 (talk) 19:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)Markj52

Pilot (30 Rock) FAC

Thanks for the comments you left on the above mentioned articles FAC entry. I've tried to do what you suggested, but i've added a casting section which encorporates the things you requested in your comments. Please could you have a look? Thanks for the comments by the way, and yeah, it is funny, like you said. -- ^[User]Jamie JCA_[Talk] 21:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

If a picture paints a thousand words...

[5] I laughed loudly enough to wake up my husband, two floors up, and am still giggling 5 minutes later. You're right, that image will take a while to evaporate from my mind. Risker (talk) 03:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

My job here is done. --Moni3 (talk) 12:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Kudos

I totally missed the whole RFA thing, but I wanted to say Huzzah! So huzzah. Well deserved. Scartol • Tok 19:01, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Ack, I missed it, as well! Traitor. Congrats. :) María (habla conmigo) 03:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Even though its belated, congratulations. Synergy 04:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

• You deserved a smoother ride at RfA, but at least it ended with the appropriate result. Congratulations. ^S._D.D.J.Jameson 03:40, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

• To Maria: It's worth repeating: Maralia told me she would punch me in the face if I stopped writing articles. If only to avoid mortal injury from Maralia, I shall not betray you and the disappointing few who frequent FAC.
• To Synergy: thank you. Feel free to give me tips.
• To S. Dean Jameson: I appreciate your support, really. I got what I deserved, actually. I knew what I would get before I went in and still didn't study. But I think we should be made to review our perceptions of what we want in good editors here. Stagnation breeds slime. --Moni3 (talk) 03:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

• And slime is so bad? Banjeboi 14:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to add my congratulations too. It reassures me when article-writers pass RfA; the process is not entirely broken. Mike Christie (talk) 14:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations from me too. Can't believe I missed your RfA - must have not been paying attention! Carcharoth (talk) 06:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget the little people! :) Awadewit (talk) 14:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Admin 101

<grrrrrr ...> User_talk:Karanacs#Here_we_go_again.2C_Karanacs_and_Moni3. (I don't want someone else to fix it; I want someone once and for all to explain to me why I can't fix it, and learn how to deal with these when they come up.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:09, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I'll see if I can't break something in the process. --Moni3 (talk) 14:30, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Proserpine (play)

This FAC was closed before I got to hear whether or not I had sufficiently addressed your concerns. Please let me know on the talk page! Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 14:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Podcast

Thanks heaps for recording the podcast last week on a wide range of copy editing / content issues. Awadewit dropped a note on my talk page letting me know that it was 'good to go' - and as I said at WP:AN, I feel smarter already, and I've only heard it once! It's now online at 'NotTheWikipediaWeekly', and hopefully it's only the first in a series!

Once again - thanks :-) Privatemusings (talk) 01:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Question

"I get confused about the switching of times after he met Tetty, then was penniless, then brought her to London."

Are there times that are out of order? I also made some changes.

Now, to get a little more in depth about this: "Now I'm totally confused. If his wife is well off, why is he so poor?"

From Bate: "Prodded by the responsibility he felt for Tetty, much of whose money he had lost with his scheme, Johnson resolved to act immediately. A job at another school had proved impossible. Irene would take time to finish. If he were actually in London, he might get some work as a writer for journals in a way he could not bey mere correspondence. In particular he was thinking of work he could do as a translator... Whatever money she had left was to be used for her own current expenses, not his. Together in London, living in a way she was used to, they would quickly exhaust the money. Alone, he could, if necessary, live from hand to mouth. He would come to get her as soon as he was sure of regular employment."

Later: "Certainly there were guilt and remorse-remorse that she had lost so much at the start because of him (though he had more than paid it back); remorse far more than, because of him, she had been forced to live for seventeen years-and her final seventeen years-in a way radically different from all that she had expected (and this he could never redress);"

I think well off is relative here. Johnson didn't like taking her money, and I guess it was enough to provide for her, but mostly her alone. She was a well off widow, but, you know what happens. He supposedly lived like a beggar for a long time and didn't take her money, so where did the money go? One of those mysteries. Perhaps it went into a failing school. Perhaps it was seed money for more books for his research. Etc. I don't really know. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Moni3; I'm not entirely certain if we've answered all of your queries. Would you mind popping anything else on Talk:Samuel Johnson in case the answers haven't been clear? Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Double Standard

Is this how it works around here? You said to me on the E. O. Green School talk page: "It is not up to those watching the article to prove how it is NPOV, but for you to justify the template. I'm willing to work with you here, but I do not know what more remains to be discussed." Moni, if you are willing to work with me, can you please help me to understand your statement? It looks like a double standard to me. Firstly, I didn't place the POV template on the article. Secondly, vague comments with no clarity, such as those made by AniMate and Becksguy are not acceptable in my books. Editors can not say something is NPOV without explaining why they believe it's NPOV. You ask me to justify why the article is POV (which I did), yet the same is not applied to those editors who claim the article is neutral. This hardly seems fair and makes absolutely no sense to me. Please reply on my talk page. Caden S (talk) 20:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Metro Station

Moni, could you help? I'm fed up with the never ending vandalism to my music page for the group Metro Station (band). Can you please semi-protect that page for me? Let me know by replying on my talk page. Caden S (talk) 23:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Caden, I'm not blowing you off. I'm fairly new with the admin tools, and am getting some input from editors more experienced with page protections. My experience is primarily in building articles and FAs. I've asked Keeper76 here. --Moni3 (talk) 02:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Even though I'm currently not an "expert" in page protections (my most recent being reverted and wheelwarred over), I can understand CadenS' frustration. The vandalism on any page is aggravating, but in this case, it isn't so severe as to warrant protection. If anything, the vandalizing party(ies) can be warned, rewarned, warned summore, then eventually, if need be, blocked from editing. Keeper ǀ 76 13:34, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I completely understand that you're a new admin, Moni, and I know that you are not avoiding my request. I appreciate your help by asking for some input from other editors. My main concern is the vandalism that occurs quite frequently on that article (by the way congratulations on becoming an admin). Thank you Keeper for your input on this. However, the vandals can be warned again and again or even blocked but it doesn't appear to solve the issue. They just keep coming back and that's frustrating. I think semi-protection would help. Moni, could you please, please consider it? Caden S (talk) 21:45, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I just looked through the contribs again CadenS. In the last few days the IP "contributions" have been nothing short of aggravating, I'm not seeing much positive come from IP at the moment. I've semi-protected the article for 3 days, just to give you, and the other writers, a fair break to continue your good work. Let me, (or Moni, of course :-), know if the IP picks up again after the 3 day "break", we can revisit the protection and escalate the duration accordingly if necessary. Hopefully, it won't be necessary. That's a good looking article, btw, I wasn't familiar with the band. :-) Cheers, Keeper ǀ 76 19:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks dude! I made note on the talk page that the main article is semi-protected for the next three days. Once the protection is lifted, and if the vandalism should pick up again (as I'm sure it will), I'll let you or Moni know. And thanks for the good feedback concerning your thoughts on the band article. If you're interested, check out their music sometime. Caden S (talk) 21:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

E.O. Green School shooting

Moni, you yourself noted that the existing wording for the category is as follows: "This category contains articles about incidents that either were prosecuted as hate crimes or were clearly and reliably reported as such." Since the former—that it's being prosecuted as a hate crime—is verifiably correct in this case, I don't understand why there should be any call for a Third Opinion or RfC. Since the first part applies, the second part—reliably reported as such—seems entirely irrelevant.

Kudos on your hard work on Stonewall riots, btw, and belated congrats on your successful RfA. I was preoccupied at the time and didn't notice until the tools were yours. Rivertorch (talk) 02:22, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the category could be restored. If other editors wanted to get clarification, however, RfC is the best avenue to get outside opinions. That was my point. Thanks for your comments. --Moni3 (talk) 02:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Imperial Napoleonic triple crown

It gives me great joy to award this Imperial Napoleonic triple crown to Moni3 for exceptional mainspace contributions to 5 WP:DYKs, WP:GAs, and WP:FAs. Thank you very much for your generous time and diligence on behalf of the project. You are a Napoleon among editors. Yours, Cirt (talk) 02:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Your Imperial Napoleonic Majesty, outstanding work! Especially on Ann Bannon - we are using that article in The Feminism Portal, so I am quite pleased we were able to incorporate an WP:FA on that topic and of that caliber. Cirt (talk) 02:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Bien sur, c'est magnifique. Merci! --Moni3 (talk) 14:42, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Endomembrane System

Hello Moni3,

I am an AP Biology student assigned the task of editing a stub until it has the calibar to reach good article status. I have been contemplating topics for a while and have found one of paticular interest on the Biology Worklist and Biology Stub pages. The articles is the Endomembrane system. By looking over the adoptee's page I saw your name and noticed your great experience with expanding articles to GA and FA. I was wondering if you could advise me on whether to persue this topic or not, or if you know of any other biology topic that would be ideal to expand on.

This is a project that is due at the end of the school year, so I have a reasonable amount of time to work with. Here is a link to our project page that identifies our goals and project information AP Biology 2008.

Thank you for your time

--VivaLaLacy (talk) 03:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your advice, I look foward to working with you. I would like nothing more than to make this article reach FA, seeing how our teacher stated that by doing so we would recieve a parade around the school. At the moment though my sights are set on getting Endomembrane system to GA and if that happens with a reasonable amount of time to spare I will then focus on FA. The information on sources will be of great help to me. As of now I only have one source on my topic and that is the textbook recieved from class. However this textbook is not to be underestimated, my instructor has said it is "godly" and full of valuable information stated in immense detail. I will check the references in the textbook in the upcoming weeks and try to find any scientific journals that relate to the endomembrane system. I have set up my sandbox that you so generously created, and I have decided to follow the steps you layed out for me. That being said, I am still understandably in the beginning stages but I now have a plan to pursue.

Once again thank you so much for your advice, I will look back on this page for a reply. --VivaLaLacy (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Lacy. Good deal. A parade around the school. That would be awesome. I didn't get a parade for any of my FAs (pout session in consideration), but I have done a few happy dances. As my user page so crassly states, your preparation for the FA will be a mixture of patience and insanity. The patience will come in handy in receiving criticism (hopefully it will be constructive, or constructively given...the worst is getting criticism that is right, but is given in a nasty way), and hunting down more sources. For an academic topic such as this, I would think at least 5 general textbooks such as your godly one, and some specialized references (articles, or even newspaper stories) about malfunctions of the system and the discovery of the aspects of the system would be appropriate. The insanity part will come in during your seemingly endless searches for sources, and the perfectionistic bordering on obsessive compulsive disorder countless copy edits and constant rewrites you'll do. Not to worry; edit buttons are our friends. I think one of the best aspects of the wiki is the ability to screw up and fix it later.

After you do the majority of your rewrite and post the article in the mainspace from your sandbox, you may also get other editors now drawn to the article. They may make changes to your stuff - such is the nature of Wikipedia. Some may give you unsolicited advice. You should take most of it, and try to have the wisdom to know what's good advice, and what's not. It's a good idea to mention on the talk page of the article that you'll be working on it. It's a pretty big chance that no one will reply. That's ok. In the 5 FAs I've taken over from B-class or stub class articles, in only one instance has anyone else pitched in.

Remember in the end - the best quality of the article is a much better reward than a parade around the school. The parade ends. --Moni3 (talk) 18:31, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

You have brought up a great point, the quality of the article is definatly a much better accolade than the parade. That is partly why my class is doing this project, it serves as a replacement for the dreaded research paper that only one person ever reads.

Do you happen to know where I could get more general textbooks? I do not have any collegiate level libraries nearby, just a relatively small public library. It would seem pointless to get a standard biology text from my school seeing how it would have the same information as my current textbook but in less detail. Or do you believe it would be worth getting just to have a different perspective on the topic? As a last resort I might be able to buy some textbooks but I would like to avoid doing so.

On a sidenote, I added a little blurb on the talk page of my article. Check it out if you'd like, Talk:Endomembrane system, I'd love to hear your opinion. I'm hoping to make this endeavor a collaborative effort once i get the majority of the information copied from my sandbox to the mainspace. --VivaLaLacy (talk) 01:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Great minds. I saw your comment right after I posted the one above. I think it's fine. I think I'll watch the page in case anyone gets a hankering to answer you. Just to spy.

On other sources, my first suggestionsright now is to get to know the fine folks in the Interlibrary Loan department at your public library. You may be able to get them to get books for you. Each city runs their ILL department differently, so ask them what their terms are. My second suggestion is that schools and districts often keep reference libraries for teachers. Your teacher may be able to check books out for you, or allow you to scour the school book room for older textbooks. It's not likely that the information about this topic in particular - in the general sense - will have changed within the past ten years. However, I wouldn't go back too much father than that for books.

Wait - on the other (third) hand I have another suggestion. You can try used books and sell them back again when you're done (or keep them if you're so inclined). Used book stores, or even Ebay or craigslist may have some cheaper ones for sale. That's a little more tenuous for someone on a limited income such as yourself, however. I have access to a staggering amount of resources. After you get your general textbooks and consider articles in journals or newspapers, I may be able to email you some. But building blocks first. If you're completely lost, ask the librarians. Muster up a tear, because there's always a way to get books to you. Librarians will be personally motivated by the sight of a teary-eyed adolescent who is confounded by such a remote location that they have no access to information. Then buy them a Hallmark card when you get it. I might consider crying on the phone with the San Francisco Public Library, who does not seem to want to send me information. I have no shame when it comes to getting the best for my articles. --Moni3 (talk) 01:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Moni you always seem to find the most fun projects. Now that I've seen this conversation I've volunteered to help, too. Young adolescent minds to warp mold into productive Wikipedians! Karanacs (talk) 15:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

It's all about making them fun. I don't see much inherent mirth in Endomembrane system mind you, but what a story it might be to tell: "I bawled like a 3-year-old in the main lobby of the library, and they brought me juice and 3 sources I didn't know about". I'm practicing my hitching breaths for my call to San Francisco. You should share your lack of shame in getting sources and images. --Moni3 (talk) 15:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I've resorted to buying books online and hiding the packages from my husband (I have one hiding place for shoes he doesn't know I bought and one for books). He doesn't quite get the obsession ... this weekend I proudly announced that I had added the last of my research into Battle of the Alamo and he actually asked "Does this mean you're finished working on the article?" He didn't quite understand why I fell over laughing. I think I've actually been talking about the article in my sleep.

On a serious note, my current obsession is the Texas Revolution, and one of my very good friends teaches the grade level that studies this, so she has given me some very good pointers on what to read. This class has a great advantage in that they already know a teacher who can help them figure out what the good sources are. Karanacs (talk) 15:27, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I find it quite delicious that you hide your purchases from your husband. I bought most of my sources for Everglades. Some new, some at used book stores, and I've been really lucky to start buying out of print books for .01 from Amazon. Now I'm trying the ILL Department at the library. Is not so good for people with difficulties with delayed gratification. --Moni3 (talk) 15:42, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

It's not quite as cool as it sounds - we set an agreed limit of how much we can spend each month and hide from the other :) He buys power tool accessories, I buy shoes/books. I use ILL a lot, but sometimes they make me turn my books in before I'm ready :( Karanacs (talk) 16:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

More practice

• Birch bracket should be at its latin name of Piptoporus betulinus. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Think I got it. --Moni3 (talk) 14:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Yerp. Well done you :) There are not as many as I thought actually but I'll throw a few up of folks if/when I see them...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd appreciate your adminly advice

at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#Groan. (Okay, this has nothing to do with being an admin, but I just had to say it.) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 23:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Your willingness to assist is greatly appreciated. If you encounter any concerns- please drop me a line. They are under my jurisdiction and I have a very low tolerance for immaturity or stupidity. That said, I suspect you'll see none of those concerns from VivaLaLacy. I too have much to learn; thank you for making this not so much the blind leading the blind!--JimmyButler (talk) 01:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Columbia River

Hi Moni, I'm writing to ask a big favor. A group of editors has developed the Columbia River article to GA and beyond and is nearly ready to take it to FAC. The GA reviewer was User:Ruhrfisch. The main contributor, User:Peteforsyth, has posted a formal peer review request, and we would like you to be the peer reviewer. We need a fresh set of talented eyes to see how this article reads and how it might be improved. I know your work from Birmingham campaign, and you know mine. I've done some copyediting and other dust-mouse stuff on the Columbia River article but nothing big. Most of the hard work was done by others, beginning in 2002 it seems from the talk page archives, long before I arrived on the scene. Big river FAs are rare. Zambezi may be the only one. If you can help us, that would be great. Finetooth (talk) 03:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Give me to the end of the day to review the article. Thanks for the request. --Moni3 (talk) 12:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this. I know how much time and effort it takes. Your suggestions have induced a great flurry of activity, and the article is getting better. If ever I can return the favor, don't hesitate to ask. Finetooth (talk) 04:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Email

I got it. During the day, I only get WP emails on my phone, so it isn't terribly convenient or practical (given how wordy I am) to reply directly to them. Are you ok with me responding here on WP (I wouldn't imagine why not - but privacy is privacy), or would you rather I just use the WP email function (aren't "Wikipedia e-mail" headers fun)? Эlcobbola _talk 15:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I care not. Reply however is most convenient for you. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 15:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Goods news and bad news (no pun intended). Let's start with the bad: I don't think it would pass NFCC#1. To play devil's advocate, couldn't one say "The top third of the the San Francisco Examiner's November 28, 1978 front page contained the headline '[quote]'"? (You could even add description of markup, font size, etc.) I certainly would acknowledge that such a Joe Friday-esque description misses some of the "pop", but I believe the fundamental concept would still be conveyed. For me, it even seems that understanding "this was a big deal" is the logical and readily-apparent conclusion to be drawn from a mainstream newspaper dedicating the top third of its front page to the event. Ultimately, I suspect "free" content (prose) could serve the same encyclopedic purpose as the "non-free" content.

The good news: this can be made (partially) into "free" content, as "short phrases" [6] are generally not eligible for copyright. If you were to crop so that the image contained only either the black box and text therein or the headline (I think an image with both would surpass the "short" mark, but the only support I have for that belief is "I know it when I see it"), you'd be sitting pretty. Just tag the one you pick with {{PD-ineligible}} (if that seems an acceptable route). Эlcobbola _talk 19:28, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, the black header above the masthead is already described in the draft article. From a logical standpoint, I can have the header and the masthead, or the masthead and the headline, but not all three? Wha? If I pout or swear enough will I get my way? Because I can do a bangup job today. --Moni3 (talk) 20:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, you're driving at the notion of, if each element is PD, why aren't they still PD when combined (i.e. shouldn't PD x PD = 2PD)? It's a consideration of proportion (e.g. how many grapes can you sample in the produce aisle before you need to pay for the bunch?) Here, it depends on how one interprets "short phrase". These are elements that become eligible for copyright protection when combined, but not when they're alone, so there's a question of where they hit critical mass. I recommend choosing one as it's a "sure thing"; you could go with both, it would just be pushing it. Эlcobbola _talk 20:33, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Practice

I left a note with Karanacs, and I'm not entirely sure on policy, but in case you want to practice the tools ... it's possible she won't be logging on for a while ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

My page is too busy, so I came over here :-)) " ... the most emotionally devastating years in San Francisco's fabulously spotted history". Thanks a lot for dragging me back to those dark days :-) I'll bow out now so I don't increase my edit count and have to recuse. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

It's Tony1's fault, or whoever demanded "brilliant, compelling prose". I had a ball writing Stonewall riots. I've been moody and short-tempered writing Milk's. It's heartbreaking. Is there something inaccurate in the article that has to be fixed (hence your higher edit count)? --Moni3 (talk) 00:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't notice any problems anywhere (I caught one possible WP:PUNC issue, so you might want to check those). By increasing my edit count, I meant that I probably shouldn't tangle on the POV issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

It must go through quite a few copy edits, I'm trying to get a few images from some copyright holders, and I'm still waiting to add a few more references before it makes it to FAC. I appreciate your input, just as I appreciate you would tell me I am full of shit if it were the case. --Moni3 (talk) 02:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Harvey_Milk

Wow, it's getting rough out there! Bearian (talk) 20:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Yay. --Moni3 (talk) 20:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I just want to thank you for taking on this article. I saw the preview for the movie this past weekend and I got very very excited. (I've been pushing the documentary on my friends for years.) Kudos to you for yet another series of excellent articles! PS. I've been working on Stonewall (years after I said I would).. It looks great, and I've got a few nit-picks here and there. Should be done by the end of the week; apologies for the delay. PPS. Have you seen Recount (film)? Very interesting for us Floridians.. Scartol • Tok 14:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Have not seen Recount. Are you recommending it? Feel free to express your nitpicks for Stonewall. I also saw the trailer for the Milk film (thankfully after I had been researching and writing it), and got some kind of choked up (hits for the article that day, before I posted the rewrite, jumped to 24,000). It's funny that I was planning to do this for a while, and I saw filming on Castro Street last February, but it didn't click in my head that the article should be out in time for the film release. Until one day when I was about 75% finished writing the article, I thought "Oh shit! This should be on the main page!" --Moni3 (talk) 14:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI

Hi Moni, I decided it's finally time for me to make a list of my FA and GA work, like you have at the top of your user page. The complexity of the necessary table is one of the things that's made me procrastinate this, so I just made a couple new templates that simplify it. Feel free to incorporate these into your table if you like. I'll insert one of each, so you can see how it's done -- feel free to just revert me if you don't want to bother. (By the way, I couldn't figure out the purpose of the "title" field, so I eliminated it.) I haven't built many templates, so feel free to make suggestions… -Pete (talk) 21:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I stole that from someone else. Of course now I can't remember who, but it looks like it works fine. I'll try to work on that soon to cut down on all the fussy fuss code. --Moni3 (talk) 21:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Kan I haz link?

Hi Moni, I'm goofing off a bit on wiki, but between random mindless posts of mine, I've been reading an extremely superb article that you've been working on. I've also read the extremely aggravating talkpage of said article. I found the fringe report, found the talkpage of the other editor, what I can't find is the ani thread. Link it to me here? (don't link my talkpage, I got too many trolls...) Keeper ǀ 76 20:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Esta aqui. Enjoy. --Moni3 (talk) 20:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you ma'am. :-) Keeper ǀ 76 20:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Gilbert Price

Did you ever find anything on Gilbert Price? Just a ping from someone with no access to a good library <sigh> :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Dude. I am so sorry. I owe you library time and I'm going back soon. I'll look it up, I promise. I got sidetracked by Harvey Milk, then the fuss about Harvey Milk. --Moni3 (talk) 22:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I've asked for others eyes on this situation

Hello, Moni3. 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. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Mosedschurte still edit-warring on Harvey Milk and disrupting talkpage. Thank you. -- Banjeboi 22:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Ping

I can see you've got your hands full -- my HS paper involved Harvey Milk too, but I think I'm going to steer clear of that one for the moment :) Wanted to let you know, though, that a number of us continue to chip away at Columbia River. There are a few of your comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Columbia River/archive1 that have been tough or complex to address, so maybe you could check back in on that discussion? We really appreciate the insightful feedback! We've been chipping away at a lot of other parts of the article too, so it might be a little bit of a "moving target…" I'm really proud of the quality team of editors that has materialized, at various times, around that article, and very excited by the prospect of getting it to FA some day. -Pete (talk) 04:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I would so much like to be 30 feet beneath the Columbia River right now. I will do my best to get to it. Once I stop considering drowning myself as a suitable path to end my misery, I may look at the article again for a diversion. I hope to get to it soon... --Moni3 (talk) 15:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I'm sorry -- I really had no idea the level that had gotten to. I just read through much of the Medcab page. It looks to me like you are engaged in a discussion that, at this point, has some potential to reach resolution… I don't really see a way that I can be of help at this point (?) but will try to keep my eye on it. Please do let me know if I can help, though. Anyway, don't worry about the Columbia River stuff, you obviously have bigger fish to fry..though I can't tell if they are the androgynous sort? Thanks for all your hard work, on all the articles you're engaged with. -Pete (talk) 17:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh boy...

Good luck with the mediation. As far as I am aware I couldn't be the mediator myself because unlike WP:MEDCAB which is more informal (though they also have regular mediators though anyone could do it), WP:MEDCOM/WP:RFM has more formal membership and procedures. I sympathize with both parties because I do sense a bit of undue weight on the one hand, and on the other I have appreciated some positive contributions that Mosedschurte (talk · contribs) has made to that article and other related articles. Let me know if I can be of assistance somehow and I will try to help. I am not above blocking a particular user if he/she/they becomes blatantly disruptive to positive progress/incivil/edit-warring, etc. Cirt (talk) 05:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh I see you went with WP:MEDCAB instead of WP:MEDCOM. SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs) may have a point here that a more formal mediation process would be more effective if you are going down that road, but of course that's up to you. Cirt (talk) 05:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Moni3: If you think formal mediation will be faster and less likely to disrupt any timing for FA or GA, I will agree to that (I think both parties must agree for acceptance on formal mediation).

I don't want to prevent the article from hitting FA or GA whether or not the Milk-Temple text is in it. You appear to have done an outstanding job on the article re-write. I just disagree on this one small issue.

I would also like to address the substance of the issue (e.g., Undue, Synthesis) moving forward. I apologize for my part in any sniping or incivility in the prior Talk page.Mosedschurte (talk) 07:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The "good" kind of hurricane.

For funsies, I took a look at your Medcab. All I can say is...holy cow and thank god that no one else seems to be interested in the Texas Revolution right now. Maybe one of these will make you feel better. Karanacs (talk) 20:22, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Hah. Yes, I'll take a few Category 5s, please. With 3 straws each. Glad to know you came through Ike ok. --Moni3 (talk) 20:24, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Battle scars are merely evidence of effort. I hope your stress levels are returning to normal editing levels. Enjoy your hurricane(s).  :-) Keeper ǀ 76 19:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

You were right; I removed the whole thing, but I appreciate the thanks. Onward and upward !!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-09-18 Harvey Milk -- I am glad this came to an agreeable resolution. You have done some incredible work with this article, nice job.Cirt (talk) 04:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

MLK jr.

Can I beg you to revisit some of your comments on that review? I understand your frustration but I think that the way you expressed it could have been hurtful to Tom. He seems like a dedicated person who just got his hackles up because someone criticized his work. I know we aren't supposed to get upset in the face of criticism, but sometimes we can't help it. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Revisit in what way? I saw your response, and I accept it will be promoted to GA. However, something strikes me as very wrong that the least amount of effort to get to GA on Martin Luther King, Jr. is all that is necessary. Again, it's my personal view - and not criteria or policy - that copying free information is still plagiarism (stuff I wrote, to boot). Why doesn't Dr. King of all biographies on this site warrant dedicated editors throwing themselves into the article, scouring every available book, and filling the article full of gut-punching information about what an extraordinary person this was? I took on Birmingham campaign because it needed to be done and it was an extraordinary story to be told. Even writing that I couldn't believe it was me who was forming common knowledge about King and the pivotal event in the Civil Rights Movement. I've written 10 FAs and I am so overcome with the awe of the project of bringing this article to FA that it scares the hell out of me.

It is never my intention to hurt the feelings of other editors. But an editor must recognize when there's much more work to be done without taking that personally. I think there is great value in challenging the belief that the least amount of work necessary to reach a goal is what the subject deserves. I resisted, too, when I thought what I had done was pretty good and was told it was not nearly enough. So I went to the library and made sure it was without a doubt. --Moni3 (talk) 16:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Argh. I had a long and nuanced response to this and it got eaten by errant keybindings. The long and short of it is: I know how you feel about the article, but I wish you would change or revisit your statement so it doesn't appear to refer to the editor. This may not have started if he didn't respond the way he did to your comment, but that is behind us now. If you don't want to I can respect that, I just figured I'd drop a note on your page about it. Protonk (talk) 16:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. you have a well of passion for wikipedia that I can't hope to meet. Protonk (talk) 17:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Langston

If you're still in the library, look up Gilbert Price - he's the "associate" of Hughes that I was interested in. Many many thanks!!! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

You're awesome! No need to make copies or anything - just need a source that says he's gay (if he is). Tons of thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:42, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Query...

Can you do me a favor and look over Horse and tell me what you think? We (the Equine Wikiproject) just put it up for GA, and it was quickfailed because it did not fit the "mold" of the other species articles. (I also suspect some personal issues but that's neither here nor there). We're probably going to take it to GAR, but we may just skip GA and take it to PR and then FAC, so we can avoid the one reviewer can fail an article for their own vision of the article problems. However, I'd appreciate second opinions, if possible. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Moni. Greatly appreciated. I didn't think it was THAT bad, or I wouldn't have let it go to GA, honestly. Yeah, it needs some prose work, and we plan on a PR after GA, so we can get more eyes. Sorry that horses seem to like stepping on you! Ealdgyth - Talk 00:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

You can tell Moni Doesn't Do Horses, or she would have said they like to sneeze on her; now that is an issue !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Funny, I didn't use the preview button to template you about using the preview button. Turns out it doesn't make its own level 2 header. Should I sheepishly add one or leave it be, pretending like I meant to have it that way? Protonk (talk) 00:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't matter; I enjoyed it either way (insider tip, the preview button doesn't help me ... the eyesight stinks and I make just as many errors no matter what I do ... I usually see them days later.  :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Woo hoo!

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 22, 2008 - congrats! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations from me, too! But it's only one star in your firmament... :) Willow (talk) 14:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

That's two. TKaM appeared July 11. Over 100,000 people hit that article that day. That was a nutty day. I don't think I'm going to be getting that many hits today for some reason... --Moni3 (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, cool stuff. I love seeing the work of my friends on TFA. All the people say yay! Scartol • Tok 14:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

When Chinua Achebe appeared on the main page recently, I peeked at the talk page to see what kind of guff you were getting. Not much apparently from when I checked. Good for you, and Achebe. --Moni3 (talk) 14:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Just seen today's featured article, so slighly belated congratulations (I did some reviewing of an Everglades article but perhaps not this one?). One thing - you say that your first mainpage got 100,000 hits. I've also had two, no one told me how many hits, so how did you find that out? Anyway, good luck and good editing. Brianboulton (talk) 22:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You've seen this tool, haven't you Brian? If not, enjoy! --Moni3 (talk) 03:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Congrats. I may have hit your article. ;) --Candlewicke (Talk) 19:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Candlewicke (Talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Would you be interested?

Hiya. I've seen your name around, and your record speaks for itself (loudly and at great length, in extremely good ways). I know you have your hands somewhat full with insanity at the moment, but I was wondering if you would like to take on a challenge.

Orissa religious violence has been a, shall we say, contentious article. Without going into great detail, one of the major issues (I think) contributing to the disputes is how poorly the article is written in general, never mind the POV issues.

I have presented a proposal to the disputing parties that we (I became involved through reverting some vandalism to the article) find someone to rewrite the article to general WP standards of prose, as well as NPOV. You popped into my mind immediately as an ideal person to do this: you are careful, meticulous, resolutely NPOV, and you clearly only want the project to improve.

Obviously this article is about as far off your normal beaten path as it is mine, but my hope is that your skills would improve it drastically. Would you be interested in participating in this? If not, I completely understand. Cheers, and keep up the impossible-to-live-up-to^* standard of work! Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 18:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
_{* This is very much a compliment}

Let me take a look at how difficult that might be, and how long it would take me. In the throes of a compulsion, I've knocked out articles almost ready for FA in a week. If I work on it without being interested, it might snow here in Florida before I get done. I'll report back to you here with how likely it would be, how long it might take, and some questions about the editors: if I spend two weeks reading the sources and rewriting it, will it be reverted? Because that would suck... --Moni3 (talk) 20:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Yes, it needs help, and I don't doubt it has caused some contention because it reads more like a list of facts than a cohesive story of sides that explains motivations for anything. I'm completely unfamiliar with this conflict. While that may improve the article in neutrality, I'm not sure if the sources used for the article are trustworthy, or if they come from papers and sources that have foregone biases I'm unfamiliar with. That's a minor concern of mine right now.

If you can get the editors participating in the mediation to agree, have them indicate so. If they do that, I will take a few days to become familiar with the sources, read the entire story, and rewrite the article in a sandbox off the talk page. Please keep in mind that I have an article nominated for GA right now, and one I hope to nominate in a week, so I'll be in between for some of this time. At the absolute best, a week from Wednesday may be the soonest it would be completed. Since the best never happens, I would say 2 - 3 weeks would be reasonable to predict when the rewritten article would be posted. Your thoughts? --Moni3 (talk) 20:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Moni. Thank you! I will speak with all the editors involved and get them on board. I'll come back and let you know when this is done (I anticipate it may take a few days). I owe you one! Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 22:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

During the past 72 hours, many POV edits have been made in the Page. This cannot be allowed. The Page is under Dispute.

Jobxavier (talk) 19:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:PrinceOfCanada" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jobxavier (talk • contribs) 19:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Moni3, is this still happening? Not seeing anything in the sandbox. and User:PrinceOfCanada is giving up on the article. Personally, I think it's time for ArbCom --vvarkey (talk) 16:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Admin practice

In case you're interested; otherwise, someone will get to it soon (second BLP offesne from IP). [7] Only sending it your way in case you're interested; it is not a big deal. I can continue to revert the IP all day. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:38, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm in and out and can't stay. If he does it again and I'm around, I'll block him. --Moni3 (talk) 20:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Busy day <sigh> ... I misread the post on my user page as a question coming from you ... hard time catching up today! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Harvey Milk permissions request

Hi Moni3. We received the letter of permission that you sent us. It was entered into our ticketing system as ticket 2008092610028641. Unfortunately we can't use those images under a license that restricts re-use of the image by third-parties. However, since the images are of an individual who is no longer alive we might be able to justify the use of the images under fair use. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 21:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The language used in this release is the same language used in previous releases for images I acquired that have been granted GNU permissions. Please confirm this. --Moni3 (talk) 00:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

No matter what may have happened previously, the language in the release is NOT compatible with the GFDL. Please check out Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission#For_text. This is what it says: "Any free license must allow all of the following, for both the image itself as well as any modified versions based on it: 1. Modification 2. Redistribution 3. Use for any purpose, including commercial purposes. The only restrictions allowable are proper attribution of the creator and the requirement that derivative works are similarly licensed." The release letter I saw only permits use by Wikipedia.

If you have previous ticket numbers I'd more then happy to check them out. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The language was supplied by Wikipedia. I've used it for a dozen articles. All other images I've used have worked with this release. I have an email accepting the images, giving me a ticket number, and thanking me for sending the permissions. So, I hope you don't take this personally, but why now does this not work on your word alone? I don't know who you are, and as image policy is very sketchy and often open to interpretation, I'm going to go with my previous experiences and the email I received from permissions@wikipedia.org. --Moni3 (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm an OTRS volunteer and I am one of the people who answer e-mails sent to permissions@wikipedia.org. We got a fax or letter that was sent to the Wikimedia office. The document was a release-form from the "San Francisco Public Library" titled "Request for Permission to Publish Pictorial Materials" giving specific permission to use on Wikipedia and nowhere else. The exact wording in the form is

"Subject to all specification and conditions stated above, ONE TIME permission to publish the designated materials owned by the Gay & Lesbian Center is granted. Repeat use of these materials is not permitted..."

This is clearly not the language supplied by Wikipedia. If acceptable permission is granted under another ticket then I apologize for the confusion. I will be happy to merge the tickets and mark the image with our customary {{PermissionOTRS}} tag if you have the other ticket number. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 23:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I've found the ticket with the GFDL release. 2008092110017313 ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 23:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah. That's a green horse. I submitted that release to the SFPL a couple weeks ago hadn't heard from them again. This is the first indication that they responded. I thought you were referring to the images by Dan Nicoletta that are already in the article. Ah well, crap... Let me see if I can discuss it with them. --Moni3 (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

(deindent) No need to apologize. I understand where the confusion came from. I didn't realize you had some other tickets floating around out there. The images are still covered by copyright as far as I can tell. If the SFPL is the owner of those images then they would need to release them under something we can use (GFDL is fine, CC-BY 3.0 is better imo). ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

In the wings for Harvey

I want to avoid dealing with ... dramaticness ... so am stepping away from Milk for the moment. Let me know if you'd like help or talkpage clean-up and I'll be happy to. -- Banjeboi 09:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Checking In

Hello Moni3,
I'm just letting you know how far I've gotten on my project. As of now I have my potential resources gathered, they can be seen on the talk page of the Endomembrane System. My next step is to read everything and then start adding all of the content to the article. I'm hoping to have the majority of the information written near the end of October. Hopefully, you can then help me with the formatting and the actual appearance of the article.
- Best Regards --VivaLaLacy (talk) 00:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Okeydoke. I've been spying, and your references appear to be comprehensive so far. I'll watch as you add and make comments on the talk page of the article. --Moni3 (talk) 01:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Harvey Milk

I'm going to take a look at this one for GA later tonight. If not then, maybe tomorrow morning. Doesn't look like there will be problems so I will try to give a good peer review. Protonk (talk) 00:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Go nuts. Be thorough. Pick it apart. And thank you. --Moni3 (talk) 01:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Such talent !

Thank you for prettifying my best barnstar :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeh, me. Sorry you got that. What a dingus. --Moni3 (talk) 21:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

And next, this; just an average day of archiving FACs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I would say that someone giving you an "I kill you" barnstar is not so average a day. I suppose we should be glad that Mitch didn't threaten to run you over with a tractor trailer. --Moni3 (talk) 22:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Movements and Memory

Glad you found it helpful. If you cannot access the full version, send me an email and I can send you the article.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I got it all. Thanks so much for the heads up! Great article. --Moni3 (talk) 02:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Doing cute little human things with their hands

So I'm guessing you've seen this? "Wait! Come back!" María (habla conmigo) 20:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Is it because they're Canadian that they're so cute? I had seen that, yes. But it's worth watching again. Lost my lunch once more. This, however, is for you. Took that in the Denver Zoo, mainly because I liked all the colors. --Moni3 (talk) 20:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Canada + otter = cute². Love the polar bear! He's just absolutely transfixed on that red thing (a flower), isn't he? I think he wants to eat it. María (habla conmigo) 20:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I think he was drinking. Another trait of Canadians. --Moni3 (talk) 20:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Virginia

Go ahead and do the sourcing check on this one! I'll kibitz from the sidelines... Ealdgyth - Talk 15:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I got all excited thinking maybe she was coming to Virginia. Rats. Maralia (talk) 15:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry! I think I need more caffeine too... Ealdgyth - Talk 15:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Someday... someday... --Moni3 (talk) 15:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

(waits on Moni's source review of Virginia...) Ealdgyth - Talk 15:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Karanacs kind of beat me to it...plus, I'm at work getting interrupted every 2 minutes so I can't keep a thought in my head about what should be going on. I have a general statement, but I'll have to get more detailed when I can concentrate on it. Sorry. --Moni3 (talk) 15:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

EO School Shooting

I don't think the pic should be there and I still don't think the event should be listed as a hate crime unless there is a conviction. --Mrmcuker (talk) 19:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The choice to have an image of the victim of the shooting is not yours to make. If you want to discuss this, bring it to the page, but per WP:MEMORIAL, the page is clearly not a memorial. --Moni3 (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Stonewall_riots.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Stonewall_riots.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 17:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Not to be uncivil or anything, but nuts. --Moni3 (talk) 17:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Question: how did Carter know that the people in the picture slept in Christopher Park? - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 17:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I just saw the text explaining this at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 18:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on my user page

Oh. I just noticed the string of vandalism on my userpage. Thanks for protecting it. -kotra (talk) 22:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem.:) --Moni3 (talk) 23:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Broken record

Hi Moni-- Just wondering if you have a moment to look over my replies on Wikipedia:Peer review/Columbia River/archive1 -- not expecting a full review, which I know is time consuming, but wondering what you think about my thoughts about a couple of your earlier points. Been very impressed with your work on Milk and Stonewall! -Pete (talk) 20:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Zomg! I totally forgot. Yes, I will review the rest of the article. Feel free to take a peek at Milk, too. I need comments before I put it up for FAC. --Moni3 (talk) 20:09, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for the constructive comments -- I see my cohorts are already on the job, I'll jump in and see what I can do! -Pete (talk) 19:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Sri Lankan Tamil people

Glad to have found somebody who is fascinated by these topics, we can work on these issues step by step. Now I am going to take my weekend break :))Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 20:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Good deal. Let me know where you need help. --Moni3 (talk) 20:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I would like to begin a new section called Copy edit 3 under the talk page and then go through your concerns as a complete outsider reading it without knowing any backround section by section, starting from the lead ? What do you think ?Taprobanus (talk) 04:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll put the article on my watchlist and do what I can to assist. --Moni3 (talk) 04:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I will first take care of your FA comments then if you see any more concerns do let me know. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 05:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

You may or may not

...want to weigh in at WT:MOS#Identity dispute (redux). I'm just sayin. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 22:44, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

No, you're the master

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For a neverending stream of hardcore research, exhaustive review, skilled writing, and intense effort – most recently on Stonewall riots – you deserve a dozen of these. Kudos on all your excellent work. Scartol • Tok 17:30, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

YAY! --Moni3 (talk) 17:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

• Moni, my belated congratulations on Stonewall riots. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Graham, thank you so much for the review, and the support at the deletion discussion for the image. --Moni3 (talk) 18:11, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't even have time to support! Awadewit (talk) 18:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome Moni. Any time you think I can help out just give me a call. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Glad you're feeling better, Awadewit! (If you have any suggestions for the article, as usualy, I'm happy to entertain them all.) You get a pass for being ill ;) Will do, Graham. --Moni3 (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Possible Milk spinout

The whole Legacy section might be a good spinout. -- Banjeboi 01:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

You mean for another article? Is that to make that section smaller or just create another article? My first priority would be to make the Milk article the best size it can be, so I need to know if I should remove information for now. --Moni3 (talk) 13:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

If you spin this out as another article then a lot of the concerns about what to cut are mitigated as only the summary stays in the main and the baby article has room to grow as new items are added. -- Banjeboi 23:42, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Stonewall riots

Very interesting article. Congratulations on getting it to FA status! Jayjg ^(talk) 04:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Jayjg! I'm very glad you enjoyed it. --Moni3 (talk) 13:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

Did you know that you were in my first FA promotion? Two months shy of a year: 25% of WP:FA. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Awwww. Ann and I both think that's awesome. Rock on! --Moni3 (talk) 12:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

25% already? Go Sandy! Karanacs (talk) 13:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar to you!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For protecting LGBT pages from vandalism by single-purpose-account vandals. Bearian (talk) 20:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Don't encourage me. I don't know what I'm doing yet. --Moni3 (talk) 20:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)