User talk:Trfasulo

Welcome!

Hello, Trfasulo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Fayenatic (talk) 12:58, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Knock yourself out (as it were)

Hi, Tom. Glad to see you've joined up with WP. I hope you'll consider joining those of us who are working on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Arthropods. We could use someone with your background and expertise, and who maintains such an excellent informational website. Welcome, Dyanega 17:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need my blessing to go whipping some of those species-level pages into shape. As for things like bad article titles and capitalized common names, WP policy supports the changes you're looking to make (there is a link somewhere to the policy on not-capitalization of common names, I just can't recall it). As for changing the title of an article, the process is easy (you just click on the "Move" button); the only problematic aspect is that in many cases this may create a huge number of links which are now redirects. In the case of Indian meal moth, though, there are only 7 actual articles with real links (you can see this by clicking on the "What links here" link - and ignore talk pages and "Wikipedia:####" pages). However, if you do this you will ALSO notice that there is already an "Indianmeal moth" article, and that IS a problem. That requires physically copying and pasting the content from one article to another, and that's tedious to do, and also forces one to lose all of the page history, which is definitely less than desirable. What you need to do in such a case is put a big note at the top of the talk page explaining that the article and talk history can be seen at Indian meal moth and its talk page. I don't have time today to do this myself, otherwise I would. Peace, Dyanega (talk) 16:25, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indianmeal moth

I'm sorry but I can see no linguistic justification for "Indianmeal" as one word, it just doesn't make sense. It is a "meal moth" "from" India... I reverted your last edit and suggest we revert "Indianmeal" to "Indian meal" throughout—GRM (talk) 17:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted Grmanners because the existing references for the article use "Indianmeal" as one word. But checking, I'm not sure which is correct. Both appear to be used in biological scientific sources. [1] [2] The article should be at the title of the more common usage, whichever that is. If the redirect needs to be deleted, I can do that; drop me a note at my talk page. The article should probably use the form that it is titled at, except for also mentioning the alternative form in the lead. (For example "The Indianmeal moth (Plodia interpunctella), sometimes also called the Indian meal moth ..." or vice versa.) GRBerry 19:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Trenton

Thank you for your compliments on the Battle of Trenton. As you can see by the differences since I started working on it, I have been quite busy with it. If I could ask you one favor, is to submit your thoughts here, because I am nominating the article for FA status. Thanks. Red4tribe (talk) 20:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. BTW, I have been in 49 of the 50 states, but I think you have been in more countries. Fasulo (talk) 21:06, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, because Europe is so small, it makes it very easy to go from one country to the next. Especially now since you don't need passports anymore, for the most part. Which state haven't you been to? Red4tribe (talk) 21:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

North Dakota. In Europe I have been in just the United Kingdom and France (just the airport in the latter). But I have been in many countries around the world on five continents — some on my own, many due to Uncle Sam. As for North Dakota, I remember a long-ago TV interview with the guy who owned Gateway Computer, who had opened his plant in South Dakota. The interviewer said that South Dakota was a strange place to open a high-tech company and asked the owner what was the advantage of opening his plant there. The guy quickly answered, "It isn't in North Dakota!" Fasulo (talk) 21:27, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WP:MILHIST!

A few features that you might find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, article logistics, and other tasks.
We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts and copy-editing alerts.
The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 00:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

You have recently added text to the article Jonathan Mayhew Wainwright IV. Can you please provide reliably sourced reference(s) to support the statement you added. Thank you in advance. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you requested, I added the reference and citation to the Gen Wainwright page that supports the text that Gen MacArthur opposed Wainwright receiving the MoH. I should have done that last night. I somehow stumbled on the page - can't remember why - and just quickly added the text. I have read this in numerous books, but I was only able to find one this morning. This book, which I recently read, includes the text of the message that MacArthur sent to General Marshall opposing the award to Gen Wainwright. I include excerpts here:

The citation proposed does not repeat does not represent the truth... I do not repreat do not recommend him for the Medal of Honor.

In my opinion, Wainwright (somewhat) and General Edward King (especially), never received the credit they deserved for the defense of the Philippines. While MacArthur sat in his cave issuing "decrees," they had actual command of the fighting that took place. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 15:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding the reference. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:13, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lovebug

Thank you for the major contributions you have made to this article which has attracted more than its share of vandalism in the past. It would not contain decent information today, if it weren't for you.

I probably should have been a little more forthcoming when I noticed the change to the article the other day, then really read the section that was being amended. It was a "how to" section. Wikipedia has a WP:NOTHOWTO policy. We inform the reader, in the case, the nature of the insect. Then we have thrown in the problem to motorists. I think that is far as we can go here. While it is foremost in my mind as a driver, the lovebug acts the way it is "supposed to" and its peripheral effects on me are of little importance. To go any further here is a bit too anthro-centric IMO. I mean besides being against policy! It winds up being off WP:TOPIC as well. The article should be about the fauna, not my car! Let them find out how to clean their car elsewhere. Student7 (talk) 11:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commas

I think 90% of Wikipedians omit needed commas, especially before coordinating conjunctions. Your gratitude is the first I have received for commas, I think. Today I picked a Featured Article out of the blue, checked for commas, and, sure enough, a couple were needed. I enjoyed your article very much, by the way; that's why I spent extra time and went over it so thoroughly. Happy editing! Chris the speller (talk) 03:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Stephen Atkins Swails

Hello! Your submission of Stephen Atkins Swails at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 21:48, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Please see talk page for one more question. Yoninah (talk) 09:38, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, what I'm trying to establish is a reference for the assertion that Swails "may have been the first African American commissioned as a officer in the Union Army during the American Civil War". Does your source say that specifically? Yoninah (talk) 16:59, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added another citation (#9) from Emilio p. 268. On that page it states, "He was one of the earliest if not the first colored officer mustered." Considering that he was promoted almost a year before he was mustered, that is good evidence that he was the first such promoted. The existing citation #2 for that sentence has the statement, "Swails was promoted in 1864 to second lieutenant for his performance on the battlefield by Massachusetts' governor John Andrews. This was an unprecedented step that was celebrated by black American journals. However, the Army, which was not paying black recruits their soldiers' wages, refused to honor the promotion until the following year, after Andrews lobbied on Swails' behalf." Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 20:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Stephen Atkins Swails

On 22 September 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stephen Atkins Swails, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving MILHIST peer reviews

Please ask for help in the future. Any of the Coordinators would happily archive the review for you. The nuances of the process are complex enough that it would be best to leave this to us in the future, especially since you've screwed up following the directions in the worst way I've ever seen. Thanks, -MBK₀₀₄ 03:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to apologize for what I said above. Upon reflection, I was definitely too harsh with you and I was not in a good mood when I left you the above message. I hope you will accept my apology and continue to contribute. -MBK₀₀₄ 02:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your apology. However, I think I'll take a break for awhile. I work on Web sites all day for the University of Florida and some others. Doing the edits for the recent review of two articles had me on the computer at night more than I liked. I'll be keeping up with the few pages on my watchlist (Lovebug adults are in season and that article gets vandalized regularly now.), and I'll work on some insect pages as they relate to my UF work. I do have an idea for a notable historic person who does not have a WP page and, in my opinion, really deserves one. But that is for the future. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 14:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist A-Class and Peer Reviews Oct–Dec 2010

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2010, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Time After Time

Hi, I've made some revisions to your edits. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen this film and have it on DVD. The business with Stevenson's bag is thus:

Constable (carrying bag, speaking to chief): I'd think you'd better have a look at this, sir.
Mrs. Turner (Wells' housekeeper): That's Dr. Stevenson's bag.
Chief: What did you say this man's name was?
Wells: Stevenson, John Leslie Stevenson. He's chief of surgery at St. Bartholomew's...
Constable (lifting bloodied gloves from bag): I'm afraid he's also "chief of surgery" in Whitechapel.

THD3 (talk) 16:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right. Sorry about that. Perhaps the reason I remember it differently is that soon after I saw the movie for the last time (I've only seen it twice but have a good memory) I also read the book. If I remember correctly, in the book it isn't the Scotland Yard folks that find the bloody clothes but Wells and his housekeeper. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting about the book. I haven't read it. Wasn't it written more or less in conjunction with the movie? I vividly recall seeing Time After Time during the summer of 1979, then on various video formats. What a great score by Miklos Rosza!THD3 (talk) 18:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Apr–Jun 2011

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period April-June 2011, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. HJ Mitchell \| Penny for your thoughts? 20:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste `{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}` to your user space

Dear Sir

Dear Sir

Dear Sir, Thank you for your helpful contributions to the Wikipedia page, American Propaganda during World War II: Animation. I hope you will look at the contributions I continued to make today. It's not yet very "pretty" but I hope with help from you and others who are more familiar with Wikipedia editing, the animation section will get better. Jordanpres1 (talk) 17:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite welcome and thank you for those kind words. I am progressing slowly through the "American Propaganda during World War II" article. I was out of town for a few days and hope to get back doing one small section a day tomorrow. I was more active in WP in the past, but my job is almost 100% Web sites and so I had to cut back somewhere. When I retire, at the end of next June, I hope to become more active again. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]