User talk:Julia W/Archive 4

1459:

stiff or too busy. I have found a couple of nice mentors, but they are involved in major projects. Thus, it is nice to find someone nice like you. Sometimes I feel like in a labyrinth, with gremlins and goblins, like in “The Lord of the Ring”. To be quite honest with you, you are more like a friend, my first friend in Wiki land or Wiki world. I did read a little bit about you, and I will study your pages some more. About languages, because I am Spanish speaking, I can understand about 70% of Italian and 50% of French, but I can’t write or read either one. Hopefully one day. Going back to wiki, and like I said before, you have a lovely page and an impressive curriculum vitae. I love all the graphic designs and I am impressed with all your awards and barnstars. I do have one, by the way; an act of kindness from my mentor. If you go to my user page (perhaps you already did), you will find a lot about me, mainly regarding Colombian coffee. I will keep it short for today, as I don’t want to take much of your time. You are also a very busy girl, working, studying and editing. I love to chat with friends and make new acquaintances. Once again, thanks for your friendly and warm welcome. Till next time, best regards, --

1403:

and was very impressed with his curriculum and graphics. I asked him a question, but did not get an answer. Looking for his answer, I found the name and page of Jujutacular, which are equally impressive. And from there, reviewing his/her talk page, I found your name and page. You also have very impressive curriculum vitae and accomplished editing record. Wow! You have a lovely page. I am a novice editor, just started back in December, and already got in trouble once. But I am trying to learn. Just wanted to say “hola”, as I saw you speak Spanish (so do I). I speak a little English and have been trying to learn French and Italian all my life; maybe someday I’ll learn them. With kindest regards, --

997: 4388:

article, I will ask that you provide me with the evidence that DNA repair mechanisms have evolved by providing evidence of precursor examples. The article is about a subject of science, not one of speculations. In science, we need physical evidence. Speculations are not acceptable as positive assertions of fact. I will make no changes to the article which cannot be supported by observable, testable, and repeatable evidence, and I will expect you to adhere to these same standards of science. If you would like to respond to me via email, I encourage you to email me at <email removed: -->

868: 2796: 3303: 2517: 3156:

Google me you will find anywhere between 15,000 and 42,000 links, depending on the time of day. My exact search Bings are well over 5 million. In the past 6 months alone I have been on or been dpscussed on many national news shows, as well as countless major online media entertainment outlets. My books are not available on Amazon intentionally, as the are "niche" market books, and sold specifically in the intended markets. Thank tou for your time. Sincerely,

3103: 2645: 3356: 4486: 31: 2960: 761:. No need for an apology. You acted entirely in good faith, as did Chienlit, myself, GyroMagician and others. None of us foresaw this. As I say, the irony is that it was the increasing usage of ((r)) courtesy of those of us using it in good faith, that brought the issues to light. That in itself is not a bad thing. And I daresay those raising the issues were themselves acting in good faith. Also, I see that GyroMagician is developing a 3880: 3467: 1934: 241: 455: 3936: 2699: 2574: 2443: 2211: 1805: 3572: 670:. Some technical issues have arisen relating to the use of the ((r)) template to achieve list-defined references, that we weren't aware of in our earlier discussions, nor in our good-faith implementation of the template. That goes for all of us implementing it. However, it turns out that the ((r)) template poses some technical problems for bots and scripts, causing some of them to not work properly. 3630: 3409: 804:

using it. Now GyroMagician is in a unique position here. He knows the background, having worked through the various issues in a very healthy, skeptical fashion (used in a healthy way, skepticism is always constructive, not destructive). Lots of people stand to benefit from that. So what you started was with good intention, and good will come of it. Now that's pretty neat. Kind regards

323:. Doesn't have quite the same ring as the names we came up with. 'Tis surely somewhat surreal sensing a semblance of enlightenment and anticlimax in the one moment. A touch of mild cognitive dissonance perhaps. I have amended my user page to reflect this new knowledge, along with some examples of articles using the style either exclusively or in combination with other styles. Regards 396: 4076:

future, wider implementation (which I think is very likely). My view is don't let Knowledge (XXG) introduce editing restrictions or complications that may in some way negatively impact on you as an editor, however rare that occasion may be, without doing what you can to prevent it, protect yourself, or work with it. So yes, by all means, have it—there's no obligation to use it.

1263: 1199: 3688: 1422: 2857: 2387: 2303:. Also, don't forget that this is Knowledge (XXG), almost everything is free! If you see a user page design that you like, you are welcome to copy it. The minimum that you would need to do is change the text and leave a small note letting others know who you copied the design from. You might find lots of user pages you like at the 4126:

other hand I'm a bit against it cutting down on the freedom of established editors. It's kind of like having to reapply for your job; you'd think when you've made over 10,000 edits, had no blocks, disputes, whatever, there wouldn't be a lot of reason to reduce your editing rights, couldn't that be automated or something.

683:

also serve the purpose of decluttering articles and grouping the references at the bottom. But the Harvard templates, while useful in some contexts, can impose a degree of cumbersomeness over and above that of the list-defined reference method, meaning the latter is a more streamlined method. No problems with that.

4039:

around 'reviewing' other people's edits on contentious articles - sure I fix vandalism or whatever if I see it, but I don't have time to go hunting it down - so should I have these rights, or am I even eligible for it if I have no real intention of 'reviewing' as such? Perhaps you can advise? Thanks, --

4387:

This is an untenable statement which require accepting speculation as fact. Put simply, we have no evidence in science that an error correction process has evolved - there are no known precursor proceeses which can are verifiable as ancestral to DNA Repair. If you want to leave this statement in the

4135:

Anyway, I may as well have that. Also rollback I suppose, I have heard about that many times, but don't really know much about it, have never bothered to look it up as I can do an 'undo' anyway and have just used that, so haven't seen much need for it. Just looking at the article now, I suppose it is

4125:

What you say about WP introducing editing restrictions that may potentially negatively impact on you at some stage was what I was thinking too, otherwise I pretty much wouldn't bother about this. In some ways I agree with it, like if it actually does help with vandalism and nonsense edits, but on the

1620:

Hello again! Mil gracias por tu amable y pronta respuesta. I truly appreciate your kindness and sweet manners. Like I said before, I think I found a friend in you! You have made a positive impact and have changed my perspective as to the ways of the wikiworld. For the last two months I used to panic

4065:

The only potential conflict that I can imagine would be making edits to pages that have edits waiting to be accepted or rejected. Technically, the preceding edits should be reviewed first, and before saving your edits I think you'll be forced by the software to accept or reject the previous changes

3766:

Hiya, I've had that problem before and had to ask for help, too! Thankfully Muhammad knew how to fix it, so I just copied what he did. It needed funky code either side of the species name to replace the ''. (It won't let me show you here, even with nowiki and code tags.) Sorry for taking so long

2913:

Hi. I was wondering if you planned to nominate one of these images at FPC. I'm not sure if you saw jjron's or my comments. I think the action shot in particular has a decent enough chance of passing, regardless of whether you clone out the chin spot. If you want to clone out the spot, go for it, but

2095:

Hi Muhammad, could you please explain why you think it should be a promote? By my calculation, 9 full supports and 5 full opposes is 64.3%, which is shy of the 66.7% required. If you do count two of the votes as halves, it looks even less like a promote. If I'm missing something, do let me know.

1402:

Hello Maedin, I came across your page seeking for an answer, as I was seeking for another answer. Both unanswered so far. I was expecting an answer from Okip, so I went to his page. There I saw a posting from Coffee, which surprised me as being associated with coffee as I am. Thus I went to his page

682:

Because my introduction to list-defined references was via the ((r)) template, and the current technical issues had not yet surfaced, I naturally assumed that the ((r)) template was the way one achieved list-defined references. Per my user page, I did come to realise that the Harvard templates could

4115:

often. I must say over the last year or so I've got into a bit of a habit of checking the history and reviewing preceding changes before I edit an article, especially if it's by an anon IP - it's amazing how often that picks up some vandalism that may have been sitting there for weeks or months. So

3813:

of the review. You may already be aware that I'm having difficulty finding time for WP, otherwise I'd do this myself. Do let me know if you can help; otherwise I may simply have to extend the deadline or find another volunteer, so no worries if it doesn't fit into your schedule. If you do take this

803:

templates can do the same job without any problems. GyroMagician becomes aware of this, and having also first-hand awareness of the process of working through the pros and cons of using list-defined references, creates a page for the Worcestershire project, that will help others who may contemplate

678:

I don't know about you, but I didn't envisage technical problems caused by the use of the ((r)) template. My own purpose was simply to declutter article text and make it easier to edit the text and the references. This is the same for GyroMagician. We explored a couple of ways of doing this, before

4038:

discussion on FPC:Talk. Not sure I fully understand the implications as it's the first I've heard about it. But have had a bit of a look through the linked pages and it appears it may gradually restrict my editing 'rights' if I don't ask for these reviewer rights. OTOH I don't really intend to sit

3850:

Finished. Hope you're okay with the wording, though I mostly nicked it from your notifications for the first stage. I deliberately skipped Alvesgaspar, Raeky, Diliff, Makeemlighter, and Nauticashades, because they have already commented on and/or edited the results page. Let me know if you need

2929:

Hello! Yes, I had seen your comments and jjron's, and I looked into contacting the author of the images but then I . . . forgot, :) I'm sorry I never replied, I appreciated the very helpful suggestions and should have. I do think the action shot has a decent chance, but I'll try to get a larger

2278:

Hello Julie, I have seen and heard all the amazing projects and wonderful works that you do. You seem to be very gifted, talented and appreciative of beauty, art and music. I also like Ludovico Einaudi. Furthermore, I also understand that you are a very busy person and involved in many activities.

1560:

As for others being too busy to be kind, I know just want you mean. I dislike officious and discourteous, it’s never any fun, so I try to be more relaxed. Knowledge (XXG) as a labyrinth is a good metaphor and is certainly how I’ve viewed it on occasion. There are still some areas which I rarely

363:

Cheers. The opposition numbers didn't seem that high to me. For option the option that was implemented (option #1), 12 at time of the result (02:14 26 July 2009), with number 13 being posted after the result posting. This compared to 41 in favour. Just more extensive discussion within the opponent

1458:

Hello Maedin. May I call you Julie? I rather talk to real people than to masks. I understand the reasoning behind it, but still, I rather have a more personal relationship. Thank you very much for your prompt and kind response. You seem to be a nice person. Most editors around here are either too

1339:

of supports to opposes that determine a promotion. It's not taking 7 supports and subtracting the 2.5 opposes, it's done on a 2/3 supermajority (more or less). 7 supports requires over 3 opposes before it approaches a non-pass. Even if it had only 5 supports and one full oppose, it would still

720:

would have any technical drawbacks. I primarily only used the template because it decluttered the main body of the article and seemed neat and tidy. I'm sorry to have led you and Chienlit astray; if I'd had any idea of its negatives, I'd have advised against its use. I appreciate your offer to

570: 366:

templates, but is somewhat simpler to implement, as GyroMagician and I found in our Malvern excursion, as we frenetically foraged through the forest of fixes before finding Signposts. Not that the exercise was a bad thing. Our attempts, and my attempt at making sense of it all, is as far as I can

4075:

I also won't be looking or watching for pending changes, I don't have time for that. I may never even use it during the trial. I assume it's the same for most. My feeling on this is that it's beneficial for as many as possible to have the rights, and once you have it, it will be ready for any

688:

templates. My reason of course is that I was not in the business of promoting any particular template, but using a suitable Wikitext to achieve the goal of creating list-defined references in some articles, insofar as list-defined references are a benefit to those articles and seen as a benefit.

345:

voyages must necessarily use signposts or they and their flying dragons might get lost. And I agree, list-defined references lacks the je ne sais quoi of your (and Chienlit's) far more adventurous nomenclature, but the innovation itself is still quintessentially attractive. Reading through the

3155:

Hello Julie, My name is Adam Dread. I do appreciate the work you do with Knowledge (XXG). I am writing you today in reference to your comments about my article, specifically questioning my "notablility" and my book. I would respectfully request that you take another look. If you "exact search"

4165:

encountered a situation where they would come in handy. I reverted some vandalism on a page with the pending changes thing in effect. So, as I see it, my reversion was essentially meaningless, since someone needs to approve my change anyway. I guess that means you might as well sign me up for

801:

it is adopted for that article. Wotnow develops a user page to brings together some relevant information in one place. Applications continue. Along the way, someone points out issues pertaining to the use of the ((r)) template for list-defined references, and points out that <ref name=/:

1621:

every time I Log in, as one does not know where the booby traps are or the arrows coming from (I have to tell you something funny). But now, I look forward to see if you have left me a message. You have earned another barnstar, for your kindness and gentle spirit. Hasta pronto, --

4197:

I assume that you also wouldn't mind having rollback. I see no reason for you not to have it, you're obviously a trusted user and it makes vandalism reverting just that little bit easier. I'll go ahead and add it, but you can always ask me (or anyone else) to remove it.

1737: 3831:

Hi, yes, I'm happy to help. Least I can do considering the hard work and time that you've put into the review, so thanks for asking me, :) I'll be able to start notifying them all in seven hours or so, assuming it can wait that long. Re the poppy, you're welcome!

3072:

Hi Greg, yes, you'll get a notification on your talk page, one or two days before the image is due on the main page. Most PsOTD appear roughly in order of promotion, and at the moment we're working through early- to mid-2009 FPs. So you could be waiting awhile! :)

1481:

Hi Maedin, I visited your user page again and explored your sub pages. Your page is lovely, most interesting and fun. Amazing curriculum and great graphics. You are a very accomplished girl. Congratulations! I also sent you an e-mail. Have a great day. Best, --:

4110:

Yeah, I had seen that bit about reviewing pending changes. That shouldn't be that arduous; I'm not editing pages under that sort of protection that often, and then there has to have been unreviewed changes before you make you edit, so it shouldn't be an issue

4054:

Hiya, there won't be much in the way of editing restrictions, at least not to begin with. As you are autoconfirmed, your edits to "pending changes" pages will still be automatically accepted and you can still undo or rollback vandalism as usual (even if it's

2068: 4184:

Hiya M, I'm surprised that your edit to Wales had to be reviewed, :-/ I hadn't quite understood that pending changes protection goes up to a level 2, with only admin and reviewers able to edit without needing to be reviewed. (There is a table here,

367:

tell, the first time anyone has tried to pull it all together in one place for other poor sods to make sense of or explore in more depth as they choose, including unambiguously dealing with straw-man arguments based on genuine misapprehensions.

1573:

are thankfully still foreign to me. I’ll happily admit to being blithely ignorant of 99% of wikidrama at any given time and quite determined for it to stay that way. Too much going on in my life to bicker and pick petty arguments with

2785: 1108:

exist to help navigate Knowledge (XXG), not provide definitions. The fact you added would be welcome if it were linked to an appropriate article—or a section within a ``concrete`` article. See the disambiguation guideline. Thanks.

1431:

Sorry to hear of your earlier "trouble", but mistakes happen and I'm sure you've learned from it. For a new editor, you're doing well, :). If you ever have any questions or feel in need of guidance, consider me someone you can ping

1426:. I don't really speak Spanish; I know some vocabulary and can read simple Spanish okay, but I can only just about tell you me llamo es Julie, :) I'm also trying to learn French, but am not finding much time for it, unfortunately. 3198:, the top league in France and one that has been fully-professional for many years. If you still wish to take it to AfD then please feel free, but personally I feel it would be a waste of time as the article will be kept. Regards, 364:

commentary. Option #2 had more opponents (14) than proponents (6), probably because it seemed to add a layer of complexity that could create new problems. Conversely, the option chosen does a very similar thing to the <ref: -->

3514: 918: 2300: 1516:

Hi Grancafé, I prefer Julie, but of course I’m fine with either. Sorry for the delay in replying, your message was left past my bedtime in this part of the world, and after that comes work! Now I’m on my lunch break and can

346:

straw poll for the new reference formatting, I was surprised how many opposed it; here I thought it would be universally accepted as A Good Thing. Thanks for your message, and sorry for the Signpost disappointment, :-)

2949: 1311: 3806: 692:

The irony in all this is that it was our naive use of the ((r)) template which brought to the fore some technical issues which hitherto weren't salient. I have now updated a number of articles with the <ref:

2294:

Hi Zwinglio, thanks for your message. Unfortunately, I am not good at designing user pages. I do not know enough of the code required. It took me far too long to make mine. Why don't you take a look at the

1923: 1534:

Please don’t be so impressed with me or with my pages, I know that I don’t deserve it! My user page took guess work and a lot of previewing; I had to ask questions, and my adopter from when I was a new user,

444: 3456: 3398: 1708:

box in your User talk page. All the quotes are amazing and insightful and, the whole context looks awesome. I enjoy visiting your pages in search for wisdom and inspiration. You have done a wonderful job!

1543:

and selected some icons from there. I’m glad you like it, though! Some very generous and kind people gave me those barnstars, I’m still not sure I deserved them, but very pleased to have them, anyway, :)

986: 844:(Russia). It requires some time (month?)... but I hope that the next article we can make together. We can start to think - which articles are best in English-Russian part of English Knowledge (XXG) :) -- 3742:

Hi. I was closing a nomination at FPC and ran into some trouble. I'd link you to the nom, but that's the trouble! The page name has the ' in it a few times, so gets italicized. Because of this, my links

3092: 1875:, (they are opposite to each other). So while it was golden hour for the high court, the Soudha building was facing away from the sun. In the end I managed to get some good pics for both though. Here's 694:

templates, and if you like, I would be quite happy to do the same with articles which you've worked on. I think it far more prudent to do that, than to cause unnecessary headaches for others. Regards

945:

Hi Muhammad, I've updated my vote to include the edit; I suppose if the original had been presented as the edited version, I'd have supported, so there seems no fair reason to withhold support now.

2634: 1900:

Ooh, thanks, great work on Vidhana Soudha! The sunset and birds are a nice touch. Sorry to hear about PS crashing on you (it always happens when you've spent 30 minutes, not ten!), but I see that

1177: 1172: 1163: 1156: 616:

Thank you, Mila, that's sweet of you, :-) And you're welcome, though I don't think I was enough help, only a little bit of help, maybe. Just doing what felt like the right thing to me. Be well!

1335:

Hi Franklin, :) Thanks for asking; in this case I'm pretty sure it's a pass. You're referring to quorum, which means the minimum number of supports necessary is 5. But that's different from the

385: 1019: 833:

Yes, I am fan and user of Audacity :). And I like to make compilations of suitable music (of course with open license :) with the voice. E.g. You can listen my last work with music background:

4161:

Hi. I noticed this discussion on my watchlist. I feel pretty much like jjron does - not sure that I'd actually need the reviewer rights. I felt compelled to add my 2 cents, though, because I

2729: 2304: 3869: 2506: 584:

Dear Julie, thank you for being there for me, when I needed it most! Thank you very much for your kindness and your understanding! You are a very kind person, and a great administrator.--

4322:

I'm afraid my fix broke something else. Heh. Physician, heal thyself. Heh. At least noone can accuse us of malice: You accidentally removed half an oppose, and I removed half a support.

1879:. After working for more than half an hour stitching and editing the high court pic, PS crashed and I hadn't saved so I will put that up later. Bangalore palace, hopefully next week. -- 3561: 172:

I'm so pleased that my user page was host to his insecurity. Presumably the more they "get it out of their system", the faster the maturing takes place! Suits my logic, anyway, :)

2703: 4336:

Haha, we're both numpties, ;-) Not sure what your excuse is, but in the summer I can blame it on my hair colour. ^^ And yes, trust us to be neutral, even when we're screwing up!

2818: 3619: 2846: 230: 2376: 762: 3814:

on, you may find it easiest to just use the same standard message for everybody - it's what I did. Thanks also for noticing my crop among the poppy set a little while ago!

1652:

Hi sweet Julie, this is just to tell you that Jujutacular helped me fix my new signature. I am very appreciative by Juju's help and advice. Hope you are having a great day,

1124:

Thanks, I'm aware. I was sure I could find an article for it, but alas, there are none. I left it because I intended to create one, but you're right to undo it for now.

1686: 1680: 890: 3292: 2907: 827: 687:

templates do the job just as easily, but don't cause technical difficulties, I have no difficulty acknowledging that and amending the ((r)) templates to <ref: -->

3677: 1252: 1983: 4035: 3544: 4384:

The article states, "Due to the damaging effects that mutations can have on cells, organisms have evolved mechanisms such as DNA repair to remove mutations."

3373: 639:

Maedin, yes yes, I noticed it sorry. I am such an old woman sometimes. I did leave a message to her, thank you and sorry if I caused you any confusion :)

3543:, I was wondering if you could comment on a potential change to the "Not promoted" instructions for closing nominations. The discussion can be found at 2328:

Hi Julie, thank you very much for your help, guidance and sound advise. My user page is looking very nice. You have been most kind and helpful. Thanks,

4365:

Sorry, I didn't know, not having been here for about, what, 3/4ths of a year? If you're willing to fix it, it'd help, as I was about to take a nap. =/

3325: 3907: 3890: 3715: 3698: 3657: 3640: 3599: 3582: 3494: 3477: 3436: 3419: 3330: 3313: 3130: 3113: 2987: 2970: 2884: 2867: 2823: 2806: 2672: 2655: 2544: 2527: 2414: 2397: 1961: 1957: 1290: 1273: 1024: 1007: 895: 878: 482: 465: 423: 406: 268: 251: 4060:

I'm not fully certain myself how it will work; there are several pages for testing, but I won't use them because I'd have to reveal my IP address.

319:

Thanks for your feedback regarding the origin of the {{reflist|2|refs= ... }} and {{r|myRefName}} templates. I now know that the adopted term is

1212: 3125: 2539: 4411: 2667: 1223: 199:

Indeed, I completely forgot I even had a Knowledge (XXG) account until a friend of mine wanted to correct the grammar on a locked article.

2296: 4244:

Thanks for enabling these Maedin (and I never even knew you were an Admin before; guess I'll have to be nicer to you in future ;-) ). --

4015: 3748: 2982: 1683: 4258:

You're welcome, too. And it's okay, I don't think most know. In fact, I keep forgetting that I am. Power does not enthral me, ;-)

3902: 218: 2773: 2713: 3489: 2735:

Sorry about that, I wasn't aware of the process, since it's my first nomination. But as you said, it was pretty uncontroversial.

675:

templates, which don't cause any difficulties for bots and scripts. I think this is both a fair point, and the easiest solution.

2597:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 2466:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 2234:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 1828:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 3959:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page 996: 4428: 3975: