User talk:Montanabw/Archive 10

California Chrome

Thanks for the heads up. Read the latest product. It is better to focus on the horse. The Coburn's have obviously been filling in the blanks while the camera's are focused on them. They are precariously straddling the line between hyping their story and crossing over into the pool where untruths muddy the waters.

I suspect that much of it is already known to the media who are just waiting to film Coburn pass out with bourbon in hand. For instance, the Martin's never complained about their treatment at the Kentucky Derby. Don't know what was wrong with the Coburn's and why they generated such a story...except to keep focus on themselves. Churchill does have a long way to go in terms of physically challenged patrons and the use of volunteers but they have appeared to be trying to do the right thing. Then there is the issue of Coburn not wanting to sell his share of CC for six million for 51%. How could sell 51% when he owns 30%? I suspect that this is the major problem when citing interviews as sources followed by not checking the facts. It takes a lot of time and several different journalists to get at the truth after a poorly written article is based on skewed interviews. It seems to me that a lot of interesting things will come tumbling out in the future...if anyone will be interested at that time.

Loved your work and will try to follow your future projects.------greensodagal (talk) 04:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I have to get two more people to approve the FAC (featured article candidate) before it gets its little gold star. Should be soon! Montanabw^(talk) 05:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

You're not going to like this, but...

... they get everywhere... --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:40, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh dear! LOL! Whatever shall we do? (wrings hands, looks distressed, trots off to the snarkives... ) heh, heh, heh! Montanabw^(talk) 23:09, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Your reversion of my edit on Yunnan horse

(diff) What was up with it? I've been squinting at my edit, but I'm still quite sure that I improved the grammar... ∴ ZX95 ^[discuss] 18:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

You wrote "...is an extinct breed horse" and you thought it was an improvement? A) it's not a "breed," it's a species (or maybe a subspecies, depending on what the taxonomy sorts are saying this week); B) It is extinct, and we use the past tense as it goes to the subject, not the modifier, e.g. "was a (x) horse" not "is extinct." C) Even if it was an extant breed, were we to keep your sentence, we would need to add "of." Montanabw^(talk) 18:12, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, just making sure it wasn't a slip of the mouse or something. I can live with it either way :) Cheers, ∴ ZX95 ^[discuss] 13:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:BRAT

And another drahmahz concluded on a positive note

I may get chastised for making a shortcut to your excellent little bit of mini-essay, but it's a darned useful little thingamawhatzit, and given what's going on in the yammering at User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 170#Monkey business and related sections, seems very apt right now....if TLDR is an essay, then your little tidbit should be too; I removed a highly offensive line from TLDR earlier by the way.....I'm not sure with the full phrase if I have to put WP:Brat in a bubble or if Brat in a bubble should be used. WP:BUBBLE maybe too?Skookum1 (talk) 16:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC) @Skookum1: see thread below. Montanabw(talk) 20:40, 13 August 2014 (UTC) MfD nomination of User:Montanabw/Brat in a bubble User:Montanabw/Brat in a bubble, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Montanabw/Brat in a bubble and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Montanabw/Brat in a bubble during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Oh goody, more drahmahz. Calling all stalkers! Montanabw(talk) 20:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Drahmahz? "The one who smelt it, dealt it" -- well, according to certain "childless white males", anyway. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:56, 13 August 2014 (UTC) While the original draft did have some troubling gender and age generalizations, I think the new version does serve a purpose. Behavior isn't always tied to gender, age, or national origin and MBW has correct that in the most recent version, IMO. Intothatdarkness 21:01, 13 August 2014 (UTC) FWIW, "teh drahmahz" is here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Montanabw/Brat in a bubble. Just being helpful. Given that this lived in obscurity as a userspace subpage that no one linked to, I find it amusing that I am now being targeted on precisely the issues that led to the creation of the gender gap task force in the first place. Oh! Forgot to ping them too! Montanabw(talk) 21:52, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Yep. Threw my handful of kernels on there, and now I'm out. Intothatdarkness 22:01, 13 August 2014 (UTC) No worries, just watch them pop now, I'm sure there will be plenty of tl;dr bandwidth devoted to this. Montanabw(talk) 22:09, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Kelsang Jangdom

Take it somewhere else people

What are we supposed to do with User:Kjangdom? Kelsang Jangdom is one of the people who organizes various New Kadampa/Shugden campaign organizations. See Dorje Shugden Controversy revision history.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 04:38, 13 August 2014 (UTC) The rules and guidelines are tools that should work across most subjects. Keep a list of relevant diffs for when you need to go to ANI or another of the dramaboards. You might be able to use WP:COI if it's really clear cut. Also, don't go alone, it is useful to have allies, though be aware that there's a fine line between like minded people working together and "teh dreaded" accusations of canvassing and meatpuppetry. Stay on the right side of the force, eh? Montanabw(talk) 05:59, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Hi Montanabw. I was looking at VictoriaGrayson's contribution history and saw her post here. Although I disagree with VictoriaGrayson quite often, in this case, I think she/he has a valid concern. On his own user page Kjangdom / Kelsang Jangdom says "I am practitioner of the Wisdom Buddha, Dorje Shugden and I'm most interested in editing pages to do with Dorje Shugden" which seems to me like a virtual proclamation that his is a single purpose account. According to the public Facebook profile of Kelsang Jangdom he is the "Admin Director at Nordic Kadampa Meditation Centre" which seems to be the main branch of the New Kadampa Tradition in Norway. The New Kadampa Tradition is of course well known as the main group promoting the worship of "Dorje Shugden" in the west and is said to be the main group behind the Western Shugden Society (another article Kjangdom has heavily edited) - which is the main group organising protests against the Dalai Lama, a major aspect of the "controversy" this article is about. I think there is a pretty clear COI here and that Kjangdom is trying to bring this, and other closely related articles more in line with views the organisation he is associated with. To his credit Kjangdom obviously makes no attempt to hide his affiliations - and, like other religious believers, I'm sure he thinks he is doing the right thing by trying to make Wikipedia articles reflect the "truth" he sincerely believes in. But, more importantly than this single case, I think there is a much wider issue. The Dorje Shugden controversy article, and quite a number of other closely related articles, have been subject to this type of POV/COI editing ever since they were created. How do you deal a situation where a series of articles surrounding a topic (in this case NKT/Dorje Shugden) are subject to this kind of editing over a span of years and years? It seems to me that when any editor makes an attempt to turn any of these into good articles their edits are constantly overwritten by others pushing a particular POV - and neutral editors eventually abandon these articles in exasperation. Now the NKT claims to have around 1100 centres and branches worldwide - and many dedicated disciples. On the face of it it looks to me like there is at least a small group of these people who pretty well dedicate themselves to zealously monitoring and editing the articles concerned to reflect their organisation's POV (perhaps in an organised manner - but of course that, if true, would be virtually impossible to prove). But how can other ordinary editors counterbalance this sort of thing? Seriously, has Wikipedia ever come up with any effective way of dealing with situations like this? There have already been numerous complaints about these articles in the usual places and over the years a whole series of editors allegedly affiliated with the NKT have been blocked or banned ~ yet the same situation keeps on recurring. Chris Fynn (talk) 16:21, 13 August 2014 (UTC) @CFynn: There are already past incidents of coordinating editing by the NKT. See here for example. Kjangdom is also director of the International Shugden Community, which he has admitted before. Also @Cullen328: might have some insight as well.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 17:25, 13 August 2014 (UTC) I have no expertise in Tibetan Buddhism and only a mild interest. I respect the topic expertise of others. I got involved in this because of my general interest in BLP policy. I consider 14th Dalai Lama an important, high visibility article, and personally, I respect the man. I believe that CFynn has summarized matters well regarding pro-Shugden editors. On the other hand, there is a common tendency when dealing with organized POV pushers to go too far in the other direction, so that coverage of what many people see as a "cult" becomes overwhelmingly negative. So, I have advocated for the middle ground. For example, I believe that quotes from Kelsang Gyatso are appropriate in the Shugden articles, since he is the most prominent living advocate. What I lack is both the topic specific knowledge and the motivation to delve deeply into the details. I am a generalist and work on many topics. My goal is the same wherever I work: to improve the encyclopedia and to help less experienced editors do the same. If the editor in question, or others from his movement, become increasingly disruptive, you can count on me to take a closer look if editing restrictions or other sanctions are being proposed. Thanks to all of you. I do share your concern. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:23, 13 August 2014 (UTC) My understanding is that the NKT is a cult within Buddhism, sort of like the Unification Church and other cults are to Christianity. I'd say that an example of "what are NPOV editors to do?" can be found in the dramas that have surrounded articles on Scientology, Young Earth creationism and related topics. My goal is to stay on the edges of this issue, as I am not an expert in Buddhism, either, (I personally am a liberal Christian within the Methodist tradition, FWIW) but I do believe quite firmly in NPOV and am concerned that NKT does engage in questionable practices and may be linked to the Chinese government. These sources [1], [2], and particularly this, and this lead me to conclude that we are dealing with a POV-pushing issue here. Montanabw(talk) 22:32, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Good evening everyone! Yet again reported by victoriagrayson because I do not share this editor's point view... I much prefer editing articles than discussing here and think this should be the focus for most editors, but since this has come up and a number of editors have piled in, it seems like I should 'defend' myself... lol. I make pro-Shugden edits and victoriagrayson makes anti-Shugden edits. Why are you concerned with my and edits and not victoriagrayson's? Personally I am happy for the relevant articles to be neutral, but the whole point is that because victoriagrayson and other editors (kt66, heicth) have been falsifying some of these articles with their completely one-sided and negative edits, some pro-Shugden edits have been needed to bring these articles back to somewhere approaching neutral. It is not my intention to make the whole article pro-shugden, the place for such articles is the WSS's website or similar, not wikipedia. My intention is to help create a well-written neutral article, but this is something victoriagrayson is hell-bent on avoiding. Cullen328 also notes the 'overwheleming' negative coverage in these articles, which in my opinion needs to be addressed. And to be honest with you I think this is a responsibilty for all editors, not just pro-Shugden ones. On the whole I have found it fun and educational disucussing with various editors here including Cfynn and Cullen328 so thank you for this. Sometimes I might have been a little enthusiastic in some of my edits, but this is not really such a big deal. However, I do have serious concerns about victoriagrayson, which also shared by other 'neutral' editors, which I would like to draw your attention to: User:Joshua_Jonathan had the following advice for victoriagrayson on 10 August 2014 (in his edit summary) on the DS controversy article "Reverted 7 edits by VictoriaGrayson: Please stop your mass-revertions. I'm getting fed-up with working on this article, and seeing my edits disappear again and again" and this on Dougweller's talk page on 26 June 2014 by another neutral editor, John Carter who had the following to say about victoriagrayson: "Wondering how to proceed regarding what is to my eyes one of the most obvious cases of group misconduct I have seen in a while. I am referring to the Dorje Shugden content. @JzG: has some experience regarding this so I am pinging him as well. So far as I can see 3 POV pushers User:VictoriaGrayson User:Heicth and User:kt66 are all historically rather obvious SPA POV pushers apparenty intending to stifle any disagreement with them on their topic of primary if not almost exclusive interest. Two of them are even apparently trying to get their “opponent” banned from editing. And I have received indications regarding the latter which I have asked the person who raised them to send to ArbCom. To me this looks very much like the earlier Falun Gong cases which between them led to the banning of pretty much everyody involved particularly those with obvious problematic behavior like the three mentioned above. Personally I am finding the conduct of the one most active of them to be increasingly tiresome and am coming very very close to starting a request for ArbCom involvement now but I do know I have a bit of a short fuse and I would welcome review by you and anyone else who might see this for their opinions regarding whether there is any good reason to think these matters will improve without intervention of ArbCom." So I hope you can see that this case is not as clear cut as victoriagrayson will have you think. I wouldn't be surprised if @Prasangika37: has found victoriagrayson problematic as well. Victoriagrayson - Repeatedly running to the moderators because you disagree with my edits is not really in the Wikipedia spirit. I hope we can work together to improve the articles we both have a shared interest in. And you might want to consider your own behaviour before you report me again. Thank you. Kjangdom (talk) 22:59, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Hello again, I would like to draw your attention to more dubious editing by victoriagrayson and request clarification on a certain matter. There has been some discussion on the Dorje Shugden controversy talk page as we seek to explain the Dalai Lama's ban on the practice of Dorje Shugden. As a result of the ban Shugden practitioners have been ostracized from their communities, denied access to medical facilities and the Tibetan people have been forced to sign an oath promising not to materially or spiritually associate with Shugden practitioners thereby dividing families and communities. Victoriagrayson claims that there is no ban (inspite of the word 'ban' being used on the Dalai Lama's own website, the Dalai Lama being filmed describing the ban, secondary sources describing the ban and a vast array of witness accounts...) In response I asked why thousands of people would demonstrate against a non-existent ban to which victoriagrayson replied "The protesting is merely to promote Shugden" This is a deeply offensive comment, because the point of protesting to get the Dalai Lama to lift this unjust and inhumane ban which is causing great suffering and divisions within the Buddhist community NOT to promote Shugden. As a Buddhist, you do not protest against the Dalai Lama to win a popularity contest, so I can assure you all that there is more at stake here. Victoriagrayson must have realized that (s)he overstepped the mark with this comment as (s)he immediately deleted it. So my question is, is it OK to covertly delete comments from the talk page as a way of covering up one's own inappropriate comments? Thank you. Kjangdom (talk) 23:20, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Columbia professor Robert Barnett says the protests are "in order to provoke misinformed publicity for their sect".VictoriaGrayson (talk) 05:56, 14 August 2014 (UTC) And I am not an admin or a moderator, Kjangdom, I'm just an editor who ran across this little drama and commented. Kjangdom, just your tl;dr post here on my talk page (given that I am no one of any particular importance) as well as your personal attacks on another user pretty much settle in my mind that you are probably a POV-pusher with an agenda, and in violation of WP:COI, but that's only my opinion and I have other fish to fry so I'll leave it to others to haul you over to the nearest drama board and ping me when they do. NKT fits the parameters of a cult, and I have no more interest in engaging with you than I have to engage with Scientologists, Young Earth Creationists, and others of that ilk. Montanabw(talk) 06:36, 14 August 2014 (UTC) @Montanabw - One minor point. You said above that you "believe that quotes from Kelsang Gyatso are appropriate in the Shugden articles, since he is the most prominent living advocate." Well he is the most prominent advocate in the west, at least as far as most westerners and the media is concerned. But amongst Tibetans he is only a minor religious figure, though I'm sure that they have now all heard about him. Since Geshe Kelsang Gyatso has virtually no Tibetan followers, all the Tibetans who continue to practice Shugden follow other Lamas, whose views on Shugden may differ substantially from those Geshe Kelsang Gyatso teaches to his western flock. Also the rituals and prayers to Shugden Tibetan Shugden worshippers use are quite different than those used by the NKT. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso is obviously important especially to the western aspect of all this, but then no one has ever claimed the Dalai Lama has prohibited westerners from worshipping Shugden. Anyway I'd call Kelsang Gyatso the most prominent living advocate in the west, but there are certainly other more prominent and higher ranked lamas in India and Tibet who still advocate this practice - so his prominence may need to be put in context and only given appropriate weight. Some of these other lamas frown on the pro-Shugden / anti Dalai Lama tactics being used in the west as they think these only give them a bad name and cause them more problems. Chris Fynn (talk) 07:29, 14 August 2014 (UTC) Um, no that wasn't me, that was Cullen328 that said that. My own view is far simpler: NKT is a cult and frankly, I see no real difference between Kelsang Gyatso and, say someone like Sun Myung Moon. Did a bit of follow up research, found this and this both fairly neutral and balanced, but upon analysis, confirming my own views on the matter. I found the position of Amnesty International on the matter quite dispositive. Now why is all this at my talk page anyway? Montanabw(talk) 07:37, 14 August 2014 (UTC) Yes, I am the one who expressed that opinion about Kelsang Gyatso, while also conceding that I lack deep topic expertise. I appreciate your more nuanced evaluation of his role, CFynn. Apologies for clogging your talk page, Montanabw. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC) Oh well, it's interesting to lurk and distracts me from other dramahz elsewhere. Montanabw(talk) 07:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC) Just looking in here.. Montanabw its an odd assertion that the NKT is a 'cult'. I ask you to look at this a bit more closely before saying that. I understand you've come to this conclusion because a few of these certain major sources out there propose thoughts like this..but please be open for a moment. There are a few of these people who call themselves 'survivors' who have actually ever experienced the NKT in such a negative way, but its of thousands upon thousands of people that have went in the doors of NKT centers..And their harm was mistakes by certain individuals and is a shame, but there are far more examples of far worse actions elsewhere, like in Soto Zen sects, Shambala, the Catholic Church, and so on. Its not representative of the whole. If you look at any of Geshe Kelsang's books it would be clear that he's just teaching Buddhism, which people can take or leave. Re: inclusiveness, Geshe Kelsang clearly says in his published text Modern Buddhism, "There are many traditions of Buddhism, like Theravada, Zen, and so forth, and all are equally precious". In addition, his teachings are on love and compassion. That doesn't seem to 'cultish' to me.. See the General director of the NKT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL_aVFHJSbc http://www.newkadampatruth.org/smear-nkt-is-a-cult#kadampa/ is a nice response to these sort of thoughts. People like Robert Thurman, unfortunately, have a huge agenda because he is a spokesperson for the Dalai Lama, whose actions the NKT are critical of. Of course he is going to have defensive and scathing words! Prasangika37 (talk) 16:30, 14 August 2014 (UTC) That's what the Moonies say about Sun Myung Moon and what Scientologists say about L. Ron Hubbard too, bucko. It's boring and you all say the same basic things. ("oh we're not a cult, if you'd just read our literature by the Great Leader...") I'm not drinking your Kool-Aid. Now GO AWAY. (That includes everyone, please, on both sides) This conversation can continue at the talk pages of the relevant articles. Montanabw(talk) 18:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Thanks for your work on California Chrome, and congratulations on getting it through FAC. I am sorry I never made it back for another round of comments, but it looks like I wasn't needed. Keep up the great work, and God bless! Go Phightins! 21:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Well done!! Surprised I didn't hear about it this personally though! Did I piss you off with my review :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:24, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh heavens, no! It was great! I just forgot to give you Carrots for your pony! My bad! Montanabw^(talk) 18:11, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Varian brothers

Hello Montanabw,

Ansel Adams devoted three paragraphs to the Varians in his 1985 autobiography. The anecdote is on pages 140-141 of my paperback copy. Adams described an assignment from Life magazine to photograph "mad scientists". He describes the humorous aftermath, with people writing letters to the editor and to the Varians, trying to figure out what the experimental gear in the photos was. This may well be the photo session that is the source of the photos in your Wikipedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:29, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

In 1963, Adams issued his fourth portfolio of photos, which was in memory of Russell Varian. Given that he had been a published photographer for over 40 years at this time, and this was only #4, you can see that a "portfolio" was a major artistic statement for him. He clearly valued his relationship with Russell greatly, and grieved his death. Original editions have sold for $53,775, per Christies Auction House. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:44, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Russell's wife Dorothy is mentioned twice in another book I own, "The History of the Sierra Club, 1892-1970", by Michael P. Cohen. She was a close associate of Dorothy Leonard, wife of Richard M. Leonard, whose biography I wrote. Richard was the attorney who organized Varian Associates, and was a director from the start. The two Dorothys worked together in a group called "Conservation Associates", which I gather was an independent group of wealthy folks closely associated with the Sierra Club, who wanted to act without submitting themselves to the discipline of a large, bureaucratic group like the club, and who favored cooperation rather than confrontation with industrialists like Pacific Gas & Electric. They bought up land that later became Point Reyes National Seashore, and also at Nipomo Dunes, near the planned site of the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. I believe that they were part of the "right" faction that ousted David Brower from Sierra Club leadership, and that Ansel Adams was also a key member of this faction. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:04, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Back in those days, the Sierra Club was a smaller and more intense and ingrown group, very influential, and the leading figures, many associated with UC Berkeley and Stanford University, were close social friends for decades, and tied in closely with leading academic, business and artistic circles in the San Francisco Bay Area. An article I wrote, Cedric Wright gives a glimpse into this social scene. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:15, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

@Cullen328: OMG! Your info would be a gold mine. Please (pretty please with lots of maple sugar on top!) feel free to trot over there (Russell and Sigurd Varian) and add anything to the article that you can source to any of your hardcopy books or other resources! I would really enjoy taking that article to GA or farther, and it works best when there is a collaborator (two heads are better than one!) Having just finished the FAC for Cal Chrome (see above) and finishing up the PR and polishing for my next FAC (Bazy Tankersley), I'm casting about for the next article to pop into the queue. I found working on those fellows to be absolutely fascinating - the dovetailing of radar and tech during WWII, combined with the birth of Silicon Valley coupled with a conservation ethic and a whiff of socialist idealism was an incredible mix. Amazing. FWIW, I got there after writing the BLP Sheila Varian - about their niece, whose horse ranch was, basically, bankrolled by "Aunt Dorothy" - then writing John Osborne Varian - about Russell and Sigurd's father. Positively amazing family. Montanabw^(talk) 18:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Selle Français

Hi, could you take a look at my note on your nomination? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 09:52, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

I didn't nominate it, but I will check it. Montanabw^(talk) 18:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Equus

Hello, would you be interested in working on Equus for GA? LittleJerry (talk) 19:38, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd be glad to collaborate, I'm not a taxonomy expert, you may also want to ping @Justlettersandnumbers: as he is someone who works on a lot of the articles about non-horse equines. Maybe figure out who is active on the zebra articles and ping them too. Montanabw^(talk) 19:44, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

The hardest for me with be taxonomy/evolution. I've heard conflicting reports on whether zebras are monophyletic for example. LittleJerry (talk) 20:31, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd say that Equus needs to be an overview, and the debates can go to the individual animal articles. Montanabw^(talk) 20:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I guess we could take some text from here. LittleJerry (talk) 21:49, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Let's invite them too... maybe post a message at talk of that article. Montanabw^(talk) 03:30, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I found this. I'm having trouble figuring out the when the dates for the divergences of horse, zebra and ass lineages. LittleJerry (talk) 22:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not much help there. Maybe post at Evolution of the horse and perhaps the individual talk pages of some of the more active editors. We need someone who know palentology, I think. Montanabw^(talk) 04:24, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Nevermind, I think I can handle it. Should I keep the list of all the extinct and extant species? I was think of instead having a cladogram. LittleJerry (talk) 22:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

@LittleJerry: What's a cladogram? I'd say so long as there is a "one stop shop" for all of them in some form, I'm not picky on what form, but keep some single collection of everything, somehow. There is also a navbox you might want to look at, see Template:Equidae_extinct_nav, and Template:Equus, which probably should be merged and definitely need some work. Montanabw^(talk) 01:03, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

For a cladogram, see quagga and look at the evolution subsection. LittleJerry (talk) 01:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Would you be able to look through the "biology" section so it reflects domestic and feral horses as well (e.g. mane and color in "Physical characteristics") and perhaps some on the conservation issues regarding feral populations? LittleJerry (talk) 21:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Will take a look, Thanks for the ping. Montanabw^(talk) 01:49, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Could you help with the other tasks? LittleJerry (talk) 20:27, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Conservation stuff? Which section do you want to pop that in? Montanabw^(talk) 20:57, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

There's a conservation subsection in Human Relations. LittleJerry (talk) 23:22, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Could you also fix the dead link? LittleJerry (talk) 00:36, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

for the "Primitive markings" source? LittleJerry (talk) 02:21, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello? LittleJerry (talk) 23:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Answered at the GAN talk. Also, tag anything you want me to eyeball either with an appropriate inline template or hidden text, will be easier for me to find. More later, I'll probably give this a couple hours this evening (local time) Montanabw^(talk) 23:43, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Selle Français

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to California Chrome, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Tough choice: this template or a trout. – S. Rich (talk) 03:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh for crying out loud, I just took the thing to FAC, didn't anyone tell you not to template the regulars? Montanabw^(talk) 04:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Plip!

– S. Rich (talk) 04:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Ok, minnow. And back atcha Montanabw^(talk) 04:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Ha ha ha ha. Hysterical. Yeah, Montana, please be more careful in the future in taking articles to FAC. Thank you for your attention to this matter.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

The Shaggy Pony Award

	The Shaggy Pony Award
	For the great research, great editing, and great fostering of the Featured Article on Soring—which must have left you pooped, isolated, and with no time for grooming...just like a pony in winter! - Tim1965 (talk) 02:11, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 03:03, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I reverted it before

Its fine now. Until tomorrow, when they do it again. They do it everyday at the same time, in the same order. VictoriaGrayson (talk) 07:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

First thing off at work? Or during breakfast? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Like now. They are removing academic info.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 17:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Dorje Shugden controversy

Thanks for your thanks! The note I've inserted may be discutable, but the rest is careful copy-editing. And I'd already corretced the level of some subheaders two times; Vic reverted, without taking a proper look, and then you reverted too... Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:15, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Somewhere in there another edit had deleted some of your stuff. Looks like it's the "clean" version now. Montanabw^(talk) 07:21, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Montanabw - what is it you prefer about the version you are reverting to over the version CFynn suggested that was supported by others, including myself? Audrey37 (talk) 21:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

The two should be blended. The version in there is awkwardly written, the proposed version is smoother but whitewashes legitimate controversy. Now please take this back to the article talk page. Montanabw^(talk) 22:32, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Congrats

On getting Horse Protection Act of 1970 on to the front page. As soon as I saw it I thought "I bet that's Montanabw's article". Bayern (horse) will definitely be due for an article if he overcomes Wicked Strong and Tonalist in the Travers. Tigerboy1966  12:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I've already got my popcorn ready and a spot in front of the TV for that one! Montanabw^(talk) 18:35, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, Montanabw. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.VictoriaGrayson (talk) 00:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Equus (genus)

Is this jenny a hairy ass or mammoth ass?

Nice one! LOL just don't google image "Asian ass" or "Indian wild ass" without a filter though, it might turn up something which might be better suited to Bomis :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:29, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

My humour is wasted on wikipedians!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:44, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I get it, I was just offline for a bit... here I shall add a photo of a nice young lady donkey that exemplifies the hazards of which you speak! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 20:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

LOL!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:45, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

A few weeks of relief

Well we have a few weeks protection for the horse worship article. Fall is already in the air here so I hope that you haven't had snow already :-) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 05:05, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

What is up with the Brony thing there, anyway? Sheesh! Montanabw^(talk) 05:07, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Sadly it seems to be connected to this this obsession. Now I myself have been obsessed with Doctor Who for over 30 years but that doesn't compel me to add a link to it on unrelated articles. At least not yet. HeeHee. MarnetteD|Talk 20:07, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Riding hall

Thank you for your amendments to riding hall. I appreciate your improvements. However, on the way you have made assumptions about UK English which are not quite true - the "arena" is the space inside the hall for the horses, not a US vs. UK term. And so far from "internationalizing" the article you have "Americanized" it with terms like bleachers and bathrooms. The article needs to be consistent and I agree international English is useful. There is also an article on sandwich panel. And draught netting is a translation of Windschutznetze - wind protection nets from the German Wiki article. Hope that helps. --Bermicourt (talk) 07:39, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

No, the term "riding hall" is never used in the USA (at least not to the best of my knowledge) We call these buildings "arenas" - meaning the whole structure, not just the riding ring. The sandwich panel article is so poorly written that I am not entirely sure what they are actually talking about... the panels or the structure holding them up? And I also have no clue what you mean by "wind protection nets"? Screens? Skylights? We are again separated by a common language... ! Montanabw^(talk) 05:58, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Skylight is the standard BE term for a window in a flat or sloping roof designed to let light into a room or attic. See them clearly in this in the image at File:Ujeżdżalnia wewnątrz.jpg. Bleacher is a strictly AE term only, very little known or understood in BE (if I hadn't written and published one of the few AE-BE dictionaries, I wouldn't have known what it referred to); nearest BE term would be stadium seating or spectator stands. 'Bathroom' (and for that matter also rest room) of course is completely wrong for international English. It's the AE euphemism for what all other English speaking countries know as a 'toilet'. Sandwich panel describes accurately what it is but the article needs some attention to decide whether it is supposed to be written in AE or BE (aluminium vs aluminum). --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:38, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

I know what a skylight is, that word is used both places. I don't think the walls of riding arenas/halls are made of sandwich panels... they are usually just steel siding. Its the "draught netting"/"wind protection screen" thing that is tripping things up now. Trot on over to the article (or piaffe if you wish) and help. Montanabw^(talk) 13:51, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

AccountCreator

After reviewing your request for the account creator right, I have enabled the flag on your account. Keep in mind these things:

• The account creator right removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24-hour period.
• The account creator right is not a status symbol. If it remains unused, it is likely to be removed. Abuse of the account creator right will result in its removal by an administrator.

If you no longer require the right, let me know, or ask any other administrator. Drop a note if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of the account creator right. Happy editing! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 18:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Great fun meeting you at last!

	The Prairie Flowers Award
	Great fun meeting you at last! Perhaps you'd like to polish up Emily E. Sloan, created just for you ... Monumenteer2014camper (talk) 17:26, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Ansel Adams on Russell Varian

Hello Montanabw,

I have not forgotten your request regarding the Varians. One week ago, Napa and Vallejo, the cities where I spend most of my time, were hit by a 6.0 earthquake. It has been a sad situation filled also with inspiration. Today, my wife, son and I visited damaged historic buildings, and I photographed them for Wikimedia Commons. We stopped by an antique shop we've visited many times before, and they said 80% of their fragile items were destroyed. But not books. I found this, which I hope you can excerpt and use in some way:

WHAT MAJESTIC WORD

In memory of Russell Varian

BY

ANSEL ADAMS

PORTFOLIO FOUR

SIERRA CLUB * SAN FRANCISCO

1963

"The production of a Portfolio of creative photographs of the natural scene seemed from the start to be an appropriate expression of tribute and affecton for Russell Varian. The fact that original prints were considered gave a more intense validity to the project than would obtain from reproductions in a book, no matter how fine they might be. In addition, the excerpts from his writings, and the poetry of his father, John O. Varian, accentuate the highly personal character of this presentation.

In selecting from a considerable number of appropriate images the particular and inevitable photographs for inclusion in the Portfolio I was constantly aware of a man of great intellect and mystical perceptions. To him nature was a fundamental spiritual reality. He was not a place-gatherer, or a mountain-winner, or did he in any way approach the world as prey for egotistical conquest. His Irish forebears, his poet father, his exposure to the subtle beauty of dunes and forests as a youth, and his life-long love affair with the rocks, trees, clouds, lights and storms comprising the vast Divine Performance in which we live, accumulated in him a grandeur of spirit and a magnificence of mind and heart unique in our time.

Hence, every photograph in this Portfolio is related in some direct or indirect way to the places, things and moods Russell Varian loved. In some, the essences of light and space dominate; in others the substance of rock and wood, and the luminous insistence of growing things. Shapes of nature, transformed into what the artist calls forms by the controlled eye and the perceptive spirit, are presented here as the equivalents of experience. Obviously such equivalents could never be inclusive as the experiences are practically infinite. It is my intention to present -- through the medium of photography -- intuitive observations of the natural world which may have meaning to the spectators, just as they might have had meaning to him. And through them I hope that some of the quality, sensitivity and heart of Russell Varian may be revealed -- at least suggested to a world in need of the vast and patient benedictions of nature and the benefactions of noble men."

Carmel, California

October 1, 1963

Ansel Adams

• Oh wow! That's terrific stuff! Thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 19:16, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Pesky

My apologies for not spotting your response to my query about Pesky on Eric's talk page earlier. Please would you pass on my best wishes to her if/when you next meet up on Facebook or wherever. She has had a rough time lately. I'm sure I'm not the only one who misses her here but, more importantly, I think that she needs to know that people care. I do. . - Sitush (talk) 01:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

No worries, I'll let her know. Montanabw^(talk) 01:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Please include me, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

And me too, please. Thinking about her. She is missed. (Littleolive oil (talk) 18:19, 11 August 2014 (UTC))

hope pictured --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Would you mind passing on my warm regards and best wishes? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 11:47, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Please give Pesky my love as well. Bishonen | talk 12:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC).

Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner)

Dear Montanabw,

Thank you for the transfer of the data I had put in Intermezzo (Bruckner) before Nikkimaria blanked it to make a redirecting page. Thereafter she deleted some of the transferred data including the infobox.

Nikkimaria did also the same previously in Rondo in C minor (Bruckner). You had then restored the infobox, which she afterwards deleted again.

I do not understand why she deletes the infoboxes, as well as some of my other edits, which are all substantiated by reliable references (she also deletes), and which are in accordance with other pages I have created or updated concerning Anton Bruckner's compositions.

Please arbitrate, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 08:22, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but you can try taking this to WP:3O. Nikki just seems to dislike infoboxes. Don't know why. Montanabw^(talk) 08:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Some editors love inboxes. Other editors hate them. I take the NPOV. Why would anyone waste one single second arguing about infoboxes, either in favor or against? The debate isn't worth ten seconds to think about it, or the electrons required to comment. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:43, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, why. When an editor inserts an infobox or two in "his" article", why would anyone remove it, go and write a separate article on part of the topic, almost as only to have an infobox-free article? Why? Why? What Montanabw said below. Other than such things, I didn't observe any debate recently, did you? Instead I see with pleasure that operas now come with infoboxes which show off the piece instead the composer and his other works, see Carmen and Louise, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:20, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I think That the infobox is interesting in the case of Bruckner's compositions, because a lot of them either exist in several versions and editions, or were not published / performed during the composer's life, even were published / performed first at the end of the 20th century, i.e., about 100 year after the composer's death. Examples: Psalm 146 (Bruckner), String Quartet (Bruckner). --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 15:52, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, here we have the article creator inserting an infobox from the outset, then another editor coming in and removing it, along with some sourced material. NM is kind of known for doing this, and this user here is not one of the "usual suspects." Montanabw^(talk) 09:18, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for putting again the infobox of Rondo in C minor (Bruckner). I do not want to dispute. Some references that Nikkimaria uses as, e.g., those from AllMusic she found on Internet are perhaps less opportune than some of my references as e.g. that to the anthology of C. van Zwoll (that she removed), a book of 782 pages on Anton Bruckner and his work. Van Zwol devoted 20 years of his life to the composer and was regularly in touch with scholars as Leopold Nowak (editor of many Bruckner's works). --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:35, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Say so at the talk page of the article, Meneerke. Discussion never hurts. Doesn't always help, but so long as everyone stays civil, it is useful/ Montanabw^(talk) 18:23, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I will do so. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 19:10, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Bruckner mediation

Meneerke bloem suggested I invite you to paricipate in Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Rondo in C minor (Bruckner) and Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner)

FYI, reformatting Meneerke bloem's initial mediation request according to the required template automatically made me an involved party, although I have no conflict either way with any of the other involved parties, not on the topic of this mediation, nor in any other way. This makes my understanding of the matters at hand rather low (I expressed my desinterestedness at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music#Please mediate). So a helping hand may be welcome for the mediation? --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:00, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Beneful

I noticed that you were active in WikiProject Veterinary medicine and was wondering if you could take a look at a draft article I produced and shared here on a page where I have a COI. In particular, the second paragraph of the History section of the my draft is regarding a veterinary-type issue where my COI seems particularly relevant. I felt the lean in the draft towards the food not being contaminated was appropriate based on comments from vets and the FDA, but it's possible I have a skewed perspective and would appreciate a second look if you have time. CorporateM (Talk) 14:25, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Gender Gap case request comment

I was intrigued by your comment at the current case request, because, while I am unable to work on it for a few days at least, I am mulling over an essay I hope to write, tentatively titled "Time and Place"--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:01, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

"Bad facts make bad law" and "issue not yet ripe for resolution" are legal concepts you may want to review. Montanabw^(talk) 23:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

There's less than meets the eye in the requested case. Montanabw's comments were apt and succinct. SPECIFICO talk 23:20, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Content	Headings	Images	Links	Sources	Tagged with…
1,062		Operation Market Garden (talk)						Add sources
43		Prince Luigi Amedeo, Duke of the Abruzzi (talk)						Add sources
334		Alaskan Husky (talk)						Add sources
17		Scurry driving (talk)						Add sources
286		Cattle feeding (talk)						Add sources
5		Tiago (horse) (talk)						Add sources
6		Liberalism in Mexico (talk)						Cleanup
39		Valentina Monetta (talk)						Cleanup
26		Richard Slotkin (talk)						Cleanup
487		Danity Kane (talk)						Expand
36		Chilean rodeo (talk)						Expand
42		Gag bit (talk)						Expand
49		The Two Babylons (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
10		Liz Whitney Tippett (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
468		Horse meat (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
34		Godolphin Stables (talk)						Merge
23		Track surface (talk)						Merge
4		Derby Trial Stakes (talk)						Merge
50		Marylou Whitney (talk)						Wikify
18		Kinnara Kingdom (talk)						Wikify
8		Christopher Tsui (talk)						Wikify
1		NorthAmerican Sportpony (talk)						Orphan
4		Steve Allday (talk)						Orphan
1		Sacred Light (talk)						Orphan
10		Nick Zito (talk)						Stub
36		Operation Homecoming (talk)						Stub
14		Fine harness (talk)						Stub
14		Mario Gutierrez (jockey) (talk)						Stub
4		Ruperto Donoso (talk)						Stub
2		Malin Petersen (talk)						Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Links to asil

In going through the list of ambiguous links, I came upon asil (as Faizhaider did last night). I've converted all seven of the links to pipe through the (disambiguation) redirect (per WP:INTDABLINK), since you stated in an edit summary that the link is intentional. From a look at the disambiguation page, it's clear why the links are intentional. I figured I'd give you a heads up that I did this, as I'm sure these changes will all appear on your watchlist. This piping will also prevent these links from appearing on the disambiguation lists created for WP:DPL, so we'll leave them alone in the future.

Is there enough information out there about the concept of "asil" to create an article, even a short one? -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 09:28, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Probably enough for a short article, just have to find the sources and the time to do so... Montanabw^(talk) 22:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Moving Montana Vigilantes

BW, I wish you had at least asked about this first. As this goes forward, I really want to avoid having to include all the vigilante and mob violence crap that happened after statehood. The article focuses on the pre-territory and territorial period, but now anyone who wants to challenge it on a "comprehensiveness" basis can insist on adding all that statehood crap. A lot of stuff on Montana in WP is screwed up that way. There's was a cogent reason for renaming the article. Oh by the way, it also broke the GAN nomination. --Mike Cline (talk) 21:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mike Cline:, a lot of "the other stuff" doesn't deserve to be called "vigilantism" (i.e. Frank Little, etc.) Those were mob lynchings. That's the stuff the needs a spinoff, not the actual mainstream period. Much as I have my issues with the over-heroicizing of the Vigilantes (no doubt in part because I must endure a two-hour annual high school skip day parade every year honoring them, which ties up downtown traffic for almost the entire afternoon... sigh), the 1863-1889 period was what it was all about. Montanabw^(talk) 21:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

I will expect you to defend the article against the addition of any of the statehood period crap when the opportunity presents itself. --Mike Cline (talk) 21:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

It all depends on your definition of "crap," but if we agree that something is "crap" then yes, it's fair enough that I assist in maintaining whatever I had a hand in creating. Montanabw^(talk) 21:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Lockwood

I see you just changed it to east, but I'm still curious as to how Lockwood could be considered southeast of Billings. This looks like northeast to me. TCN7JM 09:48, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The highway and river don't run due east-west there, but in essence, the bulk of the area is on the "south" (OK, more southeast) side of the Yellowstone River, look at where the school is and such. Montanabw^(talk) 09:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Danehill Dancer GA

Quite happy to contribute to this although the reflinks outage is driving me nuts. The creator is a v.good editor, but one of those who pops up to do a ton of work and then disappears for months. I think it's something to do with "having a life", a concept I have always struggled with. For some reason I have developed an interest in Standardbred pacers and am engaged in such life-changing issues as whether or not there should be an apostrophe in Matt's Scooter. Tigerboy1966  20:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Awesome, it would suck if this GA failed, it's close enough to passing. Having a life? Are they nuts?  ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 01:21, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

And no reflinks? Shit, I can't function without reflinks! WTF? Oh WMF. Never mind... Montanabw^(talk) 01:27, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Tuskegee Airmen

Your sources you cite also still claim that the Tuskegee 'never lost a bomber' a claim proved FALSE over and over. None of the Tuskegee airmen participated in any of the Normandy Invasion plans.

Both the 332nd and 99th were based in Italy. Much too far away for a mission across France to Normandy. Your sources are home grown websites that glamorize the 'Red-Tails'. Not printed facts. 63.72.235.5 (talk) 14:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

All I did was revert. The source cited verified what was there, and it was a college-based site. Soooo... Instead of throwing a hissy fit here,anon IP, how about going out and finding BETTER sources to improve the article? Montanabw^(talk) 21:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi there

Hi Montana, it's been good to see you around, especially at the Lady's Aide Society meetings. IMO, you are one of the very few that seems to actually understand what feminism is really about. Like you I was around in the early years, but from what I'm am seeing from a few of the leaders of the War on Uncivilness, you'd think that we were still stuck way back then with no progress in the last 40 years. It's bad enough to call myself a feminist around men who are less likely to understand what it means, but to be around women who don't understand is much worse.

I spent a little time in a peace activist community and I have seen Carol's type before. Many peace activists are great, but IMO there are just as many who need to live in a constant state of anger at something or another. In my expert psychiatric diagnosis, some people just continually project their inner turmoil out into the external world. They fight an outward battle rather than the inward battle, which is actually much more difficult. Gandydancer (talk) 14:45, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

The real work of the women's movement actually occurred largely during the 1980s. Since then there has been additional progress, but also a lot of "rear guard" actions to protect the gains that have been made. Yes, people stuck in a time warp don't help and often hinder real work getting done. The trick, however, is not to go after these misguided people in a way that would make me look like I'm siding with the misogynistic trolls, as I am not. The problem is, the grenade-lobbers and the trolls often sort of deserve each other, so sometime I wonder if it's OK to just let them have at it until the dust settles - the problem is how much they wreck in the process. Montanabw^(talk) 21:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

momentary wiki-unbreak

I thought you might have some input [[3]]. This was settled long ago, and now is being quibbled over by people who don't seem to actually have much to do with regional history; too many names in the region derive from the double-l spelling for there to be any substance invoking the single-l version now seemingly favoured by this discussion of the blind led by the uninformed. Quantitative reading of citations over qualitative ones, and lack of knowledge of the subject matter, are the bugbears of too many name discussions. I've been doing a good "job" of staying away from Wikipedia, but this one I decided to weigh in on because of some of the nonsense and narrow views being heard.....by those who don't actually work on the article, as in so many cases, beyond count.Skookum1 (talk) 06:22, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

WSS

Just wondering why you inserted that the NKT is 'parent organization' of the WSS? (this was the effect of the revert you made) Are there any reliable sources for this? We need to be careful about writing stuff in the voice of Wikipedia that clearly ain't true... Take care, Audrey Audrey37 (talk) 22:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@Cullen328, Joshua Jonathan, and CFynn: have pointed out Audrey37's COI Here and Here.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 23:01, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Also CFynn inserted that bit that Audrey37 is complaining about.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 23:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Take it back to the article talk page, people. I'm just the NPOV person here. Montanabw^(talk) 23:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner)

Dear Montanabw,

Thank you for your support. On Talk:Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner), you can see that I have put a similar argumentation as that I have put on Talk:Rondo in C minor (Bruckner). Is it OK for you?

Best regards, --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 11:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

For your info: Hans Roelofs, who is responsible for the discography of Bruckner's non-orchestral works, has in the meantime had an independent look on the pages String Quartet (Bruckner), Rondo in C minor (Bruckner), String Quintet (Bruckner) and Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner). He thereafter e-mailed the following reaction to me: "Wanneer iemand zoals jij, die je sporen al bij Wikipedia heeft verdiend, dan een lemma schrijft over een onderwerp dat relevant is en binnen het Wikipedia-Bruckner-concept past, heeft dan iemand anders het recht dat tegen te houden? Wordt die betreffende user door de redactie gewaarschuwd?" (Translation: "When someone like you, who has already won his spurs by Wikipedia, writes a lemma which is relevant and suits the Wikipedia-Bruckner-concept, has someone else the right to hold it? Has the concerned user got a warning from the Wikipedia redaction?"). --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Put it on the talk page of the article. I don't have a lot of classical music "stalkers" on my page, and you need some more support than just me. Montanabw^(talk) 20:42, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Put it on the project talk, with links to the articles involved. (The link to the project is on my user page, although I left it, look for Workshop.) The newly created article will have even fewer watchers than this page ;) - Of course, there is no Wikipedia redaction, so no warning from it. There were other warnings, though, which I still hope I will not have to repeat, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:07, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Gerda, give Meneerke the link to the right page, I think he's kind of new. Montanabw^(talk) 21:13, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music, but what do you mean, "new"? THE precious Bruckner expert here for years, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Heh, new to me! Montanabw^(talk) 21:23, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Dear Montanabw and Gerda,

Thank you for your support. As you have proposed, I have put a message on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music#Please arbitrate. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:32, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

As suggested by Francis Schonken I have put a Requests for mediation: Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Rondo in C minor (Bruckner) and Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner)‎. Is this the right decision? You do not think so... You propose to get the advice of editors with a classical music background, but I do not think that there are many Wikipedia-specialists of Anton Bruckner. There is one for sure: Artiumbremen alias Benjamin-Gunnar Cohrs. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 19:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

PS: When the WikiProject Classical music decided to set up the List of compositions by Anton Bruckner I was asked to participate as Bruckner-specialist. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 20:28, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Given who your "opposing party" is, you may be right. Montanabw^(talk) 22:11, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Nikkimaria is obviously following preconceived assumptions, from which she blinkered does not want to deviate. She can so not accept that advices of other people, which do not fit her stiff-necked, preconceived assumptions, may be worthy to be taken into account. See the recent dialog of the deaf about "notability" concerning the discography in Talk:Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner). NB: I guess that I am not the first contributor, whom she is "thwarting" because of a similar conflicting situation. What do you suggest to unblock the current situation? --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 13:22, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Bayern

Bayern

Time to get this one out of the sandbox, I think. Tigerboy1966  22:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree, @Tigerboy1966: (I was watching the race streamed live from Parx) I'll help as Bayern (horse) goes live. Is reflinks up yet? FYI, I am also sandboxing Kaleem Shah, see User:Montanabw/Kaleem Shah (entrepreneur) if you want to pop over there and add any duplicate sources whilst working on Bayern... Montanabw^(talk) 22:28, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Cropped a photo he was in at the Preakness. He laid an egg in that race, but at least we ahve a photo. Montanabw^(talk) 06:19, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@Tigerboy1966:, I got the Kaleem Shah article out first, it was farther along because I had a userfied version to start from. Feel free to play in the Bayern sandbox, I threw in some stuff, User:Montanabw/Bayern_(horse), but more needed, particularly your standardized blurbs! Montanabw^(talk) 08:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC) User:Montanabw/Bayern_(horse)

I can actually write in rich, rhythmical, even sensuous prose should the occasion arise, but on WP I stick to "standardized blurbs"! Bayern's dam is a v. unusual case as she was a December foal, which made her useless for racing. Tigerboy1966  17:40, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

We all write "teh wiki" a little differently than other forms of creative prose, don't we? Boilerplate and copperplate are not the same! Montanabw^(talk) 19:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

BTW, be sure you source that stuff as you go. Looks like reflinks is still down? (Gawd that sucks...). Montanabw^(talk) 19:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Selection of a discography

Nikkimaria remains stiff-necked and does not accept my argumentation about the selection of a discography. A real dialogue of the deaf...

See my last reply concerning the selected discography on Talk:Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner), subsection "How does a work / performance get notability?" and the comments I have put about the Discography on Talk:Vexilla regis (Bruckner), Talk:Virga Jesse (Bruckner), Talk:Locus iste and Talk:Ecce sacerdos magnus (Bruckner).

Till a consensus is achieved I will not amend the discography, but put my comments on the talk pages, so that other users can react. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Nikkimaria is very young; I think we are old enough to be her parents. Factor that in and proceed accordingly. That said, I sometimes regret that I do not actually believe in ordering someone to show some respect for their elders, I've never been more tempted in my life. But dang that growing up in the 60s and 70s thing. Montanabw^(talk) 20:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Equus (genus)

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:04, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Navicular syndrome

On my watchlist now. Dougweller (talk) 13:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Rejection of the Mediation

Dear Montanabw,

The Mediation Committee has proposed to reject the Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Rondo in C minor (Bruckner) and Intermezzo in D minor (Bruckner), because "Primary opponent has declined mediation" and they recommend "Probably ought to go to lower-level dispute resolution first, after additional discussion on the article talk pages".

It is what I am doing, with long-lasting, strenuous, time-consuming discussions and eventually a not very positive outcome, because of Nikki's stiff-necked attitude.

Nikki has in the meantime drafted a few pages on Bruckner's motets, with again the same kind of discussions and again a not very positive outcome.

Please let me know what you would propose to come out of this situation unto a kind of gentlemen's agreement. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 10:27, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Nikki never compromises, she can occasionally be convinced, and if there is about a 5:1 consensus against her she backs down. My advice is to focus on content over formatting (discography, for example), and make "friends" online. We are dealing with a very young and very literally-minded person here. Montanabw^(talk) 19:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

She replied to Francis Schonken's reaction on Formal mediation has been requested on my talk page. See my proposal, which indeed is focusing on the discography. --Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 19:53, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your support!

Réginald alias Meneerke bloem (To reply) 09:37, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Kudos on some tweaks at Landrace

I sometimes forget that the "(thank)" feature requires a confirmation dialog, not just a click, so I'm not sure my "thank" attempts actually went through, about this or that.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  04:36, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

The thank feature does have a confirmation feature - you have to also click "yes" on the bit that appears after you click the "thank" button. But thank you and you're welcome, nonetheless. I guess. Montanabw^(talk)

Users using same abbreviations

Please notice that some users are using the same abbreviations such as "DL" and "DS".VictoriaGrayson^Talk 13:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

I small a whole drawer full of WP:SOCKs or maybe WP:MEATPUPPETs. Tag teaming is not OK, surf around the drama boards and see if thee is an appropriate venue to raise this issue. Perhaps my talk page stalkers can make recommendations. Montanabw^(talk) 14:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Today's Featured Article: Notification

This is to inform you that Mucho Macho Man , which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 1 October 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

precious again --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:54, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Congrats on the TFA! Jsayre64 (talk) 16:01, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Enough for SPI?

If 2 NKT accounts a) use the same abbreviations "DS" and "DL" b) make a big deal about being a new account c) complain about being treated badly by older accounts is that enough for SPI? Or is that a Quantum leap over Manhattan?VictoriaGrayson^Talk 00:11, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Worth a shot. Make your case carefully and provide diffs and such. You never know. Montanabw^(talk) 00:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Regarding user HighWindows

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 00:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Oh dear

Don't know if you've seen this story [4]. The comments give you a hint of the sheer incomprehension we feel on this side of the pond at the response of US racing authorities to doping offences. Tigerboy1966  20:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah. And over here, well, the bullshit just keeps piling up. That said, this search gets a lot of matches. and Paulick and others favor tighter rules. Over here, everyone is making a big deal out of Tonalist winning the Jockey Club Gold Cup while running with "no medication" - but by "no medication" that meant only running on lasix and no other meds. I'm kind of an anti-medication person in general and what strikes me is how no one over here seems to be asking the Europeans how they answer a lot of the usual nonsense like "we don't want horses to start bleeding" or "all those Europeans use Lasix in training as much as we do", and so on. But then, we had to pass federal legislation to stop even sicker and more creepy abuse - and it's still happening. I really don't know WTF is wrong with some people. =:-O

Kelsang Jangdom Strikes Again

Please see Audrey37's latest edits, especially to the 14th Dalai Lama page. Pinging @Cullen328: as well. VictoriaGrayson^Talk 22:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender Gap Task Force opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender Gap Task Force. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender Gap Task Force/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 17, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender Gap Task Force/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 14:36, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

If it is not uncivil, is it OK (stalkers?) if I declare, on my own talk page, "oh dear! not more f--king drahmahz on teh wiki?" Montanabw^(talk) 23:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Barry Williams

Hi,

I've just put Barry Williams (spree killer) up for GA (my first attempt), if you're interested. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:41, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I wonder if these events have made Peter Gabriel wish he'd called this song something else ... DBaK (talk) 17:55, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

(watching also) what do you think of Barry Williams (born 1944)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:26, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll take the review, and have made some suggestions there. Montanabw^(talk) 00:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Copyright problems, other things

Thanks for your comment at Talk:Guoxia; that's a puzzle. So, I started looking at that editor's contribs; it seems from the user talk page that this problem was identified at the time, but not, unfortunately, dealt with. I don't (so far) think it is big enough to justify a CCI, but there are extensive probems. Question: would you prefer that I do not slap a {{cclean}} notice on Talk:Banker Horse? I'd normally do so, as this version was substantially copied from here. Though the copied stuff is all long gone, it seems sensible to note that the issue has been seen and dealt with; but I don't want to seem (or be) unduly heavy-handed, hence this note. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

I don't think there is really any worry that the 2007 version would be restored. But if you wanted to put a clean tag on it, I'd suggest nesting it inside the other project boxes and then collapsing it so it's very discreet. I would not view that as heavy-handed. I also appreciate your courtesy in asking. I was one of a team of about 4 people who helped User:Yohmom, who was a high school student at the time, bring that article to FAC for a school project. Amazing student and a great teacher supervising the class. What WP can be at its best. As for Guoxia, there were a ton of breed articles created a long time ago (many before my time or at least before I started going through the breed articles with the attentionto detail I have now) that were basically copied and pasted. On that one, I posted an inquiry at the WikiProject China page to see if anyone bites. There is also an editor of a lot of Chinese history articles I might ping if I can remember his user name (Timmy somebody...) Would be nice to find "real" sources like I did with Riwoche horse. Montanabw^(talk) 22:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

So, just so's you know, I've now listed Latvian horse at WP:CP; that's not because I couldn't or didn't want to clean it up, but to put an example of the kind of problem there for others to see. The whole thing was copy-pasted from equinekingdom. There seem to be just over 60 articles that'll need checking, so my initial idea of just working through them on my tod was not a good one. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:04, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Ah, horse poop. But oh well, a copyvio problem is a copyvio problem and has to be addressed. @Justlettersandnumbers:, we can all pul together and get 'er done, I hope!? Montanabw^(talk) 23:14, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for mail and other questions. I haven't given you any answers because I don't have any to give. I have no interest whatsoever in the sort of argumentation and confrontation some people enjoy; nor do I have any inclination to stand by and watch another project get walked all over like the bird one did (that discussion should probably be re-opened, too). So it's the classic rock/hard place. As for Landrace, that seems to be wall-to-wall fork, synth and OR, trying to create a topic out of thin air. It should probably be a dab, with links to Breed and Cultivar; AfD might be the way to get it there. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

OoooooH! If you wanted to do an AfD like that, I'd not just buy popcorn to watch the show, I'd buy preferred stock in Jiffy Pop! Maybe proposing a merge to those two articles, though we do have a lot of links to landrace in various articles (but maybe there could also be a resurrection of Autochthon (nature)) The not getting walked all over thing is another thing we agree on. I can't take point on everything, but I'm willing to lead a team effort, at least within the confines of not "canvassing" and all that. Montanabw^(talk) 22:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

The back and forth with SMcC on Corbett's page

Yup. Exactly what I mean. Exhibit A here

I'm torn if you should keep at that. On the one hand it's an unnecessary dramafest, but on the other it is causing some clueless people to waste their time reading all of that. Sometimes TL;DR is a good thing. My question to SMcC before was sincere. I've never seen the guy before, nor know what you two have been arguing about but If everyone says the same thing, then you might just want to consider the possibility they are right.Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 04:18, 1 October 2014 (UTC) Well, I'm on Mountain Standard time and have much to do tomorrow morning as well, so I'm not apt to be back over there for the net 12-16 hours. :-) Montanabw(talk) 04:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC) But yes, I do wish that SMC would notice that everyone is telling him the same thin. He's currently under a partial restriction that doesn't allow him to move articles, and even with his restriction is putting in move requests for dozens of articles; I think he has at least 60 pending, most with significant opposition, and other editors are trying to move back well over a hundred that he moved against consensus before his restrictions were placed on him (which expire on Oct 15). He and I initially clashed over some of the moves, splits and renaming he wanted to do with the horse articles. It's deteriorated from there and I am quite frustrated that he just takes anyone who disagrees them as some sort of spawn of Satan, attributes nefarious motives or intellectual inferiority to them, and what really has me fed up are the personalizing of everything as an attack on him. I've dealt with some very troublesome editors on wikipedia, but he's unquestionably in my top five most difficult. Montanabw(talk) 04:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC) The only one personalizing everything as an attack on them is you. I've amassed over a dozen diffs of you doing this, then projecting it onto me, as you do with personal attacks, and WP:OR, and other problems, and then accuse me of projecting them onto you, in a pattern of entirely circular reasoning. It's really quite perverse. I don't even believe in Satan, and I'm not attributing nefarious motives to anyone one (not in this debate; in the anti-Turk, anti-Kurd, etc. edits that plague the Van cat and Turkish Van articles, the genocidal motivations are certainly nefarious). Much less am I opening threads about how nefarious you are are on my talk page so I can gossip about you, but that's what you've repeatedly being doing with me, here and at User talk:Justlettersandnumbers and at least two other pages. "Everyone" is not "telling [me] the same thing". Just you, Justlettersandnumbers and PigeonIP have one position (one that you yourself have said explicitly that you've taken not because you believe in it, but simply to oppose me personally because you believe I'm a "bully", i.e. you're self-admittedly engaging in WP:BATTLEGROUNDing, as further evidenced by your frequent references to ANI and other processes as entertainment). I and many others have a different view from that of your triumvirate. It's not a debate that's going your way. The majority of respondents that aren't you, Jlan or PigeonIP actually support the moves I proposed and the rationales for them. Most of them are liable to close as no consensus this time around due to all the FUD and handwaving performed by the three of you, but it'll settle out over time, and I'd bet real money that it will follow precisely the pattern I've laid out at WT:MOS#Alterantive proposal, because it's the path of least resistance - it's what pre-existing policy and the reliable sources steer us to do. Finally, you wording here, "He's currently under a partial restriction that doesn't allow him to move articles, and even with his restriction is putting in move requests" is contorting the facts to help you engage in character assassination, and you know it. I was specifically directed in the original ANI case to use WP:RM process, and your and Jlan's followup case at ANI against me to stop me from using RM was dismissed as frivolous, and your third attempt, incredibly bad-faith-assumptive participation against me at AN, was also overruled, with my AN request proceeding in my favor. And you still don't get the message. No one but you thinks I'm doing anything wrong at RM. I find it really disheartening that after all the negotiation on my talk page we went through to try to come to détente and a de-escalation, you seem to have had no intentions of honoring that.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  17:28, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Bayern (horse)

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! It's also featured on Portal:Germany. If you have more DYK related to Germany, you feel free to add it there yourself, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

arbitration evidence

I'm putting together some of carols greatest hits as it were for the ARB page. Where did she acuse you of being a man? I didn't find this, though I more likely missed it. Thanks. Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 00:02, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, no. I'm not really wanting to push that case at ArbCom; having been a person giving evidence in the infobox case, which is like watching law or sausage being made, I fear that their usual solution is to give detention to as many parties as they can, and usually sanction the "wrong" side harder than the side that did the baiting. Then they scold everyone, tell them to be nice, but do ZERO to change the underlying problems that gave rise to the issue in the first place. The problem at GGTF, as far as I am concerned, is that one very thin-skinned individual has chosen to engage in combat with another thin-skinned individual, and the ensuing chaos has attracted a bunch of anti-faminist (and even some flat-out misogynistic) trolls who are egging on one side and bashing the other. Then when ArbCom inevitably decides to sanction both thin-skinned individuals "equally" (which will have a very unequal impact, given that one is a content creator and the other is primarily a drama queen), then the trolls score another victory and some decent people get run off wikipedia. I'm not a fan of CMDC and I've made my views on that matter clear elsewhere, but I'm merely annoyed, I'm not out to get her. I just wish she'd remember DFTT. And on that note, I find the use of "nigga" in an edit summary to be inappropriate, so I'd suggest you not use it here, thank you. Montanabw^(talk) 17:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Ah, sorry bout that. BTW, I believe we are all anti-faminists. Well, I don't think people want to starveTwo kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 17:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Also, I'm curious as to where anti-feminists (or just anti-women) are on the GGTF? Or are you referring to Gamergate et al stuff?Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 17:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I am a feminist, and a very strong feminist. Check your assumptions, my friend, and do not mistake a sense of humor or cordiality for agreement. Montanabw^(talk) 17:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The Gamergate/Anita Sarkeesian/Zoe Quinn situation is the most egregious. The folks who are at the GGTF are mostly baiting and engaging in low-level trolling (including the use of things like offensive custom user signatures, by the way) The whole situation is a good example of how Jimbo is full of nice talk about peace and love, but is a complete paper tiger. And an example of how the system is not set up to do anything but give in to whoever yells the loudest and longest, which is, as the Guardian puts is, the world according to the young white western male with a slight personality defect. Montanabw^(talk) 17:46, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Travois trails

Just logged in for the first time in a while (didn't realize I was logged out) and noticed a reversion of yours that I think is mistaken. I don't know the best etiquette for these discussions. I posted to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Travois and now drop you a line here. Cheers! Claudia (talk) 00:23, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Both work, and both together work fine I fixed it. Montanabw^(talk) 13:40, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup - Round 1 Newsletter #2

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 1 Hello GA Cup competitors! The judges have learned a great deal in this first part of the competition, and we appreciate your patience with us as we've figured out what works and what doesn't work. As we reported in our last newsletter, an inadequacy in the scoring system has been illuminated in the past 15 days, which has resulted in a major change in the rules. It has also resulted in one withdrawal. To ensure fairness, we've decided to further increase the number of participants moving onto Round 2. Everyone who has reviewed at least one article will automatically be moved forward, and will be placed in pools. You have until October 29 to take advantage of this opportunity. It is our hope that this will make up for the unforeseen glitch in our scoring system. Best of wishes to all of you as you continue to help improve articles and make Wikipedia a better place. Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

A truly shocking proposal

So, the CCI is open. I was very impressed that you'd got to Java Pony, as it wasn't on the list (explanation here) and I'd forgotten about the talk page notices. So that was a total coincidence, but a nice catch. There don't seem to be many useful sources for those Indonesian horses (and there are a lot of them), and they really desperately need some. It looks as if Breeds of empire: the 'invention' of the horse in Southeast Asia and Southern Africa, 1500-1950, by Greg Bankoff and Sandra Swart, 2007, might have some useful stuff. Which brings me to the shocking proposal: what if you get that book on library loan and we collaborate on writing a few lines of referenced text for each of them? I can't believe I wrote that; if you don't want to or have other stuff to do, NP. There's one too many of them, BTW - I'll ping you there. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

I am immensely entertained by the proposal! Are we talking ISBN 9788776940218? Also, have already located two reviews of that book in pdf. If you email, I will send those Montanabw^(talk) 00:46, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

978-87-7694-014-0 is another ISBN. Anyway, ILL request is in, could be a few weeks before I hear anything; ping me if you don't hear anything from me. Montanabw^(talk) 00:56, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's the one. Of course, if you can preview it on G-books there's no need for the library - I only get snippet.

On the CCI: thanks for checking them, but ... please go slowly and carefully – I think you were a bit hasty with Vyatka horse. Once you've identified where it was copied from you can run the DupDet to see if there's any left, as well as doing a visual comparison. But, please, only check them off if you are sure they're clear, otherwise it sort of defeats the object. (BTW, check for copyvio, cross for no copyvio, ? for not sure). If in doubt, leave them, I'll get there sooner or later. Bad news: I'm pretty sure that Jutland Horse will need major rewriting; I'll check again tomorrow (going to sleep now), but it looks as if a lot of work was done without dealing with the underlying problem. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 02:21, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Jutland horse went GA and is now fully cited. Vyatka also is cited - to Hendricks - may be worth checking if eaquinekingdom is a mirror of Hendricks! Also, well worth making sure the number of words filter is set to about four, not two... "and sometimes" or "a dorsal stripe" is kind of hard to rephrase (technical language in particular) But go for it and check anything you want. Montanabw^(talk) 03:31, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Follow up: I don't see much actually in Jutland - the longest phrase are two breed names, joined by "and". In an abundance of caution, I'll tweak a couple small things there, but really, I see nothing significant there. Montanabw^(talk) 03:33, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Oy

I think this is unhelpful and a violation of WP:UP#OWN. VQuakr (talk) 06:33, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm on a wait and see status. IF that user creates a POV fork, then that user may have to be brought to the attention of others. But for now, I'm hoping they cool down and drop the stick. What they said to be at the article talk was even worse. Sigh... Montanabw^(talk) 07:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

And here I thought this was going to be a Yiddish related post. Montanabw a mensch I might add, was very polite in her message, and more importantly she is correct. The additions you are trying to add to the article are undue. There is much more to Walsh's life than the plagiarism. It's in the article and will remain, however only in a neutral fashion and balanced with what has been reported to other aspects of his life. At a glance of the contributors to the article I see several editors whom I have the utmost respect for with respect to the BLP policy. If they are disagreeing with you, then chances are you are probably incorrect in how BLP policy should be adhered. If you still disagree, then you should seek the advice from the BLP/N noticeboard and get the opinions of uninvolved editors. But I rather suspect an incident report has already been opened there. In short, I suggest you take Montana's advice and let it go.Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 07:08, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Ooops, I thought VQuakr was the one with the ownership issue. Scuse meTwo kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 07:09, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

No worries, I think we are discussing another editor here. At least, I am. Montanabw^(talk) 07:17, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

This exchange couldn't be more confused if two kinds of pork were speaking Yiddish. Beautiful. VQuakr (talk) 07:34, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Spur

How dare you revert my edit to revert vandalism!!!! Sadly, I got that message this week on an undo. I don't know what it is, but every time I see your name, I smile. I need to see your name more often. You are one of the people who makes this enjoyable. Thank You. Bgwhite (talk) 08:16, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 16:16, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

GA review, getting started

So how does one ease into reviewing nominated articles? I'd like to help, but I think the job would be a bit too much to review everything in a nominated article. Do people work in conjunction like an assembly line, focusing on one element at a time?Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 02:27, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

(watching) No, unfortunately not, - one reviewer does it all, that's why I don't do it, but go to FA instead where several reviewers add there points of interest to one article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Read WP:GA for the basics. Gerda has a good point that FAC is more collaborative, you can follow a couple of those reviews to see the higher level of scrutiny, then maybe lurk on a GA review done by a solid reviewer. You could see the review I did for Barry Williams (spree killer) for an example of how someone who knows little about a topic might cnduct a reasonably adequate review. That or any of The Rambling Man's zillion GAs for his assorted Boar Race articles (see his talk...). Montanabw^(talk) 18:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you bothTwo kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 18:57, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Revert

Hi. You reverted me here. Your edit (reverting my own revert of myself) resulted in a link to a dab page. I don't believe we should be linking to a dab page. Tx. --Epeefleche (talk) 21:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, will fix. Sorry. Montanabw^(talk) 21:35, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

No worries. I made the same error myself, first time. I didn't see a good link in that dab list, or would have directed it there. --Epeefleche (talk) 21:38, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Wiktionary is handy that way... Montanabw^(talk) 21:44, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Epeefleche, that evil Montanabw reverted me too (see message just above this one). She supposedly did it to revert "vandalism". Montanabw has become a reverting menace. She must be stopped!!!!!! Bgwhite (talk) 21:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

You know, I'm now just waiting for the next troll to grab this thread and claim it as proof that I need to somehow be completely written out of the book of wiki-life or something. You two are just having way too much fun over here! Montanabw^(talk) 22:41, 22 October 2014 (UTC) (evilly laughing... bwahahahahahahahahaaaaa!)

RFC! RFC! Epeefleche (talk) 23:25, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

A trout to the both of you! Montanabw^(talk) 23:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Shugden rides horses in older images

What type of horse does Shugden ride in older images? Thoroughbred?VictoriaGrayson^Talk 21:54, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Not likely a Thoroughbred, as that was a race horse breed developed primarily in England! Show me an image and I might be able to give you some notion - did the Shugden concept originate in China or in India and in what century? You might want to compare to things like Ferghana horse and other ancient types... horse breeding in China dates to antiquity... Montanabw^(talk) 00:28, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Shugden is a Buddha. So he must be riding a fancy thoroughbred. You must be mistaken.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 03:24, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

LOL! A Thoroughbred is a specific breed; you may be intending to say a purebred - but a purebred what? "Breeds" as we understand them today (written pedigrees and stud book, did not exist until the 1300s at the earliest, and the Thoroughbred until the 1700s. Seriously, show me a photo!  ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 07:13, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Here is an image.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 16:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

OH! LOL! (I still say you have yet to exhaust the pink ponies and magic rainbow unicorns section of commons!)  ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 19:38, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Its interesting that Prasangika37 inserted a NPOV tag right before major NKT protests were commencing.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 19:58, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Ifi

Montana, you can put a nice infobox on Auguste Bonheur if you want, You know how dagerous you are. Actually, I would like to have one of your infoboxes if possible. Infobox artist is terribly boring. This guy is Rosa Bonheur's little brother, we found him recently. Hafspajen (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2014 (UTC) Might misunderstod that one. Hafspajen (talk) 07:13, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Avant-garde horse portrait

User:Hafspajen, I usually just use infobox person unless there is something more specific. I'm not super good at infoboxes, I just copy what other people do, or ask more techie folks to clean up the ones I insert. But incidentally, I wouldn't mind if you were to find just a few very high quality horse portraits that I may add to my User page in a rotation akin to the one that Sagaciousphil uses. The fine fellow who neighs at the start of my talk would like others to join the stable. However, he and I are rather fussy; he is of outstanding quality, and seeks similar company. ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 02:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

O, no problem. You mean you want portraits? - just the head? Hafspajen (talk) 14:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

• Glad to see you like the rotation concept! It was Matty (now sadly retired) who set it up for me with the help of Hafs with the actual images but I change to different ones every so often. A conversation on this page indicates attitude when not getting the response wanted; this gives an example that even reliable sources are questioned and assumptions constantly made; I don't know which examples to give from where the problem started - there are just so many! I think here another editor was trying to distract away to another article but other than one comment on the talk page no interest seemed to be given there at all. Of course, there is the point blank assertion to de-rail any attempts on the talk page itself, combined with the response given within your review at point #4. SagaciousPhil - Chat 16:26, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Phil, have you seen the Shih-Tzu situation - edit was on lead, American Kennel clubb info remove? Hafspajen (talk) 16:36, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

• Montanabw's paintings and pictures
• 
  Whistlejacket I
• 
  Whistlejacket II
• 
• 
• File:12-11-03 rosa Katzenpony.JPG
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  Emil Adam Mettalist 1885 - who was Mettalist 1885?
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

The Half Million Award

	The Half Million Award
	For most impressive quality improvement work bringing California Chrome to WP:FA, I hereby award you The Half Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! — Cirt (talk) 23:18, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Montanabw:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Montanabw:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Hafspajen (talk) 14:02, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Wikiproject Animal anatomy

Greetings Montanabw. There's a new project for organising articles on animal anatomy (shortcut WP:ANAN). You may have noticed that I've linked some horse articles to it. Please feel free to change any assessments you don't agree with. It would be great to have you as a member on the project if it interests you. Regards. --Epipelagic (talk) 06:06, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

HathiTrust link to Stoor worm source

Re Talk:Stoor worm#Traill Dennison's long version, I have now come to the realization that with the HathiTrust description page url I used, you were having problems figuring out what to click to jump to the acual online book page.
So I've replaced url (or tried to) with the "Full View" link. Now you should be able to view the online version of Dennison's long text and notes (in the US).
The page specific links are:

• "Assipattle and the Mester Stoorworm" p.58 to p.72
• "Notes .. by Mr. W. Traill Dennison" p.299 to 301 --Kiyoweap (talk) 10:19, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

But you are still formatting it improperly. Please work with the other editors to format sources properly AND include all relevant material, do not just erase other people's sources. Montanabw^(talk) 15:46, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!!!

Wilhelmina Will has given you some caramel and a candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun Halloween treats, and promote WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween! '"On Psych, A USA Network TV series Episode 8, The Tao of Gus, Season 6, Shawn refers to pumpkins as "Halloween Apples" because he thinks all round fruits are a type of apple. If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message!

Cheers! "We could read for-EVER; reading round the wiki!" (talk) 18:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Cup - Round 2

WikiProject Good Articles's 2014-15 GA Cup - Round 2 Greetings, GA Cup competitors! Wednesday saw the end of Round 1. Jaguar took out Round 1 with an amazing score of 238. In a tight race for second, Peacemaker67 and Ritchie333 finished second and third with 152 and 141 points, respectively. Two users have scored the maximum five bonus points for article length (60,000 characters+). Anotherclown reviewed Spanish conquest of Yucatán (77,350 characters) and MrWooHoo reviewed Communist Party of China (76,740 characters). The longest review was by Bilorv who reviewed Caldas da Rainha. The review was approximately 22,400 characters which earned s/he two bonus points (20, 000 - 29, 999 characters). In Round 1, 117 reviews were completed, making the first round of the GA Cup a success! A total of 86 articles were removed from the backlog during the month of October! We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in Round 2 so we can lower the backlog as much as possible. To qualify for the second round, one completed review was needed, which 28 users accomplished. Participants have been randomly put into 7 pools of 4; the top 2 in each pool will move onto Round 3. There will also be one wildcard. This means that the participant who comes in 15th place (all pools combined) will also move on. Round 2 will start on November 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on November 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here Also, remember that a major rule change will go into affect starting on November 1, which marks the beginning of Round Two. Round 1 displayed a weakness in the rules, which we are correcting with this new rule. We believe that this change will make the competition more inherently fair. The new rule is: Your review must provide feedback/suggestions for improvement, and then you must wait until the nominator has responded and all issues/suggestions have been resolved before you can pass the article. Failure to follow this rule will result in disqualification. The judges will strictly enforce this new rule. Good luck and remember to have fun! Cheers from NickGibson3900, Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Calling all 'Chromies

2014 Breeders' Cup Classic is Saturday, time to start vandal patrol for California Chrome again. Probably won't be as bad as it was this summer for the Triple Crown Series, but can't hurt to have many eyes on vandal patrol. Thanks all! Montanabw^(talk) 04:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I thought your post might be about the Google Chrome browser which I use, but OK. I now have the racehorse on my watchlist. Take care. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:58, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Heeheeheeheeheeeee! With me, always wise to check for the equine connection first! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 05:05, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

If you had mentioned anything about a mule, I would have known right away. That's how my brain works. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll be on it as usual. Not happy so far today: no Euro wins on Friday and a Doug O'Neill winner by proxy. Managed to get Close Hatches (way overdue) up yesterday and her showdown with Untapable, coming up imminently, should be fun. Tigerboy1966  23:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

And.... it's Untapable! And Rosie 1-2-1 for the day! A bummer that Close Hatches faded, I had an exacta (damn!) But still, I didn't lose all my money today. (Last year, though I was a few dollars ahead...) Actually, the Euros may not have done as well as usual, but Dettori did just fine, winning the Juvenile Turf - he might not be a horse, but he's from your side of the pond, at least. I won a very small amount of money by betting on him (though it was in the Juvenile Fillies' turf, not the one he won...dang!) Montanabw^(talk) 02:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Saw my name in your edit summary. Made me smile when I saw it was about Rosie the horse, but wanted to stop by and say hi anyway! --Rosiestep (talk) 04:14, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually, it is another human Rosie, a delightful young jockey named Rosie Napravnik, who just won a major horse race and announced that, oh by the way, she's also seven weeks pregnant! Montanabw^(talk) 04:16, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Untapable, what a name. What are the parents names?Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 05:55, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

The sire is Tapit, for more, see Untapable. Montanabw^(talk) 06:04, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Do names typically follow the sire or dam, or is it just a search for the cleverest?Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 06:29, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Often the latter, or going with the more famous parent, or, sometimes, a blend. Or, as with California Chrome, a name might literally pulled out of a hat. In some places, they do stuff like name all the horses foaled in a given year names that start with the same letter, there is no end to variety. Classic example: Native Dancer, sired by Polynesian (horse) and out of Geisha. (Native... Dancer... get it?) Montanabw^(talk) 06:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Queen Elizabeth II bred and owned a filly by Bustino out of Dame Foolish. She named her "Strapless". Tigerboy1966  09:20, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

$2 minimum bet

What do you know about this standard for minimum bets? I think it was 2 bucks back in the 50s, at least according to the punters in my family. Seems odd they wouldn't increase it with inflation 60 years later.Two kinds of pork^Makin'_Bacon 22:21, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Tradition at this point. UK minimum was well under one pound (10p in the 80s). Collect (talk) 22:52, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Indeed. Some tracks in the US have $1 bet days. Montanabw^(talk) 01:08, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup award

Awarded to Montanabw for participating in the 2014 WikiCup. J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 21:25, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Want to weigh in

here.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 20:10, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

More importantly here.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 22:31, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

And here.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 22:37, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Pointless hostility

Among plenty of other examples, I have to take issue most recently with your abuse of reversion for the sole purpose of disrupting article histories with snide comments, as you did here. If you have time to fill a request for a full citation, just fulfill it. It is unnecessary to waste cycles and raise tempers simply to jab at other editors.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  03:49, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Look in the mirror, bucko. And if you have the time to tag, you have the time to fix. Time to grow up and stop asking others to do the work for you. Montanabw^(talk) 03:53, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Draft:A good day to die

I have moved the non-disambiguating material to this draft page, in case someone wants to write a proper article on the subject. Disambiguation pages are purely navigational devices (like redirects with multiple targets), so we do not house anything on them except the minimum information needed to direct readers to an unambiguous title. If there is an historical interest in the phrase as there is with an adage like A picture is worth a thousand words or A rising tide lifts all boats, then a case will need to be made that there is enough sourced material to support an article, and that this article conveys the primary meaning of the term. The latter issue should be easy to address, however, if a well-sourced article is made. bd2412 T 04:04, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Noting the Little Big Horn item, I do believe this is also in Old Lodgeskins' lines in Little Big Man (played by Chief Dan George). Not sure which seen, the Sand Creek massacre one maybe. Also memorable from that movie is "sometimes the magic works, sometimes it doesn't" from the final scene.Skookum1 (talk) 06:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

This one is a situation where someone else can whip this into an article. Though I have a general interest in the time period and such, I haven't the motivation or focus to taek on this one. Anyone else go for it with my blessings! Montanabw^(talk) 07:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

• My vote: Nuke it. It's all a bunch of mealy-mouthed suppositional nay-saying WP:OR, with absolutely no point. The only case that can be made for the phrase/saying is that it has been adopted by the Native-American–loving New Age crowd as supposedly a standard Native American motto. Beyond that, the provenance of the phrase is murky prior to Little Big Horn, because there is no recorded mention of it before mentions regarding that battle. So there's no point having an article on it, in my opinion. Good luck finding any WP:RS at all. Softlavender (talk) 07:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the sentiment, but given that it is a "thing," it is probably worth noting that it is a myth. Otherwise, we just get more nonsense posted and the dab page will again be filled with assorted nonsense. Montanabw^(talk) 07:37, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

There is no proof that it is a myth. There is no proof either way. Therefore, an article on the subject is in my opinion just going to be a waste of time at best, and a magnet for edit-warring, WP:OR and WP:SOAPBOX from both sides at worst. A dab page is easily kept clean by making sure it is on a number of people's watch list. Softlavender (talk) 07:53, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

It's movie talk and in a few books. Probably best worked into the articles about the movies or something. Montanabw^(talk) 08:07, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Thumps, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diaphragm. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I think we have a winner (and I do hope I don't see anyone beat this record!)

Check out the fat roll spanning from the withers to the tail. *brr* --Pitke (talk) 20:05, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

That's a 9 on the scale! Montanabw^(talk) 21:43, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

And here, a trainwreck of similar magnitude, but of a different realm... --Pitke (talk) 23:33, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

userification

Sorry about the internal watchlist screwup which I had no inkling about (and frankly still don't really understand what this is about - I'd be greatful when I could understand a bit better).

Is it possible to rescue the discussion that was recently developing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox (I mean before you moved the old page over it again)? --Francis Schonken (talk) 21:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

No problem, found it and moved it to the top, with all the new invitations to participate in the discussion. --Francis Schonken (talk) 21:58, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

New discussions go at the bottom, just like all other talk pages. Did you join wikipedia yesterday? Montanabw^(talk) 00:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Shambhala Training

If you have any time, would you kindly look at Shambhala Training. IMO that article relies far too heavily on primary sources. The only secondary or tertiary sources cited are where the article explains some Tibetan terms and concepts. There are no objective secondary sources used in relation to Shambhala Training itself. Consequently the article reads like a subjective promotional piece - not an encyclopaedic article. I've left a note about this on the talk page of the article as well. Chris Fynn (talk) 16:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@CFynn: Answered there. Montanabw^(talk) 20:54, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

How do I untangle this?

Windhorse

(Hopefully this appeal may appeal to your love of equestrian related topics (if only peripherally) and momentarily distract your mind away from Tibetan goblins.) I noticed an article Windhorse but was disappointed to find that it was only related to a film called Windhorse so I moved that to Windhorse (film) which seemed more appropriate. Then I discovered an article Wind Horse (bad name) the content of which properly belongs at Windhorse. But I lack the magic senior wizard's power to move Wind Horse to Windhorse (with some kind of disambiguation for people who actually are are looking for an article on the film)- as a page by that name (currently a re-direct) already exists. What is the best way to proceed from here? I suppose I could cut and paste, but it would seem better If someone could delete Windhorse and then move Wind Horse to Windhorse. I have already taken care of links to Windhorse that did intend to link to the article on the film. (BTW I made the graphic of the Windhorse which I have just posted on Commons and put here for your pleasure.) Chris Fynn (talk) 18:44, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Let me see if I understand this, you want to move Wind Horse to Windhorse, merging the histories? Dreadstar ☥ 19:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

For now, I made Windhorse a dab to both articles. I have no magic admin wand, but Dreadstar does. You definitely want a history merge, but I'm a little unsure why the move is needed (normally I really hate compound words if they can be avoided, but that's just my personal quirk) I'd suggest you two wort out the RS verification that the compound form is the more correct version. Whatever works. Montanabw^(talk) 20:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@Dreadstar: Yes that was the idea. An article about the Tibetan concept of "Windhorse" would obviously be the main article. The name of the film is derived from and references that. I was thinking of a DAB hatnote at the top for people who want to know about the film. (There is also an academic journal on Tibetology named "Windhorse" but so far no article on that - several commercial firms with Windhorse in the name as well.) @Montanabw: I know what you mean about compound words but the Tibetan term rLung-rTa which it translates is one word and concept and people generally seem to write it in English like that as a single word. BTW Most words in the Tibetan dictionary are compound words because each and every syllable in Tibetan has a meaning and most words consist of two or three syllables with the words almost always having some relationship to that of their component syllables. Chris Fynn (talk) 21:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, you guys sort it out. Cheers! Montanabw^(talk) 22:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

AreBuddhistsRacist.com

Its just another NKT site. Its run by Kelsang Rabten.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 03:30, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't think its run by the NKT. It says its run by an independent UK journalist based in the UK. Its also a very helpful collection of clear, concise criticism of the persecution of Dorje Shugden practitioners and the media coverage! Prasangika37 (talk) 14:57, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually, it's biggest problem is that it is anonymous and whoever put it up hides his/her affiliation, so it's also probably a fail based on WP:SELFPUB. Irrelevant who is behind it; its content reads like some paranoid nutcase's rant. Not RS. Now please, both of you, let's go back to the drama page. I have articles about equine roundworms (Parascaris equorum) to write... ;) Montanabw^(talk) 17:33, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Website is gone now. VictoriaGrayson^Talk 22:48, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, that pretty much shitcans any argument that it's a reliable source. Montanabw^(talk) 00:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

what about the other 37s?VictoriaGrayson^Talk 03:28, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Are there more besides the Audrey one? Can you list them here? (I didn't list Audrey because that account has gone inactive...). Montanabw^(talk) 04:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Essence37VictoriaGrayson^Talk 04:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Inactive since August, but I'll watchlist. With these sorts of accounts, the best thing to do is just keep an eye on them. I've taken them to WP:SPI in the past, but when they are "stale," there will not be an investigation absent an active problem. However, what skilled socks to is to create a bunch of "sleeper" accounts where they make a minimal number of edits to get past the "new user" stage and then ignore them for months on end. Then they activate them as needed, claiming to be longtime users or something similar. So per WP:ROPE, just keep your eyes open in case they reanimate like a zombie... Montanabw^(talk) 04:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey there

Hi. I, rather stupidly, couldn't help myself from commenting at the GGTF arbcom proposals talk page where I mentioned you by name in regards to your interactions with Carol when the GGTF first started as an example of a battleground attitude in Carol's original assumption you that you were a man. The difs have been part of evidence from the start and had been discussed before so I thought little of it as bringing up an example in a passing remark, but I mentioned you specifically and I've seen other editors take offense to thier named being used without notification. It was a small remark of little consequence but I just want to be sure no offense was taken and if you feel my remark casts that episode in a different light than I said let me know and I'll strike it. Capeo (talk) 01:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I'll peek at it. Appreciate you letting me know. Montanabw^(talk) 01:13, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Also (unwisely) succumbed to commenting, after reading your remarks. The eight letter rule is interesting. Is this a standard technique? --Djembayz (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

No, I made it up on the spot. But it has the elegance of preventing compound four-letter obscenities (butthead, jerkwad, shitface, etc.) yet allowing for cleverness and creativity, to say nothing of specifity, in venting one's spleen. In other words, "imbecile" is not acceptable, but "ignoramus" would be. Figured it would be worth a try! LOL! But more to the point, banning person A or person B doesn't eliminate the problem; as they like to say elsewhere, focus on the content, not the controibutor. And penalties need to be short, sharp, guaranteed, but over quickly and allowing for rehabilitation. Montanabw^(talk) 22:57, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Parascaris equorum

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Gaslighting?

"You are the master of projection and gaslighting". I'd never seen gaslighting before reading your post containing that sentence. Interesting how a colloquialism comes into academic usage. - Sitush (talk) 12:31, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Photo of Polson, MT

Photo was actually taken from the southeast looking northwest. Rcopeland17 (talk) 17:52, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

@Rcopeland17::Can you link which photo you are talking about? (Most of the lake ones were either shot off the docks by KwaTukNuk or else from the top of a hill on a back road on the west side of Polson... Montanabw^(talk) 18:07, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Magnificat

Since you participated in previous discussion about merging the Bach Magnificat articles: After discussion at my user talk page, I have restored the pre-merger situation as best I am able. There may be talk pages left in the wrong place and so forth. I expect a new merger discussion to be started and to be closed by an uninvolved person, preferably another admin. It might be a good idea to inform a relevant wikiproject or two? Yngvadottir (talk) 20:18, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I've found my name.

As you know, I really love horses. I've found the perfect name for me, the Oglala Sioux name of Tȟašúŋke Kȟokípȟapi or Young Man Afraid Of His Horses. I'll have to drop 'Young' off of it and according to my wife, I'll have to drop 'Man' too. Bgwhite (talk) 08:08, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: I think that this would mean your name would therefore have to become "Old Fart who craps his pants when he sees a horse"? LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 17:00, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

That was a good one. Add mother-in-law to the end of it and it would be come my perfect name. Bgwhite (talk) 22:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

"Old fart who craps his pants when he sees his mother in law? No wait, we could just limit it to Old Fart -- that says it all, as there is the adage that when one reaches A Certain Age, you never trust a fart...! Montanabw^(talk) 23:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Take Charge Lady

Article up and running. Haven't spent so long on a US horse article since Carry Back! Lede and background need some work. Tigerboy1966  20:30, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Mary Wollstonecraft Award

		Mary Wollstonecraft Award
		The Mary Wollstonecraft Award is awarded to contributors who have helped improve the coverage of women writers and their work on Wikipedia through content contributions, outreach, community changes and related actions. In particular, thank you for your efforts with the WikiProject Women writers start-up; your ideas and contributions are much appreciated. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:05, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Rosie! Montanabw^(talk) 23:15, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Just curious

I notice you removed me from the authors section of the List of people from Montana page. Any particular reason? I'm not clear on the criteria for being included on that page, but I certainly feel like I meet them all. Did I violate a rule by adding myself to the page? Being a (very) part-time Wikipedian, I may not be up to speed on all of the rules and etiquette. Gary D Robson (talk) 03:44, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Probably because it was a redlink at the time, the list is basically an index to articles already on wikipedia. You have to pass WP:NOTABILITY to have a wikipedia article about yourself and per WP:COI, you can't write it yourself. Looks like you've got an article up now, maybe User:Mike Cline would be interested in working with you further, I think he maintains the list. Montanabw^(talk) 18:03, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I'll check with him. I didn't write the article about me, but I do edit it from time to time. Gary D Robson (talk) 00:31, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Getting Back in

I have an urge to write on wiki, and the nicest editor I am aware of is you. So to you I say I do wish I still knew how to create articles. I want wiki to include some of the best horses of the past who aren't given their due. Every year a promising 2-year-old comes along and up goes an article which then remains static if the promise goes awry. I'm guilty of that myself. Meanwhile some of the greats have no article at all. Once upon a time I busily wrote over 200 or so articles: horses, races, a few jockeys, a racetrack or two. It was simple. But now I have no idea how to work with wiki except simple editing. Of course, many of my articles are marked as too colorful, not very wiki, and would someone please do something about it. No one ever does - except Silky Sullivan. Silky was cut to shreds. I admit I know too much about Silky because I knew his owner (recently deceased) and had little in the way of citations. That's the problem with the older horses. No online citations. Those today can simply be cited right out of Bloodhorse or wherever. Easy peasy. And there's my whine for the evening as I go about making sure the races are kept up to date the best I can. Stellabystarlight (talk) 04:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

@Stellabystarlight: I'd be glad to help you along. Can you point me to anything already up that got tag-bombed and I can look at it? (I'll look at Silky Sullivan too) Also, is there a horse not yet having an article you'd like to start one for? (We could work on it in a sandbox for a bit before taking it live) I think it's a great idea to do more articles on horses of the past, particularly if you ahve the sources right on your bookshelf. The trick is to write in a dry, rather boring, "just the facts" encyclopedic style - yet not put people to sleep! The master of this stuff is probably @Tigerboy1966: who can whip up a basic article faster than -- hmmm -- Secretariat? (Wait, Secretariat can't edit wikipedia, he can't even use a computer and he's dead, but never mind... work with me here! LOL) Also @Ealdgyth: has done a lot of articles that went GA and FA on famous historic Quarter Horse sires, and she has a lot of book sources. (See, e.g. Go Man Go, Barbara L, etc...) My advice on writing articles that will pass muster is to 1) avoid overuse of adjectives, particularly flowery ones ("greatest", "magnificent" etc...), 2) Footnote every. freaking. thing., (sure there is WP:POPE but no one actually believes it...) and 3) as far as books go, they are perfectly fine so long as you demonstrate a track record of accuracy. Montanabw^(talk) 15:59, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

The problem with articles on US horses pre-1990 is that the google news search was changed. You can't do an archive search anymore, and the date range search DOES NOT WORK! Looking at articles like Roman Brother or Hasty Road which I did some expansion work on a while back, I honestly don't know how I'd do them now. Maybe things will change, I'd love to do some work on Fort Marcy (horse) for instance. TIP, the best way to get a bit of colour into a factual article is to use sourced quotations. There is a difference between "Neddy produced an explosive turn of speed" and "Neddy produced what the Daily Planet's Jim Journo described as "an explosive turn of speed"". Tigerboy1966  17:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Where you can find a link, Wayback is helpful. It's frustrating that Time, the New York Times, etc have put their articles behind a paywall, though it's "legal" to cite to the hardcopy without a URL (Ealdgyth verified this for me.) The bottom line is where you have books or a paid database subscription, use meticulous citations - have page numbers and full citations so those who might actually care (as opposed to trolls) can independently verify what you wrote (Inter-library loan is a beautiful thing). The main thing is that we can't have too much "color" in these articles, which sucks at times, but oh well, I guess after doing a few articles, we all probably could try to write for publication to let our creative side have free rein! Montanabw^(talk) 17:16, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi Tigerboy1966 and Stellabystarlight. You can still search the Google news archives. Go to http://news.google.com/newspapers. Here's an example of a search on "Silky Sullivan", and here's one on "Fort Marcy". Best, Voceditenore (talk) 17:37, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

thanks for that. I did try this page before with little success, but it seems fine now. Tigerboy1966  17:45, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, wow. Thank you all. What I'd like to do is a history of American horse racing, or perhaps just the extremely interesting Nantura Stock Farm... but I have a feeling whatever I chose would work better as a book, colorful language and all. I've looked at the way things are going on wiki and with its desire to be dry and encyclopedic (no blame from me) and now with the loss of good citations (if there were any to begin with), I wonder if I belong here. I rather think I don't. I'm not a non-fiction writer in the first place, but even if I were, I simply can't keep to just the facts, ma'am. Although I thank Tigerboy1966 for the great stuff on Silky. And you, Montana, for offering to mess about in a sandbox with me. I hope I haven't wasted your time. But no, I'm not a wiki writer. I know that now. I am a wiki user though. And I'll continue updating races.Stellabystarlight (talk) 18:42, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Please, please keep the race updates going. It is a very important and much appreciated task. Good luck with the book: would be honoured if you used any of the WP articles I've contributed to. Tigerboy1966  19:01, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

@Stellabystarlight:, You can still use good old fashioned paper books. And actually, it would be very helpful to even just have stub articles on some of the horses where we have redlinks (early Derby/Preakness/Belmont winners in particular) What we are most restricted on with wiki is use of original research - i.e. our own knowledge. (So once you DO write the book, tell us all and we'll use it as a source!) This has periodically driven me completely crazy with some of the horse articles because so much common knowledge has not been written down - it's tougher than you think finding a RS for why you should tie a horse with a slipknot and not hard and fast. I even once had to "prove" that you can't post to the pace because some idiot claimed that you could! Try sourcing THAT! =:-O)! Montanabw^(talk) 19:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Bach Magnificat un-redux

Hi: Gerda is understandably exhausted with the whole matter, but following the closure of Talk:Magnificat (Bach)#Merge discussion against the merge, I could really use a clear statement on whether I need to move any articles over existing redirects, and if so what to where. If I attempt to figure it out, I will probably botch it badly. I am leaving it up to you who know the subject (I won't say "know the score" - oops, I just did) to decide what to reverse from Francis Schonken's earlier moves of material between articles, but I have reverted his actions today at Magnificat in D major, BWV 243 since they appear to be reimplementation of the rejected merge, and have warned him about edit warring with Gerda. I'd appreciate if you could tell me - or find someone else who can - if there is something requiring admin tools to move, title-wise. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@Yngvadottir: and @Gerda Arendt:: In my humble opinion, if Francis is doing something that requires admin tools to fix, then he is probably doing it against consensus. He seems to be forum-shopping (deliberately or otherwise) by posting things at multiple articles so no one has the faintest clue what precisely he is doing, and then claiming there is no objection to his proposals, and in the process the multiple threads cloud the picture considerably. My advice is just. say. no. -- and watchlist all articles involved. Montanabw^(talk) 19:13, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm looks like @Drmies: was also involved, so I shall ping him to this discussion as well. Gerda is the Bach expert (though she may be modest and deny it), I'm the style, flow, structure wikignome. Who likes to sing Baroque music sometimes. Particularly at this time of year. Montanabw^(talk) 19:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

The thing is, he made multiple article moves as well as merges of material, and consensus has now been firmly established against him. So I feel safe leaving the material moves for others to revert, but are there any article moves that non-admins can't revert because there is now an edited redirect in the way? There's no big haste, except that I'd like to get it all squared away to make it clear to him that he cannot violate consensus like this; and there is a pending DYK submission involving Gerda's newer article, so its title needs to be established. Yes, Drmies closed the merge discussion (and deleted a merged draft); I've pinged him at my talk. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:18, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Repeating: Move the present Magnificat in D major, BWV 243 over Magnificat (Bach) - as it was in the beginning, to keep it simple. No problem with that name as long as BWV 243a can co-exist. Collect all discussions on those two on Talk:Magnificat (Bach) and archive ;) - Discuss things like the enormous table. - I added so much to BWV 243a today that there can't be much duplication left, and it doesn't bother me anyway. Some things are actually even more different than I first thought. Looks as bit as if we had a female and a male version now, - why not? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

ps: yes, the move over redirect requires admin tools, otherwise I had done it myself, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

That was what I thought you might want. I have moved Magnificat in D major, BWV 243 (back) to Magnificat (Bach), and I have attempted to history merge the two talk pages. I will leave you folks to archive. I hope I didn't mess it up, it's awfully fiddly. You folks, check for redirects that are now pointing to the wrong place. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:10, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Like Gerda said, and if she needs you to fix anything further, I presume everyone has this thread on their watchlist so we can all converse here as needed. Montanabw^(talk) 21:01, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for graciously hosting this, and renaming and merging. My talk: Francis saying that he adjusted to the move today which was reverted, true. (As I said before, he moved things in before, which I don't mind being there if nobody else does.) - Revert the revert and take discussion from there? - No more for me today, please!! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

When something is this messed up, sometimes the best approach is to provide a permalink to the "right" version and then rebuild from there with any article improvemnts that have occurred since. When it is convenient, Gerda, perhaps post that URL here? Montanabw^(talk) 21:21, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Answered my talk: forward please, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

TFA-related discussions

Hi Montanabw, just to let you know about what I've said at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article#Wrapping this up, in case there was anything you wanted to say there. Best wishes, Bencherlite^Talk 12:04, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Bencher. Yup time to wrap it up. Sheesh. What a can of worms a few simple ideas opened. Oh well. Montanabw^(talk) 22:16, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 is just around the corner...

Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.

• We would like to announce that Josh (J Milburn) and Ed (The ed17), who have been WikiCup judges since 2009 and 2010 respectively, are stepping down. This decision has been made for a number of reasons, but the main one is time. Both Josh and Ed have found that, over the previous year, they have been unable to devote the time necessary to the WikiCup, and it is not likely that they will be able to do this in the near future. Furthermore, new people at the helm can only help to invigorate the WikiCup and keep it dynamic. Josh and Ed will still be around, and will likely be participating in the Cup this following year as competitors, which is where both started out.
• In a similar vein, we hope you will all join us in welcoming Jason (Sturmvogel 66) and Christine (Figureskatingfan), who are joining Brian (Miyagawa) to form the 2015 WikiCup judging team. Jason is a WikiCup veteran, having won in 2010 and finishing in fifth this year. Christine has participated in two WikiCups, reaching the semi-finals in both, and is responsible for the GA Cup, which she now co-runs.
• The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. While it may be impossible to please everyone, the judges will make every effort to ensure that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.

If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Karma in Buddhism

At pages like Karma in Buddhism some editors are inserting popular Buddhist teachers rather than academic books.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 04:55, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Figured it was something like that... impossible to tell from the phrasing. Montanabw^(talk) 05:31, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Dalai Lama's Gelug school is weird

Dalai Lama's Gelug school is weird. Just accept it.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 21:17, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

LOL, you know that's not how I roll, I must hold you to an equally demanding standard. My understanding is that the Mahayana tradition has four or six subdivisions, and I don't quite see that any of the mainstream versions are any more "weird" than any other...  ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 23:44, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Dalai Lama's Gelug school is weird for many reasons:

a.Shugden

b.Tsongkhapa's weird Madhyamaka

c.weird views on karmamudra

d.as the newest tibetan school, it derives its lineages and teachings from the other tibetan schools. Yet it is sectarian.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 00:57, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. Denominational differences, I see. NKT aside, do you mean weird as in "Mainstream protestants compared to Catholics" weird, "Southern Baptists to mainstream Protestants" weird, "Mormons as to mainstream Protestants" weird or...? I have sort of figured that NKT is "Scientologists compared to everyone" weird.

Maybe Gelugs are as weird as Mormons. Although the Gelugs became the majority school since the Gelugs took over the Tibetan government around the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 21:15, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

OK, so who is "normal" or "mainstream" in your view? Montanabw^(talk) 23:24, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

The other 3 major schools Sakya, Nyingma and Kagyu.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 23:53, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. I guess I don't see how things are any more different than, say, Methodists, Presbyterians and Lutherans. Particularly if the Dalai Lama heads the gelug tradition or is of that tradition... Many religious traditions derive one from the other, just look at how Chrstians argue over communion and particularly the Catholic eucharist. I guess I feel some concern with lumping the whole Gelug tradition in with the NKT people, as they seem to have taken very different paths, even if recent. Montanabw^(talk) 05:16, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

P

I think Drmies talk has horse problems. Hafspajen (talk) 03:37, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

That was an odd discussion and I cannot fully discern precisely what ponies had to do with it... but thanks for the ping... Montanabw^(talk) 23:25, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

the lion shall lie down with the lamb...

Something strange is going on here. You have thanked me twice today. We are mortal horse enemies. We shouldn't be agreeing with each other. Oh great, I see where Hafs is spamming your talk page too. Hafs is like a fly bothering a horse.  :) Bgwhite (talk) 00:55, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: The enemy of my enemy is my friend? (Heeheeheeheeheeeee!) Montanabw^(talk) 00:01, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea how to ping you about articles

Read your comment and have no idea how to "ping" you. I am a researcher and a writer, not a programmer and often find Wikipedia difficult to navigate. The two articles are written. I think? you can access them here Draft:Kansas Act of 1940 and Draft:Tillie Hardwick. Thank you for your help. Truly appreciate it. SusunW (talk) 02:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

@SusunW: You "pinged" nicely! Here on Wiki, we tend to use "ping" colloquially as in "let me know - somehoe!" Montanabw^(talk) 23:35, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Woot! Thank you very, very much for your help and input. This program is unwieldy in its messaging abilities. I made 2 minor changes to the Kansas Act as well. Do I do anything to resubmit it? Also how does one put the banner on it, or does the "creator" once it has been reviewed do that? And yes, the Kansas piece was harder. Hard to find sources on a 70 year old piece of legislation. So predominantly had to base it on the 2 I found. But, it was hugely important to Native American law so I felt it needed its own article. Haven't yet read the changes to the Hardwick piece, but will do that next. SusunW (talk) 02:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Bless you. Thanks for fixing the footnotes on Hardwick. Finding citations is not difficult, putting them into an article is the worst. I finally figured out last night (after 6 months on here) how to use the little templates thingy, though I have no clue what half of the information is. Same questions on this one, do I do anything to resubmit it or put the banner on it? SusunW (talk) 02:46, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Ah, best wishes for a happy holiday season ...

		Happy Holiday Cheer!
		Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Hafspajen (talk) 01:52, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Yellowstone Art Museum

I have some images I took sometime back that I can load to commons for her to use.

But thank you VERY MUCH for the tip!

Sara goth (talk) 22:47, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Gina Gray

I wasn't actually planning to write an article, when a friend sent me this obituary today, but...she is fascinating. She was at Wounded Knee. She painted paintings owned by royalty. What can I say? Would you be so kind as to look this one over when you can? Is it possible to use the photograph in the obituary but crop out the words at the bottom? It seems to me that as it has accompanied numerous news articles they have released it to public domain, but I don't know that.

I promise, no new articles until after the New Year. :) Draft:Gina Gray Hope you and yours have a happy holiday, in whatever fashion you celebrate the dead of winter. (I am happy to live in the tropics at this time of year.) SusunW (talk) 10:41, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

No worries! I'll answer further on your talk page and keep it watchlisted. Montanabw^(talk) 20:07, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

You rock! Thank you again for all of your help. SusunW (talk) 21:16, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

		Happy Holidays
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. - Ealdgyth - Talk 15:06, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Spotted White Reply

I missed your comment over on the OR Noticeboard (I did reply now that I saw it) and thought the discussion had been archived so I edited the Splashed White article with a note on the talk page. Since we are still discussing it please feel free to revert my edits. We can continue our discussion either at ORN or on the talk page at Splashed White whichever you prefer. Please ping me on my talk page, that will send me an email notice since I do not edit enough to notice something on my watch list. JBH (talk) 17:39, 25 December 2014 (UTC) (JBH == jbhunley) PS Merry Christmas!

I will discuss that further at the Splashed white article talk. Thanks for the ping and merry christmas to you. Montanabw^(talk) 00:37, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Reply at Splashed White Talk. Hope you enjoy the New Year! JBH (talk) 22:02, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Help! Anyone?

Can @Montanabw: or anyone who watches her talk page help me with an edit, okay a bunch of editing :-). I'm working on the termination policy and need some other editors to weigh in. Looks like anyone else who was working on this page stopped looking at in in 2011. If you could read through the Talk:Indian termination policy sections on Republican Administrations?, 14 Termination Laws, Number of tribes/bands terminated?, and Arthur V. Watkins and offer any insight or comment, it would be very much appreciated. SusunW (talk) 06:05, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Anyone who works on Congressional legislation ought to take a look at this. I think SusunW is looking for folks to collaborate with on this. Perhaps @Wehwalt: can take a look and recommend other users who can help! Montanabw^(talk) 06:59, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Gracias, mi amiga. Truly appreciate the input and assistance. SusunW (talk) 08:07, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay, so based on what you and @Maunus and Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw·: said, I am going to try to make redlinks and break out the larger sections into articles which will only be briefly summarized on the main page. Think that will make it a whole lot easier. I'm gonna see if I did this right because am about to push the button and create Creating Klamath Termination Act would that be here? Klamath Termination Act and if it works, who puts the banner on it, etc.? And thanks for the tips on my user page as well. SusunW (talk) 03:19, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it worked excellently.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 03:23, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Yay for Susun! Montanabw^(talk) 03:27, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Yay! except that I have no idea how Maunus created the talk or bannered (is that a word?) the page or put that stuff at the bottom. BUT, I am learning how to use this beast :) SusunW (talk) 03:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Usually you can just copy and paste the stuff from one article to the next. Use the history to compare each of his edits and see what he did... Montanabw^(talk) 03:35, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that is exactly what I did I copypasted the source code for the banner from the article on indian termination policy and pasted into the empty talkpage. The code looks like this: {{NorthAmNative|class=start}}, this is what creates the wikiproject banner.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 03:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Reply to message

Yes, I know that the women are peers suo jure. In the category, the reference provided shows that women in the House of Lords wanted to be treated as suo jure peers. The point being that peers are always suo jure while peeresses are sometimes suo jure sometimes not. This is because a woman's title does not elevate her husband to a peer unless in special cases (usually if he is a titleholder in his own right) . Peer is more of a status than a title so it can refer to both men and women when referring to the suo jure titleholder.--Hipposcrashed (talk) 03:58, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

OK, and that makes sense (God forbid what Wilfrid Blunt would have done with a peerage...!) I just was trying to figure out what was going on with the category changes there. Montanabw^(talk) 04:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Tough editor

Feel like helping with the COI at Aro gTér? I could use your help. I'm having trouble with a page with what I think is an obvious COI and stubborn editor... let's just say it needs degaussing of its hagiographical/highly biased writing. The Aro gTér people are a fringe cult; not exactly one but plastic shaman-y, and I think they are editing the page with bias. I'm so not interested in a knife fight right now but I see clear page ownership issues at minimum. You are tough and let's just say I'm not tough right now. Ogress _smash! 07:08, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

I'll take a peek. NEver heard of them, so my neutrality should be intact. Montanabw^(talk) 16:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

They are a very tiny cult. While the New Kadampa Tradition is notable, I don't see why Aro should have a Wikipedia page.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 00:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Cattle

No idea if it is another example of drive by tagging, but the article has been nominated for GA by other editor. Few dead links and few tagged with {{cn}}. Bladesmulti (talk) 09:51, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

That article is definitely not ready, I'll take a peek. Stalkers: stampede over to cattle. Montanabw^(talk) 16:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Cows and pigeons

I don't know if you're up for it, but Passenger pigeon looks almost ready to go to GA as is, bar a bit of copyediting and addressing some tags. Is that something you think you could have a stab at? I remember Bill Bryson being quite scathing about their extinction. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not the one to edit, but I'd be glad to help wikignome for someone who is. Montanabw^(talk) 22:17, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 17, 2015

You did a great job on the TFA paragraph. I trimmed just a bit and squeezed in one more thing, see what you think. - Dank (push to talk) 00:46, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Today's Featured Article: Notification

This is to inform you that William Robinson Brown, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 17 January 2015. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 10:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Guidance Barnstar
		For providing very useful information about tagging and reviewing. Thank you! TheMagikCow (talk) 10:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC)