User talk:Espresso Addict/archive1

Note: This is an archive of past discussions. Current discussions are at User talk:Espresso Addict

Welcome!

Hello, Espresso Addict/archive1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --ragesoss 02:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ragesoss. I'm still feeling my way around here, but I hope to stay! Espresso Addict 23:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Mathematics was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help…

Posted by Pruneau 21:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC), on behalf of the AID Maintenance Team[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Peveril castle.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:08, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week William Shakespeare was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help…

Posted by Pruneau^T 01:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC) on behalf of the AID maintenance team.[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I have said my two cents at the AfD. Viridae^Talk 23:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin. To be honest, I just closed it because the article had been deleted but nobody had come by to close it. As far as suggestions go, you can renominate it for deletion since the article was deleted without even spending a day on AfD. –NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 01:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The reason the earlier AfD was closed early was because the article was deleted as a copyvio while the AfD was in process ... However, the current version appears to have all the copyvio stuff stripped out (although I'll take a closer look tomorrow, so we may go through the same loop - AfD open for a while and then deletion as a copyvio while the AfD is in process). For now, I've voiced my opinion at the AfD - there are no sources providing verification of notability, as the article is currently written, I believe it should be deleted as a non-notable bio. Thanks Brian 04:21, 26 August 2006 (UTC)btball[reply]

Hi, I'm wondering why you restored the accent to the word Seren in the first entry of the disambiguation page. It's not supposed to be there. Are you basing yourself on a policy or did you think I accidentally removed the accent? Not accusing you of vandalism or anything by the way, sorry if the above comes off that way ;) -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ynhockey -- there seems to be an accent in Séren on the page Israel Defense Forces ranks, which I assumed had some meaning. I'm easy either way but I'm confused as to why they shouldn't match. Espresso Addict 19:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The accents in the ranks page is just for transcription purposes and do not represent correct transliteration. -- Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. Espresso Addict 21:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:recent edit in Plantar wart. I'd have to say that "PCP" as an abbreviation for "primary care physician" is relatively common. For example, it's used in Wikipedia's own primary care physician article, and Acronymfinder.com points it out as common in their database. It's certainly a minor point and I've left the edit untouched, but I was just curious as to if you were considering it uncommon based upon something about which I was not aware (e.g., uncommon in the international community vs. the U.S., etc.).

-RJ1001 15:01, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you based in the US? It's unheard of here in the UK; I think it means what we'd call a GP (general practitioner), but I'd have to look up the definition. PCP here is most commonly used for recreational drugs, and for P. carinii pneumonia in the AIDS context. Also, I didn't really see why the term needed an abbreviation defined, which I didn't think was used? I'm not particularly invested in the article, though, so if you think it's useful then go ahead and revert. Espresso Addict 23:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I am in the U.S., and there's my answer. Good to know for future reference that it may in fact be more of a U.S.-specific term, rather than a more universal one. As far as drugs and P.carinii pneumonia are concerned, those are also commonly referred to as "PCP" here as well, so at least something holds. Won't bother w/ reverting since I agree: as far as the article is concerned, it really adds nothing. Thanks for the insight.

-RJ1001 03:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; Thanks for the heads up! I'm happy for Holmfirth to be included in the category, I only removed it as I didn't think that it would qualify, due to being outside the actual Peak District Park Boundary. I will join in the discussion as mentioned. Richard Harvey 16:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for commenting that I need not leave Wikipedia, but this is what happened, and I am intimidated and frustrated:

I had truly planned to stop editing Wikipedia. Yet due to some kind words and encouragement from Wikipedians like you, I tried, timidly, to return.

This is what transpired: I always sign in, even when reading articles. I had been reading articles on the Riemann hypothesis and the zeta function, when I was alerted that there were messages on my talk page. There were several messages advising me not to stop editing and an offer to discuss the content of proposed new articles with other editors. Therefore, I decided to attempt to contribute again.

The response was that User: Chris53516 vandalized my discussion/talk page and sent me at least two messages (and I quote) that I was guilty of "dishonesty" (this was posted on a vandalized version of my discussion/talk page) and was a "liar" (posted on User: Chris53516's own page), simply because I had decided to contribute to Wikipedia again.

Moreover, I am not a "sockpuppet" nor a "sockpuppet master". I always sign in, and I always use the same user name. I do not at all appreciate this nomenclature on my user page; it is an insult, implying that I am using underhanded, sneaky means of editing via aliases. I do not do so. I share a computer and a network. Strangely, I have been accused of being the "sockpuppet" of people who have different IP addresses, whom I have never met. On Wikipedia, is it standard to be assumed guilty without proof? to be assumed guilty until proven innocent? to be assumed guilty without an attempt to be proven innocent?

Hence, it seems, that I am truly disliked on Wikipedia and that the way to settle disputes, for me at least, is to leave. If you think otherwise, look at what happened to my discussion/talk page, due to User: Chris53516 who was aided by User: Chan-Ho Suh in restoring my talk/discussion page. This is ironic since User: Chris53516 urges Wikipedians to "be nice". Hence, in my attempt to contribute to Wikipedia again, I have confirmation that it is indeed an unpleasant and frustrating experience, and ruled by those who have a different concept of "being nice".

However, I would like answers to my questions above, so I truly understand how Wikipedia operates.

To review and summarize, the questions I would like answered are these:

1. Should I not sign in when reading other articles, so that I do not see alerts that I have messages?

2. If it is acceptable for me to sign in when reading other articles, is it all right for me to re-join Wikipedia, even after I thought I would stop editing, after having been encouraged to do so by other Wikipedians?

3. If it is indeed acceptable for me to decide to edit again, am I really "dishonest" and a "liar" as per User: Chris53516?

4. Is it appropriate for Wikipedians such as User: Chris53516 and User: Chan-Ho Suh and others (anonymous) to vandalize my discussion/talk page by deleting favorable comments while adding their own verbiage including terms that, in my opinion, are insulting and, moreover, false?

5. Why am I being accused of "sockpuppetry" when it is not true, and cannot be proven simply because it is not true?

6. Why is the accusation of "sockpuppetry" displayed on my User page? I really do not appreciate this, especially since it is a false accusation.

7. What does "be nice" mean on Wikipedia, as User: Chris53516 recommends ? Does it include calling another Wikipedian "dishonest", someone who intends to "deceive", and a "liar" if that Wikipedian decides to return to Wikipedia and attempt to communicate with others via talk, or to edit an article?

8. Why had so many of my articles been deleted? So many of my edits reverted? Even when I supplied citations? (Some of the articles I started became quite lengthy, although they were intended to be concise, simply because of so many requests to establish importance of the subject, noteability, to provide more and more citations even after having supplied many, etc.)

9. If you do indeed answer my questions, and if I should respond to your answering me, shall I anticipate being called "liar", "dishonest", "sockpuppet" that I "deceive", etc (by other Wikipedians, of course, not by you!) Again, thank you.

But now you might have an idea why (a) I had decided to leave Wikipedia, and (b) was concerned about trying to re-join and edit again.

I suspect that this experience that I have had on Wikipedia has affected other Wikipedians, probably who are people with valuable information to contribute, but who have decided to stop creating articles or to edit because of similar experiences. This would lead to an incomplete and inconsistent encyclopedia, which is not what Wikipedia should be.

Sorry for the long message, but Wikipedia is an internet phenomenon, and these issues are important, to me and to others, including students in university, grade school, and high school.

Moreover, I had wanted to use my time to contribute actual content and learning more about the markup language: articles about topics in maths and stats, bios of persons, and other topics that interest me; i.e., spend my time on useful endeavors for Wikipedia, not being involved with disagreements nor wasting time on matters such as these.

Thank you again. MathStatWoman 09:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm not one of those who commented that you need not leave Wikipedia, MathStatWoman. I'm pretty much a newbie round here, and haven't much idea of the precise circumstances, but I do hope that you're able to continue making useful contributions to the encyclopedia. I believe that the project greatly needs people with knowledge of technical subjects. Have you considered trying the arbitration process? Espresso Addict 11:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in my RfA. Consensus to promote was reached, and I am now an administrator. I'll be using the tools cautiously at first, and everyone should feel welcome to peer over my shoulder and make sure I'm not doing anything foolish. --Robth^Talk 04:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your excellent editing. A great improvement. TimVickers 23:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I haven't edited biochemistry since I used to work on the Biochemical Journal way back when, so it was a bit of a nostalgia trip for me :) Nice article, by the way, I do hope you succeed in getting featured status for it. Espresso Addict 23:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I thought I recognised the touch of a professional editor. Good to have you on the team. TimVickers 15:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, thanks for your efforts. Enzyme inhibitor is now a FA. TimVickers 14:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Espresso Addict. Thank you so much for supporting my recent RfA. It finished with an amazing final tally of 160/4/1. I really appreciate your feedback and support. Cheers, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 21:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Espresso Addict... Thank you very much for the constructive criticism in your oppose comment in my request for adminship. Ultimately, no consensus was reached, and I failed to be promoted, but I am very grateful for your coments. I will strive to better myself in all areas, especially Mainspace. Thε Halo Θ 23:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've had another go with the photos in this article. It might be better to put some of them in an image gallery at the bottom of the article. See what you think. Espresso Addict 21:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes,I like that. Really, we need some more text to have something to embed the photos in! Regards--MichaelMaggs 07:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I like your photo Thors Cave.jpg. May I suggest you upload it to Wiki Commons and categorise it as Category:Peak District and include it in the gallery Here. That way it can be used in any countries wiki project. I have put a Peak District Image Gallery in each of the languages, that have a Peak District article, as listed to the left of the en article, but I couldn't include yours as it is is needs to be in commons to do so!. I ended up moving most of my images to Wiki Commons after finding other editors overseas wanted to use them in their version and were downloading them and then re-uploading them themselves. Some have appeared in many other languages, including Spanish, Japanese, Catalonian, German, Estonian, Indian, etc. One has been used in 31 articles in 16 different wiki's. Richard Harvey 09:42, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've been avoiding Wiki Commons, to be honest, because I wasn't sure of the licensing requirements. I'll look into loading the photo there when I get a moment. Espresso Addict 04:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed the Peak district non display warning - I've been working on something like this - "Please bear in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a directory. It may be that one or two links will add something to a page however they must only be placed on the relevant page and will always be subject to review by wikipedians".

Not as hard hitting as yours but in some cases I just think it is people's misunderstanding of Wiki that makes them think the local vet and fold club would be good links to have on the page. I'll run it past the spam project soon but views more than welcome - regards --Nigel ^(Talk) 11:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mine came from Kevin Breitenstein at fanfiction. I'd assumed it was a commonly used template -- do tone it down if you think it's too harsh, but given the persistent efforts to add variants of the same link over months now, as I recall, I doubt the current Peak linkfarmer is a newbie. Espresso Addict 11:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No argument with the one you used where you did and when you did - that IP has only ever placed spam as far as I can see (& I have placed a spam4im warning so if I can catch him - or indeed you do - I/we can get him blocked).

Not aware there is a template - I've seen various versions in use when I've been removing stuff and thought I'd try for something consistent. As I say it isn't aimed at blantant spammers more the "I've got some nice pics of the area I'll put my link on" approach (Welsh uni walking club recently!) - regards --Nigel ^(Talk) 12:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're well ahead of me on this, I hadn't even realised, till a few days ago, that there was a set of spam warnings! The whole area is so difficult -- as you point out there are plenty of good-faith editors who honestly think their website is useful and can hopefully be steered into more productive contributions, but I've not found politeness of much assistance in dealing with the blatant spamming brigade. Espresso Addict 04:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse the stream of consciousness approach, bit like that for now!

Definitely checkout templates generally - for me (& I know some other editors don't do it) but always place a warning on the page if the offence is vaguely current, at least following edtors can see what has happened and escalate the warnings which will mean someone can report to get a block. If you find a heavy duty spammer look at spam4im template (had to have it pointed out to me so don't worry!). Take a look at popups (good for reverts but the "hover over" feature is just so useful and other features too). Although boring/addictive looking at "recent changes" is an interesting way of seeing what goes on and getting a feel for things (I do far less now but it fills in five - that usually turns in to 30mins!)

One problem is you find one spam, revert it (using popups is quick to view the change & revert), place a warning (based on what is on the talk page) & then look at contributions. Maybe you find one or two links but yesterday I found one with quite a list going back to some that had not been spotted from August - not sure if I was right but I went back & placed a spam4im on the page as well - ok no new offence but obviously serial spammer - at least another editor coming along in a week or a months time can get a feel for it straight away.

To me these are quite seperate from the WI/Rotary/local Church etc ones where I guess some "kindness" should be used. Rule of thumb tho - if they argue they are probably spammers (checkout Talk:Logo & Talk:Old-time radio for a flavour of what has been distracting me from what I would like to do for a while!).

Get back to me if you want anything further, all the best --Nigel ^(Talk) 12:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi, and welcome to the Biography WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of biographies.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

• Starting some new articles? Our article structure tips outlines some things to include.
• Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every biography article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! plange 16:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Espresso Addict, and thanks for your comments in my recent request for adminship, which succeeded with a final tally of 70/4/4. I hope I can live up to your expectations, and if there's ever anything you need, you know where to find me! --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 00:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for participating in my RfA, which closed successfully earlier today with a result of (60/9/4). Although, I encountered a few problems in my RfA, I have peacefully resolved my conflicts and made amends with the people involved. If you have any further questions or suggestions, feel free talk to me. I hope I will live up to your expectations. --Nishkid64 22:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I'm editing this page to bring it up to the point where it can be nominated for FA. Any suggestions you may have would be very welcome at the Peer review page. However, I'm still a little unclear regarding hyphens/slashes. For two words where neither is a modifier, but instead are two nouns (such as Michaelis-Menten) is it correct to use a – (left-hand dash in Insert menu) or a - (hyphen on keyboard) or a — (right-hand dash in insert menu)? Thanks! TimVickers 15:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tim. I'm awed by your productiveness! I'll take a look at enzyme kinetics when I get a moment with my brain in gear. Meanwhile, on the hyphens question: for two linked nouns eg Michaelis–Menten the correct punctuation is an n rule, which is the left-hand dash on the insert list. Espresso Addict 18:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. That is clear now. TimVickers 22:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. If you have any more comments or suggestions, this article is up for FA candidacy and the discussion page is here. Thank you. TimVickers 20:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your characteristically thorough editing. Very impressive. TimVickers 22:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enzyme kinetics has now been made a FA. Thank you for all your input. TimVickers 23:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch - saw it but didn't see thro your more knowledegeable eyes --Nigel ^(Talk) 18:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know about knowledgeable, but I've worked as a promotional writer, so I've an eye for how it's done ;) Espresso Addict 19:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good question! I am of the school that it is not necessary with a repeat, persistent vandal to start with level one warnings. In my book, if a previously-blocked user starts right back with filling Wikipedia with nonsense, we do not need to exercise the same incremental approach to editing. Johnbrownsbody 19:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The current History of Science Collaboration of the Month is Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Science/Collaboration of the Month/current.

--ragesoss 17:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a tally of 66/11/5. I learned quite a bit during the process, and I expect to be learning a lot more in the days ahead. As I stated in the request itself, I respect your decision to oppose me based on my short tour of duty, but I hope I can earn your trust. I will be taking things slowly (and doing a lot of re-reading), but please let me know if there is anything I can do to improve in my new capacity. -- Merope Talk 13:54, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Microorganism was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

Davodd 03:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a tally of 91/1/4. I can't express how much it means to me to become an administrator. I'll work even more and harder to become useful for the community. If you need a helping hand, don't hesitate to contact me. NCurse work 15:47, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to send a quick note of thanks for your comments in my RfA. You brought up some important issues that I was surprised were not brought up by others in the RfA. I will do my best to strengthen my understanding of the fair use policy. I really appreciate your thoughts and compliments on my AfDing! :-) Best, Irongargoyle 02:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for voting and commenting for me in my RfA last month. I'll try again as previously planned in the late of spring, and hopefully I'll win it. I'm still on wikibreak now, but have found a few hours finally, and can respond to people from my RfA. In a few months between the period I graduate from high school and begin going to a university, I'll have time to attend to Wikipedia as much as I like to. Thus, I'll be visiting xfD everyday. Do you have any tips or suggestions for me? Thanks again, X [Mac Davis] (SUPERDESK|Help me improve) 07:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Espresso Addict, this article seems right up your street and has now been nominated as a FAC. Comments and suggestions are welcome on the review page. Thank you. TimVickers 16:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Coffee was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

– ClockworkSoul 04:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I've nominated this page for FA. Your comments or corrections on its nomination page would be very welcome. TimVickers 17:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've read your "wikipedian farewell lament" and, judging from your user contributions, believe you will read this sooner or later although you say you might not. I'd rather comment here than there.

I wish I didn't, but I wholeheartedly agree with what you are saying. While up to, say, a year or two ago, I had the impression that I was taking part in the building of an encyclopaedia—and not just any encyclopaedia; rather, it would be the most easily accessible, freest, most comprehensive and most up-to-date in the world—, these days my activity here focuses on avoiding yet greater damage being done to those parts of the encyclopaedia which are already good (and have been for some time). However, the moment you start trying to do that you get caught up in unbelievably silly "debates" with people who insist that what they are saying is the truth—always. On my talk page I've been harassed by canned messages about images I uploaded in 2002 or 2003 in danger of being deleted because, it seems, they do not have the proper "tags" (which were only modified, or even created, a few months ago); articles are randomly ("speedy"-)deleted by people who have little idea of what they are doing but who always back up their "arguments" with references to some official "Wikipedia policy" or other (the most recent example can be found here); and on the talk pages articles are classified as "stubs" with the explicit wish that they be expanded although the subject has already been exhausted.

Well, I could go on forever, but I won't. As you say, the only thing left to do is to remove oneself from the frontline: Ars longa, vita brevis. It's just no fun anymore. It seems I'm too much of an addict to let go completely though.

All the best, <KF> 11:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, KF! I do seem to have managed to find a way of contributing in minor ways to uncontroversial topics, whilst avoiding the places like AfD that made my blood pressure rise. I hope that you can achieve a similar compromise. Espresso Addict 00:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chester Shot Tower, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Laïka 13:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(PS: As a Cestrian myself, I'm especially happy to see this on the front page!)

Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of unassessed articles tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 20:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's very good to see you again. Thanks. TimVickers 05:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I'm sworn off the TLA pages, but I thought I'd make an exception for such a deserving case. Best of luck, and don't get lost in all the bureaucracy. Espresso Addict 00:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of imposing on you, I wondered if you could turn your expert editorial eye on this nomination of antioxidant for featured article status. I have found your comments very useful in the past, so I would be very grateful for any comments or suggestions you might have. TimVickers 05:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I didn't get round to this, Tim; offline life has been frenetic these past weeks and I haven't really had a chance to look in on any of my online haunts. Espresso Addict 22:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i hope you decide to come back, your articles on Cheshire geography have been impressing me much W guice 08:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It's always good to know one's efforts are appreciated. I may pop back to editing local geography articles when I get any free time. Espresso Addict 22:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The inaugural March 2007 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter has been published. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse--ragesoss 04:06, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]