User talk:Tyrol5/Archive 2

Dffgd has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Bye!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of dffgd at 20:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC).

Hello, Tyrol5. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship.
Message added 18:14, 28 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello Tyrol5. I am just letting you know that I deleted Mafia2-Multiplayer, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:43, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for the advice. Is there anything in particular that struck as you being particularly advertising? I tried to source everything, including product information, back to other sites, so it wouldn't sound like that. Anything you can do to help is much appreciated. Jabrams5 (talk) 20:44, 31 August 2010 (UTC) Thanks,

Jason

If you read through the article carefully and with a critical eye, you will see what I mean. Ex: "GreenheatTM, METRO’s custom blended bioheat, which helps home heating systems run cleaner and more efficiently" sounds like an ad. By doing this and reading through the policies I've linked for you above, the article can be drastically improved. Tyrol5 [Talk] 20:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

That's what it says on its website though, which I linked it to. Do you suggest I write, 'According to METRO's website' and then put a line like that in quotations?

Consider rewriting the phrase to be more neutral (i.e. METRO has developed a custom blended bioheat with the objective of helping home heating systems run more efficiently.). Feel free to use my wording. I would not recommend you quote the website outright, as the companies own website will more than likely be written with the purpose of promoting the company. Tyrol5 [Talk] 20:58, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Great, will do! Thanks so much. First time writer over here, so appreciate the advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jabrams5 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. If you have further questions, don't hesitate to ask! Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I've provided an alternative. Under the nom. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:42, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to have offended you on the RFA talk page earlier. I misread the situation, and if even you had been as distressed as I wrongly believed, my response was clumsy. - Pointillist (talk) 06:23, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Please see

WT:RFA, I replied there. Tyrol5 [Talk]

19:46, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I judge by your response that you thought I was snapping at you. That wasn't my intention, and it wasn't directly aimed at you. It it a response to the collective discussions that have occurred over and over for the past four years. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  21:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I understand completely. After all, since this is an online discussion, I can only read your words. I cannot see your facial expression or hear your tone of voice. Anyways, thank you for clearing this up. Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

<div style="float:center; border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:#F5FFFA; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Smiley.svg|left|62px]] <span style="font-family:Verdana">Hello Tyrol5, thank you for supporting [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Magog the Ogre 2|my RfA!]] <br>I was promoted with a final tally of 65/4/3.<br> I hope I can live up to everyone's expectations, do my best for Wikipedia, and take to heart the constructive criticism. Always feel free to message me if I'm around. </div>[[User:Magog the Ogre|Magog the Ogre]] ([[User talk:Magog the Ogre|talk]]) 11:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)<!-- borrowed from text by Walton_monarchist89 on User:Acalamari/RfA-related awards-->

Why did you take down my post on Rob Palmer's website, he did get told to fuck off by the renowned manager Harry Reddknapp

You need to introduce this information into the article in a way that complies with the

credible source. The way you introduced it into the article, it was identical to blatant vandalism. Tyrol5 [Talk]

20:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the wonderful support in my RfA Tyrol. I appreciated it a ton. Really. My best regards and sincere wishes. Wifione _....... ^{Leave a message} 15:00, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

You're quite welcome... you deserved it! Tyrol5 [Talk] 19:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. As you recently commented in the

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:03, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I've closed it, as my original concerns were addressed (B-class assessment). Please feel free to leave your comments here or on the articles talk page. I apologize for the inconvenience, I intended to let you know of this. Evidently, it slipped my mind. Tyrol5 [Talk] 23:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Unless I see the peer review, I won't remember what my comments were (I deal with lots of reviews every week). If a peer review is correctly closed per the instructions at WPPR, a link remains on the article's talk page. Can you revisit your closure process?

Here's the link. When I moved the article, it screwed up the PR template, forcing me to remove it. I might just move the PR as well for ease of access and so I can restore the template to the TP. Tyrol5 [Talk]

23:49, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, I have read the article again, in conjunction with my peer review. My main concerns, about prose and citations, have been addressed and the article is considerably improved. I note, however, that you appear to have removed all mention of the naming of the feature. I think this is a matter of some interest, and should be mentioned. Subject to this, I'd say the article is probably up to GA standard (I've certainly seen many worse). Brianboulton (talk) 14:42, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello Tyrol5, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of

It looks as though the promo. and copyvio. material was rmv after I tagged it. Thank you, Tyrol5 [Talk] 23:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The article

Hello, Tyrol5. You have new messages at Bobby122's talk page.
Message added 21:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wondering if you have come across references to support your statements here [1]. I have searched and the literature uses the terms frequently interchangeably. Ie. Are there any treatments / causes / complications that may occur with one but not the other.

As I am sure you know, persistent tonsillitis will frequently require surgical treatment. This typically not the case with pharyngitis. If the treatments are different, than the complications and prognosis are likely to be different as well. The differences of course do not end here (just go into specifics of these conditions). My claims are based primarily on common sense: It is preferable to leave the articles be, simply to avoid possible confusion of the reader. Tyrol5 [Talk] 19:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

We also have titles of papers such as "Tonsillectomy versus watchful waiting in recurrent streptococcal pharyngitis in adults: randomised controlled trial."

talk · contribs · email

) 20:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I can see your reasoning. But, needless to say, some may be confused by merging these two articles, regardless of their similarities. I can see that these trials are using tonsillectomy to treat various type of pharyngitis, but it's not always the same, and it's these differences that justify the articles remaining separate. Tyrol5 [Talk] 20:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree that they are slightly different in that tonsillitis primary involves the tonsils as a sub type of pharyngitis. The question is is this sufficient to justify two separate articles. IMO the this subtle difference could be dealt with in a section on classification at the start the article. The causes overlap completely as do the treatment and prognosis / complication. If there was evidence these did not of course I would be happy to leave it as is. The literature deals with them together due to this reason.

talk · contribs · email

) 21:25, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but would it not be best to keep separate articles for the benefit of the reader?? Ronk01 talk 22:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

It's quite alright. Anyways, yes, that's exactly my point. Tyrol5 [Talk] 23:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Sigh I guess it is too great a step. It just means that we have a fair bit of duplication.

talk · contribs · email

) 00:34, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Is it a change of vote, you voted support earlier, now your neutral. Secret ^account 20:31, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

It is. I forgot to strike the vote earlier. Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 20:47, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for doing lots of good work on the spaceflight articles lately. I recently brought up the template {{

I proposed having rows correspond to "Crew members", and gave some examples

I never really noticed a need for a change in the template to accommodate Soyuz missions delivering long-term crews to space stations. The changes you've proposed, while they may introduce the information all in one template, would make said Soyuz articles inconsistent with other mission articles. Your current proposed new layout for the template, while I don't mean to sound unappreciative of your work, seem to be a bit 'cluttery'. And they could be a bit confusing for readers (considering your Soyuz TM-3 example). Perhaps adding a mission duration to the template is all that's really necessary? Tyrol5 [Talk] 18:33, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, my point is that I feel it's unnatural for the template to have "time" going left to right, which is the way it currently is. I guess my second suggestion I made to you above, is to swap the rows and columns, so that "time" flows from top to bottom. This is more consistent with spaceflight tables in general; what I'm saying is that {{Spaceflight crew}} is itself inconsistent with other spaceflight articles, because time is flowing in the wrong direction. Mlm42 (talk) 19:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but for me it seems more logical to have the launching and landing crews next to each other. In my opinion, this just makes the template more navigable. Tyrol5 [Talk] 19:14, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

A 2010 Cochrane review has just come out and wondering if you could comment further [2]

Hi, I noticed you made this edit, and added the "Mission parameters" to the Soyuz 3 article. I just want to say that I think the Mission parameters sections of spaceflight articles could be improved (in fact, I think they are better suited to the infobox). My main objection is that they are ambiguous: Is the "mass" the mass at launch, or in orbit? Since the perigee and apogee can change throughout the mission, are the parameters from the first point they reach orbit, or some kind of average for their time in orbit? Also, what is the source of this information?

More generally, do you think we should have a "Mission parameters" section on all articles of space missions? Thanks, Mlm42 (talk) 23:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

You're right, it does seem a bit redundant, but I was merely trying to keep the article consistent with other articles. I don't know if it's the best thing to do, however, to go around and take all of the sections off all the articles. It does provide quick access to basic info. As for the ambiguous parameter specifics, I couldn't help you there as I just copied from the infobox, which seems to get its info from sources with equally ambiguous params. Tyrol5 [Talk] 01:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Dear Tyrol5, Best wishes to you and your family this holiday season, whether you are celebrating Christmas or a different holiday. It's a special time of the year for almost everyone, and there's always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! ;) Love, --Meaghan [talk] ≈ 15:36, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

The

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 19:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Tyro, I was impressed with your recent advice to a new user. I'm not generally in favour of the Wikipedia system of templates for absolutely everything, but if there were to be a standard template response for situations like this, your message would be the one I would choose and use. --Kudpung (talk) 08:09, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate that! Tyrol5 [Talk] 19:27, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

i dont understand what your problem with me posting about the westboro baptist church is? do you support them as i am quoting wikipedia's entry on them not my personal oppinion. that being said if you continue to delete my entries then i will continually repost them and if my ip gets banned i will use a different IP and continue to repost... thank you for your understanding in this matter. wikipedia is open discussion or rather its open to free contribution which you have censored my contribution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.88.120.231 (talk) 19:08, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Your edit indeed appeared to be vandalism by listing this organization as a domestic terrorism organization when it is not explicitly classified as such (a quick search shows no mention of terrorism in the article about the organization). You are correct in saying that anyone can freely contribute to the encyclopedia, but incorrect in the methodology of your edit. When adding controversial information such as this, you must provide

a reliable source to support the information. Thank you. Tyrol5 [Talk]

20:05, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I know precisely who the culprit is and am, to say the least, not at all concerned - but it's good to have the might of wiki volunteers looking out for me. Keep up the good work! Egg Centric 21:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem, glad to help! Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:45, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick revert on my talk page! – GorillaWarfare ^{talk • contribs} 21:48, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Always glad to help out! Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:49, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I don`t understand why page Currency cannot be linked to page currate.com,currate got grat tools which will help users to calculate currancy very easy,and currate also has a map tool,with that tourist can easily calculate currency everywhere they go,because they don`t need to know what is the currancy in that country. Thank You! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.125.153.24 (talk) 22:21, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Adding links to specific sites is considered spam according to this policy. Please avoid adding these links, as they appear to promote that particular site. Thank you, Tyrol5 [Talk] 22:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Tyrol5. You have new messages at Elektrik Shoos's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi Tyrol5/Archive 2. I have now moved the RfA reform and its associated pages to project space. The main page has been updated and streamlined. We now also have a new table on voter profiles. Please take a moment to check in and keep the pages on your watchlist. Regards, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:05, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "

talk

) 04:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Arbitration clerking

In relation to our discussion last week about your interest in arbitration clerking, I have sent you an e-mail on behalf of the clerks. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any more questions. Regards,

•

] 21:51, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

That RfA Reform thing

Kudpung has asked me to 'nudge' some people .. as I'm an idle get, I'm just going through the entire Task Force list so my apologies if you didn't need a nudge! You can slap me about over on

WP:EfD

if you like :o) Straw polling various options: over here - please add views, agree with views, all that usual stuff. Pesky (talk) 12:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Your

GA nomination of Fra Mauro formation

The article Fra Mauro formation you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fra Mauro formation for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Szzuk (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Tyrol5 [Talk] 14:48, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

GA Review of Soyuz TM-30

I've left a few observations

Fatuorum

22:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Drew clements

Hello Tyrol5. I am just letting you know that I deleted Drew clements, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 13:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

listas parameter on latin names

Please do not do any more listas on Latin or Icelandic names from Category:Biography articles without listas parameter. Alot of Latin and Icelandic names do not have surnames but have patronymic names. However quite of few do have surnames. It can get very complicated to figure out as you may have to see grandparent names and check web sources to make sure. Also the DEFAULTSORT value in the article would need to be changed. An expert on both is sick and is off wiki at the moment. Bgwhite (talk) 16:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Will do. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I will keep it in mind. Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 22:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I have a list of the Latin, Icelandic and few names I don't know what to do with. So, there was no harm done. However, looking at the list of names, it does look much better with letters A thru C cleaned off... gives me a little more happiness to see an emptier list. Bgwhite (talk) 05:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Borders of the lung merger

Hi, I'm proposing to merge the anatomy articles

Borders of the lung. There's no consensus on the issue, and since it is supported by the Pulmonology task force, I was wondering if you could add your opinion at the merger discussion here: Talk:Borders of the lung

.

Thanks,Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 21:43, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:47, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your input! ~ Kerowyn ^{Leave a note} 16:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Tyrol5 [Talk]

Barnstar

		The Space Barnstar
		To Tyrol5, for contributions to astronomy-related articles. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Best wishes. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! It's nice to here from you again, as I've found more of my time devoted to the space-related articles. Please rest assured that I check in to

WT:MED periodically. Thanks again! Tyrol5 [Talk]

22:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

QTalk Arizona

While yes, the user who created the article has a promotional username. But how is the article promotional? -

talk|contributions

) 14:29, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

The user has changed the article since I've tagged it. See, for example, the "Individual Shows" section at the time that I tagged it in this diff. Per this change and the willingness of the user to avoid a conflict of interest, I've de-requested speedy deletion. Tyrol5 [Talk] 13:42, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Pityful

Hi there TYROL, VASCO here,

regarding this situation (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:86.44.154.132), i feel there is less and less i can add to it, except shaking my head in utter disgust. Another obscure player was vandalized, but this was not about the player, 99,999999999999% sure it was about...ME!

One year ago, i protected some pages/blocked one or two IPs for vandalism and, what did i get i return? This English "user" has been on my case ever since, vandalizing the stuff i work on, just to spite me. If he sees my message to you, i better get ready for some more taunting, pathetic. Pathetic and pityful! More pathetic is writing "i apologize" in his page after receiving three warnings for writing and kind of vile crap in an article, DELIBERATELY vandalizing...

Keep up the good work, from Portugal - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:27, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry that xe has caused you trouble; how did you make the connection, though? Did the user once have an account or did you request

CU? Tyrol5 [Talk]

18:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

No, this "user" has never had any account that i know of, "contributing" solely with anon IPs (all starting with 88 or 86, all from England, has even vandalized my userpage and sent some graphic photos to there and to my talkpage). Like i say early into my original message, i am not 100% sure, my reasoning being: it's an obscure player that i doubt anyone knows about in most countries, he's not known for anything good or bad in particular (i admit i have NEVER seen him play, only edited there because he plays for a team in my country), so the only reason for the vandalism has got to be that I edited there, nothing else. The "user" is trying to get me to feed the troll, and eventually he will succeed, unfortunately.

Cheers - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 20:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

My only advice in that case would be to report the IP's if the disruptions continue. If xe continues to switch IP's (again, this is pure speculation at this point), I would suggest contacting a CU for advice, as this is beyond my scope of knowledge. Best wishes. Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

File Mover

Hey, have you tried requesting to be a

CTJF83