User talk:DASonnenfeld/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions with User:DASonnenfeld. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Thanks very much for the tea! Good luck with the quality improvement project, — Cirt (talk) 21:33, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Only thing is I'd encourage you to contribute to other reviews at WP:PR. ;) — Cirt (talk) 21:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. I've done a few, but I appreciate your encouragement to do more. I understand the need for more reviewers. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 21:44, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, no worries, either way. :) — Cirt (talk) 05:53, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your ongoing edits to various articles. Your tireless activity is very much appreciated! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Piotrus. You, too! Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 13:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for cropping the image, I intended to do the same, but you were faster! Cheers, --ELEKHH^T 11:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Elekhh, You're welcome! (The green, plastic beverage container in the original just didn't do the subject justice.) Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 12:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you insist that the "Journal of Interpretation Research" deals with environmental science. Actually, if you read the journal's description here:[1], you will see that its primary focus is heritage interpretation: "The purposes of the Journal of Interpretation Research are to communicate original empirical research dealing with interpretation and to provide a forum for scholarly discourse about issues facing the profession of interpretation." Heritage interpretation in turn falls under the branch ofcommunication studies, a discipline of the humanities. In my opinion, inclusion of heritage interpretation under environmental science is incorrect. Regards, kashmiri ^TALK 10:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Kashmiri, Thanks for your note. As I understand it, the List of environmental journals includes a wide variety of scholarly environmental journals, including not only environmental science, but also journals in the environmental humanities, which this journal falls (in part) in to. Environmental interpretation is a widely recognized interdisciplinary subfield of communication studies and environmental studies. Kind regards,DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 10:58, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I agree with you that the journal does not do a good job on its own webpage of describing its mission. Regards,DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 11:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

The confusion is certainly warranted. I earned a master's degree in the field and even I have trouble categorizing it. Interpretation, as a profession and an academic field, is scattered hither and yon across any number of other disciplines and fields. For example, the program I just graduated from is part of the School of Public Health at Indiana University, of all things. On my long-term to-do list is a major rewrite/improvement of Wikipedia's article about the profession, but that's gonna be a big job... NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 16:35, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Collegiate woodsman teams, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.DexDor (talk) 04:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that you're on a wiki-break, and that you contribute at WikiProject Forestry's talk page. When you return, check out Portal:Forestry, which I've been working to expand. Please feel free to improve upon it!Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

A very clever idea. I think visitors will find it useful and it will generate good cross-traffic. Good job! :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Wide room for expansion; hopefully stimulating, too. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 16:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking of palm sugar but didn't see where it would fit. Please add it if you think it's a fit. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:35, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Good one! Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 03:40, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. :)

Ohhhhh, "forest products". I keep thinking it's "tree products". So, we're talking about any product that comes out of the forest, like, say, moss or something? (Not that moss is a product, but is that the right idea?) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:47, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, I'll be darned: Moss#Commercial use. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:51, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Indeed! Gotta run... Thanks again! DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 03:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar! Thanks, too, for your tireless contributions to WP (I see Piotrus already awarded you that barnstar!) Regards, Meclee (talk) 19:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Yum, thanks! Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 20:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

		WikiProject Globalization Barnstar
		For your all your work on navigation boxes!
this WikiAward was presented to DASonnenfeld by Meclee(talk) 01:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Meclee! Much appreciated. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 14:40, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

What sort of help would you like for the project? Mcnabber091 (talk) 00:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Mcnabber091. Thanks for your reply. The several sets of data incorporated into the Globalization Index article now seem out-of-date. It would be very helpful, if possible, to locate more up-to-date data series, and use them as the basis for updating the article. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 00:52, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	This is given in lieu of a "tireless prodding & rewarding" barnstar for constantly prodding and rewarding folks in WikiProject Globalization! Thanks! Meclee (talk) 21:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Much appreciated. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 13:13, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey DASonnenfeld

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy theVisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with alist of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on theFeedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello DA Sonnenfeld: Thanks for the recent barnstar. I've updated/pruned the article to-do list for WikiProject Environment, located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment/Article tasks, in efforts to update the project. Many entries there were quite dated. I noticed on your user page that you're a professor of Sociology and Environmental Policy, so please feel free to update the list with any entries that would be pertinent at this time. Additionally, the project tasks list would likely benefit from updating. Also, I completely understand if you don't have time to contribute there. Thanks for your contributions to English Wikipedia! Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:18, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

According to Hartzell's book, the name of the tool in question is a hoedag, not a "hoedad." I'm away from my copy at the moment but can provide a relevant quotation if need be. — Anarchivist | (talk) 16:26, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Anarchivist. I believe you. But there are other perspectives as well. If Hoedag, what explanation does Hartzell give for the name of the organization? (And why does hoedag redirect to hodag?) And on what basis do others use Hoedad? Given time and documentation, this should be resolvable. Thanks & Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 16:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Here's a brownie for a favor. Please mark the new The Global Journal as "patrolled" before someone calls for deletion! ;) Regards, Meclee (talk) 15:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for the treat! Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 15:41, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I am glad to hear you'll be reviewing it, it's a rare pleasure to get someone actually competent in our field doing a review :) Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Piotrus. A fine article... And thanks for your contributions to it. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 15:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, are you going to continue with this review? It is still open. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Left you a reply there. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:44, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

This should be a usable image. It's courtesy US Forest Service, so it should be PD. Guettarda (talk) 01:22, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Great, thanks! DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 01:38, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

I keep thinking I should improve that article, but I keep wondering about potential COI. I don't think I'd fall afoul ofWP:COI but I'm close enough that I probably shouldn't review his mss. Guettarda (talk) 01:58, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Guettarda, I would be happy to review any contributions that you make to the article as a check for NPOV/ COI. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 10:28, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ecological humanities may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * Marshall (2002) ''The Unity of Nature,'' Imperial College Press: London).

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. I will start to edit the summary field for any edits I will further perform.--Inaaaa (talk) 13:58, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello DASonnenfeld, I left a note on the talk page of this template, but just in case you don't have it on your watch list, I am leaving you a slightly modified version of the note here:

Today I added Brazil nut to the "Nuts and spices section" of this template because it is legitimately a forest product. I did not yet add other tree nuts such as hazelnut, chestnut, almond, cashew, and pistachio, as these days those trees are mostly grown in cultivation to exploit the nuts as a commercial food crop. However, the nuts were all originally (and still are to some extent) also harvested as wild products in forests or woodlands. Do you have an opinion as to whether these nuts should be added to this template? Invertzoo (talk) 14:31, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

What made you start the article about GreenPalm, I work for the company/

Kind Regards

Simon — Preceding unsigned comment added bySimonchrismas (talk • contribs) 22:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Simon, You're welcome. I put together the {{Palm oil}} template a month or two ago, and was looking at a variety of articles related to the topic, one of which mentioned GreenPalm. An interesting endeavor. Kind regards,DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 00:11, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Erving Goffman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Talk (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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 theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for edit. I checked the edit was full of unencyclopedic material and included external link. But, did not notice the revert has blanked the article. --Tito☸Dutta 17:20, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 08:42, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect SOHO systems. Since you had some involvement with the SOHO systems redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). DA Sonnenfeld(talk) 14:05, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, DASonnenfeld. I notice that you have recently added a number of Syracuse University related links to the disambiguation page Orange. I just wanted to verify that these are not partial name matches, article titles that include the word Orange but that are not referred to as "Orange". I think I have heard the sports teams called "The Orange", so it is good to include it on the disambiguation page. Are the newspaper, the television network, etc. also called "Orange", as opposed to "Daily Orange" or "Orange Television"? (I'll watch this talk page for a couple of days, so you can respond here.) Thanks, and happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 00:40, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Cnilep, Thanks for the feedback. I think you're right on the Daily Orange (sometimes referred to as the D.O.); I removed that link. "The Orange" sports teams and "Orange TV" are within the suggested guidelines, I think. Kind regards,DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 01:03, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Great; thanks for your speedy reply. Cnilep (talk) 01:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Welcome, thanks for pointing it out. Regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 01:20, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for cropping the picture of this sculpture, but is it possible to keep both images? The cropped version is fine for the sculpture article, but the original image is still appropriate for illustrating the Standard Insurance Building. --Another Believer _(Talk) 00:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Another Believer. That would be fine with me. As the photographer, would you mind spinning off one version of the photo to another file, e.g. one for the sculpture? Thanks! DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 00:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I truly appreciate your obviously needed help, and thank you for cleaning up my categories mess! I didn't expect you to fix my errors, it was very generous of you to take the time.

If I might trouble you briefly one last time, while it is fresh:

Should some of the extraneous categories perhaps have been included originally under the "see also" heading, rather than the "category" footer, in the first place? My goal is to establish access points; maybe that is where my confusion mixes which sections appropriate and how best to accomplish cross-referencing.

P.s. Along my way, I have been serendipitously reading a lot about logger Delos A. Blodgett (and son) of MI, would you feel he is relevant/important enough a figure in forestry that I might focus an article?

You have been really most helpful, and again .... thank you, kindly, Wil76.180.38.195 (talk) 16:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Wil. You're welcome. Took me a bit to figure out which article(s) you were referring to. I am guessing Euthenics andTemplate:Euthenics; am I right? Actually, it was another editor who fixed this... No need to add links under the 'See also' heading, as you suggest above; this is done already by the template. You are welcome to discuss categorization on the article's talk page if you think there is room for improvement; or just do it, but please be judicious! Thanks,DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 16:27, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

You do have it right! and Gosh! I didn't even check the history; when I returned to follow your suggestion, I found them already fixed! I have thanked Maralia, now. Thanks for re-directing the thank you.

P.s. Duly noted! (judiciousness, that is) Regards, Wil 76.180.38.195 (talk) 20:48, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' editson pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:09, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of unmanned aerial vehicles of the People's Republic of China may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• nyt20130921>Wong, Edward. (2013, September 21). "Hacking U.S. Secrets, China Pushes for Drones,"] ''[[The New York Times]]'', p.A1 ff.</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:15, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

 Fixed. DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 10:00, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, i would like to notify you that i relocated merger discussion you have started from Talk:Rebellions in Iranian Kurdistan to Talk:Kurdish separatism in Iran. The reason is that all previous merger/rename procedures were held atTalk:Kurdish separatism in Iran - which is the original article on that topic (Rebellions in Iranian Kurdistan was split in early September 2013 [2]). I also notify all involved users from previous discussions on the topic. Cheers.Greyshark09 (talk) 07:56, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

There is no need to discuss/question and nothing for me to change anymore, because your latest edit on 2013-9-22 @ 21:48 has resolved all the questions/issues I previously had, so everything is great now and I cannot find anything that needs to be changed in this current revision. Thank you very much for the re-edit. I'll add more to the list when new entries are ready as you've discussed on the talk page of List of unmanned aerial vehicles of the People's Republic of China. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XdeLaTorre (talk • contribs) 23:39, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. A discussion has been opened at Categories for Discussion regarding categories you have created. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi DASonnenfeld. Thanks so much for moving the page for The Climate Reality Project so that The is now part of the article name. I'm going to add merger tags to the two articles for the predecessor organizations I mentioned in my request in just a moment. I'm hoping this will bring in some new editors to review my request, but if you had any thoughts on merging these articles or on my new draft, I'd love to hear them. Thanks again, 16912 Rhiannon(Talk · COI) 21:33, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I've undone the additions of UAV categories you made to Category:Unmanned aerial vehicles of Europe, as they are entirely outside the scope of that category. We do not categorise by-continent for aircraft of any sort; Category:Unmanned aerial vehicles of Europe is for pan-European multinational projects only. Also adding Category:Ornithopters toCategory:Micro air vehicles is inappropriate as aircraft like UTIAS Snowbird are decidely not MAVs. I appreciate your enthuiasm for the topic but please slow down and be sure your additions are correct, thanks. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:06, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the guidance. Can you point me to prior discussions on categorization of UAVs that will help me understand current approaches? Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 22:47, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

This is one of those cases where consensus was achieved through the 'normal editing' method, I believe. I've proposed the category in question for renaming to 'International' to avoid being an outlyer and be more clear, btw). If you go to WT:AIR and use the search-archives function there's lots of discussion in the past but the current tree is very much a "this has evolved the way it is naturally" kind of thing. Sometimes the only way to learn is to WP:be bold and get reverted. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

That's helpful... I will slow down; and may try to summarize my thinking/ suggested direction. I do find it interesting, in part because there is a wide variety of players (countries, firms, universities) involved, and is rapidly evolving. While, as with many new technologies, military applications may lead, things seem to be exploding with a variety of new applications, too. E.g. George Clooney's rhinoceros conservation surveillance project in Africa. Kind regards,DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 22:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi DASonnenfeld, I wish the applaud the good work you did on the Article for Creation Unasylva. I accepted the submission and it is in mainspace now. You might wish to create some more Wikilinks to the article (I have already made a couple). Crispulop (talk) 19:26, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Crispulop. Much appreciated. Best wishes, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 21:10, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear Prof. Sonnenfeld, thank you for reviewing my contribution on the project EUFODOS. Would it be possible that you put back the acronym EUFODOS to the heading? Otherwise this Wikipedia contribution will not be listed in a google search on EUFODOS. Thank you in advance and best regards, S. Linser LinserStef (talk) 08:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi LinserStef, Thanks for your contributions. I've created a redirect page for EUFODOS. That should help. Wikipedia's guidelines on article titles are at WP:TITLE. The problem, in my view, with 'EUFODOS' as an article title is that for most readers it will have no meaning. By contrast, European Forest Downstream Services is more clear --at least the reader will know it is about Europe and forests, even if they do not know what downstream services are. Hopefully the redirect page will help those searching for information about the project, both within and outside of Wikipedia. You are also welcome to raise this as a topic for discussion on the article's talk page. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 09:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear Prof. Sonnenfeld, thank you for your explanations! You can also change the title into "Services on Forest Damages", however, I would prefer to keep the "European Forest Downstream Services" in the title as this is the name of the project and it is described in the text what Downstream Servies are. I hope that there is now not much more to be changed within this contribution and would like to thank you again for your help. I was very dissapointed about the comments of the preceding reviewers which had no forestry background. Best regards LinserStef (talk) 09:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi LinserStef, You're welcome. If you would like, I'd suggest starting a discussion on the article's talk page regarding the title. Personally, I like the current one for clarity and simplicity. Other editors may have other views. As an article in Wikipedia, the article is subject to further development by other editors. As it stands, I would think it is a beginning encyclopedia article, not yet fully developed. For a taste of Wikipedia's article development guidelines, see:Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 10:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)