User talk:Fowler&fowler/Archive 12

Padma / Ganges

The main flow of the Ganges, when it flows into the Bay of Bengal, is the Padma River. Do you think we can/should include a picture from the Padma River article in the Ganges page? After all, most of the cities along its path in India seem to have a picture. :) --Ragib (talk) 00:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

We must think alike. I already have! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Editor's Barnstar presented to Fowler&Fowler for stupendous efforts at producing excellence in Wikipedia. ImpuMozhi (talk) 08:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Dear Fowler, Although I have long appreciated both the diligence and the even-handed balance of perspective that you bring to all your work on wikipedia, I am yet astounded by the excellence of this critique made by you on an FA. For sources, perspective, presentation and effort, this has no parallel on WP. Please accept my heartiest salutations. Regards, ImpuMozhi (talk) 08:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ever so much for a wonderful award! It will be highly cherished! Will need some help from you (if you have time) to take a gander at the History of Mysore and Coorg (1565–1760). It is not quite ready yet, but getting any feedback whatsoever might motivate me to get moving. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:52, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Request

Fowler, Modernist and myself will be working Les Demoiselles d'Avignon towards FAC over the next few weeks/months. I want to ask if you would be so good to give it a once over before we are in a position to nom. I am impressed by your work on Lucy, and your work in general on wiki, so I just wanted to ask in advance. If you are open and not too busy, I'll let you know when the time comes. If not, no worries. Ceoil (talk) 22:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'd be delighted. Speaking of Lucy, I'll give it the once over as well. I'm assuming Awedewit is done with hers. It should probably be renominated in a week or two's time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I hope that your cat is okay..having just lost the last of my three cats and my dog; I know the feeling and the complexities...of when they get sick or something happens to them..Modernist (talk) 16:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

An interesting conversation

Good day, sir. Aside from commenting that your Talk page is badly in need of archiving, I came to discuss a comment of yours I found to be particularly interesting. Here you discuss the condition of articles such as Veterinary medicine. I feel the same way.

Some "core" or "important" topics are covered well, like the solar system and its components. There are some great FAs in computing and hard sciences. But the list of things needing attention is dreary. After writing an FA on an amazingly mundane topic (mostly because I was a reviewer interested in experiencing the process from the other side), I decided to pursue something more important. I've been working on musical instrument for almost a year. It's exhausting—the body of research and the directional possibilities are nearly endless. In an effort to avoid the conflicts most people claim to encounter when editing an important topic, I posted a bibliography and outline early on. I've experienced no conflict, and indeed, aside from an idle comment here and there, I've gotten zero help. However, when and if I bring it to FAC, armchair experts will come out of the woodwork like crazy and comment about the sources, the organization, and everything else. Is it any wonder people are driven away from the process, or that they go write topics so obscure as to guarantee no one can comment on the research?

On the other hand, the system can work. A while back, Awadewit approached me about working on Frankenstein, another important topic that's difficult to tackle single-handed. It will still take forever, but it's refreshing to know some work is getting done other than what I'm doing myself. True collaboration is nice, but seemingly rare around here.

I'm curious, how can we facilitate the last scenario without somehow changing the makeup of our editor base? How can we encourage work on core topics, whatever that means? --Laser brain (talk) 22:14, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there! Good to hear from you. I've archived! What you say above is very true. I have some random thoughts that I will post in a new section on the FAC talk page (so that I don't restart old issues). Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Nehru vs Nehru

Today I located a draft of an article on Nehru in userspace, which seem much better developed and written than our mainspace article. Unfortunately, both versions largely lack inline citations, and User:Hornplease, who created the draft, is inactive and possibly retired. Do you think it is worthwhile copying content from the userspace article to the main page ? Also would you be interested in copyediting and sourcing it this top priority WPINDIA article ? Abecedare (talk) 19:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Will look at it soon. Are you sure Hornplease wrote it? Some of the references would suggest it is the work of Rama's arrow. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Could be. I just came across it as a result of an unrelated search, and don't know any of its history. The references listed in the draft are not very broad in terms of POV, but it still seems to be an improvement over the current mainspace version. Let me now what you think. Abecedare (talk) 20:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that Hornplease's version is better. How do we replace the current version by it? Just do it in one fell swoop? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess so. But it may be a good idea to post the proposal on the article talk page and see if there are any objections or alternate suggestions. Btw, thanks for looking into this. Abecedare (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

That's why you are admin material and I'm not! :) It didn't even occur to me to post on the talk page ... Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. And your "admin material" gibe, can be taken as an insult ... but I'll AGF. :) Abecedare (talk) 23:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Great! Will post there soon. Believe me, it wasn't a gibe (not by a long shot). I have always been envious of people (like Nichalp, RegentsPark, and you) who seem to effortlessly think of the right thing. Me? I say something goofy even before I'm aware. I should blame my mother who insisted that I take typing lessons ... lessons have resulted in my being able to type faster than I can think. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

With regards to "gibe" - I had my tongue-in-my-cheek. Unfortunately the written word, while (ideally) giving one more time to think, lacks the tonal cues present in speech, i.e., unless one writes like (say) P.G. Wodehouse (have been re-reading the Jeeves books, which puts me in a good, and somewhat flippant, mood.) Abecedare (talk) 23:53, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

No offense taken. Wodehouse, of course, does it better than speech. In fact that reminds me that my wife gave me a bunch of BBC Jeeves CDs (I wonder where they are now?), but they were nowhere near as funny as the books. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Holding noms

I fully agree with you about holding of nominations on certain topics. This has been my reasoning for not nominating Usain Bolt yet. I think it would probably pass but where would that leave us in five years time? Further FARs and FACs? This is where I think the GA article process can play a good role. While I dismiss any kind of "not important enough to nominate" system, people perhaps need to think about the article first and foremost: will it really benefit from the FAC process as much as other articles would? Would the benefits gained article-wise outweigh the costs of human time? Personally I found it very strange that Raul did not send Traumatic insemination to GA or peer review first. I thought that someone so mired in the problems of a small pool of FAC reviewers would have a different approach.

Getting back on topic: A parallel core topic review system might work, encouraging editors to work on larger topics (which tend to make for the best articles) is something we can only benefit from. You raised the point of this affecting donations: I hadn't personally thought of this before and it would be interesting to actually see what readers want. (I presume that page view statistics can tell us just a little bit about that). Sillyfolkboy (talk) 17:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your post. Just quickly skimmed through Usain Bolt. Very well written, I have to say! Yes, there probably is a way to figure out from the page view statistics, what the viewers (especially the ones who might make donations) want. The trick will lie in separating the 1001 articles on "sex" (that are likely not viewed by the potential "donors") from the other ones. :) Don't know how hard that will be. Will need to think about it some more. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:16, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hi! How are you? It's been a long time, hasn't it. I don't think I'll be frequenting Wikipedia in the future. Hence, I would like to keep in touch with some of the people I've met here. I love to read and discuss about the recent history of the Indian subcontinent. Would you mind if I contact you off-Wiki>-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 12:25, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ravichandar84, Sorry to hear that you will be taking a long Wikibreak. :( Hope the return will be sooner than later. Sure, just send me email. I'm not too up on the recent history of the subcontinent though. Most of my interest is in the colonial history (or even early-modern history). I'm always happy to discuss that history. Regards and all the best! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Question on Avian influenza

Hi, I agree with you and have replied on my talk page. Regards, Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 13:14, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

English grammar

Thank you for the heads-up. FilipeS (talk) 19:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Need help with formatting!

Hi, I tried inserting a couple of references into the infobox on the Jammu and Kashmir article. Unfortunately, there seems to be a probem with the formatting and some unintelligible gibberish resulted. Please help me out. Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 14:01, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a look at it. Can't guarantee I can fix it though! Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Deleted reference

Hi Fowler&Fowler

Can you tell me why you deleted reference to Vedic civilization from introduction page. I have been college-educated in India and over here, Vedic culture is taught in the same breath as Indus Valley Civilization. Hindu religious beliefs, Sanskrit etc. are a byproduct of this theme. I know you may have had a consensus on this issue before but it was very difficult to find an explanation in the archives as you suggested. So, I'd love to understand the reason behind this change. Regards --Tech editor007 (talk) 21:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

This will be my only post here on this topic. Please don't reply here; I won't answer or even read your post. Please gain consensus for you edit on the Talk:India page itself. Vedic civilization in any case redirects to Vedic age or Vedic period or Vedic culture. Civilization by definition, is urban, which Vedic culture, a largely nomadic culture, was not. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Avian-influenza-related articles

Thank you for your kind words. Avian influenza is flu disease endemic in birds caused by flu virus; the most famous of which is H5N1 which is a subtype of Influenza A. They are different things. WAS 4.250 (talk) 17:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I have replied and clarified my question on your talk page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:05, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi F&F I've been in discussion a lot with WAS on some of the Influenza content. One of the main raesons I am adamant that Avian influenza not be directed to H5N1 is because Wikipedia should be designed to be as timeless as much as possible. While H5N1 may be the type in vogue at present, this may not always be the case. I also feel placing H5N1 in the Avian Influenza mainspace provides a subtle platform for people to be confused as to the difference between Avian influenza and the individual subtypes.--ZayZayEM (talk) 12:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Image delegates INC1885.jpg

I have moved this file to Wikimedia Commons and have nominated it mor deletion in en:Wikipedia.Commons file— . Sumanch (talk) 00:14, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, Thanks! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Jinnah fatimasalwar.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Jinnah fatimasalwar.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 11:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hope you had a nice vacation!
If you have the time, can you take a look at Mumbai especially regarding "brilliant prose" and copyediting issues ? It is currently at FARC. Guilty admission: I have long intended and promised to work on this article during FAR/FARC but have been kept away with one issue or another - do plan to devote some time this weekend though. Regards. Abecedare (talk) 03:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to find time between catching up on missed work and jet lag to read through Mumbai. But it may be a few days before I can get to it. Hope it is not too urgent. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I am not sure how long FARs remain open, but real life should take priority over this hobby/time-sink. :)

In any case the article has seen considerable improvement since its original nomination, so I hope there is no rush to close the FAR. I myself aim to put in some work this weekend. Regards. Abecedare (talk) 16:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Nice to see you around again F&f. All is well I hope? Ceoil (talk) 01:48, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Fowler, I think the damn article is cursed. You seen Liz's page, youve seen what is happening to Mattisse who was going to help, and there are other things going on too. You have been a great help bring it to where it is, and that is very much appreciated, but I think its going to have to a long game here. I'm certainly not going to nom while Liz is MIA. Ceoil (talk) 13:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• Since you are back I am making a request. There is an arbitration against me Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Evidence. Perhaps you would consider weighing in on one of the artibtration pages regarding your experience in editing with me. Feel free to disregard this request, as I don't even know what page on which you should comment. Also, I know you have little time, so I will understand. If you do comment, please feel free to make negative ones also. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 16:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

KRWIII.JPG

I found you have deleted the image uploaded by me. I am not a frequent visitor to wiki now a days ( more because of these unwarranted deletions! there should be a method of notifying by email about such hostile actions ) and did not know about your notification. This picture's original is owned by me. I have not seen a similar print of the late Mysore King anywhere. I personally took a digital picture of this and further spruced it up before uploading it. A similar one is available at flickr as Maharaja Mummadi Krishna Raja Wodeyar. Since i uploaded this has been used by many sources.

I do not have the patience to know how to upload it again. But if after the explanation given, if you feel like restoring bit, i would appreciate

thanks

raja —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajachandra (talk • contribs) 17:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

All that may be the case, but Wikipedia needs information on who the photographer is and when the picture was taken. Without this information, the picture cannot be uploaded. I personally doubt that it is a picture of KRWIII, notwithstanding that it has been in your family for many years. Compare the picture with the that of the child KRWIII in the History of Mysore and Coorg, 1800–1947. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:19, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

What a joke ! You are comparing the photo of 5 year old to identify this picture ! You are also telling a member of the family that the photo is not that of KRW III !

raja

Sorry, the image is a colored-in photograph, not a painting. If you don't have the information about photographer (and in the early to mid-1850s, when photography became more widely introduced in India, there were only a handful of photographers in India and their names and styles of picture taking are all well-documented), you can't upload it here. Being a member of the family doesn't give you any privileged information about early photography in India. The image, moreover, is of a young man, not someone in their late 50s or early 60s, which is what KRWIII would have been in the 1850s. This will be my last communication on this matter, unless you can produce documentation (in which case I suggest you first contact some museum in India before you waste time on Wikipedia, both yours and mine). Fowler&fowler«Talk» 09:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

You state that you personally doubt it is KRW III and then state compare it with a picture of KRW III when he was an infant. Now you say who the photographer is ! Amazing! Even assuming it was a photograph by an unkown photographer, there is nothing in any extant law which prohibits its use ! As i have already stated, it is a Digital photograph of a painting which i own and i have digitally enhanced to give the picture necessary effect. A similar painting exists in the Mysore Palace too. Neither do i wish to say any further on the matter to some one who wants to sermonize without knowing the facts. If Wiki does not want it, iam not the loser. Good bye !

raja

Sounds good to me. Good bye. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Matisse

Hi F&f, Thanks for the confidence you expressed in me; it's both an ego-boost and humbling. But I don't think I'll be a good candidate to advise Matisse for several reasons: firstly my editing on wikipedia this summer will be quiet sporadic because of real-life priorities, but more importantly it would be useful for an editor advising Matisse to have expertise in her area of work and be familiar with her editing history. Ideally, Matisse would pick a user herself who she trusts and respects; and who's judgment the other involved editors would also be able to accept. I am not familiar with the dispute history to suggest a candidate, but I do hope one is found - Matisse seems to be too good a content contributor for wikipedia to lose. Regards. Abecedare (talk) 04:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Rumpole. This one is a btard (in every sense of the word)

Hi F&f - I just wanted to thank you for your kind words the other day. I've had some time to put things in perspective (and plant a vegetable garden - lots of basil and exotic tomatoes), and I realise that I don't really want to leave here. I've seen some very disappointing things here lately, but leaving isn't going to help anything. Thank you for helping remind me of that.

On a separate note, I am really pleased too see that your kitty has recovered. She's looking well. :) One of mine (Mischka, who had the dental surgery) went through this phase where he was systematically pulling out all his fur... I would have assumed this was stress-related, but the doctor seems to think it's some sort of allergy. The other one seems to have acquired a number ticks despite living in a third-floor city apartment and being an indoor-only cat. Strange days.

I haven't looked at poor Lucy in a while -- do you really think its ready? Kafka Liz (talk) 23:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Glad to have you back! Rumpole looks good! Hope the others get over their maladies soon. Will take a look at Lucy again in the next day or two and get back to you (about your question). Welcome back again! (Sorry, I'm in a hurry.) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

For the record, I only have two. I don't want folks getting ideas about me. ;) Kafka Liz (talk) 21:22, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Booker prize

Hi Fowler&fowler

I reverted your removal of the reference to the Booker Prize from the V. S. Naipaul article. To say that the Booker prize is irrelevant is like (I'm not so good at sports analogies) that if you're an Olympic gold medal winner, then your world record (outside of the Olympics) is not relevant, or that if you won the Wimbledon singles that your twelve doubles victories need not be mentioned.

The Booker Prize may not have the same weight as the Nobel, but it's clearly more significant for an author than being knighted or receiving the Trinity Cross.

If you disagree, please initiate a discussion on the article's talk pages.

Regards, Bongomatic 14:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.

Well the early Booker was not that well known. I have now added all his literary prizes. I agree that they are more important than the knighthood etc. Thanks for the post. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

A very Wikipedian solution—add rather than subtract content. Nicely done. Bongomatic 16:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Why are you reverting my edits????

I spent a lot of time doing all my edits, almost all sourced! what gives you the right to revert them all simply because you suspect something?? maybe try reading.. I have had long discussions about almost all my edits that were remotely contentious... or did I offend your POV???

ps.. you have any evidence to support your 'allegations'? if not then revert all my edits back! Khokhar (talk) 20:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

They are not sourced. For example, in order for you to show that there is a dialect of English called "Pakistani English," you have to produce examples of it from the various corpora of Standard English. The Oxford English Corpus, for example, doesn't mention anything about Pakistani English. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

If you want to claim that Pakistani English is a localized regional dialect of Indian English, then you have to produce examples that are uniquely Pakistani and show geographical attrition as one moves away from Pakistan. Your list has no such example, as far as I can tell. "Out of station," for example, has been used in India for almost 150 years. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

So, what's pakistani english got to do with me?? I added something on the discussion page but that's about it??

my apologies if I sounded rude but you don't have the right to revert my edits without a shred of evidenceKhokhar (talk) 20:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not the one who has to provide the evidence; you do. Consider another corpus, the UCL corpus which forms the basis of Biber et al's Grammar of Spoken and Written English (1999). There too the only examples (one million) from South Asia are from Indian English. I'm not saying that there isn't a dialect called Pakistani English, but the burden is on you to show that it exists by appealing to such sources. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, if you're not the author, then someone else needs to provide the evidence. What reverts are you talking about then? The "British India" ones? There is a similar problem there, as I point out in the Partition of India talk page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

My apologies if I reverted edits on pages other than British India (or British India related edits) and Pakistani English. Please go ahead and revert those edits. I won't challenge the reverts. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Hindutash

Just a heads up that I unprotected Hindutash because I don't think we should fully protect an article for an extended period of time. --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 12:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

My mentoring/advising plan

If you continue to be willing and able to act as an advisor/mentor/monitor (whatever the term), then I would greatly appreciate your contribution to my plan to put forth to ArbCom. Currently the proposals are being work on in the following places:

• User talk:Mattisse/Plan
• User:Mattisse/Plan
• User:Moni3/Mattisse stewards arbcom
• User talk:Moni3/Mattisse stewards arbcom

Warmest regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 02:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Aksai Chin

Welcome back (July 1?) I'm away until a week after that. Yikes....check out the edits I made yesterday to Aksai Chin. I didn't realize until now when I looked further down the history what a battle it's been for you and Keithonearth to attempt to reign in Hindutashravi who is way out of touch with the facts. Some days (like all this week) I get to work on Aksai Chin all day, and next week will be headed over as tourists again to Ladakh but I didn't mean to jump into this article uninvited and not via the discussion page.....I was just trying to correct some of the geographic trivia (heights, rivers, Soda Plains is only the northern part) plus the rather important and verifiable fact that India showed the line variable and indistinctly until the 1954 Nehru decree; only then did their maps start showing Aksai Chin as part of India uniformly; McMahon Line and the 1963 Pakistan treaty (I added a ref to the actual text) don't apply here. (We know the guy quite well who started the erroneous speculation on the internet that the '63 Pak treaty somehow is relevant to Aksai Chin at his slick-looking "International Boundary Consultants" (one-main show) page!), etc. I'll be away, but I'm with you on your efforts to maintain a modicum of the NPOV facts in this article!....keep up the good work. DLinth (talk) 14:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Hindutashravi

So what do we do with that gentleman? Poking around, I see that he's involved with Aksai Chin, Sanju Pass, Kashmir, and various other Kashmir related articles. Quintessential WP:SPA. No point in just protecting the article and far better to deal with the user. Let me know what you think. --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 16:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. I see you're not around for the rest of the month. We'll deal with this when you get back.--RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 18:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Lucy again

It may be a while before you see this, but I've nominated Lucy for GA. I wanted an extra layer of review before taking it to FAC again. Hope the move is going well, Kafka Liz (talk) 01:15, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors Association

The Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring (and reliably sourced) contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are here - suggestions welcome.

If you wish to be elected, please notify me here. If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them here

Discussion is here.Peter Damian (talk) 19:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Did Britain piggyback India?

India may not have gave many technological innovations to Britain but it had a huge economy, for long one of the largest in the world, and, once Britain had control of this economy, Britain came to have the biggest economy in the world. Britain didn't piggyback India; it did have its own innovations. But India certainly gave it a big headstart well above the European countries going with similar technolgy level. Munci (talk) 16:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

You are requested to confirm!

Hi Fowler&fowler,

I know that you are away, but I am hoping that when you return you will confirm your willingness to be on my panel of advisers/mentors as outlined (User:Mattisse/Plan) with input from others at User talk:Mattisse/Plan, Arbitration Workshop and Proposed decision talk page. Previously, you said, in response to my request, that you were willing to be one of my mentors/advisers.

The ArbCom is in the process of rendering decision and have requested that my mentors/advisers confirm that they are aware of the plan and agree with their role in it. See Moving towards closure of the case. If you are still willing to serve as one of my mentors/advisers, and I fervently hope you are, I ask you to indicate your willingness by posting on the Proposed decision talk page.

I think this plan will work. I have learned a great deal from this arbitration and feel comfortable with my panel of mentors/advisers and trust their judgment.

Thank you so much. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 16:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Tying up one final loose end from the case, which is to leave a note here to let you (Fowler&fowler) know that the case has closed. Eight of the nine people listed as mentors/advisors responded as Mattisse asked above (on my request), but Mattisse said somewhere (I forget where) that you were not around at the moment (and I see you are indeed on wikibreak). Now the case has closed, and ArbCom have signed off on the plan Mattisse developed, what I suggest you do is confirm to Mattisse (rather than to ArbCom) that you are still willing to do what you agreed to before, and then take things from there. (If you really want to, you can put something on the proposed decision talk page, like the others did, but that isn't strictly necessary). In other words, what happens from here on out is up to Mattisse, with the help and guidance you and the others can give her (I'm just tying up a loose end here). Please ask if this wasn't clear. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 23:16, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mattisse and Carcharoth, Please accept my apologies for being away. Yes, I'd be delighted to be among the mentors/advisers (for Mattisse). Unfortunately, I have to be away for one month more (per family decision) and will now be back on August 10. Upon my return, then, I will read through the details of the ArbCom decision and also talk with Mattisse to work out what my role will be. My sincere apologies again. A happy fourth to everyone! Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:22, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! I look forward to your return. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 18:55, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

File:IndianEmpireCeylon1915.jpg

The image File:IndianEmpireCeylon1915.jpg is indeed in the public domain — Vincent Arthur Smith died in 1920, so the work entered the public domain (in the UK, the country of first publication) on 1 January 1971 (life plus 50 years). As this was more than 70 years before 1995 (ie before 1925), it was not one of the works that was withdrawn from the PD by the Duration of Copyright and Rights in Performances Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/3297, which changed British copyright terms to life plus 70), so the image is safely in the public domain.

I've added {{PD-UK}} and added |pdsource=yes to {{PD-US-1923-abroad}} to the image description page. I have not moved it to the Commons, as per your request, as I figure you're just as capable of doing that as anyone else ;o) — OwenBlacker (Talk) 14:07, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

welcome back...

how have u been?? --L I C 16:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Very well thanks! Looking forward to editing WP again. I'll likely have less time, but I see that as an opportunity to focus on a few things and see them through. Looking forward to working with you as well on some unfinished business. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

great. Indian history pages have been feeling your absence for sure. see u around. --L I C 17:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

• Hi! Wonderful to have you back. (Remember, you are one of my mentors/advisers, per User:Mattisse/Plan. So far, all has been going well.) Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 17:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Great to see you back again Fowler, even if in a reduced capacity. Ceoil (talk) 19:16, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:HeadwatersCourseBhagirathiColor1.JPG

File:HeadwatersCourseBhagirathiColor1.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Bhagirathi river map.JPG. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Bhagirathi river map.JPG]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:36, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

File:1857 ruins jantar mantar observatory2.jpg is now available as Commons:File:1857 ruins jantar mantar observatory2.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 09:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Your notification

[1]. Ottava Rima (talk) 19:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Fowler, at the thread linked above I proposed standards of behavior for both you and Ottava. For you, I ask simply that you limit your postings on the FAC page to a representative sampling of issues and place further details on the article talk page (with a link from the FAC). This will ensure that other reviewers are not intimidated by the size of the FAC page. I also strongly encourage you not to bait or be baited by Ottava. Karanacs (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Done. (And thanks.) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:50, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Grace (1991)/archive1

I ask you to reconsider your oppose, since it is currently inaccurate. Thank you. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:30, 19 September 2009 (UTC)