This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Citation Barnstar
For indirectly helping in references via WP:RX. Thank you for providing inaccessible and difficult to find resources. Thanks again for fulfilling my recent request of The Arts of Kutch. Regards, Nizil (talk) 05:24, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Robert Mellville Smith
Latest comment: 5 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hey Pajz. I'm curious if you still have access to the book I requested here? Haven't had a computer for a while so I've been pretty absent lately. - Floydianτ¢ 17:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Floydian, I can take a look next week. — Pajz (talk) 12:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Barnstar of Diligence
For your tireless scans of obscure journals! T8612(talk) 16:30, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Special Barnstar
For your tireless efforts in helping out editors over RX:-) ∯WBGconverse 17:11, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Reply
Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, Pajz. You asked why I added "via EBSCO's Academic Search Complete" to the citations in the article "if EBSCO doesn't have the text." The answer is that, per the rules of EBSCO use, I am obliged to credit EBSCO whenever I add content cited to EBSCO articles. That applies whatever the content in question is. Thus, if I add content to an article about a book, stating that it was reviewed by particular person in a particular publication, I have to include the attribution to EBSCO. The fact that I may not have the text of the review itself in some cases doesn't make the slightest difference. It's not clear to me why you would make an issue of this. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 10:27, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
FreeKnowledgeCreator: First, despite your suggestion to the contrary, I did not ask anything, I told you I do not understand why you're doing it. (It is obviously incorrect since the via parameter is supposed to be used for the "Name of the content deliverer" per Template:Cite book, which was not EBSCO, and so you using that parameter for something else is of course misleading - nobody can get the article via EBSCO. If some dark forces allegedly make you to mention EBSCO, that is irrelevant to whether mentioning it makes any sense. Which it doesn't.) Second, I did not "make an issue" of that whatsoever, I simply pointed it out to you. The only thing I sort of did make issue of was your condescending response, in which you scolded me for my supposedly "not appropriate" use of Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request (whilst not acknowledging that I also just sent you one of the articles that you requested). Your accusation was as incorrect (we frequently discuss citations there as it is directly related to what we do, and my comment referred to your citation of the very article that I sent you) as it was unkind. It looks to me like you were unhappy with my comment and decided the best way forward is to lecture me over some technicality. — Pajz (talk) 16:47, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Resolved
Request
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Could you look at specific numbers from Gazetteer of Afghanistan VI, p. 333 and Gazetteer of Afghanistan V, pp. 242-46? --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 10:38, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
Jinfengopteryx paper?
Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I just want to ask about the Jinfengopteryx paper I requested on Resource Request, since you said you were working on it. Are you able to get the paper to me, or is there a problem with my e-mail address? Zach Varmitech (talk) 01:00, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Zach Varmitech, oh, I'm so sorry, this is the first time in years and probably hundreds of requests that I've really forgotten about one (I've been on vacation - technically, at least ... - for a bit and did not check WP:RX). I did request the journal but then later found there seems to be an online copy, at http://dzhtb.cgs.cn/gbcen/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=20050341&flag=1. I first thought the PDF link ("【下载PDF全文】") didn't work (subscriber-only?), but it actually does, their server just seems awfully slow (Chrome times out, but it did work with Firefox on my machine). I'll send you that copy, just to make sure you receive it. If I got something wrong / something is missing from this PDF, feel free to let me know, I'll have someone make a copy from the print version. Again, my apologies. — Pajz (talk) 07:35, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Barnstar of Diligence
For not minding to send a good source twice, and not complaining about it. Thanks! Farang Rak Tham(Talk) 21:52, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Resolved