Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Hi, Mattximus/Archive 1. I welcome you to Wikipedia! Thank you for all of your edits. I hope you like editing here and being part of Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); when you save the page, this will turn into your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or put {{helpme}} (and what you need help with) on your talk page and someone will show up very soon to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Dogposter 23:54, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know that author citations, such as "Linnaeus, 1758" for Nautilus pompilius, are only written in brackets if the species in question was originally placed in a different genus. Since Linnaeus originally published Nautilus pompilius in its current form (under the genus Nautilus), no brackets are used. Allonautilus scrobiculatus, on the other hand, was originally published as Nautilus scrobiculatus and later transferred to the genus Allonautilus, thus its author citation is "(Lightfoot, 1786)". Also note that species lists from the Encyclopedia of Life are often out of date as they have been copied wholesale from other databases. Finally, genus names are always italicised, so it should be Allonautilus as opposed to Allonautilus. Cheers, mgiganteus1 (talk) 20:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Mattximus, the source you used for the information in Limax article was not taxonomically up to date. So I have added information about synonyms. Very short stubs exist on wikipedia about these species already. Feel free to continue expanding them if you like. If you have questions about gastropods, feel free to ask me. --Snek01 (talk) 23:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

x2 --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid (coṁrá) 00:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Coeloplanidae, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://en.microcosmaquariumexplorer.com/wiki/Coeloplanidae.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

The problem with the "political leanings" section is that you're giving it very little context; for instance, federally neither of the city's ridings has ever gone anything but Liberal or NDP, and while provincially they both used to go PC sometimes, they did so during a time when the Ontario PCs were the "centre" party and the Ontario Liberals were the "conservative" one. That is, it's misleading because you're oversimplifying things, not because the information is inherently invalid. And the other statement, about the current party breakdown of the two seats provincially and federally, is just a duplication of information that's already given earlier in the very same paragraph. Bearcat (talk) 23:58, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I've rewritten the section to give more context to what you were trying to do. Hope that helps a bit. Bearcat (talk) 00:18, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

---

Agreed that was confusing, I like your version better, though the whole part about the red tory is, I think, too much detail. I suggest changing it from:

Both federal and provincial politics in the city tend to be dominated by the Liberal and New Democratic parties. Historically, the Liberals have been stronger in the urban Sudbury riding, with the New Democrats dominant in the more rural Nickel Belt, although both ridings have elected members of both parties at different times. Provincially, both ridings have also sometimes been represented by the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party at the provincial level, typically during Red Tory eras when the PCs were running to the left of the Ontario Liberals, but neither riding has ever elected a Conservative MP federally. At the municipal level, politicians who are affiliated with all three parties have had success being elected to city council, although municipal politics in the city are officially non-partisan.

to:

Both federal and provincial politics in the city tend to be dominated by the Liberal and New Democratic parties. Historically, the Liberals have been stronger in the urban Sudbury riding, with the New Democrats dominant in the more rural Nickel Belt, although both ridings have elected members of both parties at different times.

And just sticking that at the end of the previous paragraph. Mattximus (talk) 02:04, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Greater Sudbury you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. I started the review here:Talk:Greater Sudbury/GA1. InTheAM 17:51, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Will get on those changes slowly but surely. Thanks for your time, I appreciate it! Mattximus (talk) 01:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I copy-edited the entire article except the history section(s). I find they contain a lot of "trivia" which I'm not sure belongs in the main city article. Out of respect for previous editors I left it all in, but I'm wondering if you would suggest taking some of it out. For example, in the government section, there are 4 long paragraphs on historical taxation issues... is that worthwhile? Mattximus (talk) 17:53, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

I just got around to really looking into the article and I agree with you about the amount of trivia in the article. There several places. But another problem I found with the article is that the prose is not really up to GA standard, in my opinion. There are a lot of stand-alone sentences and run-ons that really make the article difficult to read. I am considering failing the article for now. I tried to fix a lot of the stuff, but there are still places that need a lot of work. The typical hold time for a GA nomination is one week, but I don't think this can be fixed in a week. Since you already did some work on my suggestions, let me know what you think. I can still give you the rest of my suggestions. InTheAM 17:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

If the article is to reach GA status someday it can only benefit from the rest of your suggestions, so why not? Thanks for your fixes. Mattximus (talk) 17:59, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I put the rest of the review up on the review page. Let me know if I can help any. InTheAM 18:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Icaria (genus) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Icaria (genus) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Stedrick (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to drop by and say that I'm glad your sticking with the Greater Sudbury article. Keep it up! InTheAM 17:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Environmental impact of the chemical industry in Sarnia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Bradley (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 the DPL 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, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

TheKurgan (talk) 19:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, there,

Want to ask your opinion of a fact on the page Oklahoma City bombing conspiracy theories. In the article, it states that there were 6200 pounds of explosives in the truck. Then, it quotes some 1997 study that says "4800 pounds of explosives could not cause the destruction of the building." I'm thinking to myself, uh, 4800 is not 6200, so why is this study even relevant? It didn't test the correct amount of explosives. I left a question about this on the talk page Talk:Oklahoma City bombing conspiracy theories, but no one has answered me. Before I remove the entire sentence about the irrelevant study, I wanted to get a second opinion. What do you think?TheKurgan (talk) 01:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Just taking a quick look, it appears (based on Oklahoma City bombing) that the explosives in the truck weighed 4,800 pounds, and the conspiracy is stating that that amount would not be sufficient for the damage seen. I would thus leave it in, but correct the weight of the actual explosives from 6200 to 4800 using the refs from the main Oklahoma City bombing page.Mattximus (talk) 02:45, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. Early next week I'll start helping you with Sudbury.TheKurgan (talk) 13:08, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

There is no obligation, I didn't help you with your GA nomination expecting tit for tat, I'm just happy to be a part of the construction of a high quality free encyclopedia. Mattximus (talk) 03:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I know you didn't expect tit for tat. I want to help you. If you expected it, I wouldn't want to help you since that would me you had had an ulterior motive in helping me. The more teamwork I can build up, the better! Also, the more GA's we create as a team, the more FA's we can create in the future...:)TheKurgan (talk) 04:37, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm German to the core, so imagine this as the best Pilsener from Germany! TheKurgan (talk) 04:53, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you sir! Mattximus (talk) 22:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your article about Anatina! Since January 1st of this year we have a WikiProject Bivalves, so we are always happy to see more coverage of bivalve species! Thanks again, Invertzoo (talk) 18:28, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey! Nice work with Greater Sudbury. I noticed you pasted an auto-translated section on the Koppang article. While computer translations can be a good starting point for content, or even an acceptable way to read foreign-language content, it needs a human copy edit before being pasted. As it is now, the article has some pretty bad grammar, such as the sentence "The place had early church." Arsenikk ^(talk) 18:54, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks I do realize it's terribly translated. But I figure it's one step closer to acceptable, and slightly better than nothing at all. It may be easier for someone to fix grammar/linking than to go to the Norwegian page and translate sentence by sentence. Just thought I would help with something you are working in a very small way.Mattximus (talk) 22:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

If I started a page on this topic, you would only invade it, alter it to suit your needs or have it deleted. Who are you anyway to go around & delete things you do not approve of? Wikipedia is not a PR service, it is a fact resource. Censoring the facts now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.186.69.50 (talk) 06:28, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Please consult the good article review for the reasons behind the editing. The specific incident you are referring was altered to meet this good article comment: "The LGBT section seems way off proportion, going into vain detail. Unless Sudbury is nationally known as a gay center (such as San Fransisco), a single sentence should suffice."

This was followed, and in order to suit *your* needs, I offered that you create a page called LGTB in Sudbury and have this article link to that one. Mattximus (talk) 22:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Mattximus,

Thanks for fixing up the Chemical Valley page. I rearranged it and couldn't figure out how to fix the out of order refs. I appreciate it. BTW, my evenings are currently free if you want to assign me something to do for Greater Sudbury. My wife is in the hospital and when there are no visiting hours and I'm not otherwise occupied, I'm sitting at home on my thumbs. I'd like to help you get GS to GA status! Let me know.There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 04:37, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm just going through the good article review list-wise, I've picked all the low hanging fruit already unfortunately, but anything from there would be great. The references and whole history section is a mess and could use a fresh pair of eyes and some bold editing. Sorry to hear about your wife. Perhaps a distraction would be nice? Thanks for your offer! No worry if it gets rejected shortly, the thought is very nice of you. Mattximus (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

While I don't disagree that the taxation section was probably more detail than the city's main article actually needed, we don't particularly need a short permastub article just about taxation in the city, either — what I've done instead is to retitle it as a new, broader overview article on the Economy of Greater Sudbury. I've copied the economy section from the main city article over as a temporary introduction, but obviously it can and should be expanded upon and redeveloped to provide a much more detailed analysis of the subject, and possibly some additional content could be moved to that article instead of the main one. Bearcat (talk) 17:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I think the economy section of the main Sudbury page has a pretty reasonable length so I wouldn't remove anything else from there just to put it in the economy of Sudbury page, though it can be duplicated as you see fit. I think economy of Sudbury is a much better page than taxation, I just created the latter as I didn't want to delete anyone's hard work, but thought it didn't belong in the main page. My concern is getting the Greater Sudbury to good article status, which is not dependent on linked pages, so I support whatever you think is best for that new page. Mattximus (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'm not suggesting that we strip the entire section, but there are some stray facts at various places in the main article that would probably make more sense integrated into a separate economy article than they do where they are — for example, the thing about the angora goats comes immediately to mind as an example, because it's one of those things that's notable enough to mention somewhere, yet too silly and trivial to be considered a significant aspect of the city's overall history. Bearcat (talk) 20:00, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Mattximus (talk) 22:39, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of lakes in Greater Sudbury, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swimming (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 the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

TBrandley 01:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 23:23, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Based on your comments regarding the current state of List of historic places in Greater Sudbury, I was just wondering if you are interested in revisiting your delete !vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sudbury Ontario – Street Addresses and Buildings? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:05, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Agreed to keep, much better now, thanks for your efforts! Mattximus (talk) 00:26, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Boletopsis nothofagi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cutis and Type locality (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 the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Société des transports Abidjanais, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Console, Passenger car and RATP (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 the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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 the DPL WikiProject.

List of towns and cities with 100,000 or more inhabitants/country: C (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Ajax, Langley and Terrebonne

List of towns and cities with 100,000 or more inhabitants/country: A-B (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cabinda

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of towns and cities with 100,000 or more inhabitants/country: A-B, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shirak (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 the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fergana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Farghani (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 the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Mattximus, I replied to your comments at WP:featured article candidates/Alcohol laws of New Jersey/archive1. DavidinNJ (talk) 23:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

You commented on the FAC nomination for Alcohol laws of New Jersey. We believe that we have addressed your concerns and improved the article, can we now count on your support? --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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 the DPL WikiProject.

List of towns and cities with 100,000 or more inhabitants/country: A-B (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Rangpur, Feni, Saidpur and Sripur

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

EagerToddler39 (talk) 05:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello! I'm contacting you because you were one of the editors who reviewed Istanbul's FA candidacy. I just created a RFC concerning its lead (Talk:Istanbul#RFC). If you have time, we would appreciate your input. Thanks! Cavann (talk) 04:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Avdiivka, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ukrainian and Russian in Ukraine (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 the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:20, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Please do not do this again. What you have created is not a starting point, it is an extremely poor, virtually unintelligible mess of an article which will actually be harder to fix than retranslating (in fact most likely when it does eventually get done it will just be retranslated). If you are not capable of translating something properly yourself then please follow the instructions at WP:TRANSLATION rather than just adding to an already huge backlog of similarly poor arcticles that few people are able or willing to fix--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:49, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

• I respectfully disagree, I'm slowly improving the translation as time permits. And although I've only done this a few times, the results over time are actually quite good. For example see Nieuwe Kerk (The Hague). I created this a long time ago in a similar manner. And through slow edits, it's actually become quite readable.Mattximus (talk) 21:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Please read WP:TRANSLATION properly, and use your userspace if you must - your way of doing it is the wrong way of doing it, it is making Wikipedia worse not better. --Jac16888 ^Talk 21:11, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

You should be nicer to editors who may not be aware of the protocols, you can easily turn someone off from editing all together. Which makes Wikipedia worse in the long run than a poorly translated article will. Mattximus (talk) 03:05, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

You are clearly not a new editor, and should therefore know to read guidelines and that adding a big block of bad content and tagging it for someone else to fix is not the way things get done--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:14, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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 the DPL WikiProject.

List of municipalities in Ontario (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Markham, Northumberland County, Middlesex County and Huron County

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of tram and light rail transit systems, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stakhanov (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 the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough if you would prefer. But do note that just because another FL orders them by size doesn't necessary mean all similar FLs must do the same (unless there is actually very specific FL requirements that prescribe such that I am not aware of). Hwy43 (talk) 05:55, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Do you know how long these FL reviews typically go on for? It's been a month since initiated and all resolvable issues have been resolved over its course. Hwy43 (talk) 04:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

No idea actually, it's my first one. Going well I think, I really like the changes that were made through this process. I'm patient enough to wait a while and see what the powers that be decide. Mattximus (talk) 00:59, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Also think it is gone well. Just getting curious about the process now that all commenters' concerns have been addressed to date. Hwy43 (talk) 02:03, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

So the article passed! I just wanted to thank you for all your help. I really thought the process improved the article substantially. Please let me know if you have another list you want to bring up to featured status and I'll see if I can help. Mattximus (talk) 03:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

No problem and likewise thanks for your help. It sure was a significant improvement, making much better sense of Ontario's confusing and unconventional structure of municipalities. I'll let you know when I decided to undertake something similar. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 07:14, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mattximus, I haven't heard or seen much of you since mid-September, aside from your comments at the Manitoba FLC early this month. Wondering what your next steps were. Planning to move further west next to Saskatchewan? If so, I could tackle Alberta and we could potentially have five consecutive provinces of municipal features lists. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:27, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. I have been very busy in real life recently and not had as much time to edit wikipedia at all. It might slow down next week, and I could try for sask then. Would be nice to eventually get all of them up to FL! The Manitoba nomination is going well I think, it's a little quiet but I think it's because there is a featured list nomination going on. Once that is settled it should be a little faster I think. Anyway, enjoy the holidays!

Figured as much (being busy). As a heads up on the AB one, I'm going to try building it with each municipal status as transcluded separate tables from the sub pages (using the BC model rather than the ON/MB model). If it makes it, it saves from having to redundantly update the table in two locations when new federal 2016 census results are released. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 06:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with that approach. The BC one is a little silly as there are a bunch of tables with just one or two entries. I much prefer the formats of Ontario and Manitoba, since you can more easily sort and compare. And it's also awkward to edit since updating requires going to many pages instead of just one. I might have some time today to work on Sask. Mattximus (talk) 14:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I know where you stand. ;) I'm going to experiment with customized transclusion, if such is possible, to address both our preferences. I've transcluded tables from four AB urban municipality sub-pages here. Hoping I can undertake a second set of onlyinclude transclusion tags to remove the second column from all tables, add a new "Municipal status" column to differentiate the four types, and remove the redundant header and footer rows, all without compromising existing transclusions to other articles. By default, the table would be sorted as cities alphabetically first, followed by towns alpha, villages alpha and summer villages alpha, but they could then be sorted by size using the header row. Hwy43 (talk) 18:14, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I've had some time to start the Saskatchewan list. Your suggestion for Alberta seems like the best of both worlds! I wonder if the transclusion can go the other way, so we need only update one page but it automatically updates all the subcategories. This would be a much more efficient way come census time. Mattximus (talk) 14:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Haven't investigated advanced transclusion yet, but have begun fleshing out the prose for the Alberta list. Hwy43 (talk) 05:51, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

FYI, the prose, maps and images are ready to go for the Alberta equivalent. Just need to investigate the tricky transclusion to populate the urban and rural lists from their seven sub-articles, or potentially vice versa.
Also, I've archived our Manitoba discussion on my talk page, but have retained the Saskatchewan portion of it in a new section should you intend to reply at a later date. Hwy43 (talk) 05:08, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi there.Just a note to inform you that I have resolved your issues at the above articles FLC. Could you pop back and tell me if this resolves your concerns? Cheers for looking in :-) -- Cassianto^Talk 15:11, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Chinese softshell turtle may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[File:Pelodiscus sinensis distribution map.jpg|thumb|left|''Pelodiscus sinensis'' distribution map

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Metaniidae may have broken the syntax by modifying 13 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)

** ''[[Acalle recurvata]]'' <small>Bowerbank, 1863)</small> ** ''[[Corvomeyenia everetti]]'' <small>Mills, 1884)</small> ** ''[[Corvomeyenia thumi]]'' <small>Traxler, 1895)</small> ** ''[[Drulia batesii]]'' <small>Bowerbank, 1863)</small> ** ''[[Drulia brownii]]'' <small>Bowerbank, 1863)</small> ** ''[[Drulia cristata]]'' <small>Weltner, 1895)</small> ** ''[[Drulia geayi]]'' <small>Gravier, 1899)</small> ** ''[[Metania godeauxi]]'' <small>Brien, 1968)</small> ** ''[[Metania pottsi]]'' <small>Weltner, 1895)</small> ** ''[[Metania reticulata]]'' <small>Bowerbank, 1863)</small> ** ''[[Metania spinata]]'' <small>Carter, 1881)</small> ** ''[[Metania vesparia]]'' <small>Martens, 1868)</small> ** ''[[Metania vesparioides]]'' <small>Annandale, 1908)</small>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:46, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

An alternative was added to this FPC nomination. Could you make your preference clear. Thanks. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Here is the source for the "haunting" http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/9315544/justin-upton-more-mlb-players-spooked-milwaukee-haunted-hotel-espn-magazine Zonafan39 (talk) 04:15, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

On this FPC nomination you casted a conditional !vote. Could you please check whether you condision is now met? Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:54, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 'Place Names of Ontario'' (University of Toronto Press), Toronto-Buffalo-London, ISBN 0-8020-7207-0), pp.140-141</ref> Grand Bend survived as a name, perhaps because it was the most appropriate—

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:17, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I illustrated the other half now (and thank you for your 'support' vote!!). You can let ME know if it looks more familiar to you! (oh, also, if you have any suggestions, I am still taking them... And especially from someone who has actually seen a nematode in person at least once in their life). --XO, KDS4444^Talk 07:01, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for your response. Unfortunately my research was on the neuroanatomy, so I'm pretty familiar with the neurons of the head, but I'm not an expert on the gut which is what I believe is the primary purpose of your diagram along with the germ cells. It would look very different if it was the neuroanatomy of the nematode, and likely too busy. I supported it based on the quality of the image, and realize it would be impossible (and not very useful) to show all the anatomy in one image. Mattximus (talk) 18:13, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

• On these points we agree. I have considered more than once adding neurological information to my diagram, but then I take a look at the Wormatlas which begins by pointing out that there are 32 neurons in the lips alone, and my mind boggles and fingers lock up. I don't think there is any way I could meaningfully convey anything useful about this kind of nervous system in a full-body diagram such as mine-- I would end up creating a hundred tiny lines and there would be no place for the labels anywhere. If it only had a brain! I could at least then point to that. Or a heart. Or the nerve. (Ha!) In any case, thank you for your revised support vote-- this is only my second (hopefully) successful attempt at achieving FP status for an illustration I have done, and every little bit of encouragement helps. My ego is still rather delicate (I gotta get over that, I know, I know). KDS444 (talk) 07:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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 the DPL WikiProject.

List of tram and light rail transit systems (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Tula, Samara, Dzerzhinsk, Krasnoarmeysk, Volzhsky, Salavat and Cheryomushki

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:28, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Mattximus. Well, because you were basically the only commenter on my Sarnia FAC nomination, it's been archived. I removed the Ian Chadwick quote about the notability of chip trucks in Canada against my better judgment because I couldn't convince you of its importance regarding the notability of the chip trucks themselves. My chief concern with this is now someone will ask "why are the chip trucks notable? Who cares if Sarnia has chip trucks?" I did, however, find a few more references, and one of them might interest you. The Ontario Medical Association began an initiative in November of 2012 to have Sarnia's fresh-cut fries labelled in the same manner as cigarettes. It was part of a province-wide plan regarding all "junk food," but Sarnia's chip trucks were popular enough to get a special mention. I'm going to wait the additional two weeks necessary and then re-nominate the article. I just hope I can attract some more people to the process this time. The first time I tried it, all I got was high-minded condescension. One guy even slammed me for not using enough references and then, after I added some, slammed me for using too many. When I asked him for examples, his answer was, basically, "you should know, and if you don't, you have no business recommending the article for FAC." I hate it when people tell me to fix something and then make me guess what they mean! At least when you offer advice and criticism, I know what you mean, even if I don't agree with it *GLARES at you about the Chadwick quote!* Just kidding. Feel free to make some edits throughout the next two weeks. Talk to you later. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 05:34, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

• My issue wasn't that the quotation you gave didn't state that chip trucks weren't important. It very much did, and was a good source at that. It just didn't say that *Sarnia* chip trucks were important. So the question remains whether you can find references stating that *Sarnia* chip trucks specifically are notable, compared to all the others all over the country. There are chip trucks everywhere, and everyone says that they are the best, some solid reference needs to be given that shows that Sarnia's themselves are notable. I hope that clears up my recommendation. Good luck getting it to FAC, always nice to see a Canadian city make it. Mattximus (talk) 03:17, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello Mattximus! I see you have edited a lot of ant-related articles, including creating the page Hypoponera. You may be interested in the recently created ant task force. Check out the task force's subpage and see if you're able to help out with any of the open tasks (or add new tasks). I've added a link to an open access article about Hypoponera to this list. I hope you find it or any of the other links useful, cheers, jonkerz ♠talk 21:53, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of municipalities in Saskatchewan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Regina (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 the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mattximus- The version of the image for Dome of Yusuf that you mentioned preferring has been listed as an alternate for the FPC nomination. Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 18:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I have added an alt image. Could you take another look at the nomination? Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:26, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mattximus. Just wanted to give you a heads-up that I started the article for the artist for the above nomination, Yashima Gakutei. Thanks, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 08:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

—Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 17:05, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

You have voted on the delisting of US Postal Currency 5 cent 1862 1863. Some new information has been presented. Would you consider reviewing your vote?

The deletion request was started because it was assumed that File:US-Fractional (1st Issue)-$0.05-Fr.1231.jpg was the same currency as File:US Postal Currency 5 cent 1862 1863.jpg. The Fr.1231 currency was in better condition so it should replace "US Postal Currency 5 cent 1862 1863" as the featured image. They are not the same. The older file is of type Fr.1230 because it has an ABC monogram on the back. As a security measure, the US Post Office had the front and back of the bills printed by two companies. The back of the Fr.1230 was printed by the American Banknote Company and their ABC monogram appears in the lower right corner. The Fractional currency (United States) article explains the difference but does not show an example. -- SWTPC6800 (talk) 18:47, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of municipalities in Saskatchewan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• largest municipalities: the cities of [[Saskatoon]] and the capital [[Regina, Saskatchewan|Regina]]]. 52% of the land area of Saskatchewan is currently incorporated as a municipality with the

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4