User talk:Kathyrncelestewright

Please introduce yourself and leave a message! I look forward to meeting you! Thank you!

Welcome!

Hello, Kathyrncelestewright, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!  Badgernet  ₪  09:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On May 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Spratt's, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 23:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On May 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Snowman (fairy tale), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Jamie^☆S93 16:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC) 06:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• shakes fist* Why do you have to be so good so quickly at what you do! >_<

I was planning of making a Harald Scharff article the other day, but you beat me to it by a few hours. XP So, if you don't mind, i'm going to go and expand it a bit and submit it to DYK, with you as the creator, of course. Silverseren^C 22:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...I had thought I would be able to, but all of the news sources i've found are junk. They don't say anything new, really. The ones I really want, that i'm sure have all the information, are restricted.Silverseren^C 12:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On May 29, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Most Incredible Thing, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Victuallers (talk) 14:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC) 02:22, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your GA review and suggestions for improvements to the article. They were extremely helpful, and I'll definitely be using them as I prep the article for an FA nom. Geraldk (talk) 17:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note! I'll start work on it later tonight. Nikki♥311 19:27, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished everything, so I was hoping you could take another look at the article (and hopefully pass it!). Nikki♥311 00:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notice, but I'm about to leave home for some matters. I will catch up your DYK nom about 3 hours later. I've appreciated your contribution to the all-time favorite fairy tale in the world. See you.--Caspian blue 22:27, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On June 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Puss in Boots, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Awadewit 14:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

On June 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Flora and Zephyr, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 20:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for your GA reviews. When you pass an article for GA, such as in this edit, could you use "GA" in your edit summary? It makes maintenance a lot easier. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! I'm so sorry. I simply forgot. Thanks for the reminder! Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 15:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 01:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Thnk you! I forgot and will be more careful in the future. Thanks! Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 01:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've begun overhauling some of the problems that I've missed since the original creation of the ode set. I have cut quite a bit and added quite a bit more. Right now, I am working on the reception - there may be a problem finding 19th-century responses, as such reproductions are valuable but hard to come by. Googlebooks is cluttered but I am digging through. I have exhausted a lot of my personal books for the critical reception (with about 9 books left and a few essays to look through, plus JSTOR). Ottava Rima (talk) 21:22, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good eye with the Reynolds. Joshua Hamilton Reynolds was his friend. I just wikilinked without looking. I couldn't find a disambig or anything to suggest he has a page. I guess he is like Woodhouse - another notable person without anything on Wiki. Sigh, I guess I have a lot of work to add to my list. :) Good call on the illustration. I was hoping to find one on Keats that would fit. I am also looking for a free image of "Winchester to London along the River Itchen". Ottava Rima (talk) 01:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you! You've been doing great work on the article. I understand what you mean with the neglected Woodhouse and Reynolds. More work! How sweet it is! The last two sections (Themes and Critical reception) in my opinion are "set" and need no further work. Expand the lead and develop the following three sections slightly and the work is done! GA coming your way! Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 01:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I felt kinda bad for you after looking at the page - I meant to nominate one of the others instead (there were 7 in the set, and this one was in poor shape). I expanded the background section some. The Structure section might just need some definitions thrown in (probably in parentheses). I condensed the second and third paragraph in the lead for balance and I added actual publication details (how that was missing, I don't know). Ottava Rima (talk) 02:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just added quite a bit more to the page for the top sections. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you put in a lot of work for the GA review, and since GA recommends that you take an active role in the page - would you like to nominate To Autumn at FAC? I would only request that you add User:Mrathel and myself as co-noms. I would provide you anything that you would need for the sources and the like. I've been meaning to nominate it myself (with you and Mrathel as co-noms). However, I will be busy working on some clean up on other pages (I have over 30 DYKs that I am working on and some GAs), so I wont be as focused on To Autumn if there are any clarity problems that are discovered. You have definitely proven your understanding of clarity and wording, so I would trust you in position to deal with the majority of concerns if there are even any at all. What do you think? Ottava Rima (talk) 22:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to list it sometime soon, just do so and drop me a note after you do. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 17:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have listed it with you and Ottava as conoms. This should be a fun project to help me get back into action:) Mrathel (talk) 21:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Les Fêtes Chinoises at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Art LaPella (talk) 01:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you! I've reduced the number of characters and hope the entry meets the DYK requirements! Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 01:47, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please don't forget to list an article on Wikipedia:Good articles after finding it's a good article. Please follow the guideline on WP:GAN to, in the future, also add a date for when you finished the review by putting five tildes in the GA template when you replace the GA nominee template. You can also give the Wikiprojects a GA rating once the article is GA. Thank you. Hekerui (talk) 16:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi! I tried but was unable to "get into" the page on several attempts. I thought I would try again and again until I could access it. Thanks for the heads up on the tildes...I was wondering why the date wouldn't show and now I know! It takes five! Will alert the WP Projects associated with the article. Best, Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 01:49, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • I notified one or two of the associated WP Projects but was unable to access the others. I don't understand their formatting.Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 02:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Marcellus NY Church1 (176 x 235).jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 02:02, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On July 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Les Fêtes Chinoises, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 09:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On July 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Catherine Bernard, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Bencherlite^Talk 16:15, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On July 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jason et Médée, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

{{User0|Giants27 23:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The article you nominated for GA has been reviewed and put on hold. Please see the talk page for details. Kaguya-chan (talk) 13:18, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I saw you had put the above article in the queue for a GA review. I won't do a full review, but popped in to the article, and thought it didn't look like a good article candidate. It will probably be a few weeks before it gets properly reviewed, so i thought that, if i made a few comments here, you might have an opportunity to react before someone gets to it and fails it. So: it needs better organisation and structure.

• At the moment the "background" section is by far the longest and contains all sorts of material, beyond what i would call 'background' to this ballet. A section with such a name should contain only background material - the circumstances in which the ballet came to be created; the cultural content of ballet at that time into which this piece was introduced (for two examples). Material relating to its actual choreography; critical reviews and commentary - these should be in other sections.
• For 'plot summary', I symphathise with not trying to improve on someone else's prose, but no-one is likely to support having a section that contains just a big quote. Has no-one else written about the plot and/or is there no way of improving the summary?
• 'Performance history' should cover more than just the first performance. Some of the material from the section "Non-traditional interpretations and adaptations" may belong here.
• There should be a section on critical reception and legacy.

These are just some of the issues editors are likely to be asked to address. I will copy these notes to the article's talk page as well. Thanks for all your contributions. Regards. hamiltonstone (talk) 06:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of The Tale of Peter Rabbit at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dylan620 (contribs, logs) 23:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of The Tale of Peter Rabbit at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NW (Talk) 04:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya, you've done a great job on the Beatrix Potter articles! I just wanted to let you know that her illustrations (and book covers) should not be uploaded to commons as they are still under copyright in the UK. Rather, upload them straight to wikipedia. More info here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Beatrix_Potter
Also, if you want to change Category:Books by Beatrix Potter to Category:Works by Beatrix Potter you should probably take it to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion to get it renamed properly. I'd do it myself but I'm not familiar with the procedure. Siawase (talk) 07:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can tell, the information on the images you uploaded looks just right. If you have any other questions, I'd be happy to help out if I can. Good luck with the GAs! Siawase (talk) 09:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just happened to glance at the list and I saw that you nominated it. I am prepared to pass it without any major difficulties (I will look again later when I have a clearer head) but I wanted to note one thing - being more than 20k, it could have two paragraphs for a lead. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you might want to move the image of Beatrix up into the Background section. By the way, your writing style is best summed up as "sweet" or "endearing" - it matches the tone of Peter Rabbit perfectly while setting a stage. It may not be as "encyclopedic" as most of the pages around here, but the style is definitely a plus. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have undertaken this review, if you want to look at making the minor changes involved. It is much improved: good job. Regards. hamiltonstone (talk) 06:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your revisions. Your approach to web citations was unusual, but accurate, and i have passed it at GA. Pretty soon my wife, a former dancer, is going to read The Dying Swan and tell me what's missing no doubt, but in the meantime I think you've been doing an excellent job here and on other cultural articles. Thank you for your contributions! hamiltonstone (talk) 22:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am passing this article as GA. I left some comments about possible expansions if you want to complete the page to its fullest possible extent (for FAC if you are looking for that). I mention a few minor problems, but they are very minor. You use the phrase "based on the familiar myth". "Familiar" might be out of place in the context as it lacks a reference to who the play is familiar to. "his usurping uncle Creon" could be reworded slightly, as "usurping" would imply that he is still in the process of usurpation. "usurper-uncle" might be more appropriate or an additional reword could work. In "Production details" you forgot to put a citation directly following the quote. This one is the only real problem and once you fix it I will finalize passing it as GA. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a clearer/larger version of File:Squireel Nutkin 2.jpeg sourced from project gutenburg. I don't know if you intended the facsimile of the full page, but from what I could see the article text was about the contents of the image, not the layout of the page. Feel free to just revert to the old version if you prefer.
I also restored one more image in the The Tale of Squirrel Nutkin article. It's rather lengthy now and since it's about a picture book (and there are no copyright issues), I think it's good to include more than just one or two images. Again, feel totally free to revert if you disagree.
Oh, and nice work, once again! Siawase (talk) 13:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On August 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Tale of Peter Rabbit, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

WP:DYK 02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

To Autumn is now FA level, thanks in part to your skillful GA review. You should be happy with your first star. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 19:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Without your skillful review it would never have gotten far enough to warrant FA. You should be proud and I hope it is a first of many stars that you will receive. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 01:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that on your userpage, the good articles you have contributed to have a GA image, using Template:FA-star, the featured article will do this too. Just letting you know, in case you didn't. ceranthor 15:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is also and Ottava Rima (talk) 16:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you'd like to clarify? Killiondude (talk) 23:47, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On August 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Tale of Squirrel Nutkin, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 17:00, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I bumped into 'Squirrel Nutkin' on the main page, very nice. I saw the Rene Zellweger film a while ago and was captured by the story. I see that there are a great number of Beatrix Potter books, they are linked by category but not easily accessible in each individual article. A great way of linking them is a 'Navbox', I have created quite a few for the aircraft project, here is an example Template:British Aviation Museums and an example of its use at Shuttleworth Collection. If you copy the template to a sandbox you can play with it and see how it looks. If you need any help please shout although I will watch your talk page for a while if you want to reply here. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:52, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - [1] Cheers, --Scott Free (talk) 13:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you care to look over Ode on Indolence for grammar errors and any comprehension problems? You seem to have a keen eye for readability and there may be some things that I have missed. It is up for FAC, so I would like to get quite a few people with a strong grasp of grammar and comprehension to give it a read through. I know you can be tough and demanding, which is good. :) If you decide to make any suggestions or whatever, feel free to make any direct changes, or leave comments on talk page, FAC page, my user talk, or even yours. If not, that is fine too. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Fairy Tales Told for Children. First Collection. at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Art LaPella (talk) 03:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On August 29, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fairy Tales Told for Children. First Collection., which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 11:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

		The Minor Barnstar
		Awarded for Les Fêtes Chinoises and Jason et Médée. — Robert Greer (talk) 21:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the discussion re: your additions to this article at [2]. In addition to making other changes, I have removed the biographical section for Temple you added to the article because it was not in keeping with film project guidelines. Still of concern are the sections that sound like they were written as a thesis for a film course. Thank you. LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 20:04, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On September 4, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Curly Top (film), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 05:15, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I would pass this now, as it is aesthetically pleasing and a good read. However, there is a original research template: "The half-French, half-Swedish Charles-Louis Didelot worked with and was the student of the greatest ballet innovators of the eighteenth century:[original research?]". I assume this could be found in Greskovic 2005, pp. 28–30? Does the language say something about "greatest" or anything close? If so, could you produce a short quote. That way, I could verify the comment. The only other things are very minor: 1. commas to separate off "however" in "Flore et Zéphire however was dancing", 2. "Speculation suggests" Speculation by who? 3. "success brought Didelot" Brought might not be the best thing, as it would attribute sentient motion to success. You could try "Following the ballet's success, the Francophile Russian monarchy in 1799 invited...". Minor things. I just need the one issue cleaned up before this can be passed. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ottava makes some useful points, however there is a more serious problem: the article contains quoted phrases from Kirstein that are not in quote marks and relies overwhelmingly on that one source. It will need careful revision, to include quote marks, and / or to move away from Kirstein's text, if it is to pass GA. Ottava, if you are popping by at all, see here, and click through to p. 130. I have tagged the article for possible copyright violation until the issue is addressed. Kathryn, ping me at my talk page if you need further guidance. Regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 00:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have opened up a section with a comparison of the first half of the uses of the source. That should help explain where it the language was acceptable, where it borders the line, and where it crosses over. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've seem to disappear and I hope it has nothing to do with the above. However, it seems like your edits stopped a few days before that. It is not a -big- deal, as it is a mistake and can be fixed. I am willing to work with you on it to ensure that such problems are dealt with in an appropriate manner. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:59, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I hope you will resume editing some time soon. In the meantime, unless you re-appear in the next few days, I will remove your remaining noms Les Fêtes Chinoises and Curly Top (film) from the GA noms list. If you come back and still want them reviewed, renominate them and let me know you've done so, and I will try to help out. Regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 02:22, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kathyrncelestewright! Are you still around? I've reviewed your article on Curly Top which has seemed to have greatly edited since you have nominated it. You are a great editor and everyone here would appreciate your input on the review. Cheers! Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great job on the work on the article so far! I'll give you another week to find time to add more citations and information to boost the article's quality. Glad to see you back on the site! Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very glad to see you back and busy editing. Leave a message at my talk page if you've any queries or concerns re actions while you were gone. cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 04:11, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wondered if you would have the time to do some checking on Ode on a Grecian Urn in terms of grammar and clarity as it is currently a FAC. Since Ottava has retreated to the wilderness for a while, I could greatly use someone who can catch my many mistakes. I understand if you are busy, but I just thought I would ask. Thanks Mrathel (talk) 20:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'll be glad to look at it tonight. Thanks for inviting me! Best! Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 21:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. Ottava's main concern with the lead was that it that the style guidelines suggest 2 paragraphs for articles of this size, so I think he made a few changes, but I agree that brevity is the soul of wit, though it might be one of Polonius's few intelligent remarks:) Feel free to make any edits you feel are necessary, as I think a third opinion will be very beneficial. Mrathel (talk) 01:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I have made some fixes to ensure that what I stated about the "influences" is more clear on the page. See if that helps with any confusion. Ottava Rima (talk) 06:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ItsLassieTime for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You requested a second opinion about this article on the GA nominations page. I wanted to let you know that I've completed a review. You can read it here. // Gbern3 (talk) 14:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All the Andersen articles can be verified on-line. The Wullschlager text is a goggle.book (though I used a paper edition) and facts such as publication dates, publisher, etc. can be found on-line at the Hans Christian Andersen Center supervised by the University of Southern Denmark. Best! Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 22:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, are you aware of the ongoing discussion on your created articles at WP:ANI#ItsLassieTime banned or not? and half of your articles were deleted. Are you going to appeal to overturn your WP:BAN to WP:Arbitration Committee ([email protected]). If you want to say about the ANI discussion, just leave your opinion here. --Caspian blue 01:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kathryn. Thanks for the clarifying details on verification. My own experience, in looking at some of your work, was of content adhering to the highest standards with the most authoritative sources used in its construction. I'm aware of others who've obtained the texts for content you've worked on, and found them to support the content in full.

I'd like to suggest you don't let the above-linked thread occupy your thoughts too much. It's not uncommon, that a discussion composed of multiple topics will find it hard to maintain focus. A blend of the specific and more general especially so. If appealing the site use restriction, to the arbitration subcommittee, is something you'd like to do, I am willing to present a statement with evidence to them, in support of that. Whatever you choose to do, take good care of yourself. –Whitehorse1 05:58, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your kind, supportive words! While some here are eager to throw my scholarship overboard, I wonder if they are as eager to do the same with the thousands of dollars I've donated to WP fundraisers? The various discussions scare me. It appears some members are making decisions for the entire community. I'm uncertain about appeal. How many banned editors are actually reinstated? I have to think more about this. I took-on Hans Christian Andersen because, for a world class author, he is sadly and surprisingly neglected here. Well, it was not to be. By the way, I passed at least one of Collectonian's articles to GA: The Fox and the Hound (novel). It should be stripped of its GA status and returned to the GA queue. Best! Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 08:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• As a courtesy, I'm informing you of this another discussion at WT:GA#GA approved by sock of a banned user.
• As for the unban appeal (though I don't know the process well), the process would be purely depending on how you appeal given the past cases. Some of editors who have been under community ban were successfully unbanned after contacting and appealing to WP:Arbitration Committee via Email or IRC. So you need to state why you believe you should be unbanned, and how you would do in Wikipedia after the unban. There was an admin who was indefinitely blocked and banned for WP:OUTing and WP:HARASSing some admin, but unbanned via the ARBCom appealing and established good contribution and then became an admin. There are editors in much worse cases who are freed or whose ban periods are shorten. So why don't you give it a try?
• I don't know about all details on your ban, but the reason for your ban is mostly your socking/meatpuppeting, incivility, and POV pushing (I do not have any view on this, but just simply restate why people endorsed the 18-months ban), so if you agree that you should only use one account, not use socks, and promise to abide by the rules, and possibly you need to agree that you can be monitored by Mentorship program offered by ArbCom for some period of time, your chance of unbann or shortening the period could be increased. That means you need to appeal as ItsLassiTime, not as Kathyrncelestewright since you've been accused of and confirmed as the sock of ItsLassiTime. However, if you want to stick with the account, Kathyrncelestewright, you need to provide a good reason for that. You can also contact any of individual arbitrator whom you can trust (Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee#Current_members) since they are representatives of the committee. Or you can contact any admin whom you've contacted before such as User:DGG, and then can ask for help. Such admin could delegate your unban-appealing process as long as you provide all necessity in the process. I hope this would be helpful for you. Whatever you want to choose for the unbann process, your statement and rationale should be provided to any accessible channel to Arbitrators. Good luck!--Caspian blue 17:37, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a list of the articles I either created or brought up to GA status. They should stripped of their status. Some were created BEFORE I was banned as ItsLassieTime. I was an editor in good standing then but since, as you know, my star has gone south. Do what is best for the project, of course.

These articles were all created or developed before I disgraced myself as ItsLassieTime:

• The Mansion of Happiness (original with ITL)
• Cootie (game) (original)
• Ruth Martin (Lassie) (original)
• Horror comics in the United States, 1947–1954 (original, I believe)
• Eerie (comics) (original)
• Pal (dog actor) (original)
• Baby Jesus theft (original)
• The Story of the Three Bears (developed from existing article to GA)
• Play-Doh (original)
• Vauxhall Gardens (I found this article while browsing and nominated it because I thought it worthy of GA. I only worked with the reviewer here and there to bring it up to GA.)
• Milo of Croton (developed to GA)

These articles were all created AFTER my fall from grace as ItsLassieTime and under my "sockname" Kathyrncelestewright:

• The Snowman (fairy tale) (original, I believe an editor recently vouched for this article's accuracy)
• The Master Cat, or Puss in Boots (developed from an existing article)
• The Dying Swan (developed)
• The Tale of Peter Rabbit (developed)
• Jason et Médée (original)
• Thumbelina (developed)

I swear to you, and all others here at WP, that these articles were created or developed in good faith, valid references were sourced, and no hoaxes were perpetrated. I am ashamed of the sad incidents in my WP past. Since my disgrace as ITL I have become painfully crippled and spend my days either flat on my back or in a wheelchair, never leaving home. There's no chance of recovery. Writing for WP has been my only and my greatest joy! Best! Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 19:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Curly Top 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:1796 ballet premieres indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Ballets by Charles Didelot indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:49, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:1763 ballet premieres indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Ballets by Jean-Joseph Rodolphe indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:07, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thumbelina has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Wizardman 23:34, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Dying Swan has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Wizardman 16:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Tale of Peter Rabbit has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Wizardman 01:28, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Puss in Boots has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Wizardman 23:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]