Welcome!

Hello, MathewTownsend, 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 and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Meelar (talk) 19:07, 18 November 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Please help to establish notability of the minister from Nigeria you just posted. Just being a minister from Nigeria does not mean the subject is notable. Please review notability guidelines, and then write examples into the article with inline sourcing to external and reliable sources. Happy editing Standard2211 (talk) 20:19, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok for Daniel Ajayi-Adeniran. MathewTownsend (talk) 23:55, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again all :). So, some big news, some small news, some good news, some bad news!

On the "big news" front; we've now deployed AFT5 on to 10 percent of articles, This is pretty awesome :). On the "bad news", however, it looks like we're having to stop at 10 percent until around September - there are scaling issues that make it dangerous to deploy wider. Happily, our awesome features engineering team is looking into them as we speak, and I'm optimistic that the issues will be resolved.

For both "small" and "good" news; we've got another office hours session. This one is tomorrow, at 22:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office ^connect - I appreciate it's a bit late for Europeans, but I wanted to juggle it so US east coasters could attend if they wanted :). Hope to see you all there!

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

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:23, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all :). We've just deployed another set of features for Page Curation. They include flyouts from the icons in Special:NewPagesFeed, showing who reviewed an article and when, a listing of this in the "info" flyout, and a general re-jigging of the info flyout - we've also fixed the weird bug with page_titles_having_underscores_instead_of_spaces in messages sent to talkpages, and introduced CSD logging! As always, these features will need some work - but any feedback would be most welcome.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Notability (geographic features). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Odeon Cinemas. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MathewTownsend. This will be, if not our final newsletter, one of the final ones :). After months of churning away at this project, our final version (apart from a few tweaks and bugfixes) is now live. Changes between this and the last release include deletion tag logging, a centralised log, and fixes to things like edit summaries.

Hopefully you like what we've done with the place; suggestions for future work on it, complaints and bugs to the usual address :). We'll be holding a couple of office hours sessions, which I hope you'll all attend. Many thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:16, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I see you are single handedly bearing a good deal of the backlog in GAN. Fairplay. This is just a quick reminder about the above article. Going away for a few days later in the week so any comments left after then will be responded to in a week or so. Keep up the good work! Best wishes, --Ktlynch (talk) 09:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

don't worry. I just suddenly burned out but I'll complete your review, and give you plenty of time to reply if you're away! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Methew!! Greetings!!! I am happy to tell you that my college exams are over and now I am back on wikipedia and also I completed my second wikipedia article Gajar ka Halwa. You please see it and give your suggestions. However some pictures are remaining but I will upload them soon. So please see it and tell me about my mistakes. Thank you.ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 18:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very good! I copy edited the opening paragraph and put a space in the title of the article. Let me know if I made any mistakes. MathewTownsend (talk) 18:56, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mathew, Thank You for copy edit this article. I have a problem that the article named Gajar ka Halwa is redirected to the article Carrot pudding. But the Carrot Pudding is actually very different from the Gajar Ka Halwa. You can easily find it on the internet. So I want that the gajar ka halwa is redirect to Gajar Ka Halwa instead of carrot pudding. So Please change the page name to Gajar ka Halwa so that people can find exact information easily.--ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 12:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arum, I agree with you and I changed it. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 21:51, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Mathew for fixing the page names and redirects. But can you change page name Gajar ka Halwa only instead of Gajar ka Halwa (Indian carrot Halwa). I think it may be perfect for this article. --ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 11:18, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it ok now? MathewTownsend (talk) 15:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Now it seems perfect. Thank you for change the page name and thank you again for copy edit the article.--ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 08:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you feel that your reviews have been ridiculed? I won't deny that I get a little nervous about some new GA reviewers (I've contributed to a good few threads about problem reviewers in the last few months...) but by no means do I personally feel it should be an old boy's club only. In any case, looking at the number of GACs you've reviewed, you're hard a newbie. J Milburn (talk) 10:10, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yes, Malleus Fatuorum personally attacked me and ridiculed everything I've done, except the Signpost! I made apparently misguided comments on a policy talk page, not understanding that only veteran editors can express opinions there. Although I tried to redact and apologized repeatedly and profusely, and tried to explain what I meant, Malleus Fatuorum continued ridiculed me personally and my contributions.

Along with many other put downs, Malleus Fatuorum said to me "if you took the trouble to look you'd see that I've done more than 500 GA reviews"[1] He said "you've never written anything worth spit".[2]

Since GA is Malleus Fatuorum's territory, I'm not risking exposing myself to him again by continuing to review GAs. It'll be only a matter of time before he finds a stupid mistake I make and specifically starts in on my work there. It's not worth the chance of being ridiculed, though I enjoyed the reviewing immensely and always tried to do the right thing. But I'm not competent enough. I started out wanting to help wikipedia but my work isn't worth anything really, as Malleus Fatuorum rightly points out. I've found the Commons more pleasant and will probably put more of my energy there and at places on wikipedia where Malleus Factuorum isn't a major voice so I don't have to be scared about making a mistake. GA isn't one of those places. It's not worth the risk. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 15:21, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Matthew. Considering that you heavily objected to asexuality being listed as a sexual orientation because it is not sufficiently defined as one, you might also want to weigh in with regard to the above linked discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 18:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really a medical person and not into the socio-cultural stuff. So I've no opinion on the direction "sexual orientation" is taking here and haven't been following it. Sorry! MathewTownsend (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as stated at WP:MED, this has to do with how the medical community defines sexual orientation vs. social terms that have been created to describe sexual preferences/feelings and/or gender. But I understand if you're just not interested in weighing in on this; it just seemed like something that you would be interested in weighing in on, given your objection to listing asexuality as a sexual orientation due to, as noted above, it not being sufficiently defined as one by experts in these fields. Flyer22 (talk) 06:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

well, I gave up on asexuality, since there was no definition and could include just not having a partner, a physical condition such as an illness or a hormonal imbalance, a religious orientation or any number of things. It seemed the people weighing in were really taking political stances rather than seeking to understand. I'm not interested in those kind of causes on wikipedia. But thanks for asking. MathewTownsend (talk) 10:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a definition, Matthew. As the article states, "in its broadest sense, [asexuality] is the lack of sexual attraction to others or the lack of interest in sex" and "Researchers have varied in their attempts to define asexuality, but the term is usually defined to mean the lack or absence of sexual attraction or sexual interest." It's considered distinct from sexual abstinence/celibacy because it is not based on health, religious or other social factors, at least as defined by some researchers. But, yeah, as you've read, other researchers consider it to be "not a meaningful category to add to the continuum of sexual orientations, and say that it is instead the lack of a sexual orientation or sexuality" or "that it is the denial of one's natural sexuality, and that it is a disorder caused by shame of sexuality or anxiety, sometimes basing this belief on asexuals who masturbate or occasionally engage in sexual activity simply to please a romantic partner."

But like I stated, I understand your not being interested in weighing in on the pansexuality/polysexuality topic. Thank you for your time. Flyer22 (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/City population templates. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mathew! Can you tell me about assessed and unassessed class articles. Thank you.--ARUN SHARMA ¹⁰¹Talk | Email 09:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there!

I think the different projects, like Project India and Project Food and Drink, assess the articles according to their criteria. I'm not sure who in the projects does it. Perhaps you could ask them. And you could ask at the Village Pump how to get someone to do it. (You could go to the projects and find out what their criteria are.) Seems to me that your articles are at least "Start" class. MathewTownsend (talk) 10:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mathew for your helping efforts. ARUN SHARMA 101Talk | Email 14:01, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit
		Well, I just read the discussion over at the good article wiki project talk page and I'm pretty disgusted. Editors like Malleus Fatuorum don't belong on Wikipedia if they are going to act like that, we are supposed to work all together, not rip each other apart. Either way, I see that you will no longer be reviewing nominations and because of that, with all your great reviews, you deserve more then just the Good Article Barnstar. Thank-you for all your contributions to the WikiProject/review process. :) --Dom497 (talk) 19:24, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the real problem is know-it-all schoolkids like you, who in reality can't even tell their arses from their elbows. Malleus Fatuorum 19:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]