The wireless telegraph is not difficult to understand. The ordinary telegraph is like a very long cat. You pull the tail in New York, and it meows in Los Angeles. The wireless is the same, only without the cat.
For bringing some NPOV sanity into a crazy left-right food fight! CarolMooreDC (talk) 02:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar
For converting my bunch of amazon.com book URLs to ISBN / text view during the work on the article marked AfD. That's pure altruism and and excellent example of a team work. Thank you for your efforts! APS (Full Auto) (talk) 23:35, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
On 21 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joseph Henry Sharp, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) 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.
I wrote this at Talk:Enrico Fermi in 2012 about WP:OPENPARA. That guideline has since been moved to WP:CONTEXTBIO. Putting it here to refer people to should future explanation become necessary, though I have to say that this has become much less a problem in the last 10 years. Either more people seem to "get it" - or less people are actively watching articles, I'm not sure which...
Basically, most people will be described using their birth nationality, if they became notable before changing or adding a citizenship. People who were moved and repatriated as children are the primary exception, they should be listed using the acquired citizenship in effect when they became notable (for example, Isaac Asimov became notable as an American, not as a Russian: this is citizenship, not ethnicity). An individual who develops a first career for which they do not become notable, then repatriates and goes on to a second career for which they do become notable would be described using their acquired citizenship. But basically, it's just common sense. Just ask, what country was the subject a citizen of when they first achieved notablity? Sometimes they are dual citizens or acquire a second citizenship shortly after becoming notable. Then then should probably be described using 'and': for example, "Canadian and American", notCanadian-American, which for many English speakers means a person of Canadian ancestry born in the US. 'And' should be used in these cases as the hyphenated terms are ambiguous and are frequently interpreted in terms of ethnicity rather than dual nationality.
Skyrise (talk) 21:29, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Last Exit on Brooklyn - original Seattle espresso culture
.svg){kind=small}
.jpg)
