User talk:D. Matt Innis
| Citizendium Moderator Group | ||
|---|---|---|
| Professionalism | Moderator Blocking Procedures | Article Deletion Policy Application Review Procedure | Moderator Policy | Help for Moderators |
|width=10% align=center style="background:#F5F5F5"| |}
| To Approve articles | Confirm Accounts | Diberri citation maker | Help Wikiformatting | Citizendium Test Wiki | CZ:How to use Bugzilla |
Where Matt lives it is approximately: 04:10
Cleaned up and ready for more
Oxytocin ready for approval
Matt, I updated the version number of Oxytocin after vetting Gareth's last minute edits. I believe you can approve it now. Thanks. —Anthony.Sebastian 21:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
- Will do, Anthony. I'll wait till I get home from work when I can stay focused. D. Matt Innis 21:39, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Led Zeppelin
I want to know Matt why you have decided to correct Jimmy Page's birthdate in the Led Zeppelin, after refusing my request to do so a number of months ago citing "Only a music editor can correct it". This was over a series of emails I sent to you earlier this year. Meg Ireland 11:10, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- I realized you were right. D. Matt Innis 12:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Appeal of block 1549
Hi Matt,
please take a look at CZ:Managing Editor/2010/3 - Appeal of block 1549 and comment in the Statement by the Chief Constable section as you see fit. Thank you!
--Daniel Mietchen 21:22, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Daniel. I have nothing to add publicly at this point. I believe it's part of my duty to keep behavior issues confidential (for a variety of reasons) until the MC or an Appeal Board directs me otherwise. D. Matt Innis 01:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion
I have tagged Template:Free space/Metadata for speedy deletion because it was a left-over after I renamed the "Free space" article to Free space (electromagnetism) as requested by our new physics author, John R. Brews, who created the article. Would you please do the deletion? Milton Beychok 18:49, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
New editors
Milton thought you might have an answer to this. Is there a page somewhere I could put on my watchlist that would notify me of the induction of new editors? Peter Jackson 14:40, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The Approved version of Thylakoid should have been the current draft version
Matt, the version of Thylakoid you recently approved is an old version. It doesn't have the many edits I made in response to Chris Day's comments and suggestions, including new images, text, and references. I wouldn't have approved that version, only the current draft version.
Will you re-check? Anthony.Sebastian 03:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, Anthony, since Chris did not add his name, I had to go with the version that Gareth approved. I assume he will probably approve the new version as well, but he needs to read it before I can put his name on it. Let me know when he does. If Chris doesn't return, I'll add your name as a second editor. D. Matt Innis 03:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying, Matt. Still, I'd ask that the approval be revoked (or whatever the correct word) and the Approval Date be advanced for two weeks (from now), to give Chris a change to review the Draft version. I'm embarrassed to see that earlier version among the Approved Articles, and that version shouldn't represent CZ's best current effort.
- Forgot to sign. Anthony.Sebastian 04:43, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, Anthony, I'll let Gareth take a look and see if he wants to update the version number. D. Matt Innis 13:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
- You forgot to protect the page, Matt. --Peter Schmitt 23:59, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I did. D. Matt Innis 04:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- Matt, on the Thylakoid Talk Page, Gareth said he'd be happy to update. Where does that leave us? I'm still concern about having that earlier version among CZ's Approved Articles. It doesn't deal with Chris's concerns, which the current draft does. Anthony.Sebastian 06:57, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- HI Anthony, I'm glad to report that I can now update to the new version (Gareth changed the approval date to the 10th so I had to wait a day!). D. Matt Innis 13:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay to confirm an account for a 14-year old? Can't find any guidance in the Charter.
Matt, is it okay to confirm a new account as an author for a 14-year old boy? Does the Charter discuss minimum age anywhere? Milton Beychok 23:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- Until the MC decides differently, we approve as young as 13, but do not advertise the age (we only mention that they are in school). D. Matt Innis 01:02, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Bear in mind the following guidance from CZ:User pages:
- Minors are asked not to include any personal information about themselves, nor about where they live, but they should still give some nonspecific information about their interests and education (no school names, please) --Chris Key 10:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Petroleum refining processes is in need of re-approval
Matt, the Petroleum refining processes article is badly in need of re-approval. For example, a completely new section, "Average refinery product yields" was added many months ago and there have been some other much smaller copy edits.
The article is in the Engineering and the Chemistry workgroups. The problem is that I have been the only active main-stream engineering editor for the past two years (to me, main-stream engineering does not include military engineering) and there is now only one chemistry editor (David Volk) and he is not always available. Is there anything that can be done to get that article re-approved?
According to the Google Analytics data recently added by Chris Key, that article is one that has attracted a great many visitor to CZ. Milton Beychok 22:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
New user Claude BINEAU
Matt, I confirmed this new user with the last name all capitalized because that is how the name was written in the user's application. Is that okay? Or should I rename that user page as "Claude Bineau ? What do you suggest? Milton Beychok 18:55, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
- All-capitals is custom in a French context, which we don't have here, so I'd think it's better to rename to English custom. --Daniel Mietchen 23:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)