Loading AI tools
No, you helped a lot, thank you. I'm just trying to avoid the "some said he was one of the most influential; others said he wasn't" formula, which is more or less what the intro said until a few minutes ago. I did find a Habermas paper for you, which I've given the citation for on the talk page, and a secondary text, which I've linked to. Thanks again for your comments. SlimVirgin (talk) 15:59, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could help me with a new user - Contrib (talk · contribs) - I think he means well, but he has been creating a lot of new articles which consist of nothing more than lists of subheadings, and adding subheadings to existing articles (e.g., in Jamaica he added "Golf courses", "New of 2005" and "Soccer news", all empty). I sent him a message, but I don't have time this afternoon to deal with this, and more importantly, I don't have your skills of diplomacy/ability to be "nurturing" (I reverted him twice on jamaica, he probably hates me already). I'm not sure the best way to approach this, so if you have time I was wondering if you could say something to the user. Thanks. Guettarda 18:27, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks (and now I know what to say in the future!) Guettarda 19:07, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Where am I from? "When?" :) Actually I am not from Port of Spain - I'm from San Fernando. Very much a proud southerner. It's actually not safe to assume Trinidadians are from POS - not that many people actually live in the city, and the most of the people in the "greater PoS" area (the "East-West Corridor") don't describe themselves as being from "town". Despite the fact that Trinidad is so small, there's a lot of regional identity. There is also a tendancy for northerners to be totally oblivious of the southern 2/3 of the country. It doesn't help any that, while north Trinidad has an Afro-Trinidadian majority, southern and central Trinidad is mostly Indo-Trinidadian. And no, I can't think of any Myers family, except Lincoln Myers, a former politician who I don't know personally. Googles David Myers and found that there is a judge by that name in Trinidad, but even if that is your friend I can't pretend to have heard of him :) I'd be really impressed if you picked my accent out as Trini...or if you were able to classify my accent at all. I lived from 3-9 in Canada, and I acquired my accent while trying not to get a Canadian accent. I also spent 7 years in the US doing my PhD (then 3 years back home before moving to Oklahoma, where I've been for the last 8 months). Just re-read your user page - you've added a lot more info about yourself. I do need to get to Oxford one of these days...hope to get to England in 2006 or 2007. Do you know Nick Brown in the Botany department, by any chance? Guettarda 19:48, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- No offense taken, none to take. East Indian is pretty standard, or just Indian. Indo-Trinidadian is more accurate (we are, after all, Trinidadians) but it's not that widely used - though more now than 10 years ago. Nothing helps to assimilate a population like finally achieving some level of acceptance at the national level - it started in 1987 and grew a lot after 1995 when Basdeo Panday became PM. When I was young a lot of Indo-Trinidadians cheered the Indian cricket team, today they mostly support the WIndies - though Brian Lara helped, on one hand, while the perception that the Windies Board is anti-Trinidadian is something that transcends race :)
- I actually don't have a Trini accent - some people say they can hear it once I say where I'm from, but I'm more likely to be told I sound vaguely Irish, Guyanese or Indian. Which I don't - none of the above.
- I have always been curious about the similarity between Trinidadian and Welsh. Must be convergent evolution - no historic links to speak of. As you probably realised - I can ramble on for hours at the drop of a hat about Trinidad if I can find anyone who is dumb enough to pretend to be interested :) Guettarda 22:46, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, as for mixing - you should see my Indian-German-Carib-African-Corsican-Spanish niece - cutest 14 month old there ever was :) Guettarda 22:49, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- As for accents, I think my favourite is an upper class Bajan accent. Very melodius, very different from the average Bajan accent. A Jamaican accent can be pleasant on the ear, but it can also be very harsh. Never noticed a similarity between Yorkshire and J'can accents - except that they are both the most difficult to understand for me of their regional kind. Guettarda 14:02, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
why I get the title "longwinded" sometimes. ;) --VKokielov 19:50, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- And that is why I also get the title "obscure"...Well, in any case, I didn't do the work; I confused the issue. I shouldn't have been showing off. --VKokielov 00:16, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ehh....Well, let that be. I've always been making mistakes ;) I thought that This is a fake entry was marked by you, while that's not the cae Sry for my strong tone anyway =]
Soul1337 23:03, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've taken a day to step back from this medium to try and formulate a coherent response to you.
In case you have a short memory, you decided to revert every single one of the edits I had made on the article E Clampus Vitus. You gave some reasons such as you "was trying to the article a favour". Even with the obvious grammatical problem in your statement, I got the jist of what you were trying to say. But by not allowing me to post a single edit, how does this help? The additions I made at first may seem to you to be far fetched. Fine. However, most of the later additions were not. If you had bothered to read any of them, you might have found that they were well thought out and well balanced additions. I have tried to not include anything that someone has objected to. You, Mel, have only specified one objection. I promptly changed it. But that didn't seem to satisfy you, and you deleted the article and replaced it with a version that is in desperate need of revision.
The version you stubbornly insist on putting up is rife with mistakes. I have left a message on the article's Discussion page explaining many of them. If you would read that, you might actually see that maybe, just maybe, some of those arguments might be right. I suspect, however, that you have decided that any contributions coming from me are without merit, and will not allow me to change anything.
Neutral Point of View. I have taken the time to go through and read this section from Wikipedia. Allow me to relate this to what I'm trying to do. ECV has had a reputation in some circles of being a rowdy group of prank pulling drunks. Some of that is true. However, ECV (from the 19th century to the 21st) has a tradition of helping out people in the community in which the members live and giving to charity. Just today, as a matter of fact, there was a notice on an ECV BBS soliciting aid from ECV members to give to soldiers who may have been hurt fighting in Iraq. The chapter I belong to donates thousands of dollars a year to a battered womens shelter in our community. These are but 2 examples of how ECV lives up to its motto to "Protect women and children". "Per caritate viduaribus orphanibusque sed prime viduaribus". By talking about the charitable aspects of ECV, it helps give an NPOV, because it would present a better picture of ECV's activities. The article you have insisted on putting up gives an extremely poor explanation of that. I have tried, repeatedly, to correct it, but you apparently don't think that I have anything useful to say in the matter. Is this something personal? Have I made some wikiblunder that you have found to be unforgivable?
I'd like to revisit the 3RR issue. Yes, you mentioned it. I responded with a question and you, rather than answer it, decided to just ominously refer to it again. In your next missive, you implied that I may be "paranoid or perpetually defensive" and acted like you were actually using good manners. Good manners would be answering a perfectly reasonable question. Your attitude was rude. I have been trying to edit the E Clampus Vitus article, and you have (3 times) erased every single thing that I had written and replaced it with text that is unchanged. I have asked you to clarify what it is that you find wrong with the article as I've left it, but you don't respond. Well, actually, you do, by erasing everything I have contributed, which seems childish. I ask again: why have you decided that I have nothing of value to add to this article?
Jumping to conclusions. You have said that I have a habit of jumping to conclusions. I'm confused as to how you got that. I was responding to the message you had sent me. You apparently made a poorly thought out message, I responded and you lashed out at me. You said to me "I realise that you're only here for this article, and so haven't really got a feel for Wikipedia." How do you realise that? I have been reading various articles on Wikipedia for a long time. That this is my first attempt at editing does not mean that this is my only interest. I just felt that maybe I could contribute to something that I have knowledge of. I plan to do a lot more.
I await your reply
To clear up the controversy about how many members netbux has, please check the homepage of netbux. The other day, it said 10,000 and i updated the page to reflect this. NOW they have 15,000+ members (plz check homepage if you dont believe me) and i have updates the page again. Please reconsider your vote for deletion based on this and also the additional info i just wrote into the page. Thanks. THE KING 04:23, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hey, just to let you know, using multiple cleanup tags on one page (e.g., The Freshmen Musical) is not advised. -Grick(talk to me!) 04:41, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
- Well, in particular, Wikipedia:Cleanup_resources#General says not to use the general Cleanup tag with others. -Grick(talk to me!) 20:36, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Teletraffic GSM isn't listed on VFD any more. It went through the entire process, and gained a vote for delete, but the link in the header was wrong so the admin closing the vote (no idea who, the other similar pages have just been deleted, the vote hasn't been marked up) didn't delete this one by accident see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Log/2005 April 11 for this and others in context. You might decide that it had "procedural irregularities" (wrong link) and so needs to go through again, but I personally think that would be overly pedandic given that discussion is already ongoing on the policy discussion page (see article header) and there have been no objections to deletion of this article anywhere. Mozzerati 06:55, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)
- okay, I'm going to leave it for some days in the hope it gets closed off, then mark it speedy again if nothing happens. All the teletraffic entries went through with only one vote. The impression I get is that it was such an obvious delete that nobody could be bothered to debate. Alternatively, since your an admin, you could close the debate and just delete the page. Have a look at the extensive debate on the policy page, the listing of things to do with pages, the fact that it's a completely duplicate page etc.etc. I think you will find that the consensus to delete is pretty overwhelming; personally I would appreciate it being done quickly since I'm trying to clean up the various pages and waiting for the page to disappear before I can happily deal with all the different links. Mozzerati 19:42, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)
You're welcome. I particularly liked your use of dashes, and they must be preserved. :)) ---Rednblu | Talk 15:05, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well, sorry about that, but I was glancing at it and on the computer I was using showed some rather 'random' marks. On the edit screen the marks showed up something like ' &$"·! ' so I thought I'd erase them. I wasn't trying to vandalise your page, and I won't do it again. Ecvjackass
I am not sure about your latest sylistic contribution to Zanskar. The original version was: The opening of this region to foreigners has brought benefits, such as the financing of schools, the restoration of monasteries and roads, but has also taken its toll on this fragile mountain environment and its population., which you changed to: The opening of this region to foreigners has brought benefits such as the financing of schools and (emphasis added) the restoration of monasteries and roads, but has also taken its toll on this fragile mountain environment and its population.. Are you sure about these two succesive "and", I would have considered it as an ennumeration, were only the last item is preceded by an "and".
Moumine 16:45, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oh, and Mr Tan is again up to his old antics and has now put a {{gcheck}} banner on the Zanskar page. If you also do think that this is not adequate, please remove it. I am starting to think that his fixation on Zanskar is slightly edging on the pathological.
Given your huge involvement in Wikipedia, I hope you are not suffering from a burn-out effect :-)
Moumine 20:26, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
What was Gropecunt Lane in London in now Grape Street WC2. It is not non-existent. I intend to do some research about the other places that were formally Gropecunt lane and do a bit of a write-up. I believe one was in Oxford. Bill Bryson mentions Gropecunt Lane in one of his books. See -http://www.guardian.co.uk/gender/story/0,11812,1453789,00.html Jooler 22:33, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- That's nonsense. If Fucking, Austria was renamed you would remove it from the list? Gropecunt Lane appeared on maps of London until the early Victorian period. I think it is a very interesting fact and intend to write an article about it. Jooler 23:20, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- What is the main point? The size of the page? If there were genuinly a million "interesting and unusual place names" then not listing them all would mean that the list would not be fulfilling its purpose. We have list of people which has been built up split up over time. This is what happns, we add and organise information, we don't chuck it away. To suggest that Fucking, Austria should be removed is just nonsense. Jooler 23:30, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I said "If Fuckin, Austria was renamed should it be removed?" (and if you look at the article you will see that the population voted on renaming it) and you said "Yes, if it were renamed, the old name should be removed.". But why!? We don't remove people from list of people because they are dead. I see no logical or rational reason for not having "interesting" archaic names. Jooler 08:47, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The logic is this - Fucking, Austria is an interesting place name whether it is still called that or not. You are saying that it should be removed from the list if If the population changed the name of the town to something less interesting. I am saying - "what difference does it make?" Fucking, Austria is still an interesting place name even if if the town itself has become something else. This is analogous to the renaming of Gropecunt Lane, it is still and interesting place name even though in one particular case it has been renamed Grape Street. What difference does it make whther the place is still known by that name? The page isn't called "Interesting place names (but only ones that are still extant)" Jooler 09:01, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
User:Clem whatsisname has reverted Rockall again, after your last edit. Jooler 09:23, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mel, I have a minor suggestion for part of your quest to do good-not-evil. Please take a look at Talk:Matthew Smith (disambiguation); if what I say interests you (either way), please comment there. (Or, if you agree with me, you might even unwrap your administrative kryptonite and do a bit of page zapping and moving -- once you tell me you've done this, I'll work hard to clear up the incoming links.) Thanks. -- Hoary 09:27, 2005 Apr 23 (UTC)
PS That was fast work. Many thanks! (And drat, why didn't I think of fixing it via that route?) -- Hoary 10:16, 2005 Apr 23 (UTC)
I would appreciate if you to proceed to this article's talk page and comment first before reverting unanimously. I'm afraid that you are another having a peculiar behavior that makes one feels both frustrated, pressurised and irritated by you, however.
Tan 20:09, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I was doing some more thinking about how to best go about improving and refactoring our (comparatively) weak coverage of Philosophy. As I'm sure you're well aware, the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy is an excellent resource for both corpus and relative importance (for structuring the articles). Perhaps we could arm-twist some interested Wikipedians into volunteering to incorperate sections into the associated Wikipedia articles. A structure to doing things in vital in getting them done; people need prodding - myself included. nsh 15:20, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
- With regard to your recent message (which you didn't sign [wags finger], so I've had to go round the houses to find you), Jim Feiser's IEP is copyright, so we can't simply insert bits into Wikipedia (is that what you meant?). I'd agree that we could use it and the Stanford Encyclopædia as patterns to guide what needs to be added to Wikipedia. What are your primary interests? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:29, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I assumed that the IEP was copyright, hence "corpus" rather than "content" (though the distinction probably only exists in my head). We can however, use it as a reference from which to write original phrasing of the (almost completely) descriptive (ie: not original) material it covers. As for structure, I meant that the topic groupings in the IEP will be a useful guide for how to arrange the new material if it is not immediately placable in existing articles. nsh 16:18, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
Did you remove the VfD notice from 1-san? Why? Andrewa 15:21, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for reply on my talk page, I have replied there in turn. Andrewa 16:15, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:01-horsie.gif
Yes, I *am* the uploader, the image is still there, I wanted to delete/overwrite the image to replace it with a graphic of just Horsie's head (who really *is* quite famous, albeit not in a large circle, just a couple of 10,000s)
I accidentally uploaded the wrong graphic, that's all.
here's 3 tildes: DarkSkywise here's 4 tildes: DarkSkywise 16:02, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I hope this is enough info for you?
and you can check other StickHorsie stuff with my name on it here: http://groups.msn.com/OffTopicthesequel/horsie01.msnw
Suggestion: Go to the article and remove all words and expressions (such as "movement") that have nothing to do with the facts. State only the facts in very short sentences and force advocates to defend changes to any sentence. I have begun this process at the top of the article but I suspect that it will be instantly reverted. If you cut the article back completely to only the facts and then repost the new (and very brief) amended version supported by new discussion on the Talk page about each sentence, supporters will be hard pressed to continue. For instance, "Teach the Controversy" is only a proposal. The word "movement" was accepted without qualification: that word should be struck. The originator of the term needs to be identified. The source of funding of both the originator and the association (DI) of which he is a member also needs to be identified. I know that I have taken issue with you in the past, but this is one occasion in which you can use your delight as a stickler for a "proper" use of the English language to great advantage - with my support. MPLX/MH 16:45, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
In forty years British English has evolved. This is perhaps one of the distinctions between British English and American English. Many of the spellings that are used in American English have dropped out of favour in British English. The same is true of punctuiation style. It is now common in British English to avoid excessive use of full-stops when writing acronyms. I cannot find the specific guideline on Wikipedia, but I can assure you that it is the custom to write UK rather than U.K. for British English articles on Wikipedia. Take a look at the United Kingdom article for starters. Jooler 21:46, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I've not made any mention of American anything in the edit summaries. What on Earth are you on about? UK and not U.K. -IS - the Wikipedia convention for articles written in British English., which, given the fact that the Rockall article mainly concerns British and Irish interests, is the variety of English of choice for that article. Jooler 22:29, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Also I can assure you that stating that American English spellings etc.. have evolved less than British English spellings is specifically stated in Wikipedia somewhere. The ..ize ..ise difference is a good example. Jooler 22:34, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- You said "I find your claim that using the correct punctuation in "U.K." is American to be peculiar" - Where did I state this!? Nowhere.
- You then said "Saying that the dropping of punctuation in abbreviations is now common in British English (a point that I made myself, just above) is very different from claiming that their use is American" - Yet again I have at no point made any claim about U.K. being American.
- So after you twice asserted that I made a claim that using U.K. was American I tried to reinforce the point by emphasising that that I hadn't made any such claim in my edit summaries (or indeed elsewhere). Ok? Jooler 22:40, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think it's time for us to cool down a while..., my projects are waiting for me up. Meanwhile, lets go seperate ways for the time being in wikipedia, but I will come back to debate about Zanskar and Tsushima Islans somewhere in May. It is still not at proper wikipedia article standard. If you don't know what I mean, go to Wikipedia:Pushing to 1.0.
Tan 13:35, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I was wondering why you protected Jguk's admin criterion discussion page? I had a really good point to make. I also noticed on the system log that you didn't leave a reason in the summary field as to why the page is protected. Is it a private matter? — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 16:31, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for the block of Antaeus FeIdspar (talk · contribs). I was trying to report him on WP:ViP but something was going wrong with the editing... -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:04, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for getting rid of that header at Moshe Marzouk, Mel. I didn't feel I ought to do it myself. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:09, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
That's just an unfortunate remnant of an attempt to learn to make templates, sorry. Kim Bruning's deleting my template now, I hope and trust. Thanks for telling me!--Bishonen | talk 22:55, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mel, I recently made significant changes to the Afrocentrism entry. I understand that, given that I have JUST registered, that it may appear as if I'm a "vandal." But I read the original entry very carefully, and having expertise in this area I felt compelled to make the changes I did. I know how to edit pages, but am still working my way around Wikipedia as a website. So if you feel strongly about this, or would like to talk to me about etiquette, please email me at kspence@wustl.edu. Thanks!
For your vote and for your kind words of support in my rfa. I appreciate that very much. I feel especially fortunate it did not take place on 1 April, though come to think of it... ;) El_C 03:13, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sorry for the lapse. I generally do check history. But that day on RC Patrol I had only opend New Articles from RC Patrol. So I thought this article on Oona King to be a new one. Anyways thanx for correcting me.bye Gaurav1146 09:30, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi there! I noticed a rather ugly debate on this article that lead to an apparent sock-supported vote to merge, and much-debated VfD... some of the names seem familiar and I do recall a certain context of relentless POV-pushing. I'm no expert on these matters, but maybe an RfC is in order, or an RFAR since there already were a series of RfCs on the subject that didn't much help? Yours, Radiant_* 10:49, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
Have a look: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). muriel@pt 08:35, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I just saw this edit of yours in RC (just coincidence, i dont even usually see whats on RC) and found it extremely odd. You are aware of the conventions, arent you? As a sysop, i mean. muriel@pt 11:25, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mel: i'm not trying to get *an explanation* for your edit, nor do i want to criticize you. I just found the thing odd and i was just wondering if you are aware of the conventions. Well apparently you are and you had your reasons. Thats just it :). Cheers, muriel@pt 11:40, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello Mel. I made a few new articles and if you have a chance could you wikify some of them? They might not be your type but I really need some help to get organized. If you can help me out please let me know on my talk page or whatever preference you want. --Contrib 16:34, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mel I really think the ZOOM casts should stay because it's not really useless material. If you really think it should not belong then i'am not going against you but I really think the casts should stay. --Contrib 17:14, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mel is their already a list? --Contrib 18:26, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
is it ok if i write an article on how to stretch the recent changes page? k thanks
I'll be more visual; how to stretch the recent changes page
- ( 62.255.64.9 18:47, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mel Etitis — Joy Stovall has mentioned you as a person that I could ask for some advice on what to do about the Jeb Bush article. I see that you have already started to try to edit the article yourself, and have seen some of what I was on the receiving end of for the last few days.
My version of events and how I tried to resolve any disputes with SummerFR are located at User:BaronLarf/Aribtration with SummerFR. If you have any ideas on how I could have handled the issue differently, please let me know. Also, if you'd like to comment on the arbitration which has been brought against me by SummerFR, I'd appreciate it. Thanks much. --BaronLarf 20:07, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that there's little anyone can do informally. The pattern is a familiar one: an editor who ahs a very strong point of view but isn't very articulate, who sees everyone who disagrees with him as biased and hostile, and who won't or can't think clearly about the issues or reflect upon his own behaviour. I'll keep trying, but eventually I think that something more formal, such as an RfC, will be needed. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:21, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. I would tend to agree that an RfC against him will probably be necessary. I don't want to be the first or only person to lodge it against him, though, since that would probably seem retaliatory. I have plenty of evidence compiled, though, if one eventually is filed. --BaronLarf 20:26, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
Sorry to keep pestering you, but SummerFR has removed messages from my talk page twice now. Is there a way that she could be blocked from editting my user space? Thanks much. Oh, and congrats on the 10,000 edits. I hope to get there, too, before burning out. ;^) --BaronLarf 03:06, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
Because you have asked me to comment on this RfC I have done so, though I still think it's nonsense. RickK 23:05, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
Congratilations you busy guy! hydnjo talk 00:16, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Please reconsider your vote to delete the article Netbux, which has been completely re-written. Your delete vote reflects your attitute to the previous version of the page, but I am sure your vote will be to keep the current version. It would also be appreciated if you could remove your offensive comments about 'shrinking very rapidly' off the vfd page. Thanks. THE KING 08:27, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for supporting my revert of Trey Stone's edits to Death squad. FYI, he is also pushing the same POV in Amy Goodman, Allan Nairn, and FRAPH. W.r.t to the latter two, I haven't reverted him yet; I challenged him on the resp. talk pages but as yet no response. For my part, I would have no objection to him adding alternative analyses of such events, provided such assertions are attributed to someone and citations are given, but he doesn't do this. Looks like just another right-winger on a quixotic crusade to "purify" Wikipedia. -- Viajero 11:52, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The problem with Wikipedia is that it can be taken over by just a handful of people with their own agenda. Teach the Controversy is a good example. I am coming to the conclusion that Wikipedia has built-in flaws with regards to its liberal editing policy. On the TTC article the very first few words turn a idea into a movement and a future controversy into an ongoing affair. But there is no movement outside of the DI and now I see that about 3-4 people (possibly less under more than one name) have spread this same polemical nonsense over many articles on Wikipedia. My reason for stepping in was to see if something logical would result, but I am rapidly reaching the conclusion that Wikipedia is a failed system because of its built-in flaws. I have pulled everything back except for this article in order to see what might happen - which is why I backed you - but unless something happens fairly soon to restore my lost interest, I am pulling up stakes and moving out of Wikiland. MPLX/MH 19:51, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
User Whodunit is sockpuppet of recently banned (by you) Whodidit. His own confession. He was blocked for mere 24 hours. Could you please block him permanently as well? I would put request in WP:VIP but the page is so big that it become unusable. Pavel Vozenilek 22:00, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
You are a pain in the neck in other areas, but please come on in and take over now that I have set the stage for you on Teach the Controversy. It is now all about a basic use of the English language and the meaning of words and tense, etc., etc. (really very boring, but so easy for you to drive a little stake through the heart of this mess of words - English words!) MPLX/MH 23:56, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Both you and I have been involved in this debate, but looking at the flurries of edits, reverts, and general hostility over the last couple of days (the page now has THREE (!!) "disputed" templates at the top) I'm wondering if maybe it's not time to put a temporary protect on the page to give tempers a chance to cool. If you feel you're too involved to use your admin powers to protect, I'll happily request it on the "Request" page. If you think it's appropriate, of course. Soundguy99 00:14, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- well, things seemed to have calmed down somewhat on their own as of right now. I'll keep an eye on it and if it fires up again I'll put in a request. Thanks. Soundguy99 14:18, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
User:Helpful Dave and User:Sam Spade are trying to make this page into a redirect to Evacuation of East Prussia. I'd welcome your assistance in preventing this. --- Charles Stewart 10:47, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Dear Mel Etitis, greetings from Whodunit! Or Whodidit, Whoisit, Whowasit, Whowillitbe, and Whowasthat. You were wrong in thinking that I am an "idiot without a life." I am quite the opposite. I am a learned man with a very fruitful life, and who does things like these on Wikipedia under cover of anonymity. As I was saying, I had posted a message, which I broke up, on many pages in Wikipedia. It is very important and addresses a security flaw that you have here. However, I guess nobody cared to read it, so don't blame me if hordes of vandalbots wreck every single article written here, or if terrorists decide to store information on Wikipedia. As a philosopher, you should have stopped and looked at the big picture, not just those little fragments humans like to contemplate on. But of course, you didn't do that. Regards from Whoisthat. 12:12, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello, Mel. Thanks for your vote at my adminship nomination. I appreciate the support, particularly from such a respected editor as yourself. Cheers! — Trilobite (Talk) 13:20, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
It looks like you've got a fan, too! I have blocked the account User:Smell Etitis indefinitely, as I construe it, along with the edits from the account, to be harassment and a violation of policy at Wikipedia:Username. Cheers. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:42, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
Hey, Mel, I've reverted the dates on this article. The format I'm using is the Wikipedia standard for birth and death dates. RickK 66.60.159.190 18:49, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Look over there -->
Sorry if it's too long, feel free to truncate it if you wish :P
I know edit count is definitely not everything...but you've gotta give a guy credit for having such an extrodinary number! And I thought I was an addict! -Frazzydee|✍ 00:45, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello Mel,
On "Occam's Razor" I changed the word "defence" to "defense." Apparently defence *is* a proper variant of defense, though normally only in Britain, according to Dictionary.com. I believe defense is the more common spelling meaning "to defend."
-Scott
- Sorry to butt in, but "defence" is not a proper variant. It is the spelling of the word. "Defense" is a variant of it used in the US and to some extent in Canada. — Helpful Dave 19:55, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Da cow jumped over defence, first defeat and then detail. :) "Defence" is a proper variant, being used mostly in Great Britain and in "civilized/civilised" Europe (meaning those Europeans who speak English and are aware of their being on the intercontinental level). No, I am not prejudiced, merely observant of other people. I am very open to different ideas. Since this article Occam's Razor refers to an originally British concept, the spelling used should be British, therefore defence and nothing else. - Sir James 21:04, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'm assuming you meant Pantheism where you said "Pamtheism". --brian0918™ 21:48, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Mel, may I ask why you reverted my edits to birdfeeding? In particular, the jackdaw does not exist in North America, and the list is of birds in US cities. Also, the style on Wikipedia and in general is for common names of bird species to be capitalized . -- Coneslayer 21:59, 2005 Apr 28 (UTC)
- OK, I've explained things on the talk page, but really the changes are pretty obvious and could be verified with the WP articles themselves (most importantly jackdaw which I linked to in the edit summary). The links were pluralized for grammatical reasons. I wouldn't call them broken since they still work, but I've rewritten them as [[Goose|geese]]. It just seems backward to me to use human beings as labor-saving devices for computers. Was there something in particular you wanted me to see in the species lists? I'm generally familar with North American birds, and my edit brought the taxonomy and capitalization in line with the lists you sent. -- Coneslayer 23:58, 2005 Apr 28 (UTC)
- Mel, it is absolutely, positively, standard practice in birding to capitalize the common names of species. See, for example, ISBN 0679451226, which you can look inside at Amazon.com. I have about 3 feet of birding books on my shelf, and can't remember seeing one that didn't capitalize common names of species (unfortunately, most of them don't have page images at Amazon to show you, but they include works by the top authors in the U.S., like Pete Dunne and Kimball Garrett). I also checked my only European field guide, ISBN 0691050546, and it also capitalizes the common names (and you can look inside on Amazon), so it's not just a North American thing.
- The practice may not be as uniform in, say, scientific journals on ornithology, for consistency with other biological fields which do not capitalize common names. The Ivory-billed Woodpecker article in Science, for example, does not capitalize. However, ornithologists like Kimball Garrett (curator of ornithology at the Los Angeles Museum of Natural History, one of the best collections in the U.S.) do capitalize common names in their books, and when writing to birders on the Internet.
- It may "look odd" to you to see some birds capitalized and others not, but the point is to make it clear whether you're talking about a particular species. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (fauna) makes this point explicitly. And in North America, it's critical to know whether you're talking about the House Sparrow or the unrelated (New World) sparrows.
- Regarding Jackdaw being on those NA lists, that's because those are comprehensive lists that include any bird ever recorded on the continent, including rarities and vagrants from Europe and Asia. A similar list for the UK would include American Robin, even though it is a rarity there (and certainly not a common city bird!).
- Honestly, if you don't like the list as it is now, I'd be tempted just to axe it. The article is not Birds found in U.S. cities, and birdfeeding is not an exclusively urban nor American activity. The list looks totally ad-hoc to me. As a fairly experienced birder, I was just trying to make it suck less. -- Coneslayer 14:45, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
- Mel, we may lack species in common, but the ones we got from you (House Sparrow, European Starling, and Rock Dove) make up for it in sheer number of birds! I like the list you added, because it's from a bona fide source and lists real species of birds (not vague groups like "ducks"). I'll try to find something similar in the U.S., maybe from our Great Backyard Bird Count. It may simply not work out as well here, because the U.S. is so big, with such varied weather and terrain. Aside from the pests listed above, the yard birds here in Los Angeles are not the same as I had growing up in Pennsylvania. -- Coneslayer 15:30, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
Professor, I am very clear in my recollection that my own humanites professor discussed this concept in class, although it was a decade ago. Maybe it properly goes under a different name, but surely there exists some philosophical system that encompasses these beliefs? -- 8^D BD2412gab 22:09, 2005 Apr 28 (UTC)
- (not including the bit about spiritual pandeism at the end - someone else wrote that, and it's entirely different from anything I'd heard). -- 8^D BD2412gab 22:20, 2005 Apr 28 (UTC)
- The Albuquerque Journal for Saturday, November 11, 1995, B-10 quotes a Vietnam vet-turned trappist monk who "describes his current spiritual position as "'pandeism' or 'pan-en-deism,' something very close to the Native American concept of the all- pervading Great Spirit..." This is around the same time that I first heard the term used - a few thousand miles from Albuquerque - so maybe it was just in vogue for a little while then. -- 8^D BD2412gab 01:41, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
It appears professor Mendoza is no longer in the FIU Philosophy department. He may have retired by now - I believe he got his doctorate in the 1960s. -- 8^D BD2412gab 07:47, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
- Forget all the above. I just found conclusive evidence of the use of the term "Pandeism" dating back to 1833 , being used by Godfrey Higgins, a follower of John Toland, the creator of pantheism.. The term is used in a book on the history of religion written by Higgins (and published on his death in 1833) called the Anacalypsis. The article has now been completely rewritten to primarily reflect the use of the term in this book. I suspect you are in a position to verify this information, and request that you do so if possible. -- 8^D BD2412gab 10:55, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
