User talk:Rl/2005

As of September 4, 2005, this editor has left. Drop me an email if you need a reply.

Hello Rl/2005 and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

• To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
• Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
• If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
• Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
• Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
• Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

I meant no it's not as sort of an "answer" to what the first sentence was saying, not to any user in particular. I don't know what the source of that phrasing was. Sorry if I said something wrong. VeryVerily 12:40, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi Rl, just deleted the old copacabana/bolivia and loaded a new one less compressed, 141kB, that should suit the article. I'm never quite sure how many kB I should use in pictures. Thanks for the comment Gerd Breitenbach 22:15, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

LPA

hey, re: lpa (lansing progressive alliance) ya i am in the process of writing it, sorry, havent finished it yet. i have checked it out and i believe it to be note worthy. It is new, so i guess i caould wait till it starts getting google ranks if you believe that would be more kosher. zro/lansing resident

so.... are you syaing that i should trash the whole thing? I do believe it to be worthy. AND i have written a stub (for now) for Lansing Progressive Alliance... (sorry, if im outta line, i just wanna help)

African American history

Thanks for the heads up. I reverted to the version prior to the insertion of the copyvio. That's generally okay, unless the copyright holder comes over and demands that we get it out of the history. RickK 21:09, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Anti-American Sentiment

Splitting the two articles OUGHT to be an embarrasment for WP. It's idiotic. Using the logic employed for the split you could create thousands of redundant, unnecessary distinctions in the encyclopedia. Somebody should re-merge them.

As for my addition it's sensible and I think neutral. Sam Johnson is probably the best known anti-American of the 18th century and deserves mention. Marskell

Thx for reply. I only say idiotic because the definitions in the two articles are IDENTICAL. The fact that aren't more splits like this is sort of the point: the encycl. works because its discursive without too much redundancy and when you see a distinction were no real distinction exists it sticks out. --Marskell 17:48, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hello

Hi. Suffice 19:45, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

flag templates

The changes I made were to conform to ISO 3166-1, so you could use that as a reference page. However, User:Earl Andrew prefers List of IOC country codes. Anyways, I've posted a comment at Wikipedia:Village pump (news) asking for wider input into this. -- Curps 23:17, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wakefield Regional Council:Green Paper

Thanks for the note - have moved the page to Wikisource Brookie 15:03, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Forum Venalia

have at it, and thanks. Ccson 04:29, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think the topic Forum Venalium should be Forum Venalia since it discusses all the markets. Do you know how to rename the topic? thanks for watchful eye and help. Ccson 06:17, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm ready to create the next topic Forum Civilium. Is this the correct singular form and fora civilia the plural form? I can help with french to return the favor. Ccson 01:06, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

German elections

Are you sure that the page on German elections in 2006 should be mentioned in the Category:Elections? There are hundreds of pages about specific elections, I don't think they should all be mentioned there... Rob 07:50, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, I had not seen the box you mentioned! I'm new here :-) Rob 09:33, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Greek Cross and CopyVio

Why you keep saying that Greek Cross is a copyvio? It is not! It is just wikipedia's cache, a tottaly legal way that all search engines are using in order to present copyrighted texts from the internet. So please revert your "copyvio" notice and put back the "wikicache" notice. Thank you. Agatharcides 11:07, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you that we have to respect copyrighted cached pages and let all those pages as they are, without editing them. So please remove your "copyvio" notice, put back my "wikicache" notice and protect the page, so that noone can edit it. Agatharcides 11:17, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Copyright infringement

I am owner of that site and I am using summary of my own pages about Pahlavi Literature so the page 'Denkard' should not be a copyright infringement because I am the holder.

I noticed you removed the copyvio tag from Denkard. Was that solely based on the claim of some (anonymous, no less) WP editor, or do you have further evidence that I am not aware of? Rl 20:58, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That was solely on the anon's claim. Thue | talk 21:14, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Mind if I put the tag back? Rl 07:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That is fine with me. I just didn't have the time to send the webmaster an email to check the validity of the claim. Thue | talk 08:03, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jeypore

Hi, Jeypore and Jaipur are two different places. Jaipur is capital of Rajasthan, while Jeypore is a small town in Orissa.

{{Move to Wiktionary}}

Thanks for adding the "move to wiktionary" tag to some pages, but in the process of tranwiki-ing, I noticed that some of them have already been done before. When I transwiki, a template gets added to the talk page. Before you add a tag in the future, could you check the talk and/or history to see if it's already been transwikied. Off the top of my head, both Fultum and belifan had already been done. In fact, in the future if you see a dicdef that's already been transwikied, you may want to nominate it for VfD. --Dmcdevit 23:49, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

{{cleanup}}

Likes to go around adding {{cleanup}} to pages without looking into why they are there. Pointless wiki-facist! RebelScum RebelScum

Gary Webb

Do you have a reason for the dab header being at the top of Gary Webb? Yes, Gary Numan's real name was Gary Webb, but people searching for Gary Numan aren't going to search for Gary Webb. A google search doesn't show any problems either, so there isn't a chance of someone getting the wrong page if they search for Gary Webb. If you don't object, I'm going to move the dab header to the bottom. I'll give it a day or so. --Viriditas | Talk 11:18, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply. Regarding the official policy page on dab, there is nothing wrong with adding the dab to the bottom of the page, but I agree, they are useful at the top. The page also states, Do not disambiguate, or add a link to a disambiguation page, if there is no risk of confusion..When a reader enters this term and pushes "Go", would they expect to view any of the articles listed on the disambiguation page? So, it might be a good idea to speculate why someone might enter Gary Numan's real name when looking for information about him. I'm going to let your change stand for now because I agree they are more useful at the top in most cases. --Viriditas | Talk 05:31, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

From User:Dbraceyrules

Thank you for ou help on the Oath of the Horatii article of mine. I'm not ver good with HTML, (as you can see) and I still can't figure out how you got the picture to go in the right place. But anway, thanks for the help. I like it when other contributors help my articles out.

No, I'm fine. Thanks. Dbraceyrules 23:32, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Clint Curtis

You noted a lack of NPOV in this article. I have attempted to restore a balance, but it's frustrating with so few sources, alll of them seemingly biased. Your comments are welcome. Bovlb 01:15, 2005 May 4 (UTC)

Circa

Both "c." and "ca" are standard abbreviations for "circa", though I'd have thought that "c." was much more common. Actually, looking at various reference books to hand (published by OUP, Penguin, Pan, Blackwell, Rowman and Littlefield, Barron, and Routledge), "c." is used in all of them, "ca" in none (checking a couple of dictionaries, "c." dates to the 18th century; I don't know about "ca", they don't give a date for it).

I prefer "c.", not only because it's the one I'm used to seeing, but also because it avoids the U.S./U.K. abbrevations conflict: correct U.K. usage is to place a full stop after an abbreviation to mark a cutting off (so "Oxford Street" becomes "Oxford St.", while "Saint Peter" becomes "St Peter"; thus it's Dr, Mr, Mrs, Rd, ca 1137, etc., but Ave., Phil. of Sci., etc.). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:27, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

The martall images

Why did you remove the external image links from Mara (folklore)? I thought it would be good if people not familiar with pine trees got an idea of what the article was referring to. Salleman 18:13, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

William Stuart (archbishop)

Hi there RI. Yeah I think Category:Archbishops would probably be better as I don't think there's a Category:Archbishops of Armagh (Church of Ireland) at the moment (maybe you could create it? :-) ) Also {{Reli-bio-stub}} could be added too maybe? Thanks ♪ Craigy ♫ 04:06, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

Finger licking good

Again, can you check an article's talk page or history before you put the "move to Wiktionary" tag up? I transwikied Finger licking good just yesterday, and you tagged it today, creating more work for me if I have to search every article to see if it has been done before and take down the tag. Of course, I don't want to discourage you from tagging dicdefs, just be more careful. --Dmcdevit 22:01, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

• I have no idea what the policy is for a template like that. {{vfd}}, {{npov}}, and {{cleanup}} are definitely less wordy, but they, I think, serve a separate purpose. They are for the reader as much as the editor, and point editors to the relavent discussion page. Whereas the "Transwikied to Wiktionary" is only for editors, for their information and to tell them what to do about the article now. I suppose we could have another template on the article to point to the more wordy message on the talk page but that's just more work for the Transwiki-er. In any case, i don't think it's a big deal to just check, and even then it's not much of a crisis if it's done twice (even though that deletes the previous transwiki, which is bad if it has changed). I guess I didn't really give you an answer :) but if you care enough, talk to Kevin Rector and Uncle G --Dmcdevit 00:18, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

rv Anti- American sentiment

sorry not to be clear. i did not revert in entirety only cut-and-pasted intro changes and left subsequent edits by unnamed user. Marskell 12:37, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

W-field

To answer your questions: yes, well, I also posted a deletion notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics but curiously, there is no Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics. There are qualified people on WP who could look at this stuff, but there are three problems: 1) they log on infrequently, 2) they don't hang out on VfD pages, 3) the 5-day period is not long enough given 1 & 2 above. As to that user's other contributions, they all seem to be links to this cluster of articles. linas 21:18, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Holy Ghost redirect

Apologies, my oops. jlang 10:46, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

photographycorner.com

why did you remove most of my posts regarding photography? Would you rather I just insert the article onto the page or something? I'm not link farming, and I resent the fact that you are accusing me of doing so.

moved Thebassman's note over from User:Rl/Scratchpad

- sorry for writing here... I'm not overly familiar with Wikipedia as far as editing goes, so I'm not sure where else to put this... I use it extensively for research, but rarely add anything myself. Again, I am sorry that the links I added were against policy. Originally, a couple of the links that pointed to myself were added by someone else. I will not post any more links to external sites here. Thanks, and sorry again for the inconvenience.

moved Thebassman's note over from User:Rl/Scratchpad

Categories

For some reason, in the past few days if I save a change in the category sorting (eg. if the entry has been filed as "John Smith", so I change it to "Smith, John"), what happens is that the sort change saves on the article, but it still stays incorrectly sorted under J in the category list. I've been removing categories and then readding them again because so far, that's the only way I've found to actually make the category page move the article to the correct sorting letter. It's supposed to change automatically, yes...but in the past few days it hasn't been working that way. Bearcat 22:41, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

PLGA microspheres

I've had it on my watchlist as well, and I couldn't find it on Google first time around. I'll check the other two suspect ones at work this morning (I have access to University databases that store thousands of abstracts and papers). From my own experience hunting down journal articles you have to be really finiky/carefull/lucky to score an exact hit sometimes. Thanks for flaging up those other two for me. Sabine's Sunbird 14:32, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

• Update, I've tagged both of them as copyvios. Sabine's Sunbird 15:08, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Quaesitosaurus

Yeah, you got it. Basically I wanted to see if it was real. When I googled for it I typed it in cause my copy/paste was screwed up. Must have typed it wrong. Thanks! CryptoDerk 20:30, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Man-boy Love

A longtime proponent of man-boy love, I feel it is my duty to share the wonder of sex as I learned it growing up, with young boys just discovering their bodies.

moved 131.30.121.23's confession over from User:Rl

{{wi}}

I have some problems with the redirect template, and that's why I haven't been quick to use it. The fact is, Wikipedia is still an encyclopedia, and a redirect to a dictionary definition is just as good as a definition itself. Not to mention that as a redirect, it fails badly, because interwiki redirects don't work and the reader has to click the article. Also, it strikes me as a self-reference. We have templates for encyclopedia articles ({{wiktionary}}) because they are like external links, and provide context for the article. If there is no article, than this is just advertising our other project. Also, it creates a blue link where such an article has no right to appear blue. And it skews results in Special:Shortpages and "Random page" (especially if it were used more often).

Actually, I have a feeling if it were listed on TfD it wouldn't survive. In fact, I've even seen articles that consisted of just this be deleted on VfD, because, after all, it would be just an article with no potential for growth and no encyclopedic content (which could even be speedied for that reason). Despite all this, I can see it may be helpful for entries that are such common words they may be recreated again and again, but only if it cannot be merged and redirected. All in all, I don't dislike it enough to list for deletion, but I certainly don't like it enough to use it, and from the looks of, not many others do either. --Dmcdevit 18:35, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Stub

There is no fixed definition for a stub. Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub has them being generally "of one paragraph or less". I personally feel that the number of pages marked as stubs should be kept down. Marking three sentence articles like this one makes it less likley that someone will get around to fixing the several thosand one and two sentence stubs that are far more in need of aid. This is especially true of the massive categories like bio-stub. Others obviously disagree and there are many much larger articles marked as stubs. So if you think it is important feel free to readd the stub template to Mr. Spottswood. - SimonP 15:38, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

Sup

Dude, how much does this site pay you for the work you do? I can see a long list of yr contributions. Are you jobless by anychance or yr a full time employee of this site? --Fcuk 15:31, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Copyvio

Sorry, I don't think I could possibly try to sort things out, not having been involved in it before. Maybe you should bring it up on the India Collaboration of the week, and possibly file an RfC on the editor. RickK 18:58, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

You're very wrong, copyvios are taken very seriously. Like I said, I really don't want to try to wade through all of it. List it on Copyright problems or revert it, and as I said, take it to RfC. RickK 19:34, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your suggestion regarding comments on Mount Everest. Much appreciated. --postglock 03:02, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I, too, would like to thank you for finding the correct spelling of Ronald Mallett's name. Steveo2

Those Indo-Pak images

I've listed them all on WP:CP. Lupo 20:04, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Personal Attacks

I will try to tone down my responses. However, your message indicated that RJ has tried to stay calm. What he has tried to do is troll and incite others, repeatedly. He has blatantly advocated an attitude of eternal war on wikipedia, where there is no compromise, no cooperation, and no consensus. He routinely mocks any procedures on wikipedia that attempt to find a middle ground between disperate views. As such he is attacking wikipedia itself, yet I am the one who is chided for inappropriate behavior? I would rather loose my temper on occasion to someone who is purposefully unreasonable than to not even attempt to be reasonable in the first place. That RJ covers his obvious hostility make him no more civil, his barbs and snide remarks are never-ending and all the more biting for their claim to some high ground. Kev 23:08, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

April Love

Hi, I just saw your comment on your addition of the image to "Arthur Hugues (artist)" (April Love, 1856 (well, no couple; I suppose this is a fragment, then?). Thanks for adding the pic. It’s not a fragment, but it is a couple. Sadly, the man can’t easily be seen in this illustration. The black shape at the left in the window is the man’s head, bending down to kiss the woman’s hand. Paul B 20:31 12 June, 2005 (UTC)

Link spam warning

Hello there,

In regards to me being warned about link spamming - I found the tone a bit offensive. I was adding the articles as support for the topics and was unaware that this would be a problem.

Hlarson User:71.37.2.14 01:24, 14 June 2005

PA 103

Thank you for your kind and gracious comment, Rl. I appreciate it very much. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 12:56, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Terrorism in Kashmir

Hi, I'm trying to clean up the old WP:CP, would you be able to tell me how the article stands no in terms of the copyvios, and which version was the last clean version. Thanks --nixie 00:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I had the same query about copyvios inserted into an exisitng article, and these were the best sources I could find, Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations on history pages in the section on GFDL & Deletion of Article History and here Wikipedia:Copyrights. My interpretation of those sources is that if a copyright violation is added to an existing article that it should be removed or rewritten but the whole article doesn't need to be deleted to clear the history. I revert copyvios in existing text and only list articles that started life as a copyvio on WP:CP. Thanks for spotting this one, but if there are no traces of the old copyvio then it should be ok to leave it as is.--nixie 07:11, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Tutorials for HTML

Why did you revert Peterf's edit on Talk:HTML? The article page instructs people to make suggestions there: "we are intentionally keeping this list very short; please use the discussion page to nominate new entries" Rl 5 July 2005 06:38 (UTC)

Honest mistake. It was the exact same text he had pasted on XHTML, so I thought it was yet another link spam. I had only looked at the diff, so I didn't have that context. I will remember to look more at the context before reverting in the future. --cesarb 5 July 2005 12:08 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. It wasn't meant as a criticism anyway, I was just curious. Rl 5 July 2005 12:20 (UTC)

I had already noticed by the tone it was not a criticism, more like "you did something strange. Are you sure you meant that?". Anyways, thanks for that — I wouldn't have noticed I had made a mistake otherwise. --cesarb 5 July 2005 12:27 (UTC)

NPOV

I'm too tired and technically incompetent to move a comment on a new discussion page that I've inadvertently created on your NPOV comments. I would have preferred it here.Apologies. Jeffrey Newman 06:06, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Arrived here through your comment just above an edit I've made: [[1]].

I am gathering strength to look at the philosophical/political implications of NPOV and appreciate your gloss. Am I fair with my Hayek edit? I'm a newbie. Jeffrey Newman 05:59, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

moved comment over from User talk:Rl/NPOV

Concerning Hayek and Tacit knowledge, thanks for the encouragement - only my second real 'edit.' I have now performed the transplant, left a short explanation and hope someone will help with the somewhat incomplete surgery. Jeffrey Newman 08:49, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Wildfire

"The word wildfire originally meant a medieval substance somewhat like napalm."

I read it somewhere. An expert on medieval warfare may know more than me. Anthony Appleyard 09:22, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

buzzwords

I'm not going to rv the non existance of wank word claim but your argument "wikipedia does not have an article on it" is weak. There are many articles, let alone phrases, that are missing from wikipedia that are found in textbooks. Currently, wikipedia is not even close to comprehensive. David D. 00:38, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for taking on Peredvizhniki. This important article desperately needed the overhaul. Rl 18:10, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure. >>sparkit|TALK<< 20:54, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Napoleon reference

If it were just listed as an "external link", I'd agree. But it's given as a reference, with the date it was consulted. Someone should re-check the site for whatever material was referenced from it and then give the new date for when the reference was checked. Until then, it is against all standards of referencing to simply claim that the new site qualifies as a reference used in writing the article. One of the things that is a pain about online references, especially when someone cites the index page of a site, with no further clarity as to what they used: if there had been specific pages cited, we could simply find them on the Internet Archive. There may be a better way to handle this than what I did, but claiming that on some date in 2004 we accessed something that was not there on that date is misleading citation. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:46, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

WP:CP

It's good to see someone willing to help out with copyvios. Please add them at the bottom of a day's list, and do sign them with date and user name (~~~~). Keep up the good work. Rl 10:57, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Actualy I can do beter than that on server: irc.freenode.net and channel: #en.wikipedia.vandalism I have a bot that was ment to detect vandalism. It apperanltly does a good job detecting copy vios. An unintended function if you will. Feel free to use it ;) --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 11:01, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. Did you post the source code somewhere? Rl 11:35, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Code isn't open source only because I am too... well... protective of my code... --Cool Cat ^{My Talk} 11:51, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Mark Wingett/annoying IP/Mr Burns

I see you're one of the people who has been reverting the vandal who claims that a minor British soap opera actor does the voice for Mr Burns. The IP is doing a similar thing with (albeit a far less notable subject) Families - I've slapped a VFD on his{?} article Amanda Dickison, if you want to join in? The JPS 12:52, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Reference section move reversion on Kerteminde municipality article

Hi, I reverted your section move, but to the best of my understanding references should be at the bottom of the article, per Cite sources. Yes, I saw that there has been some discussion about the positioning, without any conclusion drawn. I personally prefer the end position. I am in the process of "improving" all the articles about municipalities in Denmark, and not just the Kerteminde municipality article. And I have been applying the references section as a "standard" piece of text at the end of each article. I am striving for more consistency between the articles, and would like to avoid inconsistencies wherever possible. If you think this is bad placement, lets talk about it, so that the placement can be consistent throughout. Thanks. Sfdan 14:53, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Tři oříšky pro Popelku

Thanks for catching this. Pavel Vozenilek 21:31, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanx for advice

Namaste, We the proud Wikipedians surely change the way world thinks Tux the penguin 06:36, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

External links

Is links supposed to be uncapped? Any style recommendation on that?

• Jordanmills 19:56, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

previous

Hum, can't see how I missed that. Thanks, I'll keep it in mind.

Naturalism in paintings

I came here because I see you deal with painter cats frequently. I'm not sure what category Jules Bastien-Lepage fits. His style is usually called naturalism. The difference between realism and naturalism in painting looks like an exercise hair-splitting to me, though, and if I went by the Naturalism (art) article, then he would fit Category:Realism artists. Thoughts? Rl 07:33, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I was curious about the categories, and the next thing ya know... Indeed, it does look like a hair splitting exercise, or perhaps the terms are synonymous. Though there is an "art movement" called Realism, and Lepage seems to fit the description -- realistic depictions and mid-19th century. >>sparkit|TALK<< 15:27, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Slime_Volleyball

Hi,

You asked about Slime_Volleyball - I'll explain what happened, hopefully this will answer your question! I'm a bit green, and I think at least one newbie error occured...

I put a Vfd on Daniel_Wedge due to non-notability. In my haste, I commented that Slime_Volleyball should probably go too, blithely assuming it was just something he'd made up. I even went so far as to begin Vfd'ing the Slime_Volleyball page - I quickly realised my action was wholey uncalled for! I manually removed the Vfd of the top of the page, which is perhaps bad form... I assume it was this that drew your attention. Should I have acted differently?

Thanks in advance for any advice! Grayum 21:22, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Moved over from user page

A huge tool whom thinks he owns this site.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.64.98.163 (talk • contribs) 05:31, 15 August 2005

Honda

Hello, and thanks for asking. The reason I removed Honda from the Category:Companies of Japan cat is because I placed the entire company category (Category:Honda)as a subcat of CoJ, which had not been done before. I then placed the Honda article as the marquee article of the Honda cat, which is what it should have been. I realize it probably confused a few people, but the whole cat should have been done that way in the first place. Hope that clears things up.--Mitsukai 12:23, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Heh. That's the fun of what happens when the computer gets into stutter-land. ^_^;;;--Mitsukai 12:33, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

UTF-8

Hi RI - you wrote: You may be using an editor that doesn't deal well with UTF-8. Unfortunate things can happen if you do. It's fixed now, but I thought you might want to know.

Thanks for that - back then I was having trouble with my browser (see comments here - for some reason my copy of Mozilla was re-setting its preferences every time I started it up). Must've missed that one. Grutness...wha? 13:00, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

rv addition of external link

Hi RI. Why did you remove some photos links (Vilfredo Pareto, ...)? It's not spamlinks! It is a good collection of photographies. Please look at them attentively. Vdgr 22:59, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

I've got your massage just now. I've understood. Thank you for your answer. But I already insert my links to some pages. I'm sorry. Vdgr

Admins quality

I see your work and wonder why you are not admin. Quality and quantity of your work suggest it. Admin available tools may save some time. If you ever thought about it I would be the first one to nominate you. Pavel Vozenilek 21:09, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'll nominate you say a week from now, there are currently many people on WP:RFA to get proper attention. I'll let you know. Pavel Vozenilek

Nominated at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rl. Please add acceptance and few words about you. Pavel Vozenilek 02:40, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry

Ah, OK, sorry. I just thought it's the only way to get through to him, since he(?)doesn't reply to talk pages, and the vandalism is prolonged. My lastest comment has used the patting technique, as opposed to responding with hostility that has previously been used. The JPS 12:05, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Redundant cats

Hi there RI. You say on my talk page that Category:New Zealand all-rounders is in Category:New Zealand cricketers which in turn is in Category:New Zealand sportspeople, so those two were redundant in Lance Cairns. Categories can indeed be a puzzle. But, regarding Lance Cairns, he is first and foremost a New Zealand sports person and therefore comes under Category:New Zealand sportspeople. There surely has to be a category that we can click on that takes us to every kiwi sportsperson. That was the fundamental rationale for the establishment of categories, with further sub categorisation being broken down into indvidual sport. Another point, in this particular instance, is that Cairns was also a representative golfer (as his article will soon say), not just a cricketer. If we had only one cat to describe him it would logicaly need to be sports person. So I have re-inserted Category:New Zealand sportspeople into the Cairns article. Cheers. Moriori 22:27, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Image:M alison atkins ark.jpg

The licensing information you provided for that image says "Permission given to show image on Wikipedia". That sounds rather unlikely. Either the image is out of copyright (unfortunately, there's no publication year given), or it is still in copyright and is unfree. Can you clarify? Rl 17:13, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Well my father owns the original and I took the photo, but also it was painted in 1921 so I believe that puts into the public domain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt.whitby (talk • contribs) 23:14, 17 August 2005

ABB disambig

The objective was to present the various possible beanings in clear manner to expedite the researcher being able to get to the article they were seeking. Please let me know more precisely what prompted your response to me, and what your input on format is. Thanks! Joshbaumgartner 19:10, 2005 August 19 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments and help! Joshbaumgartner 16:51, 2005 August 22 (UTC)

Hardy Boys vandalism

I saw your note on Academic Challenger's talk page. I agree with you. If I ran across those links, I'd call them spam. Well-intentioned new-user spam, perhaps, but clearly spam. (Unrelated: What is the 2nd letter of your username?) Joyous (talk) 17:53, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Jesse0986

I actually wasn't testing anything; I was showing my little cousin exactly what this site does and what its users can do (he didn't quite understand the concept of open-source editing the way I explained it to him). Apologies for any inconvenience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesse0986 (talk • contribs) 19:02, 20 August 2005

Optical disc links

The links I have added to sections related to optical discs (DVD, CD, etc.) contain current and historically relevant material (eg. EMediaLive). Please review them carefully before assuming spam. Thank you. Hugh Bennett 14:51, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: Bergies

Feel free to change the style of the article. I was stating facts about bergies as I know them. Obviously this is (hopefully) not the definitive article. Nausea 17:29, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

UTF-8 editing

Thanks for your message regarding UTF-8 editing.

I am already a registered wikipedia user. See: User:Andrew_Sly

I do not have a choice of editor when working from home, using Lynx (web browser).

The only solution I can see for the present is to avoid editing wikipedia, as utf-8 encoded characters will not neccesarily be visible to me.

199.60.222.3 18:34, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Richard Stallman

Thank you for the feedback. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 19:42, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Your RfA

Thanks for the response both in the RfA itself and on my talk page. I don't particularly doubt your knowledge of policy if you've been around a good length of time, which you have. Of more concern is your interpretation of that policy. You are certainly correct that 100% is a consensus. But it is not, or at least in my opinion should not be, the only consensus. Fixing a hard limit and then feeling bound to would not be appropriate, since you would be expected to exercise judgement. However, that point is somewhat contradicted by the fact that you'd be reluctant to close a contentious VfD. I can also understand not wanting to make like a politician and make promises you don't keep, but it's good to know that an admin candidate has a reasonably clear idea of what/why they'd do with the additional powers and responsibilies. Your answers to the question imply considerable vagueness on that point — vagueness that may or may not exist in fact: it is hard to tell. I have no particular criteria for voting on adminship, and those relatively few candidates I vote on I consider independently of one another. Generally, I like to see good participation in admin-related areas such as VfD/CfD/TfD/SfD as appopriate and a willingness to engage in discussion. A willingness to hunt down the vandals wouldn't go amiss! Do you spend time on RC/NP patrol for example? Your article work is good, and making the awful good is a critical mission round here and I can see that doing that leaves less time for the grunt-work. Then there's the "no big deal" philosophy. My personal take on it is that it should be "no big deal" from where the candidate currently is and I suppose that's the most specific personal guideline I apply to RfA, although I don't have a rigid interpretation of it. In any case, you are hovering around the 80% threshold, so there's a good chance you will make it as the week progresses. Good luck! -Splash 21:55, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Wien

Didn't you know that geographical areas wouldn't be translated? The headline was still in English, besides, there's no problem or disadvantage to know how Vienna is spelled in it's own language, it's a pity that you haven't time for real problems (to correct) in wikipedia. You may have pervers views. Have fun in correcting! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.217.115.112 (talk • contribs) 18:36, 23 August 2005

Watch this in other wikipedia sites in different languages, besides it was and it is still taught in school, and the reason why i wrote that in the summary was that i had to wrote something neutral because wikipedia is (should be) international and so in every sector. But i can tell you that other English, French etc. geographical names aren't translated NAMES ARE ALSO NOT TRANSLATED or didn't you know that too? E.g.: New York, London or North Dakota and so on. -- But it is very odd that

english wikipedia sites like Blitzkrieg, Kristallnacht, Das Lied der Deutschen aren't translated in English. I wouldn't bother you but it is reality and the ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA is an exception. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.217.115.112 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 23 August 2005

Links from Individual Hardy Boys Articles

There is a discussion I referenced you (or you might be interested in) at [2]. --PhilipO 16:57, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

High Mass & Sung Mass Articles

Hello. Thanks for the input. The terms really are confusing, especially since they mean different things in different countries. I will be shortly working on an article for Solemn Mass and will eventually be creating some sort of overall Liturgy of the Traditional Latin Rite Mass article. It will, however, be a laborious task. As for the word "aberration", I stand by this word since it is what most authors use to discuss High/Sung Mass, since it was really intended as a make-shift Mass for churches not having the resources to have a Solemn Mass. The Holy See didn't officially approve it till around two hundred years ago, so it can be considered relatively "new". I realize that to-day the word "aberration" has a negative conotation, however there are many words just like that in English that have been slighted just because of a modern connotation that they have taken on. English is a very precise language and has a word for just about everything--no two words mean exactly the same thing. Therefore, I suggest that it is not the words themselves, but the context that should be used to judge whether or not an article has a particular bias. [3].MiguelJoseErnst August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome : )

It's perhaps about time that I lent a hand. There is no other resource on the web more comprehensible than your "French Kings" entries, and I've been dipping into it most probably since it began.

Thanks for the "welcome links" - I gave them a read, and will do so in more detail later, but it all looks pretty straightforward. I don't think I'll be writing much to begin with until I get a chance to read through all you have - perhaps my knowledge of the French language (and my collection of French history books) may help you in some way one day. For now I will be more than happy to correct any errors I should find. I also would like to help keep content relevent where my knowledge allows me to. Is it a good practice to warn of changes I would like to make as I did this morning? Or should I just go ahead?

In any case, I was pleased to hear from you, and thank you for your kind message.

Take care,

Josef.

Josefu 16:07:29, 2005-09-01 (UTC)

Entendu : )

I do have to say that I am a bit confused whether to answer you here or "chez vous" (so I've done both) but thanks for the very helpful tips. Take care.

Josefu

Oh, dear. This is what I meant in yesterday's "should I just go ahead".

Alright then, I'll go back and discuss this with the others. I would very much like to find some way to include that content that isn't "tourist-oriented" though. I'll put in a sub-heading now and put those links back until we get this sorted out.

Thanks,

Josefu

LOL Half of the reason for my gung-ho-ness this morning was my lack of time. I should be working not playing around with this. I'll save the rest for tonight. Thanks for your kind encouragement but never mind my being discouraged - it's only understandable that, when when the first one sees of another is his striding directly at him with big, bold steps, that his first reaction would be one of defense : )

Take care, and have a great day,

Josefu

WikiTravel and...

Rl,

Okay, I've put back most all of what I'd removed (though re-arranged and re-titled for clarity - plus I added some missing info). My first-day ordeal is over.

I do have another question though - about WikiTravel. Is it true that they are now an "incompatible" element of Wikipidia, and a separate company with separate copyright laws? I must learn more about that.

While searching on the net just a couple minutes ago for a tidbit concerning the Paris article I found this: http://www.wakkawiki.com/index.php?title=Paris - is this legal? Spam (debt-elimination, loans, etc) links along the top, Google ads to the left and bottom, and he's using a php insert to swipe wiki content direct from the site. It's not the first time I've seen this sort of thing.

Thanks, Take care,

Josefu 18:23:52, 2005-09-02 (UTC)

I added a (cough) little note in the Paris discussion page that I hope will make everything clear. I'm beginning to get the "feel" of how things are bantered back and forth so already I feel "much ado about nothing" in much of what I wrote but what the hey. Plus it looks now as though I wrote it for the benefit of only a few. I should have looked at the entire history before. Newbies sure are fun to watch, ain't they? : )

I think after this little introductory episode I won't be needing daddy's help any longer (grin), but I must thank you for your support throughout. Near-total freedom (with others) can inspire odd behaviour and takes a bit of getting used to.

Thanks and take care,

Josefu 09:51:52, 2005-09-03 (UTC)

Flatbread

Thanks for starting the flatbread article. It was something I was meaning to do myself, but you beat me to it. =) Dforest 03:34, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

No problem, and enjoy...

Thank you for your message. It is obscene that your RFA reached no-censensus. It was going so well until the first 'object', and then pack mentality reigned. It is good to see you're taking a break: the wiki will be less stable and of a lesser quality without your contributions. Hopefully you'll return.

There's absolutely no point in me running for RFA. The only functional advantage I'd like is that rollback button. It's a small price to pay, though, for what is a popularity contest. There's a few influential people out there just waiting to get revenge... The JPS 11:46, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Your RfA

Hi Rl, I'm sorry to see your RfA didn't work out, especially because at least some of the oppose votes seem to be based on misunderstandings about things you said. I wish you better luck next time. Keep up the good work! Sietse 11:53, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Your RfA

You're quite welcome; it's a shame it didn't pass. I'll see you next time, though! --Merovingian (t) (c) 12:39, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

No problem. I hope to see you run again soon. Sorry your RFA didn't work out. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 13:22, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. It was somewhat disappointing that so many people opposed for reasons I felt to be incorrect. Hopefully next time though. JYolkowski // talk 14:25, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. I know you're saying that you've left, but people can rarely leave Wikipedia for long. I hope you run again sometime. :) Andre (talk) 17:19, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Linkspam?!?

R1 - you said "be more specific" than just "some composer pages". I don't know how to be more specific than the last message. GershwinFan.com was listed on the Gershwin site before you removed it. All I did was change the exact title of the site. It is the premiere site on Gershwin and has been linked by numerous magazines and websites, including CNN and other prominent sites. It is even included in textbooks for classrooms! I simply can't understand why on earth it was deleted as being "spam".

Composerfan 03:09, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Come back, please

Hey. I don't think you've interacted with me too much, although I've seen your name on the edit history of a couple of articles I read, but please don't leave because of the politics. The Wikipedia community often undervalues it's primary asset; ironically, the Wikipedia community members. I sincerely hope to see you around here again.--Scimitar ^parley 14:07, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree I have seen your edits but not interacted. You really want to let the idiots win? There is some good stuff on these pages and it will all be undone if dedicated users leave. Sorry I didn't see the vote otherwise I would have supported. I agree with your sentiments too. The way the community panders to repeat offenders seems counter productive. David D. (Talk) 14:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

This can be corrected!

Folks who think Rl is cool, please second here

[4]

-- Kim Bruning 05:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

I should have watchlisted the RfA page. In any case, a Weak Oppose on an RfA is not a vote against an editor. Robert McClenon 15:38, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Nice to see you back...

Even under such circumstances as an arbcom case (and thanks for your comments); I thought your RfA turned out rather unfairly and it was nice to see your name there. Take care. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)