Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! -- maveric149
Hey, KT, With regard to your genealogy question, as far as I know no one is using wiki-software for genealogy. There's been some discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Genealogy, (and a bit on my talk page) but no implementation. Yes, the wiki software is available for downloading, though unless you really WANT to be a pioneer, and the interactive ascpect is of particular importance, I would think other software might be more useful. Interested in Freud genealogy? Beatles genealogy? I have files on both<G>... -- Someone else 22:02 Mar 9, 2003 (UTC)
- Another answer to your question on Talk:Genealogy: for wiki software, try www.usemod.com -- it's fairly easy to set up, and the markup is the same as here. I know of no wikis on genealogy .... yet! -- Tarquin 00:53 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)
- fixed it. Kingturtle 07:30 Mar 28, 2003 (UTC)
Hi. Could I ask in what way Liberace and Lichfield don't qualify for the list of people known by one name? I don't see any difference between either of them and, say, Houdini. Deb 21:20 Mar 30, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. I've put my reasons for disagreeing on the article's talk page. Deb 17:02 Mar 31, 2003 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I moved "Who is who of the Taliban" to Taliban members (and I changed the linking pages). Anyway, keep up the good work on the Afghanistan-related pages (you've done an excellent job so far)! -- Notheruser 22:27 Apr 4, 2003 (UTC)
Good change from dictator to president. I'm always making similar changes. It is good to see others also spot the problem. Some people unfortunately don't. STÓD/ÉÍRE 23:25 Apr 6, 2003 (UTC)~
I'd come across Burgin's name in various art books, but the reason I started that article on him is because I'm conducting a little personal mini-project to write articles on all the past Turner Prize nominees. I know very little about him and his work, however - if you can add anything then please do. Incidentally, what did he teach at UC? -- Camembert
Funny how those things happen. It's like never having heard of a word or a person before, and all of a sudden, seeing it all over the place. Please review my The Miracle Worker page and upgrade as needed. -- Zoe
There seems to be duplicate articles at P. T. Barnum and Phineas Taylor Barnum. You want to have a go at merging them? (Probably under P.T., that is how he is most often referred to, right?) Plus it has that nice picture! -- Someone else 04:52 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
- Quick work! One trick is to use the #REDIRECT on the old page rather than See: (I've done it at the P.T. Barnum article, so you can look there if you have questions about the syntax. -- Someone else
- I must comment that I was a bit surprised by his reaction. It seemed to me that you had been quite careful in editing that particular page. But I'm saying this on your talk page rather than on the article talk page because I don't want to start up an argument. Deb 19:49 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you're checking some pages I just edited. Hope you liked what I did. Yours, Ken M, firstname.lastname@example.org
- What is your login name? Kingturtle 04:43 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)
- Don't have one yet, but I'll create one when I get back to my home computer tomorrow (I see Wiki recognizes users via IP addresses, and I'm on my girlfriend's computer.) --KM
- You must be 22.214.171.124? Keep up the wiki-work, and join the fun. Kingturtle 04:47 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)
- Yep! I like this. Especially creating entries about my own work. . . I'm such a damn egotist....
Blessings on your local punk scene wiki, though I would like to encourage you to add info on the music scene of Santa Cruz to Wikipedia. While both Wikipedia and your project have divergent goals, Santa Cruz's music should be in both. Eventually a music of Santa Cruz, California would be great, but how about writing something at music of California for now? It would be unbalanced at first, but if you do it, let me know and I'll expound a bit on LA hair metal, San Francisco psychedelia, west coast rap and Long Beach punk, and maybe even native American music from the area. Tuf-Kat
I've just seen your comments on Sibley-Ahlquist taxonomy. Whilst I wouldn't necessarily disagree, I think that there are two point. I think Tannin and I are trying to produce and outline structure for bird topics, working down from order and family level, and at this stage it's a bit early to get too bogged down on a single issue, important as it may be. Secondly, the DNA stuff can get too technical for a general encyclopedia. I've read the Sibley papers, and I'm struggling, even with a science background.
We are short on articles on North American birds-any interest in doing a couple?jimfbleak 08:50 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
- I don't know that there is a template as such, but a look at eg Ostrich or great grey shrike will give you the idea-taxobox, image if available, links up to family (or down if strating from a group heading like shrikes.
- Bits on distribution, food, nesting, migration, whatever is available. We have good coverage on European and Australian species, but not much on North America, although I've done a couple of introductory articles like New World warblers as a kick-off point. List of birds gives an idea of coverage at family level, but many of the families have few if any species accounts. I hope this helps jimfbleak 18:40 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
With regard to
I searched all over the place, but I could not find an appropriate place to put this. I have a request to block an IP. 126.96.36.199 has visited Wikipedia on two separate occassions and deleted information and posting graffiti. Kingturtle 01:51 Apr 15, 2003 (UTC)
I think the place you are looking for is Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. Usually people only get blocked if they're particularly persistent, I dunno if that's the case for 188.8.131.52 -- Someone else 01:59 Apr 15, 2003 (UTC)
LOL! -- Zoe
Hi Kingturtle. Excuse me butting in. I saw your question on Jimfbleak's talk page, and thought I'd drop by to say "yes, great". There are not many people working on the birds at present - mostly just Jim and me, though a few others have done bits here and there - and your help would be most welcome. Jim and I have started roughing out a few ideas at Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds but no template yet. If you have ideas for one, or even just a list of questions that a template should answer, go right ahead and add that stuff in. Welcome aboard! Tannin
- Welcome aboard! There are some (400+) public domain bird images at , the US fish and widlife service. I've used some, but there are plenty, including lots of ducks, that can still be uploaded.
- Obviously it's up to you what birds you choose to do. Most North American non-passerine families , and some of the passerine families, have an entry at that level, (see list of birds, but the rest of the passerine families and virtually all the species accounts are very thin or non-existent, so you have lots of choice. jimfbleak 09:14 Apr 16, 2003 (UTC)
I had a look at List of birds of Santa Cruz County, California. Although the capitalised names are correct, Wiki practice is only to capitalise the first word. I had the same argument, but gave in. I'll amend the list, and you will see that many of the articles exist under the Wiki name jimfbleak 15:56 Apr 16, 2003 (UTC)
On a lighter note, I found it interesting to read your list. I've been to Point Pelee National Park, Ontario, Nova Scotia and Florida, and also seen several N Am species as vagrants to the UK, so I have a reasonable knowledge of eastern species, but some of you west coast birds I've not even heard of. jimfbleak 17:42 Apr 16, 2003 (UTC)
Kingturtle, have you considered applying for sysop status? You should. -- Zoe
- Yes, I have. Where do I inquire? Kingturtle 02:44 Apr 17, 2003 (UTC)
- On the mailing list, or maybe the Village Pump page if you don't want to subscribe to the mailing list. -- Zoe
Kingturtle, check out http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/Primetime/Iraq030417LostViruses.html -- Zoe
Thanks for the Afghanistan timeline entry. I've been looking for a blog or something covering Afghanistan developments. -- The Cunctator
Hello. Please note my editing of arms race. Complete sentences should be used; you wrote the first sentence as if it were supposed to be a dictionary definition instead. And the title phrase should be highlighted very early in the article, typically in the first line. 184.108.40.206 23:17 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)
- thanks! but I didn't write that article. I merely moved it over from Arms Race. A user at 220.127.116.11 wrote it. Kingturtle 23:19 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)
I'm adding Tanninboxes to families where I've written the article but no box, eg Gull, Skua New World vulture. Others I'll do as and when. As usual I won't stick to this, and I'll write more interesting bits like Golden oriole instead. I'll do nightjar within the next 24/48/72 hours. jimfbleak 05:42 Apr 19, 2003 (UTC)
I've responded to your question on the same page it was put. apologies for the delay, but I didn't have "watch this" on itjimfbleak
Your royal Turtleness,
I am trying to sort out the existing articles swan, goose, duck and Anatidae. All of these have very incomplete lists of tribes and genera. Before I do much more on these, I would like views on the groups to see if we can reach a consensus.
Swan is probably OK Goose what do we do about the subfamily Tadorninae, some of which are called geese (Egyptian goose, Pygmy goose), and some ducks (Comb duck, Pink-eared duck)? Is Snow Goose in genus Chen (Sibley) or Anser (Wildfowl of the World, BOU).? To keep Anatidae manageable when the many other groups have been added, I?m tempted to just put Subfamilies and tribes and link from these. However, that still leaves Duck with a long list of genera, and the same problem as with goose in the case of the non-Anatinae ducks, like Comb duck, Pink-eared duck.
Isn?t it interesting that the ducks, a large, well-known and colourful group, appears not to have a single species account, whereas the Corvus crows have 14 (American crow is the latest addition). jimfbleak 05:58 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)
Hi, Kingturtle. Please take a look at Talk:Spinifex hopping mouse, and then cruise on over to the mailing list and let people know how much of a pain this capitalisaton nonsense is. Jim is away right now, so you and I will have to speak up for ourselves on this. -- Tannin 19:01 Apr 26, 2003 (UTC)
I wish I had banning authority. -- Zoe
You been asleep mate! Missed all the fun. Last weekend I spat the dummy out, threw my toys out of the pram, and took the matter to the mailing list. Thanks to the support of many contributors (Jim amongst them) we have hammered out a compromisse. Yes, use the correct capitalisation for article titles, links, and in text, but you must also make a redirect from the lower case form. I have to do some work now, but I'll fill you in on the details a little later. The wikiproject page has more. Tannin
- OK, I took the afternoon off. :) Well, what's left of it - it's 3:30PM here so there is not much left of it anyway. We need to get together and thrash out some minor naming details at some stage, but the info now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds seems to cover the basics. Take a look, add anything you think it needs. Tannin 05:29 May 2, 2003 (UTC)
- I think the election maps look better centered. Kingturtle 05:15 May 4, 2003 (UTC)
Hi, thanx for wikifying my page. I'm sorry, i think i modified your changes! (Eralos/Solare)
Great work on the excision of naturally. -- mib 05:31 May 5, 2003 (UTC)
Can either of you fill me in on the details of the campaign against "naturally"? Is the word incompatible with NPOV, or what? I am most curious. --Ryguasu 06:33 May 5, 2003 (UTC)
- Although naturally can mean "without a doubt", it primarily means "in a natural manner." Plutonium can be naturally occurring. Obsidian is a type of naturally occurring glass. Cultural anthropologists assume that human beings are naturally social. But does Machiavelli's life fall naturally into three periods? Has the point of Brahms's work naturally been lost by critics? Are primitive recursive functions naturally defined subclass of the recursive functions? I did not remove all the naturallys, just the ones that weren't natural. Kingturtle 06:43 May 5, 2003 (UTC)
Hi - just wanted to say "thanks" for making the cross-link and removing the request for the Iraq playing cards. I didn't even know it had been requested, I just noticed it was missing. Again, thanks. Dwheeler
"if you have some free-time handy, I could use your chart-conversion abilities at Triple crown (baseball)."
Heh. It's good to feel wanted. Done. :-) Evercat 00:53 May 6, 2003 (UTC)
- You're a genius. thanks! Kingturtle 00:56 May 6, 2003 (UTC)
I agree that you've found interesting stuff... but it can all be included without having an article so misleadingly entitled. Nothing personal<G>! I doubt that it'll be deleted anyway, I just thought I'd voice my opinion on it... -- Someone else 04:45 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
The Madness of King George being renamed so it wouldn't be thought of as a sequel is not quite entirely true... you may enjoy reading Urban Legends evaluation of the story. Apparently the lack of "King" in the play's name was the relevant factor! -- Someone else 04:51 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
- Ugh. duped again. :) The Madness of Kingturtle
Hello, Kingturtle. Pages are usually listed for one week on votes for deletion before any action is taken (unless they're newb tests with nothing more than "fsaaaaaaaaaaa" or similar junk). -- Notheruser 22:02 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
- Rookie mistake :) Won't happen again :) Kingturtle 22:11 May 12, 2003 (UTC)
I was just browsing the Recent Changes and saw your edit to Talk:Don't even think about it!, I followed the link, read your comment, read the article and discovered the origin of a scene in Family Guy where one of the characters meets Mean Joe Green. Without your comment I may never have discovered this, so thanks, you've made a bored, revising student very happy! -- Ams80
With regard to "Where do we go to ban users? **** should be banned", the answer is sysops/administrators have no way of banning a NAMED user. Only a developer can do that. I think it's usually done through the mailing list. (Sysops can only ban IP addresses.) -- Someone else 00:44 May 15, 2003 (UTC)
Hi Kingturtle. When you spot a copyright violation, instead of doing what you did on Dr. John, can you please replace it with the boilerplate copyright violation notice, and list it on VFD? That seems to be the convention these days, and it's less confusing to the newbies than just blanking or replacing with a link. -- Tim Starling 12:42 May 15, 2003 (UTC)
I've de-orphanised Berkhamstead. As it happens, I had a need to find out about this castle some time ago, and what I discovered was that there's very little of it left and not much is known about it! Deb 20:04 15 May 2003 (UTC)
Hard to say what's wrong with that image; "works on my end" as we used to say in tech support. <g> I'm tempted to blame the ongoing work on the server at this point; does the image at Farthing work OK? (That's another one I uploaded.) Hephaestos 00:12 16 May 2003 (UTC)
- I think (think) that it is indeed to do with the new server - images uploaded to the new server aren't being shown if you access the old server (or the other way round, or something). It should be sorted out in a few days when your local DNS server learns where the new server is. In the meantime, http://larousse.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_J._Tilden might work for you (if that doesn't work either, then I've got it all wrong, and you should ignore me). --Camembert
As Neoism is something set out to defy explanation, I feel this entry demionstrates what Neoism is rather than explaining it. I am not a neoist nor an anti-neoist and see this as the easiest solution to presenting someting anti-thetical to definition. Harry Potter
Do you see (Talk | Block) next to regular user names? I do - but it isn't only by new accounts. Weird. --mav
- I first saw that with User:Michaelese, and also noticed that the edits he was making weren't showing up on his contributions page. That was around 7 or 8 hours ago, I'd guess. Don't know what's up with it yet. -- John Owens 06:11 16 May 2003 (UTC)
No worries, Kingturtle. :) Wnissen 16:04 18 May 2003 (UTC)
KT, Can't you "rollback" your own changes from your "My Contributions" page? If not, let me know and I'll do it, but I think there's less likely to be a mistake if you are able to do it yourself. Or are you worried about being accused of abusing sysop powers? I don't think "Rollback" really should worry you there, as it's equivalent to a series of edits/clicks that anyone can do. If it still worries you, I'll do it, just let me know. -- Someone else 23:01 17 May 2003 (UTC)
Right, rollback doesn't work for new articles, even if the original creator has edited several times since then. And it doesn't do page moves, either. A page move doesn't actually affect the information stored in the article itself, it just gives it a new name, and creates a new article (redirect, of course) at the old name. That's why it keeps the page history and stuff. So the move itself won't be rolled back. -- John Owens 23:32 17 May 2003 (UTC)
Argh, looks like you just need to do moves manually then. Good to know. I suspect you can just do a move back without doing any deleting first, since the new page created will have no history. -- Someone else 23:57 17 May 2003 (UTC)
Newer entries go right after the link to the current day - not at the end of the sub-section. Also, in order to make sure there isn't a line-break for people with 800x600 screens, we all have to make sure that when we add entries to any sub-section that we also remove entries at the end of the subsection. That way the line is about as long as it was before. --mav 22:08 18 May 2003 (UTC)
I noticed you reposted the deleted PROPOSED risk declaimer. Afterwards mav redeleted it. Trying to find a compromise I put a note that some people dispute it, made the person link to the disclaimer and the talk page if they are interested in using it. It seems reasonable to me that if someone thinks what they are posting is really DANGEROUS that they could use this disclaimer. Then, if someone does not use it they can't blame Wikipedia in general. Mav's argument that if it is not on any page then that page is not dangerous is bogus, IMHO as it clearly states that it is only for dangerous pages. It will be pretty obvious what these pages are, anyway it is a discretionary thing that the person writing the dangerous stuff has posted, it is they who need to worry about being sued, not Wikipedia in general (as I don't see how a wiki can be held responsible for the postings of its members if those postings are negligent, misleading or dangerous, it is the poster's problem). Anyway that is my opinion but remember Wikipedia does not give legal advice. — Alex756 04:36 21 May 2003 (UTC)
I don't know how either, but I did it anyway. If the Corneille pic is now too small for your taste, just revert to your version and delete mine! <G> -- Someone else 01:12 22 May 2003 (UTC)
- Looks good. the file size is much less too. how did you do it? Kingturtle 01:31 22 May 2003 (UTC)
- Downloaded it, used a graphics program (GraphicConverter, but I imagine most programs have similar features (Photoshop, etc)) to "Scale" it to 50%, resaved it with the same name, then uploaded it with the same name. Seems like it worked though I was just guessing at the 50%- going by # of pixels wide. -- Someone else 02:11 22 May 2003 (UTC)
Why is Aaron Burr listed on the Main Page? I see nothing in that article to indicate why any date in May is significant to Aaron Burr. Could you add this information to Aaron Burr so the reader is given context on why that article is listed on the Main Page? :) --mav
Hey King of Turtles -- are you going to be adding any entries to the May 21 article? If not then I'm going to go ahead and do so. If you are already working on this or plan on doing so soon, then I'll just work on something else on my HUGE mental ToDo list. :) --mav 06:15 22 May 2003 (UTC)
Hope someday you substitute Don King as the top boxing king!
Thanks and God bless you!!
Sincerely yours, Antonio Sex Machine Martin
- Remind me what my question was :) Kingturtle 06:18 23 May 2003 (UTC)
Hi Kingturtle. For some reason I get the message that I am blocked by you when I try to edit Aracaju. Oddly enough, I'm not blocked anywhere else. Could you please make the title bold instead of linking it to itself? Thanks Danny
I deleted Hawker Hunter. I was going to write a fresh one from scratch anyway, so what matter? I'll do the new one in a day or three. (Unless I forget.) I seem to be deep into mammals again at present, with the odd bird for variety. Back to aircraft some other day. Cheers, Tannin
OK, mostly I trust your edits, but why this redirection of Rites of Spring to the as-yet nonexistent The Rights of Spring? I'm pretty sure "Rites" is the right spelling here, so to speak. Unless there are punning names based on it, in which case they ought to be disambiguous notes at the bottom or top, instead of an entire redirect. -- John Owens 04:19 29 May 2003 (UTC)
- Because I'm dyslexic sometimes. I fixed it now. It redirects to The Rite of Spring. Sorry for the mix up Kingturtle 04:22 29 May 2003 (UTC)
- Actions speak louder than words, of course, and by the time I got done typing that bit up and hit "refresh" on my "Recent changes", I saw you'd already fixed it (twice even!). It's OK, for my part, I didn't even think about plural vs. singular use. I think I actually would have thought plural, if I had considered it a moment. -- John Owens 04:25 29 May 2003 (UTC)
Thanks, KT. Did you see my Australian Pelican one? I really like that one. Mind you, the way those two were sitting, a 6-year-old with his first Kodak Instamatic would have taken it the exact same way, and still not have changed his mind when he was Dean of the School of Photography at Harvard. (Sometimes, you just get lucky. (grin)) I'll look forward to seeing you slip back into harness on the bird entries next week: the New World birds are starting to get left behind a little, so someone better balance the Poms and Aussies up! Best -- Tony (Tannin)
On the theory that articles are more likely to be expanded than created, I made a stub for Pocahontas. (I hope it is a correct theory....) But you should perhaps change your wikimoney offer so it's given to the person who expands the article! -- Someone else 05:36 31 May 2003 (UTC)
You moved my wikimoney offer to the very bottom of the page, for the reason it was upstaging the other offers. Do you think it was perhaps not very nice to move it even out of the field of current propositions, below the fullfilled requests ? Do you think it was such a wrong proposition it deserved to just disappear from other people eyes as well as yours ? ant
smith03 you block me? I have aol
Hello. Was Ronald Graham listed on Votes for deletion before you deleted him? It's just that I didn't see him there... You are familiar with the deletion policy, aren't you? Just checking... -- Oliver P. 15:42 5 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- Ronald Graham was not listed on Votes for deletion. The article was a mere link to a webpage that is "still under construction" and gives very little information about Graham. I am familiar with the deletion policy, and I deemed this article to fall under rule #6: "delete pages that simply will never become encyclopedia articles." Kingturtle 16:02 5 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. If the page consisted only of a link, then I would consider it to be fair game for immediate deletion, under the "no useful content" rule. Guideline no. 6 doesn't apply, though. As the guideline clarifies, it is talking about "completely idiosyncratic non-topics". Ronald Graham is a valid topic - the man is a real mathematician, and Graham's number is named after him, for example - and so there will be an article on him one day. In fact, I might make a start on it right now. :) -- Oliver P. 17:25 5 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Dear King: Hi! Since I tried but can not reach the List of famous cancer patients page cause you locked another person using my ICP or whatever, (this happens to me a lot), could you please add Edna Campbell, basketball player for the Sacramento Monarchs to the list?
Thank you amd God bless you!
Sincerely yours, Antonio All Over Latin America Martin
Dear King: Hii1 How are you? Im fine. Hey dont worry about it, I know how the dice rolls, I know it wasnt that you tried to block me. Probably some vandal has a IP or however it is you call that that is close to mine. Its happened to me about 15 times since I came in September..LOL!!!
The one user I got a problem with is Stan Shebs. Can you see what he put on my page? I see his point but to judge my personality because of an honest mistake I committed (Poor citizenship) I think he went too far.
I mean I know that as an encyclopedia we must have certain degree of seriousness if we are to be taken seriously and all that, and look in a good , presentable way to the public, but....he seems to take it too seriously....
Well amigo, thats all for now . Thank you and God bless you!!
- 1 Why are you blocking me again? This is the fifth time I've been blocked this week. What is this bullshit about continued vandallism? I have written nearly 50 articles and made major edits to about 50 more, none of which was vandalism. user:mydogategodshat
- 2 Thank you, Kingturtle, great editing!
- 3 Frankly I am much puzzled.
- 4 Requested articles
- 5 Bruce Sterling picture cropping
- 6 American arrogance
- 7 Thanks for your edit
- 8 Fungus
- 9 Titles of Works
- 10 Dates
- 11 Anniversaries
- 12 VfD notices
- 13 Chip row
- 14 Main Page
- 15 Pages needing attention
- 16 commercial folk
- 17 Spelled can be spelt spelt
Why are you blocking me again? This is the fifth time I've been blocked this week. What is this bullshit about continued vandallism? I have written nearly 50 articles and made major edits to about 50 more, none of which was vandalism. user:mydogategodshat
Done the 30-30 club - however I had to guess which numbers were which (ie which was the runs and which the bases). You'd better check to see if I got it the wrong way round. Evercat 20:33 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- Heh, and naturally I got it wrong. But I then checked it against Google, and I've fixed it now. Evercat 20:54 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Founder Found"er, v. i. imp. & p. p. Foundered; p. pr. & vb. n. Foundering. OF. fondrer to fall in, cf. F. s'effondrer, fr. fond bottom, L. fundus. See Found to establish.
- (Naut.) To become filled with water, and sink, as a ship.
- To fall; to stumble and go lame, as a horse.
- For which his horse fear'e gan to turn, And leep aside, and foundrede as he leep.
- For which his horse fear'e gan to turn, And leep aside, and foundrede as he leep.
- To fail; to miscarry. "All his tricks founder." --Shak.
- -- John Owens 23:47 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Kingturtle, I added an image to catfish. It was the best I could find in the public domain, but it isn't really a catfish in the wild. On the other hand, it isn't a pile of undiscernable meat in a net. Hopefully it is enough to at least partly fill your request? --Josh
I will be on vacation until August 10th. I will not have access to the Internet. Have a nice summer. Kingturtle 19:22 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Eeek sorry. I hate that too. It's there as the default because most of what I do is minor. I'll try to remember in future. Thanks for pointing it out. Angela 21:06, Sep 21, 2003 (UTC)
Hi Kt. I see you made a minor change to Dashboard Confessional. The user who created the page shows all the characteristics of being the dreaded multiple-banned user Michael under yet another false identity. As such the policy is to delete articles he creates on sight and to revert anything he writes. You made a minor change to the page. Are you sure the page is 100% accurate? Michael is famed for making contributions that look Ok but have a deliberately placed lie on them. Because of that, the policy is not to correct anything associated with him but to delete the text (in some cases the entire article) on sight. As just about everything else this user tonight has done has been reverted, I have removed the text and placed the standard Michael disclaimer The factual accuracy of this article is disputed (But for the fact that you had contributed to the article, I would have deleted the article completely.)
Because of the problems with this blasted Michael, the best route when editing a music page is to check back on the user's past contributions on their user page. If everything they have touched has been reverted and/or deleted, then don't bother with correcting text just delete it and put in the dlsclaimer above, as you can take it that if everyone is removing his contributions they have copped on that he is Michael under yet another false identity. I know it is additional work but Michael is being reported to AOL and so hopefully is reign of terror will be over soon. Leaving his text, even if it correct, is inadvisable because (a) if he thinks he can put things on wiki and get some of them at least left, it is an encouragement for him to keep coming back; (b) his skill with burying fiction among facts makes it on occasion hard to spot the inaccuracy; (c) if he is allowed to contribute, his fact/fiction work undermines the work of all serious contributors, damages the reputation of wiki and undermines the process of banning abusive vandals from the wiki. There is a page on the meta that lists the articles that Michael under various identities invariably goes to edit. I cannot think of the name of it at the moment but you may spot it appearing on the recent changes, as people add in more pages to it. (He tends to stick to music pages, by the way, so anonymous users contributing to other topics can usually be presumed not to be Michael, whereas unfortunately, anonymous contributors to music pages may indeed be him. It is a tragedy that this one repeatedly banned vandal has caused so much grief and extra workload for honourable and genuine wikipedians. In my eight months on wiki, no one user has done as much to destroy the reputation of wiki and undermine the work of all of us. lol. FearÉIREANN 03:02 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Why did you revert two-point conversion to a redirect? Now you've made both pages redirect, and the other one has an illiterately written title, in which the missing hyphen is more conspicuous than the subject of the article. -- Mike Hardy
I wonder if, in exchange for my table skills, you could offer me some advice? :-) I know you do a lot of fauna stuff, so perhaps you could tell me whether Bulldog Bat should be a disambig. page. It was originally patent nonsense, but I replaced it with a stub and my first ever taxobox, based on Google search. Still, there seem to be precisely 2 species of Bulldog Bat. What's usually done in a case like this? Cheers, Evercat 22:51 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks, guess I should have known. Sorry to trouble you. Evercat 01:17 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- No plans for more fauna articles, it was just a one off - when I see a junk page I occasionally have the urge to research the topic and post a stub. Did you see the original "article"? It was quite funny... Evercat 01:21 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
It's a dirty trick you pulled on me! First Eloquence put's Symposium on the mainpage "New Articles" banner, which I can just about deal with (although I felt the scrutiny right over my whole integumentary system). And now you put it on "Brilliant prose". Though it's not a stub, I am most thoroughly humbled by what you have done. Let me vent just one more time, safely within parentheses (AAAARRGGH!) -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo stick 16:41 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Why did you deleted a perfectly reasonable article, without it being listed on vfd ? Please, would you take the time to restore it ? It is listed on Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion. If you really want it to be deleted, please list if on vfd first. Thanks User:anthere
- I'd like to request that you undelete Right Back and the other one. Hey, I put some work into editing those - I don't want it wasted just because Michael touched the thing once. Martin 19:30 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
(just don't deleted my favorite articles, or it won't be peaceful here :-))))
Any idea what the heck the 1962 Grammies person is up to? Almost seems like Michael when he's drunk, or something like that. Certainly not his normal style, though. Some of the edits might have been actual improvements... and then the next one is a complete blanking. I don't get it. :-\ -- John Owens 07:20 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Dear King: Hi! Thanks for the touches on the Larry Doby article. contrary to my boxing knowledge, I only know a few things, such as names and years in baseball, so I had no idea Tris Speaker retired whn my grandpa, who still lives by the way, was only 11! LOL
By the way, what a gentleman Larry Doby!! He signed a baseball and a trading card for me, and beginning an article on him is my way of paying tribute to him. I was saddened to hear about his passing on the local news.
Thanks and God bless you!
Sincerely yours, Antonio Eye of the Tiger Martin
user:Smith03 here, it says you blcok me? I use Aol.
Hi Kingturtle The Aol block on Michael(?) has block me again
You blocked me again. This is getting tedious. It dosn't encourage me to continue to write articles when you repeatedly block me. I lose my work because I am not able to save it. - - user:mydogategodshat
Have a good vacation in the low-tech beaches with golden sand, KT! Have a blast there, then come back replenished and have a blast here! --Menchi 20:13 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Noticed a bug with your taxoboxes: you seem to use cellpading when you mean cellpadding. :-) Evercat 22:58, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Nice to see you back. :-) Evercat 00:29, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Hi, you cast a vote in the TEMP5 debate. The Temp5 proposal was voted down by 61.3% to 38.6%. But even that wasn't clearcut, 17 voted no to Temp5. 19 voted no to temp5 but didn't say keep the current page, and 8 endorsed the current page. So the decision was an ambiguous 'no' decision. Clearly we seem to be going around in circles on the whole issue of the main page. A new definitive vote is now taking place to clarify what exactly we want, to end the endless ambiguities and re-votes, namely
- Do we actually want to have a new page? Y/N
- If so when (immediately, after a pause, timed to the press release, etc)?
- What do people want on the front page and what do they want excluded?
As of now, the whole issue seems surrounded by complete confusion. This way, finally and definitively, we will know what we want and when we want it. So do please express your opinions. The vote is on the same page as the previous votes. FearÉIREANN 20:31, 13 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I don't mind The Exorcist fact to be in there...it just doesn't go with the flow of the article. She died a very short while after she turned 18 and got the apartment and started dating the guy. This is all in 1976, whereas the Exorcist thing would be in 1972/73. So where should it go then? Shawn
Fair enough, but I still think her school info should stay...agreed? How did you find out where the quote was from by the way? Becuase I couldn't... Shawn
Who says what the right format is? User: Shawn
I was under the impression that using a flag purely for indicating grammatical and spelling changes, such a notion had been rejected by the general mailing list community. LirQ
Could you unprotect your user page? Martin 14:19, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I do use preview. Are you biased against "social science textbooks" in general, or do you have some actual complaint against the data? LirQ
Well, if you find something constructive to say in criticism of Fisher's book -- feel free to let me know. Otherwise, have a nice day. LirQ
Please note that I never said u did touch anything in the article. LirQ
I put"KRÜGER 1993" back in the Phelsuma quadriocellata lepida article. The scientific name of a plant or animal consists of its Latin name + the author who first described this species + the year in which the species was described. Sometimes the name of the author is abbreviated (like L. for Linaeus). Please do not remove the author in other articles on animals!
Jurriaan 06:48, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Thank you, Kingturtle, great editing!
- < removed unnecessary, etc...>
- Sincerely, best to you !
Wednesday, 2014-July-23, 09:30 Universal Time, 4,563,544 articles in Wikipedia, and growing, growing...
- "Remember! United we stand... Divided we fall... Well, well, well... well... Well, Stanley!"
Frankly I am much puzzled.
Would you care to name which entries I removed from Votes for Deletion. Please look carefully at my edits. I just did that; in the fear that I might have done some inadvertent damage. But the edit history at least does not show any such deletion of entries by me. So what are you talking about? I only inquire, because I want to clarify things. Respectfully. -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 19:53, Oct 11, 2003 (UTC)
Thank you for the apology but it wasn't really you that I was accusing of attacking me, although I did see the time-stamping of each of the entries as an insult, as if I should be the one attacked for listing them there. I was not even the one proposing these for deletion. The people listing them on Wikipedia:Things to be moved to Wiktionary were suggesting that. I just moved them because the Wiktionary list has fallen into complete disuse. Everyone lists stuff and no-one does anything about it. I try to solve it by putting them in a place that people will comment and everyone just complains that I listed too many things at once. The reason I removed them wasn't so much because of what you did but the comments from others: "This is ridiculous". (Wik). "I agree with Wik" (Adam Bishop). "Listing Dowager for VfD is crazy". (Jtdirl). Patrick suggesting that if I wanted to list it on VfD it was up to me to take it to Wiktionary. So much for it being a collaborative project! And then Schneelocke's ridiculous complaint that I had listed them all at once. What am I meant to do? Save them up and post one per day? I've put them all in my sandbox instead. Angela 01:38, Oct 12, 2003 (UTC)
Moving the maths stuff was a good solution for the requested articles page. Thanks. It's a lot more manageable now. Angela 22:51, Oct 12, 2003 (UTC)
Bruce Sterling picture cropping
- photo needs to be reduced
... for Bruce Sterling; do you mean in colour depth, size, compression, noise, or something else? I'm happy to crop the picture (which, personally, I think you mean, but can't be sure), but don't want to do something others don't want :-)
James F. 11:03, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- i was referring to the size of that image. thanks for asking. have a good day :) :Kingturtle 14:03, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Hey, King T. Got a question for you about American arrogance at Talk:Baseball. It seems to me that making allegations about stereotypical national traits inferred from what was probably marketing hype is a bit dangerous. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it needs to be done properly. Certainly as a Canadian I'm not above thinking Americans are arrogant, but I don't know that i could prove that. Trontonian 22:41, 21 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. I'll wait and see what you come up with. I'm interested in the mythic dimensions of sport, as you tend to get when you listen to both American and Canadian sportc commentary. Trontonian 02:50, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I was toying with the idea of trying to make that clearer<G>. It gets so involved, though. Here's my brief version:
The carbon molecules in organic chemical compounds are numbered by chemists, for ease of reference according to established convention. When a chemical bond is made, such as attaching an "-OH" group to the #4 carbon atom, the number is used to indicate which carbon atom it is being attached to: in this case, the molecule would be said to be "4-hydroxylated".
When talking about nucleic acids, which are made up of bases (purines or pyrimidines) attached to ribose molecules, there could be confusion as to whether you are talking about the carbon-structure-numbering of the base, or of the ribose. By convention, when you are talking about the ribose structure, you add a 'prime' to the number, and a number given without the prime designation refers to the structure of the base. In practice, the only interesting sites on the ribose molecule are the 3' and the 5', so these are used as part of the jargon of chemists without giving much thought to them.
Why are these the interesting places? Because the chain of nucleic acid forms by connecting the 5' position on one ribose molecule to the 3' position of another with a phosphodiester bond.
So by specifying the direction (5'-3' vs. 3'-5') you can indicate what direction you are reading the nucleic acid in.
Whew! -- Someone else 23:49, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- I'd be glad to adapt that into something like Prime (ribose structure), though I'd like to think about it for a bit to see if there's not somewhere better to put it. It seems to be that part of the problem is that our current explanation of DNA structure (at DNA, and possibly elsewhere...) uses very big words and still doesn't manage to get specific about details like 3'. I wonder if we don't need an explanation that avoids scientific jargon in favor of a clearer explanation for a more general audience.... I'm just not sure where it belongs. -- Someone else 01:00, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC) (If I had a graphics program that would draw chemical structures, it'd be easier, but alas...)
- List of localities in Britain where rare ant species had previously been recorded but are no longer considered to be present - if not deleted, at LEAST the title of the article needs to be parsed. Kingturtle 22:19, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I removed your vote from this, but kept the listing, because the article has now been renamed to List of locales in Britain where ant species have become locally extinct. If that's still not short enough, or if you think it should still be deleted, perhaps you could re-add your name? I wasn't sure if the long title was your only reason for suggesting deletion... Martin 20:30, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Hi Kingturtle. I notice you're interested in old reference works. Do you know anything about the Oracle Encyclopædia? I have the five-volumn set in beautiful condition, but I know almost nothing about it. -- Stephen Gilbert 10:55, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Hi Kingturtle, It is my plan to add information to the different articles I started on animal taxa. However, since my spare time is limited, my idea was to get the "taxonomical structure" in place first so it will be easier for others to add their knowledge of these taxa to wikipedia without creating "orphans".
Jurriaan 09:09, 28 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I think procedure dictates folks involved with disputes should not protect the page. Perhaps get another admin to go in and protect it? Perhaps safer to unprotect to avoid giving more conflict. Fuzheado
Regarding Intact dilation and extraction, there were some complaints on the mailing list about it. I'll try to summarize the disputed portions and copy them to the talk page, but until I get to that you can look through the mailing list archives for October  if you'd like. The person objecting is "Eileen", and her three posts are: , , . There's also a bunch of discussion in the threads entitled Major Correction, "partial birth abortion"..., (no subject), Following up -, and a few other threads with partial birth or partial-birth in the subject. --Delirium 20:06, Oct 30, 2003 (UTC)
I'm not a problem! I was testing my talk page notification. Sorry, Angela1 is just the account for checking things work without being logged into my normal account. Most people would just log off and do this, but I don't have a floating IP like most so I have a separate test account in order to avoid giving out my IP. Sorry if this wasted your time. Angela 07:24, Nov 2, 2003 (UTC)
Maybe (and i think you are referring to my accidental intermediate version with ===s instead of ====, so refresh and see if that's any better) but i think it is worth the pain for easy navigation. Morwen 11:19, 2 Nov 2003 (UTC)
And do you understand what All the way to left means and why it doesn't apply to my latest version of the change? Morwen 11:26, 2 Nov 2003 (UTC)
And now? with Geography: %s?
Morwen 11:36, 2 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Do you think it is necessary to add again the details about Anissa's schooling history? Thanks Dysprosia 06:48, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hi Kingturtle, you just put a redirect on the page Cambodia: A Book For People Who Find Television too Slow that I created. I'm new, can you point me to an explanation of what you did and why? (I do know that the article where I created the link I used (Brian Fawcett) now has a broken link, and I'd like to avoid this in the future. Thanks, vanden 08:03, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hi Again, thanks for the explanation on my talk page. Clear as a bell. (I had been worried that it was to do with italicization of book titles or some such.) Thanks again, vanden 08:19, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I unprotected User:Kingturtle/sandbox - assuming accidental/old vandal/etc. If deliberate, please re-protect and drop a quick line of explanation on wikipedia:protected page and/or on the page itself. Thanks.
Thanks for your edit
I have been chiseling away at what I originally found on "anal sex" ever since I started editing here. I'm still pretty shy about deleting, so I had been trying to subtley reword what at first was a rather striking POV against female recieving anal sex. Anywho, I just wanted you to know I think your deletion was great, thanks. JackLynch
Please revert your removal of the reference to butt rot. This issue was discussed on talk:Fungus and a decision was reached that the reference is genuine. You have my word, for what it's worth. -Smack 04:44, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I am deeply honored by you adding me to your watchlist. I do do a large volume of high-quality work (to the best of my ability) and hope I can meet your esteemed standards. Thank you. NightCrawler 23:24, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Titles of Works
Play titles are usually italicized. Sadly, it's easier to find in the Chicago Manual of Style than it is on Wikipedia: 8:172: "When quoted in text...tiitles of books, journals, plays and other freestanding works are italicized; titles of articles, chapters and other shorter works are set in roman and enclosed in quotation marks." You're probably thinking of song titles: they are in quotations, not italicized. -- Someone else 10:38, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Am I right in my other thinking?
- novels, "short stories"
- movies, "television shows" - KT
Oooh, cool way to show it!. Basically, yes, but television series. My attempt at a table showing italics, "quotes", and neither.
- novels, "novellas", "short stories"
- book of poems, "poems", cantos
- operas, "arias", "songs"
- instrumental works have rather complicated rules, so I'll leave them out<G>
- television series, "episode title"
- recording (album title), "song title"
- plays, scenes, musicals, "songs"
- paintings, drawings, statues (though CMS makes an exception for works of antiquity)
- journal, "journal article"
- newspapers, regular comic strips, "articles"
-- Someone else 11:00, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for stepping in and letting me know. This is one battle I really don't want to fight. There are more productive things to do here. *sigh* --Minesweeper 06:25, Nov 17, 2003 (UTC)
Hey King of the Turtles. Just a note: Entries in the Selected Articles section on the Main Page need to be listed on their corresponding theme page. Specifically, anniversaries need to be listed on a recent day page before listing on the Main Page. For example Birmingham Six and King Biscuit Time were not listed at November 21 at the time you put them on the Main Page. This is part of the minor price we ask in order to get things listed. I'll go ahead and list the items (they are otherwise good choices). See Wikipedia:Selected Articles on the Main Page for details. Cheers! --mav 04:38, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)
No prob. on the Who album. Glad to be of help Tuf-Kat 05:02, Nov 21, 2003 (UTC)
That old version of the page was just for when Special:Lonelypages was disabled. Now it is usable again, the Wikipedia:Orphaned articles has to look like that so it can feed the Special:Lonelypages. Angela 00:16, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I was trying to express "it's not important" or "it's just a redirect" or "no matter". Sorry if it felt belittling. Now, do I owe you a wiki-kiss for that flower? Unfortunately, I've cashed out at the WikiBank... Martin 02:36, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder. I removed 4 but the other 4 are still true. Angela 05:48, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)
The VfD notices added to articles are the only way we have to notify those who are interested and watching an article that it's listed on VfD. Giving those interested in a subject notice is a key part of the deletion process. That's why I'll usually move an article to the day when the VfD tag is added - it gives those interested some chance to participate in due process before the process is over. Jamesday 16:14, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hi Kingturtle, I'm afraid I disagree with you that Chip Row is resolved and I have relisted it on Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion. I can't see any reason that chip row should redirect to Cardiff. A lot of towns have a Chip Row, so why redirect there? It's like redirecting cat to Brighton because you once saw a cat in Brighton. If you had some reason for it, could you mention it on Redirects for deletion please? Thank you. Angela 22:53, 23 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Is there a reason that you revert my edit to List of Taliban leaders? It seems strange to me that the Foreign Minister and the Minister of Culture & Information should be listed not in the section on government minister but in the section on Other high-ranking officials.... And I am fairly certain that court is spelled court not coirt. Rmhermen 01:06, Nov 25, 2003 (UTC)
Hey. Just wondering what this edit summary means: (anniversaries: removed The Band, Free French Forces, Boss Tweed, Wilhelmina of the Netherlands because their articles did not represent well the dates in question. removed JFK assassination, Contra, D). Those entries were a bit old and I like the newer ones you replaced them with, but how can any entry 'represent a date in question'? Just curious since technically Annivs can be up to a week old. But we both know that that hardly ever happens (and in fact that is a good thing). :) --mav 08:41, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Answer on my talk page. --mav 09:30, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Another answer on my talk page. --mav 20:09, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Now go back and spell incumbent correctly. And Edwards IS retiring. Adam 05:11, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for the note about removing my own VfD nomiations. This is one example where cooperative writing really works. I'm going to leave it up there for a little while so that anyone who saw it listed but didn't see the discussion knows what's happening. DJ Clayworth 19:27, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Sorry about the santorum undeletion request--MyRedDice deleted it. I was thinking it was you because you deleted Hertz doctrine, a decision which I disagree with. Please undelete Hertz doctrine. --The Cunctator
re: edit summary at VfU ("removed most recent post of articles that were never deleted") - those actually were deleted (see Talk:Engelsism). I didn't know whether to re-add the listing though. That IP has been constantly vandalising the Talk:Engelsism page. I'll leave it up to you if you think they should be listed now you know they did exist. VfD and VfU are just scary at the moment. Angela 02:14, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Primitive Lyrics is real, but I don't know anything beyond that (and all I can find is sites that copy wikipedia content and German language sites) so I left just the facts (taken at face value). Tuf-Kat 07:24, Nov 29, 2003 (UTC)
Dear Kingturtle, do you mind telling me why you deleted Caecilius Metellus family tree? Yes, it is just an image, but an image linked to several pages, which is intended to clarify the complicated familiar relations of the Romans. I also had a lot of work compiling that information. You cant find it anywhere else in the web and it is this kind of thing that make Wiki special. I assumed it was a mis-understanding of your part and restored it. If you dont like it, you can post it it in VfD where we can have an healthy discussion about it. All the best, Muriel Victoria 08:51, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thanks for reusing the violet for a forgiving wikihug :-) Anthère
Hello Kingturtle! Now we can vote in the BP articles. Check:
- Wikipedia:Refreshing brilliant prose - People and culture
- Wikipedia:Refreshing brilliant prose - History and religion
- Wikipedia:Refreshing brilliant prose - Others
- Wikipedia:Refreshing brilliant prose - Science
About the confusion about family trees: i'm glad everything is resolved. I confess that i panicked a bit with the idea of some wikipedians thinking those diagrams useless. Have fun! Muriel Victoria 14:33, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Good job on the categorization scheme. Some of the categories are a little broad or a little narrow, but nonetheless you've made the page vastly easier to use. -Smack 07:23, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)
If you feel like making life difficult for commercial redistributors, just check if they're in complete compliance with the GFDL for articles that you have contributed to Wikipedia. Most of them won't be. Then you get to send them a DMCA takedown notice or a cease-and-desist letter. You are legally entitled to act where you feel someone is infringing your copyright by failing to comply with the GFDL: you don't need our permission to do so, and neither can we stop you. (but IANAL) Martin 04:39, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Spelled can be spelt spelt
Kingturtle-- er.. no, actually. OED has, "Pa. tense and pple. [past tense and participle] spelled, spelt". Either is perfectly correct. But I shan't bother changing back... because either is correct. seglea 07:19, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Several days ago you joined the discussion of whether Brunswick or Braunschweig should be the home of the article on the German city. After a brief discussion, the question was moved from the Votes for deletion page to Talk:Brunswick. Quite a bit of fact-finding has occurred since then, but the decision appears to have reached an impasse. Could I ask you to take a few minutes to review the facts presented on Talk:Brunswick and share your current thoughts? Thanks. Rossami 22:31, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for moving them to Wikibooks. I've deleted the redirects now. I jut didn't want to do it before they were moved there as so many people had said they wanted them moved. Angela. 03:09, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- As requested, Corporate social responsibility now exists. --Raul654 04:44, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- As does Disappear. And FYI - I'm not trying to write the ones you asked for, it's just a coincidence that they just are all the ones I know. Honest! :) --Raul654 07:26, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hello Kingturtle! If you are interested please have a look in Wikipedia:Brilliant prose candidates: me and Bmills made some suggestions and comments and i would apreciate your opinion. Cheers Muriel Victoria 15:21, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)