User talk:Preslethe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

If I start an exchange of messages by posting at your Talk page, please, reply at your own page. I'll keep an eye on your page for a while to see whether you reply.

If you start an exchange of messages by posting at my Talk page, please, look for my reply on my Talk page—unless your message is about a specific article, in which case I may well duplicate your message, and post my reply, at that article's Talk page.

You can see old messages in the History of this page. — President Lethe 16:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

For some months now, I've been on a hiatus from Wikipedia, sometimes checking in not even once a week. I expect this to continue for some months more. If you want to contact me, please, use the "E-mail this user" link, under "toolbox", in the left column of this page. Thanks! — President Lethe 17:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks[edit]

Guinnessglass.jpg Thank you very much for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully today with a result of (62/18/3). I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! Guinnog 14:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)}

Barnstar question[edit]

How do you get a barnstar?

Wi-king 16:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Wi-king. For you to get a barnstar, someone should award you one—or, I suppose, you could award one to yourself. See Wikipedia:Barnstars. — President Lethe 16:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

RAF Northolt[edit]

I didn't remove the audio because it was outdated but because it was a redlink which I now see got changed/vandalised a month ago. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, O.K. Thanks for letting me know. — President Lethe 01:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem[edit]

Hi, and thank you for saying thank you ;-). I also would like apologize if my edit summary sounded a bit harsh. I just tried to "shortened" what I meant to say. I do appreciate the hard work you put in the US article and the mistake of confusing population with households is actually quite common. Have a good one... Regards, Signaturebrendel 05:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

La Amistad[edit]

Greetings. Good work on the grammar/clarity of the La Amistad article. In the text for that article you asked about the legality of human trafficking at the time of the La Amistad incident, and I wanted to let you know I've changed that text and commented on the article's talk page. I also changed a bit of the text in the paragraph that describes La Amistad as a slave ship to make it somewhere between the original and the changes you made so that the article would express as clearly as possible the difference between La Amistad and a "true" slave ship. Thanks. Geeman 10:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Date linking[edit]

Hi. I wondered if you would be interested in contributing to User talk:Guinnog/date linking? --Guinnog 18:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Doing something about the ridiculous date autoformatting/linking mess[edit]

Dear Preslethe—you may be interested in putting your name to, or at least commenting on this new push to get the developers to create a parallel syntax that separates autoformatting and linking functions. IMV, it would go a long way towards fixing the untidy blueing of trivial chronological items, and would probably calm the nastiness between the anti- and pro-linking factions in the project. The proposal is to retain the existing function, to reduce the risk of objection from pro-linkers. Tony 04:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: your comments on the date/time issue about choosing a single format

I agree with you. Problem is, there have been massive discussions over the same thing in regards to CE/AD and even as you mention American English/British English spelling. In fact, "color" and "colour" are both allowed in wikipedia and none is recommended over the other. I prefer consistency in all aspects, and would prefer for a specific form of English and a specific CE/AD time period to be chosen, etc., etc. Do you think we should start some comprehensive movement on this? I would be willing to join you in that. But I anticipate that fight to be *much* harder than the current one of just de-linking dates, which I think is also important and easier to accomplish if we don't try and change the existing consensus on everything from date time formats to English spelling to unit consistency. --MattWright (talk) 03:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi there.
Yes, both spellings are accepted (though there are recommendations about when to use which). But my main point is that we don't have any silly game of linking the words and having special display for their spelling. Having different national spellings doesn't bother me. I'm also not bothered by reading the date in different ways, as long as it's properly punctuated. But I am quite tired of how much I and others have spent time and effort on such a thing.
The main reason for which the battle to delink dates right now is so hard is that people are hung up on the idea of having specialized date display encoding.
If we completely removed the option of specialized display (apart from using a standard old piped link) from the table, people would be stuck with the sole question of whether a cross-reference was relevant. This would be true even if we allowed both "December 10" and "10 December" (regardless of cross-referencing). They might still fight about it; but at least they'd be fighting only about the relevance of cross-referencing.
My reason for suggesting a standard also for writing even non-linked dates is just to get the main benefit of standardization: one rule for everyone to play by, and the ability to direct any 'deviants' to the rulebook. We all drive on one side of the road within one country not because it's morally right to be on that side as opposed to the other, but simply because standardization makes it easier to deal with more-important things.
I would accept multiple standards for writing non-linked dates, as long as there were rules about those standards (including their commas ;)), and as long as the issue were entirely separate from the matter of cross-referencing. I would also prefer that we not introduce more codey syntaxy stuff; still, at least a new code would at least separate the matter of date display from that of date cross-referencing.
I bet a survey of all Wikipedia readers would find that most cared not much about whether they saw "December 10" or "10 December". This is an issue of much more fickleness than, say, spelling: British English has had colour for centuries, while Americans have had it without u for close to 200 years; but, while "December 10" is supposedly American and "10 December" British, the fact is that putting the date before the month is standard in the U.S. Armed Forces, while The Times of London and some other prominent British newspapers regularly write "December 10". I myself must have about seven ways of writing the date, in different contexts; I doubt I'm unusual in being able to understand more than one date format.
Sorry I'm babbling on.
If you described in more detail your comprehensive movement, I might be able to answer you more definitely. I think what I've written above, while it was intended only to deal with the date issue, may show that my opinion differs from yours on some other issues. Still, I'm curious about the details of your proposal.
I'm not spending much time at Wikipedia these days. I'm just giving some attention to the dates just now because maybe, just maybe, a turning-point has finally arrived.
Feel free to message me more; but I'm likelier to be aware of your message if you use the "E-mail this user" link at the left of this page.
President Lethe 04:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can[edit]

Thanks for a great laugh[edit]

This may leave you scratching your head at the end of it, as it really has not much to do with you specifically...but in a story mostly written by me and collab'd on with several others, we have a favourite antagonist who has the ability to yank out a person's fear and throw it in their face; this he does with gusto and slight massive tendencies for megalomania and arrogant sadism. His name is Lethe. The very idea of our Lethe being president of ANYTHING was quite shocking - and then was absolutely hilarious. XD Lady BlahDeBlah 21:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Shakespeare[edit]

You may want to rread this [1] Paul B 15:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I have. ;) I may post a little more about it at the article talk page where you saw my first post on this topic. — President Lethe 18:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Good work![edit]

I noticed you making this rather nifty little copyedit. Keep up the good work, and good to see you back! --John 00:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


Image copyright problem with Image:Puzzle jug altered.png[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Puzzle jug altered.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 02:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

A quick note of thanks for adjusting my puzzle jug photograph - big improvement. I hope that you get this copyright problem sorted without too much difficulty. If you need any help from me, just ask. Thanks again. Gaius Cornelius 11:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I came up with something. :) I also made yet another version today. My main concern was not wanting to convey the false impression that the image was truly, truly all my own work; after all, you're the one who made the original photo, even if you did release it to the public domain.
President Lethe 20:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
PS. I skimmed through your other photos, which I'll look at in more detail later. Good work!
President Lethe 20:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Please do feel free to make any changes to my photographs that you see fit. Gaius Cornelius 09:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Response from WP:MCQ[edit]

Hi, I'm responding from the media copyright question page. If you make a derivative work from a public domain source you are free to license it in any way you would like generally. Wikipedia policy requires that you license it under some free license however, or still under public domain. To choose your license please take a look at WP:ICTIC#For_image_creators. If you have any questions let me know. - cohesion 03:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, cohesion! Above now, you can see what my concern was and that I've decided on something.
President Lethe 20:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Wm. Faulkner article cliché cleanup[edit]

Kudos on your journeyman editor's tweaks on the William Faulkner article made this afternoon. What drew my attention to them was your concise, masterful edit summary: '

Four words -> one word. Seven syllables -> three syllables. Eighteen characters -> nine characters. "on a regular basis" -> "regularly".

I would regret to contradict any part of it, but "regularly" has four syllables, not three. However, since a syllable is a phonetic element, you could be basing your count on a pronunciation from any one of a dozen or so global English sub-dialects that drop the "u" or sharply flatten it to the point that it's phonically annexed by either neighboring syllable. Having been a resident of William Faulkner's hometown, I can attest that the word is pronounced tri-syllabically there on a regular basis. Bridgman (talkcontribs) 02:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

American flag in http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Wien_Besatzungszonen.png [Bearbeiten][edit]

Hi Preslethe,

thanks for the information, I fixed the two images containing now the old flag with 48 stars.

Mit den besten Grüßen, de:Benutzer:c.lingg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.154.15.219 (talk) 14:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:FrogPondBostonCommon_enhanced_2006-06-07_1431CDT_PsCSJPG10.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:FrogPondBostonCommon_enhanced_2006-06-07_1431CDT_PsCSJPG10.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk 05:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:CONTEXT[edit]

Regarding this edit, it seems that you added some unnecessary or repeated internal links to the article - such as tuberculosis (already linked in the same section), adoption, suicide (common terms with no particular relationship to the article on Poe). Please note that this article has already been criticized for over-linking on its FAC page. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Veronica Moser[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An article that you have been involved in editing, Veronica Moser, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veronica Moser. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Horrorshowj (talk) 09:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Cut-and-paste page move of Alistair Cooke's America[edit]

Hello, Preslethe. It appears that you copied and pasted Alistair Cooke's America to America: A Personal History of the United States. Please do not move articles by copying and pasting them because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself using the move link at the top of the page, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you, • Gene93k (talk) 20:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


ButtonBlue.svg Also, if you move a page please make sure to deal with inbound links. • Gene93k (talk) 20:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Preslethe. You have new messages at Gene93k's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nice edit![edit]

This made me laugh :-) Adrian J. Hunter(talkcontribs) 14:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Not digging too deeply into your history of contributions, you seem to be on a roll as this edit summery contributed to my chuckling. Thanks, rkmlai (talk) 06:37, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Metrication in the United States[edit]

A disgusting comment has been placed on the Metrication in the United States talk page. Can you remove it?

There are two principal reasons why the United States of North America has been unable to change to a sensible measurement system that 200 / 203 countries use.

1. The financial cost of such a change would probably cripple a weakening economy.
2. The average American lacks the intellect necessary to be able to handle such a change.

ILuvAmerica (talk) 11:06, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

t[edit]

t —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.73.133.177 (talk) 22:54, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Twilight (series)[edit]

Per: this edit. "If" is the more proper text as it may not be published. • S • C • A • R • C • E • 01:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that "if" often comes with an inferred, if not an implied, converse: in this case, the converse is that, if the book is not published, it won't be a retelling of that story. Whether it's published or not, it's a retelling. If you think that "not yet published" looks too much like an implication that publication is inevitable, then perhaps it should be "which is unpublished" or "which has not been published". Come to think of it, "will be a retelling" is odd, too, because, if the text already exists, it already is a retelling. President Lethe (talk) 03:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:America_-_A_Personal_History_of_the_United_States_is_the_title_-_small_PsCS3o10.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:America_-_A_Personal_History_of_the_United_States_is_the_title_-_small_PsCS3o10.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, Melesse. To keep this relatively short, I'll just say that the rationale for having the file here is listed in its description—it illustrates (supports) a point that has had to be discussed repeatedly at multiple Talk pages (which, I admit, are not article pages). Feel free to remove it (it's not a big deal to me), but bear in mind (1) the chance (I don't know how big or small, though it may be small) that the dispute will arise again and (2) that such an illustration is the surest documentation to settle the dispute for those who don't have access to video recordings of the TV miniseries in question. I did think of hosting the file offsite and linking to it from the Talk page, and maybe I'll do that in the future; but, to continue the isolation of my Wikipedia identity from my other online identities, it would require me to find a hosting-site and make a new identity there. Hosting the file here is an easier (for me) way to ensure that Wikipedia's statements of the miniseries's title remain accurate, rather than inaccurate. ... I have just had an idea: What do you think of my making a different collage, without the explanatory text in the lower right quadrant, one that could be used to illustrate the actual article and simultaneously support the accurate version of the title? — President Lethe (talk) 19:59, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Sabotage — thank you![edit]

Hahahaha! Thanks for your Sabotage edit and your terrific summary — (→Legacy: I thought he made use of the utility of subjecting to usage the utilization of this tool's usefulness and usability.) It's a pet peeve of mine, too, and it drives me crazy. Thanks again! — HarringtonSmith (talk) 07:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference[edit]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For power users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Light bulb patent.jpg[edit]

You appear to have started the deletion discussion on en.wp for an image you tagged on commons. I completed the commons nomination process. DMacks (talk) 19:34, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Umemaro 3D[edit]

WikiThanks

Thank you for your contribution to the topic. Alucardbarnivous (talk) 21:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Umemaro 3D[edit]

Hello, I'm leaving you a message regarding the AFD comment you posted for Umemaro 3D. When you say that I saw notable sources, what I was saying is that there weren't any at all except for a porn video. While the video may count as notable, there wasn't anything else to make the video notable, in other words....No other sources. SwisterTwister talk 02:55, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. My own search showed more than "a porn video". Anyway, perhaps you should copy your reply to the AFD discussion. — President Lethe (talk) 19:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

discussion re. images at Sex positions[edit]

Hi there,

I don't know if you're watching this discussion. I noticed your post about representative diversity and I completely agree. There are many historical/art images on Commons that can be used. However there are many, many "fans" of Seedfeeder's illustrations who are passionately opposed to the use of anything that doesn't look like a porn still or something out of a sex manual (and also anything that doesn't reflect a dominant, white, young, male heterosexual viewpoint). I could really use some support there (if you have time & are so inclined) for my changes, though so far I have only added a few images and haven't removed anything, as that would only cause an edit war.

Anyhow, not sure you're still interested but thought I'd let you know.

Thanks :)-- TyrS  chatties  09:34, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Hallo, TyrS! Only just noticed your communiqué. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I am reading the discussion and may find I have thoughts or information worth sharing there (even though I am much less involved in Talk discussions than I was some years ago); I hope I'm not too late. I think my views overlap partly with yours. President Lethe (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Puzzle jug altered.png[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Puzzle jug altered.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. McGeddon (talk) 18:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast! Not even an hour later, the file is gone! I probably would’ve agreed with the file’s deletion—but how am I supposed to agree with that speed? — President Lethe (talk) 19:12, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

A find![edit]

In 2010, you posted on the talk page for Valdemar Poulsen, asking if anyone was able to find a copy of the recording he had made of Franz Josef I.

-- enjoy! DS (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Just several weeks ago, it finally dawned on me to see whether the recording was at YouTube. One of the videos I found is this one, which seems to have less in the way of digital artefacts interfering with the fidelity to the original. I would be interesting to know what causes the sounds that resemble 'tape echo' in the recording: perhaps, if the record head is also the playback head, the fact that the tape is wound as a helix around a drum means that the record head picks up the sound of the previous bit of wire on an adjacent wrapping and adds that to the bit that it's recording at that moment. — President Lethe (talk) 18:46, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Next friend, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)