User talk:Tide rolls/Archive 31
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I understand why my initial 'addition' re: the Nine-banded armadillo was removed but I was wondering why there shouldn't be a section with more detailed information on inspection results, just because it is mentioned in the lead. This is the sort of information people looking at the school on wikipedia may be most interested in and I had planned to expand it with even more detail. I am not trying to be difficult or a vandal but just wondered what the crack was really.
- Added @ 0219 18/12/2010 Also someone has added profanities following the official website reference in the summary box on the Emmanuel College page. I don't know how delete this and it certainly was not me. Thought you should know (if you don't already) ***
Thanks
90.209.15.252 (talk) 02:07, 18 December 2010 (UTC) Pete (i haven't yet got a proper log-on)
- Thanks for coming here to discuss your edit. Mentioning the school's review twice is not needed in my opinion. That's just my opinion. The school was rated well...the fact is stated and it's sourced...I see no reason to mention the fact twice. Expansion? In what way and to what end? As for the vandalism you saw after the website, I looked but didn't see it. I'll check again. Tiderolls 02:37, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Statement
I cannot figure out how to navigate to apprpriate venue to contest use of a letter which does NOT OCCUR IN THE ENGLISH ALPHABET as the PRIMARY SPELLING in the ENGLISH LANGUAGE WIKI.
How can you possibly fail to acknowledge the absurdity of such formatting?
Click-by-click please.
PS I might consider donating to Wiki if it was not for this and related issues which IMO are deforming, unencyclopedic value-subtractions. I can live without an organization administered by people like you, and I am certainly not going to part with any of my money if people like you stand to benefit from it, if only as unpaid little Caesars.
You do know, don't you, that they are not consodered encyclopedic by anyone in the field except Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.18.181.70 (talk) 03:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Since I could not determine how your message applied to the section above I have separated the two. It appears you have a difference of opinion regarding the Wikipedia:Manual of style. You can click on that link to find discussions that determine Wikipedia's consensus on non-Roman characters. Somehow I get the impression that I have already had this discussion with you. Any specific instances that you can show me would help me explain how the guidelines apply. If possible, I would appreciate a bit of modification in your mode of expression, though. It's unlikely that I will respond when addressed in a dismissive or demeaning tone. Tiderolls 03:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi TR -- Could you and your minions put this article on your watch list? The kiddies are having a field day with it, and you seem to enjoy reverting vandalism and posting warnings and blocks on people's Talk pages. I'd appreciate it very much, as I don't enjoy such tasks. Sincerely, Softlavender (talk) 05:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks very much! Merry Christmas and New Year and whatever else you are celebrating. Softlavender (talk) 06:15, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Your Naming Convention Violation
Regarding letter which looks like a "B" (call it ~B) transliterated "ss" in English, manual of style states Under "Foreign Terms":
"Names not originally in a Latin alphabet—such as Greek, Chinese, or Cyrillic scripts—must be romanized into characters generally intelligible to English-speakers
Original author I reverted and your reversion of my correction violates manual of style on two grounds that I can think of:
(1) ~B is not a Latin alphabet character, it is a Germanic alphabet character.
(2) ~B is not generally iontelligible to English speakers.
Either one of (1) and (2) justify correction from ~b to ss.
Now listen tell me how to transmit what I have just said above to the proper authority.
--NCDane (talk) 19:11, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Your Naming Convention Violation Part #2
First of all, this is a different issue from your defence of indiscriminate foreign language insinuations in English language articles.
The issue at hand is the narrow one of tranliteration under naming convention guidelines.
From Wikipedia "Naming conventions" linked from Manual of Style, italics in original:
- German proper names should be treated with care, and attention to English practice
- The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language
The original author was clearly in violation, and you were in violation to revert my entirely proper correction.
As for the prior issue of indiscriminate insinuation of foreign language, please identify explicitly aunthorizing Manual of Style section.
Thanks--NCDane (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- The guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), under the section heading Including alternatives, states that "The body of each article, preferably in its first paragraph, should list all common names by which its subject is widely known." The first sentence of that guideline states "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources"...(My emphasis). That means an editor must support their position by providing sources that show a common English usage. Did you read the discussion that resulted from your post here? Several editors explained how the rendering of an article's subject spelling is determined. Some of those editors even agreed, in that particular instance, that the present usage was incorrect. Those editors, however, cited sources to support their position rather than simply stating "it's obviously incorrect". It appears that no consensus to change was reached as the article name remains unchanged. I have not seen one editor agree with you that there exists "indiscriminate foreign language insinuations ". There may be individual instances that need to be addressed (with the proper sourcing and discussion), but, under the present guideline, I see no need for wholesale changes. There is no "authority" on this project other than policy and consensus. If you wish a review of my position, you may contact any editor. Additionally, if you feel it necessary, you can raise the issue at the WP:Administrators' noticeboard/incidents. Tiderolls 00:00, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Naming convention violation part #3
(Tiderolls) The guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), under the section heading Including alternatives, states that "The body of each article, preferably in its first paragraph, should list all common names by which its subject is widely known." The first sentence of that guideline states "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources"...(My emphasis).
(NCDane) I read the naming convention before my previous message to you, and I considered Naming convention citations I originally provded to to constitute superseding, prima facie authority. I think they are worth repeating, and I will repeat them:
German proper names should be treated with care, and attention to English practice
The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language''''
(TR) That means an editor must support their position by providing sources that show a common English usage.
(NCD) That is ridiculous because the article's previous authors did not provide citation, and the burden should be on them because they were the ones using a letter which does not exist in the English alphabet.
Furthermore, you know as well as I do that ~B is not common English usage: I am sure you, like me, have NEVER in your life seen it used in ANY English-language publication EXCEPT for Wikipedia, and perhaps the Internet Wiki copycats.
But since I am up against unreasonable legalism on this issue, here is the first page of Google ENGLISH LANGUAGE BOOK hits on the name “Uli Hoeness”:
As you can see “Hoeness” is the version used.
I also googled the next five pages and can confirm no use of ~B by any other English book source.
I also found that the name “Uli Hoeness” does not occur in encyclopedias Brittanica, Columbia/Bartleby and How Stuff Works.'
However, it does occur twice as “Hoeness” in infoplease:'
http://www.infoplease.com/search?q=+hoeness&in=all&fr=iptn&x=45&y=9
And it occurs 10 times times as “Hoeness” on the 1st page of Encyclopdia.com:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/searchresults.aspx?q=uli+hoeness
(TR) Did you read the discussion that resulted from your post here? Several editors explained how the rendering of an article's subject spelling is determined.
(NCD) No I did not see it. Where is it?
(TR) Some of those editors even agreed, in that particular instance, that the present usage was incorrect. Those editors, however, cited sources to support their position rather than simply stating "it's obviously incorrect". It appears that no consensus to change was reached as the article name remains unchanged. I have not seen one editor agree with you that there exists "indiscriminate foreign language insinuations ". There may be individual instances that need to be addressed (with the proper sourcing and discussion), but, under the present guideline, I see no need for wholesale changes. There is no "authority" on this project other than policy and consensus. If you wish a review of my position, you may contact any editor. Additionally, if you feel it necessary, you can raise the issue at the WP:Administrators' noticeboard/incidents. Tiderolls 00:00, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
(NCD) I will attempt to post what I have written above at the apprpropiate forum if I can find it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NCDane (talk • contribs) 20:28, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- I will attempt to make clearer what I have been stating before. You do not have to convince me. I am one editor and my opinion counts only that far. Some here would not give me even that much. Previously, you have been editing disruptively; acting unilaterally against consensus and accepted convention. That is my only concern. If you wish to locate sources for your position and present them on article talk pages as support for your edits, then loose the hounds. I am concerned that you would start a discussion (click here) and not bother to revisit the matter. It indicates that you are not grasping the basic concept of consensus. However, that is something you can learn if you want. That's mostly the point. How you edit is completely up to you. You can choose to edit productively or disruptively. Regards Tiderolls 00:22, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Naming convention violation Part #4
I interpret your reply to mean that I may repeat my edit, and provide reason and documentation on the subject talk page. If I do not hear differently from you in the next day or two I will proceed along those lines.
I am not sure what you meant by my not following up. I may have given up some line of conversation out of frustration and exasperation.
I stand by what I said in the link you did provide. Harsh words, but necessary given the extreme absurdity of the state of "consensus" on the subject.
You did not, as far as I can tell, provide link as requested to the site where I recieved some editorial support. I say "as far as I can tell" because I find Wiki administrative site navigation to be another another frustrating and exasperating feature in itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NCDane (talk • contribs) 00:39, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed, you do not need my permission to edit on Wikipedia. I can understand frustration and exasperation; I think you will agree that neither would be helpful in a discussion. Can you be more specific regarding "editorial support"? I will try to provide any assistance you require regarding contacting others that may be more experienced than me. Tiderolls 00:46, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Osmosis
Please tell me where my biology is incorrect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frombyhed (talk • contribs) 01:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Targeted...
Allow me to tell you a bit about myself, i am a university student, studying economics and australian history in york university (uk) and i aim to persevere and complete a PhD. To be more precise i hope to compose my dissertation on the small town of Windsor in New South Wales. As one of the earliest british settlements, it really caught my attention. however my passion for this town truly began when i was merely seven years old. My grandmother, who in actual fact originates from Australia took me to WIndsor and informed me of a minute proportion of its history: she showed me the old buildings the picturesque scenes Hawkesbury River and the oldest building of them all... Patrick Windsor's. She whispered to me the darkest secrets of the town... the terrible flood of 1812, and that the oldest and most beautiful building of all was in fact the town's brothel. We giggled at that one! So now i hope you can see how this was not some petty wikipedia vandalism, no! This is my eager, passionate discoveries about my favourite place in the world.
I appreciate your efforts in trying to get the hoodlums off this site, but honestly think before you act. This has been very distressing to me, and i feel you have targeted myself in some cruel, masochistic attack, and to be frank i will not stand for that kind of repulsive act.
I am no longer sure whether an apology will be enough to fill the gaping hole you have torn in my heart, perhaps when you have threats from Jimmy Wales himself you will understand the despair you have brought upon me.
Thank you for your time, i hope you take a lengthy think about your actions.
Frombyhed (talk) 01:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Just to add, i myself, like a user that has posted above, was considering donating to wikipedia. On discovery that a proportion of this would be given to people like you, i immediately withdrew any notion of this. I just could not live with myself if i had funded the movement that you front. Sorry for the bluntness in this, but i honestly believe that you are pathetic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frombyhed (talk • contribs) 02:00, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Tide rolls, i understand your pride has been hurt, in my discovery of your sick games. I myself am a deeply religious sole and believe profusely in absolution. So due to this on receipt of a simple apology i will take this no further, complete my work, and leave you to loiter around wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frombyhed (talk • contribs) 15:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Wow
You are fast! Thanks, LadyofShalott 02:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- You're welcome, of course. Didn't know if you were around so I took the liberty. Thanks for letting me know I wasn't butting in unnecessarily. See ya 'round Tiderolls 02:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Why did you delete The Democratic Republic of Brogeria page?
I found out that there is little information on this country and thought it would be good to make a page on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gameoutlaw (talk • contribs) 02:43, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- 4chan is trolling everywhere with this so called Brogeria right now. Delete any page leading to it! - Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.172.147 (talk) 02:54, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
I just noticed you reverted some vandalism to my user page some days ago.[1] Thanks a lot, I didn't even catch it.--Cúchullain t/c 13:28, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I appreciate your letting me know I wasn't interfering unnecessarily. Tiderolls 14:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Happy Holidays!
| Happy Holidays! |
 Best wishes to you and your family this holiday season, whether you are celebrating Christmas or a different holiday. It's a special time of the year for almost everyone, and there's always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! ;) Love, --Meaghan [talk] ≈ 14:47, 22 December 2010 (UTC) |
Could you delete a CSS page I accidentally created in my userspace?
Hello Tide rolls. Could you delete this for me? I accidentally created it. Thanks. Usb10 Connected? 17:23, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism done to my - fairly unexciting - talk page. Happy Holidays! xMaDz :) (talk) 00:28, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Thanks for letting me know it was ok to butt in. See ya 'round Tiderolls 00:31, 24 December 2010 (UTC) BTW, an unexciting talk page can mean you're not making people mad....definitely a good thing :)
Merry Christmas!
| “ | And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God. | ” |
| — (Alma 7:10) | ||
The Thing T/C is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:User:TTTSNB/Merry_Christmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
- I do appreciate the well wishes and want to pass on the same to you and yours. I sincerely hope you find a way to come back on a regular basis. This project needs the conscientious effort that you are known for. Plus, I'm a lazy so-and-so...having your help would mean less work for me :) Feliz Navidad y prospero año nuevo Tiderolls 23:15, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
WAYNESLAM has given you a Christmas tree! Christmas trees promote WikiLove and are a great way to spread holiday cheer. Merry Christmas!
Spread the WikiLove by adding {{subst:User:The Utahraptor/Christmas tree}} to any editor's talk page with a friendly message.
WAYNESLAM 23:38, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, Wayne. I don't have a tree, so this one's much appreciated :) Merry Christmas Tiderolls 23:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
National College of Art and Design
Just wondering reason for removing Nano Reid and Patrick Swift as former notable pupils? Merry Christmas by the way --TisTRU (talk) 16:38, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
- A mistake on my part. I've undone my edit. Please accept my apology for this carelessness and gratitude for bringing this to my attention. I hope your Christmas is joyous as well. Tiderolls 16:48, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
- No probs and thanks for reverting. A joyous Christmas to you too --87.194.121.22 (talk) 16:55, 25 December 2010 (UTC)--TisTRU (talk) 16:56, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Rvv thanks
Thank you very much for catching that! – Athaenara ✉ 04:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
fake block
I just wanted to fake-block you. I'm sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NASCAR I am (talk • contribs) 04:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- There's nothing wrong with kidding around, but if you want to seriously help out we would appreciate it. See ya 'round. Tiderolls 04:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) He actually got blocked indefinitely later on. WAYNESLAM 16:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Happy, happy
- It was rainy here Friday night, so the fireworks were necessarily curtailed. Thanks for the display :) Happy New Year Tiderolls 00:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
So, what is the etiquette....
In a situation such as this User_talk:64.229.92.229 ? Dbrodbeck (talk) 03:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
- Best answer...edit warring on user talks is lamer than edit warring on articles. That IP's edit is disruptive but impotent in the grand scheme. Personally, I would ignore the edit. If they return with the same attitude then the inevitable will occur. Just my opinion. See ya 'round Tiderolls 03:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
- On a more technical point; user talk editing privileges can be disabled for extensive disruption. However, since IP addresses may not be unique to individuals that remedy is problematical. I'm not advising you to ignore disruption, but only to be aware that some folks (whose motivation is lost on me) find amusement in provoking overreaction. Tiderolls 04:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Senior Skulls
A bit heavy on the reverts there, nicht wahr? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're right. I got carried away. I left a non-templated message on my last revert. I'll leave it be for now. Thanks Tiderolls 00:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Protect the revolution! Drmies (talk) 01:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm slow, I know. I'll get there :) Tiderolls 01:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- What was going on there all of a sudden? It's not on the front page. BTW, Happy New Year! Happy new Republican state government! Happy new notoriety for AUM! Drmies (talk) 01:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm slow, I know. I'll get there :) Tiderolls 01:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- They've been hitting various pages tonight...no reason, just impotent squirming. Happy New Year backatcha. So, one of your collegues is of the opinion that American litertature is in need of "updating". I have an opinion, too....care to guess? :) Tiderolls 01:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, you hate reading. Seriously, he's not updating anything: the book is intended for high schoolers--apparently a whole bunch of high schools don't teach the book because of the n-word (though in AL it's on the reading list, my wife tells me). The comments are funny, sometimes--here's a teacher who's vehemently opposed but she doesn't teach the book, "because it is too long." Too long? My ass! She just doesn't want to touch it, and I think that goes for a lot of people. BTW, the editor in question is far from "politically correct," politically speaking, but that's original research of course, haha. Hey, I got hate mail too--some idiot emailed the editor and cc-ed all his colleagues. Some moron yelling at everyone. Even our secretary gets hate mail and hate phone calls--it's downright silly. Drmies (talk) 02:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- Frankly, I'm surprised the article hasn't been vandalized yet... Drmies (talk) 02:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- They've been hitting various pages tonight...no reason, just impotent squirming. Happy New Year backatcha. So, one of your collegues is of the opinion that American litertature is in need of "updating". I have an opinion, too....care to guess? :) Tiderolls 01:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I can understand adapting for different audiences. I'll leave it at that as Wikipedia is not a soapbox :) Tiderolls 04:47, 6 January 2011 (UTC) ...and if I chose to blog my opinion it would bore the #%&@ out of the four people that stumbled upon it.
- Haha--that's a lot more readers than I have friends on Facebook. Take it easy Tide. Oh, one more thing--can I root for the Tigers? Should I? I'm trying to, a little bit, but it's soooooooo hard! Drmies (talk) 04:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)