User talk:AllyUnion/Archive2

mathematics/ical-related

Hi! Thanks again for the flower. So sweet.

In Template:Math-stub and User:Msh210/ms, you changed mathematics-related article to mathematical-related article. I don't think you're correct, and I commented on the change at each Talk page: Math-stub, Msh210/ms. —msh210 18:06, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Adminship

I'd be happy to nominate you on WP:RFA for adminship, if you're ok with this. Cheers! JOHN COLLISON [ Ludraman] 22:26, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. I shall do my best. -- AllyUnion (talk) 01:03, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It's on WP:RFA now, you can accept and answer the questions there. Cheers, JOHN COLLISON [ Ludraman] 10:21, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Collaboration of the week

Congratulations, the candidate you voted for, Underground Railroad, is this week's Collaboration of the Week. Please help edit the article to bring it up to feature standard.

Re: Nuns

The New Testament is Koine Greek (a sort of colloquial ancient greek) in the original. Therefore what the Hebrew for Jesus actually is is entirely a matter of supposition.

It could be Yeshua, which roughly makes sense as having become Iesous (the greek), but Yeshua is just a pet name for Yehoshua, in the same way that Liz is a pet name for Elizabeth, so the formal Hebrew name could just as easily have been Yehoshua. You see the problem is, Jesus isn't actually written down in Hebrew in the bible, or anywhere else in the appropriate time period, for that matter, in a manner that it is guaranteed to being the Hebrew for Jesus.

Thus Jesus ben Nun is perfectly plausible as translating into Yehoshua ben Nun when converting into Hebrew. CheeseDreams 01:34, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

P.s. disambiguation pages are not meant to be NPOV, they are for people who might be looking for something else, or might wonder what else shares the same title or name, or is thought to do so by others.

P.p.s Shawn is a phonetic variation on Sean, completely missing the point. Sean is the same word as John, spelt according to Gaelic pronunciation rules, so that when assumed as a Gaelic word, it is pronounced "John". In the same way Seamus is actually just James. etc. CheeseDreams 01:34, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 16:58, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Congrats! But leave the hummingbirds alone in future, ok? :-) &#0xfeff; --fvw* 10:25, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)

Congrats, AU, on your deserved adminship! JOHN COLLISON [ Ludraman] 12:02, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you all. -- AllyUnion (talk) 04:44, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Cleanup

Dear AllyUnion

Thanks for your rapid feedback. You noted on Tom Sotis that "This article needs cleanup". Please elaborate with pointers as you see fit.

Keep well

User:Mudthang 19 Dec 12.20 (GMT+2)

Blocked in error???

My IP address is 64.12.117.8. You have blocked me from editing entries due to "vandalism, pov edits," which I believe is in error, since I am very new here and haven't contributed much so far. Any enhancements or new entries I've made haven't been challenged or changed by anyone, so it seems this block is a mistake. Could you please rectify this situation ASAP? Thank you! The FinalWord 17:25, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Further discussed at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(assistance)#Incorrect_blocking. You might chime in there when you sort this out. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:36, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

Chemical warfare

You've done some work on chemical warfare, so I thought you might be interested to know that I've nominated it to Featured article candidates. I was hoping you would take a look at what we've done, and maybe help me perfect the article into something that we can all be truly proud of. -- ClockworkSoul 02:13, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Week

League of Nations is the new Collaboration of the Week. Please join in helping make it a feature article.

Kraftwerk and Nico Demonte action

Hello. Seems like our little Kraftwerk/Demonte enthusiast is back on track. He edited those two articles again, though I'm not sure if the things he put there are necessarily bad or not. For Kraftwerk, it's just a covers external link. Seems harmless to be. Not much of vanity or anything. For Nico Demonte, however, he added a lot of his stuff there, without Wiki formatting or anything, just like we saw already. I thought that, the way it looks like it could even be copyright violation, and well, looks like it really is. That text comes straight from this page, and as you can see in the bottom, the content is indeed copyrighted. Now unless he is Bernard F. Lopez himself, it is a violation.

Based on the date, the poster on discomusic.com copied Wikipedia, not the other way round. --Michael Snow 02:10, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I know this could be just a confused user, but the way he insists with his edits without paying attention to what we say, he's probably just being annoying and vandalizing. I've just been granted sysop powers (five days after you, it seems), so I'm still trying to learn how to deal with certain things. I noticed you protected those pages before, but looks like the standard proceeding regarding repeated vandalism by a single user to a group of articles is to deal with the user, not the pages, since protection of pages is nocive to Wikipedia and should usually be avoided. But that's alright, don't worry.

About the user, I'd do something right now, but I'm not very sure, and since you're aware of what he's being doing, perhaps I could ask your opinion. What do you think?

Thanks for your attention.--Kaonashi 17:35, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

See Kaonashi's talk page for my reply. -- AllyUnion (talk) 04:13, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I decided to block him for three days, after thinking about what you said. Sounds more appropriate to me. I didn't warn him again, since it looks like he had plenty of warnings. I did however do as you said, and reported at Wikipedia:Vandalism in Progress. Feel free to keep contact with me if you wish to discuss more about this, or even other things.

Carry on.--Kaonashi 04:22, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Bug

Hmm... ignore. -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:30, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Signature

I think that I have it fixed now. I rarely visit the Village Pump, so I didn't find out right away about the change of software and its effect upon users who put their talk page in their signature. gK ¿? 07:21, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Stub sorting policy

Aloha. Thanks for inviting me to the policy page. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to get into the site at all today due to some problems with the Wikipedia servers. I'll try again asap. --Viriditas | Talk 10:44, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ship shape grammar

Hi AllyUnion,

I spotted your comments on the Village pump with regards to Wikipedia:WikiProject Grammar. This morning I came across a mildly interesting grammar question at ' Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships#"The" before the ship's name ', which might interest you. -- Solipsist 20:55, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

(Pun intended). It seems to me that the proper way to address the problem is simply, as discussed, include 'the' when you do not have the ship's full name, i.e. USN Lexington. For some famous ships, it might not be necessarily included. I recommend to include it for readibility and to make it clear that you are speaking of a noun which is mostly likely an object, rather than a person. -- AllyUnion (talk) 05:54, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I agree, but many on the WikiProject Ships seem to have decided the opposite and are now systematically removing 'the's from articles on ships. One of the worst examples I have found so far is the article on the Mary Rose - in the past couple of months that article has expanded a fair bit, but all references to the Mary Rose have had the 'the' removed. To me, it now reads very poorly. Elsewhere, the Mary Rose nearly always includes the definite article. -- Solipsist 06:27, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I said the key is natural readability. How many people refer "Mary Rose" as a person without the and how many refer "Mary Rose" as a person without the as a ship? -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:05, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I can't answer that question directly. However, I was first alerted to the issue when the Goya (ship) article was changed a couple of days ago. According to User:gdr's figures on the talk page there, the ratio of common usage for 'The Mary Rose' vs. 'Mary Rose' is 12:1. On the other hand I don't know what Google searches he was trying - I would have thought they were quite a difficult searches to construct accurately. -- Solipsist 07:25, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If we take a look at the dictionary (www.dictionary.com) definition for "the":

1. 1. Used before singular or plural nouns and noun phrases that denote particular, specified persons or things: the baby; the dress I wore.
   2. Used before a noun, and generally stressed, to emphasize one of a group or type as the most outstanding or prominent: considered Lake Shore Drive to be the neighborhood to live in these days.
   3. Used to indicate uniqueness: the Prince of Wales; the moon.
   4. Used before nouns that designate natural phenomena or points of the compass: the weather; a wind from the south.
   5. Used as the equivalent of a possessive adjective before names of some parts of the body: grab him by the neck; an infection of the hand.
   6. Used before a noun specifying a field of endeavor: the law; the film industry; the stage.
   7. Used before a proper name, as of a monument or ship: the Alamo; the Titanic.
   8. Used before the plural form of a numeral denoting a specific decade of a century or of a life span: rural life in the Thirties.
2. Used before a singular noun indicating that the noun is generic: The wolf is an endangered species.
3. 1. Used before an adjective extending it to signify a class and giving it the function of a noun: the rich; the dead; the homeless.
   2. Used before an absolute adjective: the best we can offer.
4. Used before a present participle, signifying the action in the abstract: the weaving of rugs.
5. Used before a noun with the force of per: cherries at $1.50 the box.

-- AllyUnion (talk) 07:26, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC) (Cross posted at the project page.)

I noticed. That more or less corresponds to the last comment there from User:Stan_Shebs. However, it is perhaps too prescriptive the opposite way. It certainly seems acceptable to loose the 'the' when personifying a ship, and in particular when describing a blow by blow account of naval battles. Also with quotes like this, it is a good idea to mention which dictionary you are trusting as there is no single 'the dictionary'. -- Solipsist 08:01, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

VFD/Today

Hey, here's something neat: WP:VFD/Today. -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:10, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Cute, but not useful for my purposes, as it merely transcludes the actual VfD page, so it isn't the page I'd want to edit. But don't worry, despite the drawbacks I think the new VfD system is a significant improvement. Happy (UTC) new year! --fvw* 03:53, 2005 Jan 1 (UTC)

Same -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:48, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ustub is NOT the same as metastub.

I am very angry that you listed a template for deletion simply because you don't understand the function of the template. I have posted an extensive explanation of the template on its talk page. Look carefully at the two templates and you will see the differences in function. Norman Rogers\^talk 01:47, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Fvw's RfA

Hello; could you take a second look at Fvw's RfA? I don't think your wote will affect the outcome, but I like for things to be nicely resolved. —Ben Brockert (42) 04:32, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

VfD mechanics

Yes, /Log is certainly a better plan than shifting in midstream to VfD/debate/Jow Bloe. And probably -- despite my impulse to say "gee, it's a shame we didn't start out doing VfD/debate/..." -- the best solution that could be hoped for without a top-heavy software-design plan.

I still don't have a sense of having gotten the viewpoint of the comments right, but i'm getting closer; as i get more used to the implications of the doubly nested structure (hey, was i the first to suggest that?), i should be able to get to a point where i grasp what the current mistakes are, that get users into the bind of editing VfD on one hand or the day on the other when they want to nominate a page for VfD or add a point to the debate. At the moment, i'm still "planning to win the previous war".

Thanks! --Jerzy(t) 14:49, 2005 Jan 7 (UTC)

Altitude tent/substubs/multiple articles

Since you seem to know lots about the inner workings of stubs, etc., I noticed today at Category:Substubs that it shows two Altitude tent articles. I thought that Wikipedia:Duplicate articles would explain what to do, but that article should have been titled Wikipedia:Articles to be merged. How does one get rid of the second article with the same name? gK ¿? 07:04, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Just mark with the {{merge}} and {{mergewith}} and leave them alone. -- AllyUnion (talk) 22:42, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ustub

It could have been a useful idea if it had been implemented when the topic stubs were first created. I think that it could still possibly be a useful way of doing thing in the future if someone would spend the time with a Wiki-bot to "fix" the stub name/category name disconnect (I assume there must have been some reason for that disconnect, but I can't figure out the reason, and I haven't seen any discussions in the archives on why things were done the way they were). I probably wouldn't have laid into the proposal so hard in the TfD discussion if he hadn't YELLED and then SHOUTED at everyone. gK ¿? 03:41, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The history of stub sorting went as follows... ssd created the bio-stub back in 25 Jul 2004. Since then, I added geo-stub, then other people added more stubs, and it just kept growing. So the set precident was multiple stubs. What Norman was suggesting did radically change the entire structure of stub sorting, but his suggestion comes far too late. -- AllyUnion (talk) 05:52, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

re:"use full names for stubs, perhaps?" You mean biography-stub instead of bio-stub? Would that be fairly easy to fix with one of the Wikibots? And what about trying to make the stub names match category names? (And even regularizing a few of the non-"standard" stub names like mathbiostub and Ireland-place-stub instead of Ireland-geo-stub?) gK ¿? 08:02, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)