User talk:Rjanag: Difference between revisions
Line 227: | Line 227: | ||
Yournumbertwofan |
Yournumbertwofan |
||
POOOOOOOP POOOP POOP |
Revision as of 09:08, 5 December 2008
Archives |
1: August 2008 – October 2008 2: November 2008 |
If you leave me a message here, my habit is to post a response at your talk page. If you would prefer that I respond here, just leave a note in your original message and I'll respond to you here. Thanks!
Click here to leave me a new message.
Further to your comments about Quanta case
I assume you realize that the article that was allegedly plagiarized from is my own article (in which I own copyright). But I can take another shot at revamping it over and above eliminating my copious footnotes. Any further specific suggestions that you might care to make would be greatly appreciated. Thx.
--PraeceptorIP (talk) 05:48, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Neurolinguistics / psycholinguistics articles
Thanks for your message. I won't have time until next week. My (limited) knowledge of linguistics is biased towards Chomskyan linguistics but I have been exposed to neurolinguistics and computational approaches at the undergraduate level. I want to get the basics right on the related articles. Can you suggest a really good article that introduces neurolinguistics? ----Action potential t c 12:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts
Thanks for all your efforts related to "Did You Know?", including repairing articles. Nice work! --Orlady (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
English flag on New York City#Sister cities
As the editor who inserted the St. George's Cross into this table (after considering the discussion on the Talk Page), I'm grateful that someone else has put it back. But in defence of the editor who deleted it, I consider that a legitimate question for disagreement and doubt (e.g. should we insert Palestine's flag above or below Israel's since Palestinians and many Muslims consider Jerusalem to be Palestine's capital and Tel Aviv's to be Israel's?), so the deletion doesn't really qualify as malicious vandalism. (Technically speaking, Sister Cities only allows the UK for the one-country per city rule, so New York City couldn't add Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff or Belfast as a sister city.) Although I was born in London, my mother's side is Scottish, so Happy St Andrew's Day! —— Shakescene (talk) 23:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry about the revert. The editor who made that latest edit is a suspected sock puppet of Nimbley6 and was vandalizing a large number of pages, so I was just going through and reverting all of his/her edits. I might have reverted some things that weren't so clear-cut. —Politizer talk/contribs 23:51, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with the reversion itself; in fact, I'm grateful. I was just saying that by itself it wasn't evidence of vandalism since there had been genuine disagreement among other editors. On the other hand, this editor left no reasoning or rationale, and apparently has been editing a bit recklessly elsewhere. (Perhaps I'm too punctilious when the result isn't affected, but I try hard to be fair to those who disagree with me. Assume good faith and all that.) [P.S., I usually prefer to keep exchanges on one page.] —— Shakescene (talk) 00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Cyrusmilleyhannana
I noticed a rvv on this user's edit - which didn't look like vandalism to me. Specifying Scotland, UK instead of UK. But I saw that you reverted quite a few of these edits. Has there been some decision not to distinguish cities by Scotland, Ireland, Britain universally. Not being quite up on the politics of the UK, I can see where it could be a point of contention, but also a useful geographic reference - i.e. in some cases it is nice to know if where in the UK a city is (being an American I am not up on detailed UK geography but I do know enough that people from Scotland and Ireland do not like being referred to as being a part of England - as a euphemism for the UK). For example I couldn't tell you, without looking, if Glasgow is in Scotland of Ireland - just that it isn't in England proper. I see that this user's talk page is marked as a suspected sock so you might be able to enlighten me rather than asking at a bunch of different article talk pages. TIA --Trödel 00:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thx for the info - and good idea re the notice on the user's talk page - though I suspect it will list he is a sock soon enough --Trödel 13:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
- Also, an excellent edit putting the {{user page}} tag on his user page. That eliminates a fear I had, especially with another editor, that the user page could be mistaken for the article. —C.Fred (talk) 17:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
DYN Serenity High School
Thanks for tweaking the DYN nom. If you have time, would you be so kind as to check the article for B-class criteria? Being the original author I assume I'm biased, even if I'm not, so I gave it a conservative C-class rating. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Illana Katz
Hi Politizer. If you have a chance, I would appreciate your review of this. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 19:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Request for feedback
I thought you might be interested in reading an essay I just wrote on the use of info boxes. I'd appriciate hearing your opinion. The essay is at Wikipedia:Disinfoboxes. Nrswanson (talk) 19:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Your rollback request
Hello Politizer, I have granted your account rollback in accordance with your request. Please remember that rollback is for reverting vandalism, and that misuse of the tool, either by revert-warring with other users, or simply reverting edits you disagree with, can lead to it being removed. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 00:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Miho`s death
Hi.
You are right, i said that i won`t say more in the matter and i`ll keep to that, but for the record, Ed call her a dead girl just after the attack without a corpse and just something very sad happen, none of that is definitive.
I won`t get in the matter until further info comes. Zidane tribal (talk) 05:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello
I'm sorry but I don't understand why my pictures are attacked even though I crated it myself. As you know, Hangul was influenced by Chinese and Japanese. So I made it easier to see how it had been changed. Since you undid it without any explanation, I will undo it. Unsigned comment by Byeonggwan (talk / contribs).
DYK Sig
No problem! BTW, thanks for reviewing my DYKs! Cheers. Imperat§ r(Talk) 15:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Imperat§ r(Talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Cheers. Imperat§ r(Talk) 15:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
LOLcat Picture Removal
The "Dude...wait, what" picture is actually of my cat. I added it just for fun (it is part of my userspace) and was surprised to see it was accepted for use on the page and stayed that long. If images are readded, you can always readd it. No hard feelings on this end. - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 2, 2008 @ 22:13
Lolcat
Any ideas how this could be re-written? Needs a description, history, response, usage etc, but I'm struggling to think how to put them together. The list of sources in my userspace is just sitting there waiting to be used - it would be pretty awesome to make a GA out of this, don't you think? Best wishes, – How do you turn this on (talk) 22:21, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your message. I must admit that at first I was angry, but I guess that is the passion that I put behind my writing that got the better part of me. It was really no big deal and I fully understand. I'm just glad that I have been receiving a lot of positive input about my writing in Wikipedia because it means that I am reaching out to people and doing what I had aimed to do in the first place and that is to provide good educational articles. Keep up the good work and Happy Holidays. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Re: List of Cleveland Cavaliers head coaches
I think you already know I replied at T:TDYK. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c] 22:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Please notify the article's creator - I admit this nomination is my attempt to show him what he needs to improve in his creations, and getting a "DYK on hold" note is a good way of showing him that.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 02:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. You requested an in-line citation for the Jose C. Abriol article entry at Template talk:Did you know#Jose C. Abriol. I provided it over there. Could you please kindly take a look and see if that's fine now? Thank you in advance. Thank you too for your comment. - AnakngAraw (talk) 03:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Medicamina Faciei Femineae
Hi, Politizer. I have responded at DYK but am eager to resolve any outstanding issues. Could you be more specific about your concerns? I would be happy to send you a PDF of the entire article, if that would be helpful. The poem has not been ignored in the modern era, though most of what has been written is for an audience of academic specialist. Peter Green's article is unique in that it covers not the text but makeup. He goes systematically through Ovid's ingredients and identifies many still used today. The article has been cited by almost every subsequent commentator, and I thought it would be a foundation for a nice hook. Please tell me what I need to do. Thanks for your interest. Regards, Aramgar (talk) 04:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
QC Twitter triviality
You reverted the section I added regarding the Twitter pages Jacques has created for his characters citing that "this is trivial until it gets covered in a 3rd-party source." By the same logic, the "Easter Eggs" section of the Dinosaur Comics page is also trivial. Are these things trivial or are they not? (I'd rather you just respond here) Matterson52 (talk) 06:45, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- They might be trivial; I haven't looked into it closely. But the status of the DC article has no bearing on this; you can take a look at WP:Other stuff exists for an essay regarding this kind of comparison.
- But please don't go and delete information from the DC article to prove a point. If you believe the Twitter information should be included in the QC article, the best way to go about it is to start a thread at the discussion page. —Politizer talk/contribs 06:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Another thing to take into account is that the Dinosaur Comics easter eggs have been around for many years and are pretty commonly known part of the comic (I don't have a source handy for this, but I would venture to guess that a large number of DC readers read the easter eggs just as religiously as they read the comic itself), whereas Jacques only started doing the twitter thing a few days ago—there's no way to gauge how long it will be around, how significant it will be, or how much it will be seen as an integral part of the comic. —Politizer talk/contribs 06:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Just to tell you the hook, "
- ... that although Chuck Daly is a Basketball Hall of Famer now, when he served as head coach of the Cleveland Cavaliers he had a 9–32 record and was fired mid-season?", sounds like its talking about Chuck Daly, and not the article it is supposed to be talking about. (Hope you get what I mean) -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 07:53, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah...it is. -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 01:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Stephen Gardner Champlin
Dear Politizer, thanks for reminding me about my DYK nomination. I was busy in RL, and I had other things in my mind. I forgot about my DYK nomination. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 09:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Alberta and Great Waterways Railway Scandal
Thanks for your comments about this article's DYK nomination; I've made some resultant changes to the article and responded at Template talk:Did you know. Cheers, Sarcasticidealist (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Mea culpa. I checked the article for sourcing before promoting it, but I failed to recognize that the hook fact was still dependent on the same Geocities source (that finally had been cited inline). It's clear, though, that she was Akihito's oldest sister -- for example, see http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,800566,00.html and http://fultonhistory.com/newspaper%202/Utica%20NY%20Daily%20Observer/Utica%20NY%20Observer%201961%20a%20PDF/Utica%20NY%20Observer%201961%20a%20-%200075.pdf (image of a newspaper page that includes her death notice) --Orlady (talk) 21:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
DYK
Have you tested that next update on tomorrow's main page? --Orlady (talk) 03:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- On Template:Did you know/Next update, underneath the hooks, it says "See how this template appears on both today's Main Page and tomorrow's Main Page." Those links work for everybody. Before DYK got its fancy new structure, testing the DYK list on those main pages was one of the key steps in the "next update" instructions. It's moot now, since the hooks have gone into the queue, but I had truncated that list at 6 because those 6 hooks more than filled the available space on "tomorrow's" page. --Orlady (talk) 03:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- Stuff at Wikipedia can be pretty bewildering, so we continually have to help each other out. --Orlady (talk) 04:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
DYK for bǎ construction
BorgQueen (talk) 14:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
I'm glad you enjoyed my article on Urbach-Wiethe disease. I've actually never done anything before on Wikipedia. This article was actually part of a class project for my Neuroscience class. We were supposed to find some topic that related to neuroscience that wasn't currently on Wikipedia, research it, and create a Wikipedia article on it. Kindof a neat project! —Preceding unsigned comment added by GTgth688k (talk • contribs) 18:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Question and debate.
Should a promotional release be counted as a single? Preceding unsigned comment by IHelpWhenICan (talk) (contribs)
Lee-hom Wang
thanks Preceding unsigned comment by Nygirl410027 (talk) (contribs)
- Actually I made the edit because I'm trying to keep searches for Alexander Wang the designer from redirecting to Lee-Hom Wang. Any ideas how? Preceding unsigned comment by Nygirl410027 (talk) (contribs)
- Thanks for getting back to me!! Good point about the chinese/american name dilemma but I definitely think the designer will get a lot of searches as he's getting more well known. is there some way we could get a page where it lists both links when you search Alexander Wang? Preceding unsigned comment by Nygirl410027 (talk) (contribs)
bling bling
Oi, by the way, I'm looking at your userpage, and our interests have significant degree of overlap:China, Chinese, linguistics, etc. Be seeing you around when I become more involved... Later! Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 04:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Chinese-language entertainment
Marmaduke
Hello. You have repeatedly changed my edits to the Marmaduke page to not include an entry I wrote about a relatively popular blog named Marmaduke Explained, which is viewed by many people and is very relative to the topic of Marmaduke. I find it truly unfortunate that although I took the time to include a link to the blog as well as information about its content that you did not bother to check it, but rather mark it as insignificant and delete my posting. I do not mean to be antagonistic, despite deleting all your information, but I was frustrated by the ridiculous hierarchy here on what is supposed to be a website which is editable by all who visit it. Of course, I understand the neccessity of preventing spam, but this is one of my only contributions to this website (despite my joking creation of a page about a friend of mine) and I would appreciate it if my addition was not lost to backwoods, clusterfucked internet bureaucracy. I assure you that my posting is not spam, but it extends beyond your myopic view of what should and should not be posted on the Marmaduke widipedia page. One man's trash is another man's treasure, and after all, who are you to dictate what knowledge reaches people? I have included a link in my posting, and have kept this posting for several months previously before it was deleted. I know my actions subsequent to the edit were fairly childish, however I enjoy wikipedia and its spirit of democracy, and wish that you would not crush it with some bizarre ego trip that involves maintaining the integrity of the Marmaduke page.
Thank you,
- As additional information, I have provided the following links to website which expound upon or make reference to the content of the blog I mentioned in my post:
- http://roflcon.org/2008/04/26/bonus-rofls-joe-mathlete-marmaduke-explained/
http://www.lesjones.com/posts/005176.shtmlbloghttp://www.collegehumor.com/article:1723880only minimal mentionhttp://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2006/12/marmaduke_expla.htmlblog- http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l%253D216520%2526a%253D216536%2526po%253D62,00.asp?p=y
- http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6153865
- http://roflcon.org/2007/12/20/breaking-news-joe-mathlete-of-marmaduke-explained-at-roflcon/
- My assertion was not that "alot of people read the blog" but that it is a relatively popular blog, meaning that it is popular enough to garner articles on the websites of Collegehumor, PCmag, and NPR. I apologize if a simple checking of blog hits is not enough to endow something with the long coveted "notable" status which you so graciously endow. You misquote me further: I did not call Wikipedia a "clusterfucked internet bureaucracy." I was referring to the system which allows certain users to override others simply based on their own personal experience, without any further insight. Listen, I understand that you do have to prevent spam on this website. I know that anyone could come in here and edit the page of a noted dignitary or president to say "FUCK FUCK BBOOOBIES POOP", but my posting was relevant enough to instigate investigation and your deletion of it amounts to an ego trip in that it simply regards the information I posted as irrelevant, despite the fact that my previous posting of it on this website lasted for months before being taken down. I assure you, I am not trying to spam up or fill the already expansive page about Marmaduke with misinformation. I simply want to let people know about a blog I enjoy which is critical of Marmaduke. I am acting in extremely good faith, and have all the freedom to call the levels of bureaucracy on wikipedia a "clusterfuck" and to call your edits an "ego trip." God forbid I should question your authority on the subject. I would appreciate it if you didn't try to condescend me.
- Thank you,
- yournumbertwofan
- Good lord. I mentioned the clusterfucked bureaucracy but I did not anticipate your adherence to it. You deleted my post and it was regarded as "vandalism" when I tried to repost it. One of the editors which removed my information was on trial for being a bot. I'm not sure what "edit war" you are referring to, other than my own additions to your page, which you state at the top that you welcome. Your immediate removal of my edit was very suspicious to me, as it seemed pretty authoritative. Are you on the edits to Marmaduke subscription list? I don't understand. I do not think I am acting like a child. If childish behavior to you is using bad language, then call me a a child I suppose. I did not call you any personal names and only referred to what I thought of as a hierarchy on Wikipedia as a "clusterfucked bureaucracy." I can call your edits an ego trip, which they increasingly seem to be, as you want to talk to me like I am a child, even calling me "childish". It seems as if you didn't even consider the several links I included in my last post, inculding NPR. I am trying to tell you that I made a reasonable edit to a page, one that I made before and which lasted several months before I noticed it was gone tonight. You assertion that "I am willing to bet no one will show you more sympathy than I will" is further proof that this process is an ego trip for you. If users are all equal, than I would prefer it if you left me alone. My edit is not inflammatory, and included a link to the website. If needs be, I can include all of the links I provided on your page if that is enough to validate my claim that marmaduke explained is a relatively popular blog. If all users are equal, then why does your designation of my writing as "non-notable" brand me with vandalism when I attempt to re-post the content? Please explain yourself.
- Thanks,
- yournumbertwofan
GODDAMIT MAN LISTEN TO ME FOR ONCE JUST PLEASE READ THIS WITH AN OPEN MIND. DON'T TRY TO REFUTE ME OR NITPICK ABOUT THINGS I HAVE SAID. I HAVE PROVIDED AMPLE PROOF THAT MY POSTING WAS RELEVANT, YOU STRUCK OUT 3 OUT OF 7 OF THE WEBSITES I PROVIDED. EVEN IF YOU STRIKE OUT THE REPEAT WHICH I JUST NOTICED I HAVE PROVIDED 3 SOURCES OF PROOF, WHICH IS ENOUGH TO PUBLISH AN ARTICLE IN A FUCKING NEWSPAPER. I SAID BEFORE THE POST HAD BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME BEFORE IT WAS DELETED, AND THAT ONE OF THE THREE EDITORS YOU CITED WAS ON BOT TRIAL. PLEASE EXCUSE MY ASSAULT ON YOU AND THAT OTHER GUY, I WAS MAD THAT MY RELATIVELY INANE POST WOULD BE ASSAULTED SO QUICKLY. AGAIN, I BELIEVE YOUR HASTINESS TO INFORM ME OF THE WIKIPEDIA RULES AMOUNTS TO AN EGO TRIP, BUT HONESTLY IF YOU THINK I AM BEING AN ASSHOLE ABOUT IT PLEASE STOP TAKING IT SO PERSONALLY. YOU CALLED ME CHILDISH TWICE AFTER I USED IT ONCE. YOU REGARDED MY PREVIOUS EXPLANATION OF MY ACTIONS AS CHILDISH, WHICH I DO NOT FEEL IT WAS. WHATEVER THE FUCK AN EDIT WAR IS IS IRRELEVANT, AS I TOLD YOU MY ACTIONS AFTER THE POST WERE OUT OF FRUSTRATION. I WISH TO CONTRIBUTE WHOLEHEARTEDLY TO THE WIKIPEDIA COMMUNITY. I WOULD NOT TAKE TIME TO WRITE THIS BULLSHIT OTHERWISE. I HAVE EXPLAINED MYSELF TO YOU AND I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU QUIT ACTING THIS WAY. DESPITE YOUR IMPRESSION THAT I, A STRANGER ON THE INTERNET, THINK YOU HAVE A PATHETIC LIFE, I CAN ASSURE YOU THIS IS UNTRUE. GOOD GOD 400 PAGES?!? YOU'RE WIKIPEDIA ITSELF. I WANT TO EDIT THIS PAGE TO INCLUDE THE PREVIOUS INFORMATION WHICH I HAVE POSTED. WHY IS YOUR DELETION OF MY POST NOT VANDALISM IF WE'RE ON THE SAME LEVEL? I WOULD LIKE TO REPOST THE INFORMATION WITH MY PROOF IF YOU DON'T MIND.
THANKS
YOURNUMBERTWOFAN
Once again, you are taking this way too personally. My apologies if I have offended you. I do not care about edit warring, nor do I think I ever will. This is the internet, learn how to chill out. Not everything here is serious business. If I was blocked from Wikipedia, it would not end the world for me. As it is I have posted a ton of sources validating my claim that there is a relatively popular blog which criticizes Marmaduke on the internet which is read by people in the talk section, as you requested. If people do not believe me after this I will think people have gone defunct. You have still not answered my question about how you have designated authority over me, and I am getting tired of asking you. Why was my posting deleted after several months of being up on the page? Why was a user who is on trail for being a bot allowed to delete my posting? You know, I came here to do one simple thing, not argue on the internet like an idiot. But this whole thing has done terrible damage to my self esteem. I am sorry you do not wish to work with me again, as I think I have eloquently and passionately stated my points, which you have attempted to refute by pointing me to some rules page. I hope that the links I have posted are proof enough, and that I will finally be allowed by the grace of the Wikipedia editors, to post one chunk of information which is true and not inane regarding critcism of Marmaduke. Good fucking lord. I did not think things would be this hard.
Again, I apologize for what I did to your page and that other guys page. I was mad, and a little drunk.
Thanks,
Yournumbertwofan
POOOOOOOP POOOP POOP