Jump to content

User talk:ChildofMidnight: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Thanks: new section
Joheba (talk | contribs)
Line 610: Line 610:


For creating a sub page without telling me! It actually came in handy today, [[Alfred E. Newman|what me worry]]?--[[User:Kelapstick|kelapstick]] ([[User talk:Kelapstick|talk]]) 00:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
For creating a sub page without telling me! It actually came in handy today, [[Alfred E. Newman|what me worry]]?--[[User:Kelapstick|kelapstick]] ([[User talk:Kelapstick|talk]]) 00:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

== I'm afraid I'm a bit lost ==

Hello,
sorry for bothering you, I am really trying to find my way through Wikipedia without bothering people. However there are some things I do not understand. <br />First of all, I do not know what I have to do now. I've seen that the Award article is relisted, though I do not understand what this means for me or for the article - so what has to be done?<br />
Then during the last days I've tried to find articles about the Award, unfortunately there were mostly press releases by companies for products that have been awarded. There was only a small article in the asiafoodjournal. And there was something written in French on lalibre.be. Within Wikipedia there is a link from the Greek company FAGE to the Award. Not really helpful. On the other hand, before I wrote my first two articles I looked up other articles in the food/drink and/or award area and I do not see that the notability or sources or references criteria differs much from other beer award articles (e.g. World Beer Cup or Champion Beer of Wales, where the articles behind the links are not only genuine journalism but also companys' releases).
Somehow I still do not know what has to be done, to remove those flags or marks from those two articles that I've written. And who removes them. Is it my job to add something and then I am allowed to remove the flags until the article is checked/proofread by someone else? Or do I add something and someone else removes after re-reading the marks? And my last question: it is not only that the Superior Taste Award article was marked with the deletion flag. It is also that this article and the European Beer Star article are obviously not good enough. The problem is, that I just do not have a clue what else to write so that they meet quality standards ... <br />
So I'd be really glad, if you could give me some more hints how to improve my articles.
Thanks in advance.
[[User:Joheba|Joheba]] ([[User talk:Joheba|talk]]) 00:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)joheba

Revision as of 00:09, 24 February 2009

Wiel Arets (Heerlen, 14 mei 1955) is a Dutch architect. He graduated from the TU Eindhoven in 1983. In the following year he started his own firm, Wiel Arets architect & associates, in Heerlen. He prefers simple and abstract compositions. His palet is very sparse and he prefers black and white (including for his own clothes; he usually dresses in black).

His main claim to fame is his design for the Academie voor Beeldende Kunsten in Maastricht; his design for the Universiteitsbibliotheek in Utrecht is also praised. With Jo Coenen he collaborated in the restauration of the glaspaleis in his birthplace Heerlen, and designed a number of pharmacies (?) in the south of the Netherlands. In Hapert he designed a complete Medisch Centrum (Oude Provinciale weg 81/Lindenstraat Hapert). The form language of neo-modernisme is combined with an abstract, placid aesthetic. His favorite building material is the glass brick.

Awards

In 2005, Wiel Arets received the BNA-Kubus, the oldest award for architecture in the Netherlands. The jury appreciated the remarkable quality of his work and praises his extraordinary contribution to architecture. The Kubus is awarded annually since 1965; previous winners include Herman Hertzberger, Wim Quist, Jo Coenen, Jo van den Broek, Benthem Crouwel and Hubert-Jan Henket, and Wessel de Jonge.

Also in 2005 Arets received the Rietveldprijs for his design for the Universiteitsbibliotheek on De Uithof in Utrecht, which came with a check for 7500 euro. The Stichting Rietveldprijs awards the prize every other year to an architect who builds a remarkable building in Utrecht. Past winners include Koen van Velsen, Mart van Schijndel, and Rem Koolhaas.

References

This apparently has something to do with a thread on this page...


Signing so this will be archived. Gracias Drmies for translation. Although the pharmacies issue makes me wonder whether you are really Dutch? ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Bezgovo cvrtje

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bezgovo cvrtje. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Bacon shrimp article?

*Some praise from published connaisseurs for bacon shrimp:

    • "Here is divine finger food for the hopelessly hedonistic: one perfect, plump shrimp wrapped up in succulent bacon."[1]
    • "A unique and delicious way to serve shrimp."[2]
    • "The smokiness of the bacon against the sweetness of the shrimp is irresistible."[3]

References

  1. ^ Siegel, Helene (1997). Totally Shrimp Cookbook. Celestial Arts. p. 11. ISBN 9780890878231. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  2. ^ ..even for the Milk Soy Protein Intolerant. Wise, Jane E. (2005). The Culinary Guide for MSPI. Milk Soy Protein Intolerance. p. 7. ISBN 9780976402305. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  3. ^ Daley, Bill (2001-03-11). "Chengdu Cuisine of China". Hartford Courant. p. 10. Retrieved 2009-02-10. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

Speaking of...

...AfD, have a look at Flandreau Cemetery when you have a moment. It's nominated, for some decent reasons perhaps. I don't know if cemeteries are inherently notable. I did some work on the article, but didn't yet get around to checking the individuals buried there for notability (none have articles on WP, I think). Do you have any ideas for upping the value of the article? You're always good at writing leads and stuff (and tell Bongo that "lede" is simply an alternative spelling for "lede"!) and I've tried to do the kind of thing that you might do in the first paragraph--but not so well, of course. Your help, as always, is appreciated. And now it's bedtime here! Drmies (talk) 06:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bongo knows that "lede" is an alternate spelling for both "lede" (although not very alternate in that case) and "lead". But it's easier to parse as it cannot be mistaken other uses / pronunciations. Encyclopedias (encyclopediae?) are not newspapers, but I've never met a journalist who didn't use the vernacular spelling—have either of you? Bongomatic 06:35, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Haha Bongo, I don't think I've ever met a journalist! You're right re: parsing, of course, but the spelling kind of rubs me the wrong way, since I'm a very, very old-fashioned kind of person, and there is an Old English "lede"--"people," "nation." I had to look it up the first time I saw "lede," which was right here, on WP, and I thought it was a misspelling. Later, Drmies (talk) 16:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re Flandreau: I really, really appreciate your help here, all the more since you probably know as well as I do that it's a lost cause...and if it's not, that's due in no small part to you, my friend. Drmies (talk) 01:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camberwell Baptist Church

I feel like I'm repeating myself constantly, but please read Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators. In short; I took it upon myself to try and save the article, but was able to find no more sources that allowed the article to meet GNG; as such, it is presumed non-notable in the absence of any other evidence. AfD is not a vote, it's based on the strength of arguments, and the keep votes even those based on the sources, were weak. As for a possible merge, the oft-cited WP:PRESERVE mentions nothing about preserving non-notable content in the case of deletion; articles about cities and towns I've browsed to not appear to single out churches in their own prose. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 13:45, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, clearly, my deep-rooted hatred of Baptists is what influenced my decision... </sarcasm> The article fails GNG; no good arguments are put forth that it can meet it or an SNG; article is deleted. Don't go lecturing me about policies when you don't understand some basic ones, such as WP:AGF. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 22:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please point out where I didn't assume good faith? I simply pointed out that as the closing administrator you are supposed to weigh the arguments, not impose a conclusion based on your personal research. That you failed to follow policy is not a failure on my part to assume good faith. I think you are confused about several policies and would be well served by reviewing them carefully. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Butting in: You are aware of WP:DRV, right, WP:CoM? I know nothing about the AfD in question (trying to keep out of that tar pit), but if you feel the closing was not kosher, you might consider bringing it up at DRV. Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 22:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Dekka. A good suggestion, and I had just done so. Having checked out a few of the reviews in the past, my impression is that it's difficult to overturn closures even when they are not based on policy (I think there is generally a reluctance to overrule fellow admins). So I think it's important to get good closures in the first place. My hope is that this administrator will consider and abide by the guidlines in the future so this situation isn't repeated. I've mostly been working in article space rather than spending a lot of time in the AfD discussions, but the deletion of content on notable subjects that simply needs improvement and better citations, and the deletion of content that should be merged, as in this case, does a lot of damage to the encyclopedia. It's a time consuming struggle to stay on top of all the deletions, and that time would be more usefully spent improving articles. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I thought (and thinking are mental forms and processes) that Wikipedia was for biting of each others head... Like Deviled eggs  ;)

Warrington (talk) 23:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fear you may have spent too much time around Scapler...
Are you sure the photo with washed out colors in that long named German artchitect's article is better than the shady one I replaced it with? I think my layout was much better, and although the photo wasn't perfect, it's clearer and you can still see the colors. Perhaps I'll have to hunt up a superior photo to satisfy your fanaticism. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


He was using those colours himself, I can't help it. I have seen the original houses.

Some do, like Luis Barragán for ex, http://www.designmuseum.org/__entry/3825?style=design_image_popup, see here


go to bed

Warrington (talk) 23:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may have a cheap monitor or bad eyes. Those colors look retched.
It's a little early for bed, but after I finish eating I might take a nap. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And what were you eating?

Warrington (talk) 07:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flandreau Cemetery

I was doing New Page Patrol, and noticed that you created an article about Flandreau Cemetery. Although you evidently intended to put it in your userspace, you in fact created it in mainspace. If you want to make a page in your userspace (for example, a page called FortyTwo), you type this as the name: User:ChildofMidnight/FortyTwo. Without the User: bit, the page will show up in mainspace (and depending on what it is, be deleted). Quantumobserver (talk) 01:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right, sorry about that. I will try to move it... Thanks for moving it for me. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tired today COM? Kidding, I have had to revert myself when I accidentally destroyed a template once, we all have our moments. Oh, and Google is creepy, it follows you everywhere... ominous music... Scapler (talk) 02:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not only did I waste precious time looking at Mies, Dr.'s mapquest link before I realized it wasn't to the exciting war of words he's involved in that I was hoping to stick my nose into, but it caused my Amiga computer to grind to a halt. And now Scapler pops up with Michael Jackson Thriller jokes. But where are you guys when the FA experts at Tina Turner are telling me that every article on a musician has to start out with "John Doe is a musician from Whoville" zzzzzzzz instead of containing a notable and relevant introduction to the individual's significance? Well? That's what I thought? I need a nap. But first, a shower. What else is going on? And did you know that MJ is a businessman and Celine Dionne is an actress? Wasn't she in Alien v. Predator? Apparently John Mayer is an American Musician, just like my neighbor Bill! Simply the Best!!! ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

State Fair of Florida?

If you created it, then why is it redlinked? Moooooo........ Scapler (talk) 04:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That blue link appeared exactly eight minutes after my comment, don't think I didn't notice. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 14:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ululation LELELELELELELELE!!!! Scapler (talk) 15:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is Thomasville, Pennsylvania a township, or a borough, or what exactly? Scapler (talk) 19:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LuLuLuLuLuLuLuLuLuLuLuLuLu I have no idea. How do we find that out? It is home to Mr. T's roadhouse [1]. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, I gave it an infobox though. That website is certainly right about one thing, the Steeler's are the greatest team in the universe! Scapler (talk) 19:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, it was great. Secondly, the Steelers are far superior to the Jets (though my dad may disagree with me), thirdly Tonedeaf is an amazing Indie album by Orbit, and fourthly, I believe the Zenger trial was so influential that it warrants a separate article. Wooh... that was quite a long list. Scapler (talk) 01:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In what sense has this got anything to do with rhyming slang? (apart from the obvious sense that all words ending in -izzle will rhyme with each other, that is). If I'm missing some deep connection please let me know! pablohablo. 21:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are both rhyming slangs and language games. I think it's a great see also that provides access to a subject that is similar, but not directly related. They seem to have a lot in common and the similarities and differences make it worth providing a link between the subjects. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand see also Language Game, but not specifically rhyming slang. pablohablo. 21:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of the great things about Wikipedia is the way articles link to one another. If there is a direct connection, perhaps a term should be linked in an article, but as is the case here where the connection is intersting and valuable, but not direct, I think a see also connection is valid. It seems to me to make the encyclopedia better. If there were a list of rhyming games, that would be a better link than to an individual one. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well on that note, I have added the category "Language games"" to "Rhyming slang". So there's a link there. pablohablo. 21:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A welcome improvement, but adding to a category is not the same as a see also. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly. But the "see also" is still there. And it now points directly to the article, rather than a redirect page. Which is another improvement. pablohablo. 21:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I am also referring to the Cockney rhyming slang, or whatever it is called, that was also a"see also". But I guess I shouldn't push my luck, and I admit the connection isn't a super strong one. But since there isn't a list to connect to (at least not that I know of) and since this seems to be a mjor rhyming game and there don't seem to be articles on lots of others, I thought that rhyming game in particular was an interesting connection. But I'm willing to settle for less. :) Thanks for your communications and your efforts to improve the encyclopedia. Have fun. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My talk page

I have asked you to stop leaving comments on my talk page. Any discussion you wish to conduct on the Tina Turner article should be left on the talk page for that article. If you cannot stop, I will gladly report you for harassment. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:03, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I posted one message on this user's talk page that I can remember, after he repeatedly reverted to a poorly worded section title. I also just posted an acknowledgement of this message. It's always troubling when people get upset when their mistakes are corrected, but not everyone is perfect like I am. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Alan Scott (blacksmith)

Updated DYK query On February 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alan Scott (blacksmith), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 07:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Raw beet party

Now this edit is nothing but pure vandalism, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Swedish_cuisine&diff=248249025&oldid=247153510this The guy was creating a picture with a lot of raw beets on some newspaper and he goes, a traditional Swedish meal, eating raw beets, he calls it bedegille and locate it in the south of sweden. This stupid picture with this hoax have been in the article since last year, October, to be more precise.

Tru that Swedea eat strange things sometimes, but never raw beets, especially not on special raw beet-parties.

This image should be deleted, I guess, but I really don’t know how. Just check how many hits you get on Google with bedegille... nome. excepi for Wikipedia. Warrington (talk) 12:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ChildofMidnight. You have new messages at Bongomatic's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Warrington (talk) 19:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


He says bedegille ("beet party"), a traditional meal in southern Sweden, various knifes and tools are used to split the raw beets.

Well, it is not", a traditional meal in southern Sweden. Never heard of bedegille,, and no Google hits as I said. And he named the image Bedegille.JPG.

Harvest feast is indeed called skördefest in Swedish, but you do not make skördefest with some dirty beets only, laid on newspapers. Skördefest looks like this, http://www.aspvikskoloni.se/skordefest.jpg. or C:\WINDOWS\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\YGN215HT\img[1].jpg or this http://www.eckerolinjen.nu/medialibrary/data/stor-skordefestbild-web-%7Buce0z-vkwjp-lvbvl%7D.jpg


Warrington (talk) 17:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it was a poor harvest that year? ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very funny... I just LOVE Wikipedia. I go aand clean up the Honey article and work with it a whole day, new refernces rhere asked, and everything, and somebody goes and puts back the clean up tag again.

Warrington (talk) 19:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Worker bees
Maybe it's karma for your reversion of my photo changes in the Handenwasseturshoven article? It looks like you did a lot of good work on the honey article. Don't let the bumps in the road phase you. Just stay positive, cool, calm, and collected like I do. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely words. Thanks, I feel much better now. And yes I am a tulku lama who got lost.

Warrington (talk) 20:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input. A section has been started at Talk:Michael Jackson, addressing your concerns. Pyrrhus16 19:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stick candy - adding unsourced information

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Stick candy. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Ronz (talk) 19:21, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, ummmm unsourced? Aren't you the one who removed the citations for that content? Let's keep discussion on the article talk page. When you're the only editor who keeps reverting something, that's usually not a good sign. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You've been formally warned for repeated violations of WP:V. If you continue, I'll request you be blocked. It's that simple. --Ronz (talk) 19:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome to request that I be blocked for reverting your deletion of verified content when there is a clear consensus that it should be included and you are the only one trying to remove it. Good luck with that. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments like that make it all the easier. Keep it up. --Ronz (talk) 20:21, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you've followed up. How about you remove this section from your talk page and we start fresh? --Ronz (talk) 00:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stick candy - Starting over

As you've probably already noticed, I decided to have the article protected. I don't want you to be punished for simply following the bad example of other editors. consensus is not a vote, nor is it resolved by ignoring concerns about policies, guidelines, and what is best for Wikipedia. Please focus on the content, and avoid commenting on editors and their behavior. I look forward to your further comments. --Ronz (talk) 23:52, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Chicken fried bacon

Updated DYK query On February 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chicken fried bacon, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 19:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo!!!Bongomatic 01:37, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources noticeboard

I have asked a question about using pages like this as reliable sources at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Stick candy--kelapstick (talk) 22:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Abbey deletion

Hi, I deleted the second Race quote in the Edward Abbey article because it was redundant. Look closely and you'll see that it appears twice. Thanks.

Okay. Best to use an edit summary so there's no confusion. Thanks for the note. I restored your edit (at least I think I did...).ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion for some Un source Topic

Please stop editing in Zamboanga City thread if you don't have any source to prove.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shin368 (talkcontribs) 12:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the history, the various talk pages, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Stick_candy, etc. made for good reading. I find myself a bit in the middle on a couple of those things--I think, for instance, that the article had a few too many of those "primary" links, and thus there was a lack of balance. Still, I don't really see (and Bongo's comments on WP:RS are quite valid) that citing a few of those sources is against either the spirit or the letter of WP. That Ronz claims there is a consensus against that particular usage is, well, not very valid, in my opinion, after perusing the Talk page for the article. It seems to me that at least in this particular case their consensus is a consensus of one. Ha, I don't think you'll be blocked quickly either--if that does happen, we might have to invent the bacon slap (as opposed to the bacon slab). BTW, stick candy in the Netherlands is sold at every single fair--my favorite is cinnamon flavored. They get as long as maybe 3 feet. Oh, that's OR (not directly verifiable, but true!). Drmies (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot, the generic name for 'stick candy' in Dutch is zuurstok; kaneelstok is probably not properly hard candy, since they're softer. Here's the (all-too brief and characteristically unreferenced) Dutch WP article: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuurstok. Drmies (talk) 16:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, here's a reference for a 1.5 meter, 10 kg. zuurstok. Drmies (talk) 16:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A promotional stick of rock, something that passes for candy in Britain. Almost makes the Dutch seem like master chefs
Interesting stuff. In britain they have some other weird candy thing. But the Dutch have these swirly barber pole candies? I am working on getting the fart usage for Dutch oven included in that article if you want to help. Also, I see someone on the talk page has enquired why that type of cooking method is called Dutch. My important work improving the encyclopedia continues!!! ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dutch oven = Newfie gas chamber.--kelapstick (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...eh...aaahhh... Drmies (talk) 17:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch oven (fart chamber) has been created. But it needs better citations. Feel free to work on this important subject. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For your work on Dutch oven (fart chamber)

What a cute puppy!
This cute puppy has been given to you for your recent amazing performance. Please accept this well deserved cute puppy. Don't forget to train it. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But should probably be moved to Dutch oven (prank)--kelapstick (talk) 19:09, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hence the puppy! Everyone needs puppies. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Moved. Should Dutch oven be disambiguated? What a lovely animal!Thanks. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:13, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you know anyone else who needs a puppy, Deploy as {{subst:User:Timtrent/puppy}} :) Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps Timtrent should consider neutering? I see there is discussion of this issue of the less savory meanings for Dutch oven going back to 2006. Hopefully this resolves it. I see also there are other slang uses on the disambig. page. Can we merge them into the new prank article? It's not exactly a prank though in that sense. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The puppy is far too young to be neutered. It needs to be 5-7 months old before one can consider it without harming the beast's development. As for the article, merge away! Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I gave you poor information, it should have been Dutch oven (practical joke), as prank redirects to practical joke, I have fixed it and changed all redirects, oddly enough there are not that many links...--kelapstick (talk) 19:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding your latest post on the talk page (more appropriate here), my wife would disagree that it a funny joke :O--kelapstick (talk) 21:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also I would like to get some references for it being called the Newfie gas chamber and "playing tent" (what we had originally called it)--kelapstick (talk) 21:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I can't wait until you get this to DYK...Featured Article here we come!--kelapstick (talk) 21:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope Drmies isn't mad at me. We don't associate this joke with anything having to do with being Dutch. It's just a description derived from cooking using the ovens, and most people don't even know what Dutch ovens are, and even for those who do, they're called Dutch ovens, but I don't think there's much connection to the Netherlands is there? I may have a lot of atoning to do. I'd be okay with including it all in the actual Dutch oven article, but it gets deleted from there. And if it gets folded in with other practical jokes and pranks, then people looking for the information at Dutch oven have to go rather far afield. Bah humbug. Now I'm really in the dog house. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What about turning it into an article about sayings using the word Dutch? Would that be legitimate? What would it be called? Slang uses of the word Dutch? There's going Dutch (dining out where each person pays for themselves), Dutch auction (where the price goes down until a bid is gotten), etc. Or is that just going to make things worse? I guess that's more of a dictionary article? I don't know. I certainly think this use of the phrase Dutch oven should be covered. Is there a better way? ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dutch oven as a farting game (and I use the word game in its loosest possible context) is notable enough for a stand alone Wikipedia article. It's one of those things that doesn't get enough press, like the various lengths, diameters and flavours of stick candy, but that doesn't mean it isn't notable.--kelapstick (talk) 21:58, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. My conclusion is that it would be fine to include it in the Dutch oven article, as it's based on the way things cook inside one, but outside of that I think I agree that a stand alone article is the way to go. FA here we come!!! ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
only 500 more words characters for DKY qualification! I am already contemplating a hook.--kelapstick (talk) 22:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You have to get the citations right. MUCH more impressive using the cite template. I did one, but too much edit conflict stuff to make it easy!
Oops, sorry. I'll take a break. What do you think of the Australian usage for smoking doobie in a car with the windows rolled up? I found another not great source for it. Here [2]. Do you think I need to separate out a notes section from references? Including quotes is obviously useful, but some "editors" try to get rid of them. This is too bad because links go dead and a quote is a great way to preserve the source in greater context. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch Oven

A tag has been placed on Dutch oven (prank) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. GorillaWarfare talk 19:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VIETNAM

I have reverted the file back to its previous image. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 22:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I win Scapler (talk) 02:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, good question!

Shoot, I didn't even think about it. I had nominated the article before I used the Flikr upload bot to find some photos. Feel free to add one if you'd like, or I can do it in a couple of minutes. Wish I could have found a free use photo of the thing when they found it. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.  :) When I saw the original article in Hot Rod a few months ago, the story just blew me away. It sure didn't take long to get the thing back in shape. I'm amazed that Roth actually didn't like the car! A lot of it had to do with the body hiding the engine and chassis. Wouldn't mind having it in my driveway. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Odwalla founders started a soda company

Adina World Beat Beverages - thought you might like this one. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 14:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tina Turner 2

Would you mind pointing out exactly where in this sentence, or in the entire article, are the sources that support your contention that this is a well-sourced statement? I see the use of the word "icon" once in the article and there are absolutely no sources to support that. LaVidaLoca (talk) 19:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, here's a link [3] (it's also on the article's discussion page). One of the next couple sentences refers to as a Queen of Rock and Roll or something to that effect and the article discusses in depth her 40 year career and legendary status. Icon is a word that is not only well sourced but entirely accurate in characterizing these achievements. As I suggested on the talk page, if there is a better or more accurate or more well sourced term I would be happy to consider it. Thanks for the note. I'm happy to answer any other questions you have. I'm just trying to have accurate and well written leads on the articles I work on. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But posting a link to an outside source on your talk page or on the article talk page does not constitute a well-sourced use of the word. At no point elsewhere in the article does the word icon appear, so your summarizing the page content and arriving at icon isn't in keeping with use of reliable sourcing. It can certainly be your opinion of the article subject, but it isn't sourced. Also, why would at least 4 other editors have to find a word that would make you happy to consider? There appears to be wide consensus that this, and other changes you made, are not in keeping with consensus or with good article requirements. If 2, then 3, then 4, and maybe more have objected to your edits, perhaps the problem is not with the other editors but with the edits you've made. Do you suppose a request for comments would have any different outcome than what has already occurred? RfCs rarely have more than a handful of opinions be posted, and there is already ample consensus. LaVidaLoca (talk) 19:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think using the word more than once would be redundant, don't you think? Once in the lead serves the purpose of characterizing the singer per the article contents and is supported by numerous sources (intros aren't usually cited and citing a lead sentence would be ugly indeed), but you're welcome to add one or more citations if you deem it necessary. No one seems to object to the word icon as content, the claim is that the word doesn't belong in an intro based on some sort of sheeple think about trying to make every lead identical in every musician article. But every musician is not identical, so that doesn't make any sense and there's no policy to support it. The word is appropriate exactly because it distunguishes this musician from others. That's the whole point of an encyclopedia, to inform people. I'm not sure which other changes you're unhappy with, but I followed Wildhartlicve's suggestion of moving the extensive award discussion out of the lead. I'm stilling waiting for the note of thanks to arrive. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:51, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're mistaken about citations in the lead. You were clearly told that here with a quote from policy - "should be carefully sourced as appropriate here." That is especially true when you make an extraordinary claim about an article subject. Even your description of your use confirms that something that is unsourced, such as this word, is not repeated in the article, thus it is unsourced. I agree with the other editors on the talk page, if you put a claim into an article, it is your responsibility to reliably source it or it should be removed. What you are doing is essentially synthesizing a description based on your viewpoint of the career. One of the editors made a very valid point that a large number of articles on musicians could use the word icon, which would not distinguish any of them in any way. Readers don't need an editor's interpretation of a musician to draw a conclusion like icon. In the context you are using it, it is POV and unsourced. Let me stress that - it is your responsibility to reliably source your own additions, never to post a general link on talk pages and tell other editors to fix it. From what I've read from the talk page, it's also extraordinary for you to expect anyone to come and thank you for anything you've done on that page since you have bucked consensus consistently, not just here, but as I looked, on other musician articles as well. LaVidaLoca (talk) 20:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So to summarize, you don't disagree that the word is accurate, you acknowledge there are numerous sources for it, but because someone said Lindsay Lohan has also been referred to as an icon we can't use it? Silly is as silly does. Tina Turner is an icon, this is well established by the article and by independent sources. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. To summarize, it doesn't matter whether I think anyone is an icon or not, nor does it matter what you think regarding that. All that matters is that there is no source to support the inclusion of the word and that what you are doing is synthesizing a conclusion based on your interpretation. Nothing in the article says Tina Turner is an icon and independent sources have at no time been added to the article itself to support its use. What also matters is that a consensus has been determined that your inclusion of it is inappropriate. I see you're having problems on other articles with your interpretation of things vs. even reliable sources. I would echo the note from Realist2. This is heading for a request for comments on user conduct. LaVidaLoca (talk) 20:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

<outdent> I'm confused about your statement that there "is no source" to support calling her an icon. I just gave you a link to dozens including headlines such as "HOW ANNA MAE BULLOCK BECAME A ROCK ICON" (their all caps not mine) and other stories that say "Turner is considered a rock 'n' roll icon," "Several new books on pop icons such as Led Zeppelin, David Bowie, Tina Turner, Elvis Presley and Motown legends such as the Temptations and the Supremes...," "A new musical tracing the life of rock icon Tina Turner is currently aiming for a London debut" she's ranked 128 on "The 200 Greatest Pop Culture Icons Complete Ranked List" which includes people other than musicians. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A link posted on your talk page has no meaning on the talk page. Can you seriously have been here for 3 months and not understand the concept of adding references to an article for content you've put in? I don't believe that, so I have to think you're being deliberately obstinate. It has been explained to you over and over that sources need to be added to an article along with the content you put in. And they have to be from reliable sources. Giving me a link to a search page here does not benefit the article in any way, unless you expect someone else to do the work for you. The only time a source is valid is when it's actually put in the article. I know you were given a link on Talk:Tina Turner for assistance in adding citations to articles. LaVidaLoca (talk) 22:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fun catty

Alack! what poverty my Muse brings forth, That having such a scope to show her pride, The argument all bare is of more worth Than when it hath my added praise beside! O! blame me not, if I no more can write! Look in your glass, and there appears a face That over-goes my blunt invention quite, Dulling my lines, and doing me disgrace. Were it not sinful then, striving to mend, To mar the subject that before was well? For to no other pass my verses tend Than of your graces and your gifts to tell; And more, much more, than in my verse can sit, Your own glass shows you when you look in it.

Mr W. Shakespeare

Do cats eat corn on the cob?

Warrington (talk) 21:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares about that when I got a note from W Shakespeare!!! It makes me laugh that you're involved in Ayn Rand a bit. She's taking over!!! ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are a Sherlock Holmes.

Warrington (talk) 22:33, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson

Please continue to use the talk page, this is the 4th edit you have made against consensus, and given your recent history on other articles, I see little choice but to file a user conduct report if this POV behavior continues. Please take this opportunity to slow down. — R2 20:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. As you know I asked for citations to support Michael Jackson being a businessman, and in reply a google news link was provided. Other than trivial mentions and unrelated use of the term businessman having nothing to do with Jackson (which goes to confirm that the term isn't in wide use as relating to him), there was no substantial coverage of Jackson as businessman or discussion of his business dealings. So, quite reasonably, I think, I added a dubious tag. I could also have added a citation needed tag and an undue weight tag, if such a thing exists, but I tried to restrain myself. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:16, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, currently you are the only person who see's it that way. It is not for you to decide what constitutes a business man, yet third party sources are calling him a business man, and that's all that matters. Like I said, please slow down, before you get yourself into trouble. There is no need for things to get heated over such an issue. — R2 20:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
User:IanMacM said "MJ is probably no more of a businessman than any other showbiz star. His acquisition of the rights to the Beatles' songs was his most important business deal, but it is debatable whether he is a businessman in the strictest sense of the word.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)" so I am clearly not the only one who thinks it is inappropriate to refer to him as a businessman and downright strange to do so in the first sentence of the article. I once again suggest an RfC. Please don't remove my appropriate tag for disputed material again. Thanks. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I put in my comment - merge.

No, I am far from Kerala. Not enough snow for a Newfie.

Right now, I am trying to save the orcas. They were going to be wiped out, so I built a nice, big safe container for them. Now I am told the container is too big: readers will not be able to find their favorite orca among all the others. Can't win. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Newfie steak is a slice of fried bologna. If you add some potato chips you get a Newfie taco. I don't think you want to know about a Newfie breath mint. Newfie gas chamber is new to me, but consistent. I checked but couldn't find any references in Google Scholar. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget Newfie fries, never had them myself but they sold them at the restaurant at the Thompson Airport.--kelapstick (talk) 22:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. That definition was removed from the article. The only sources I can find are not entirely 100% reliable. I'm also hesitant to popularize the illicit use of herbal rememdies. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, ChildofMidnight. You have new messages at Smallman12q's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Smallman12q (talk) 23:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sauerbruch Hutton

Updated DYK query On February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sauerbruch Hutton, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 00:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, lots of drama there eh? I saw your suggestion about the long notable people list, check out what they did at my old stompin' grounds, much more gooder no? I do agree with the guy who thought he should put an essay in as the title of a section though (although he gave himself away as unreliable when he use the term "wikipediers"), it does look like it was written by a Realtor. Maybe I should resort to anonymously editing like that to get my point across, it looks like it works.--kelapstick (talk) 00:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a nice beach community, but a bit pretentious and overbuilt. I'm hoping to relocate somewhere tropical before the dollar completes its collapse. Doesn't look like I have much time. But like a good captain I'll go down with the ship if it comes to that! ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

World Mastership in candy cane making (Polkagris)

(Not a joke). Se at the city info with this too in English http://www.communityofsweden.com/Pages/Stories/Story.aspx?storyId=772 and these guys in this Swedish evning newspaper Aftonbladet say that there is a World Mastership in Sweden candy cane making... – handmade, I mean, 25 July and Lars Hopf from the Chatanna candy cane shop, 2006 http://www.jnytt.se/ReadPrint__9560.aspxfrom Gränna, Sweden, was and Magnus Heidenbom Cabbe Polkagrisfabrik the master 2005 .

Gränna VM in candy cane (Swedish) with e mail http://www.jnytt.se/ReadPrint__9560.aspx is the center of polkagris-making in Sweden, polkagris is candy cane in Swedish. Candy canes are a very traditional old candy in Sweden. By the way, one can find people in folkart and ethnogr. Museums in Sw. demonstratee how they have been made once upona time. %2Bmuseum%26hl%3Dsv%26sa%3DG VM Gränna

Warrington (talk) 17:50, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all for the interseting information. Here's the Swedish article (I think) which Drmies can translate [4]. I think the information on Polkagris and Gräna will be good additions to the stick candy article, although I suppose it could go incandy cane too, or Rock (candy). My search indicates this is also a drink, Here is the tourist page for Gränna [5] which includes some history. Of course the European version are a bit primitive compared to our "Old Tyme" candy sticks, but I'm sure you guys will catch on soon.

Here are some sites (not great as far as reliability) but with some interesting information. I'm sticking them here for now. [6] includes picture and a map. Reference.com discussion of Candy canes and history and legend[7] reliable? Recipe and such [8]. Commercial website with picture [9] Don't let Ronz see this... MSN search results including videos!!! I lvoe videos. [10]. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


You are crazy. I enjoyed reading the marmalade story. Is it true? No, it is vandalism, but it is funny. I do not feel I have to chase fame by creating a lot of articles. I have in mind several I should, but I did not started them yet, so go ahed and do it. I will hang on it later. But I would appriciate a barnstar or a puppy or something like that...

Warrington (talk) 23:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC) a[reply]

No problem

No problem with the edit, my mood and attitude have nothing what-so-ever to do with you. ;) ... I'm just seeing some real issues with a few editors lately, and I hate to "run to mommy" on an AN or AN/I board. I've supported a few peeps here lately, made a real effort to be welcoming,... and get stabbed in the back. I see editors violating consensus, POV-pushing, inserting OR into articles ... (do I need to go on?). None of this has anything to do with you at all ... honest! ;). I can't say what I would like to because it would be against WP:NPA, and un-civil. I see new editors headed down a very bad WP:OWN path, but since they won't discuss things - I can't get anywhere near a reasonable solution. I see editors post "I'm going to gut the article by deleting this" at 12:00, and then posting "Good, since everyone agrees, I'm doing it" at 12:01. I signed on in hopes of a collaborative effort, and I see a grade-school mentality editing style. I see children wanting to WP:OWN articles. I see editors arguing with experienced editors, when they obviously haven't even read the policies and guidelines. I see self-righteous editors who have been here for over 2 years biting new editors. I've tried to talk to folks, and they don't hear - or they hear, and don't listen. I see editors so wrapped up in their own little crusades that they won't even read a total post, look at the links, research the facts, or listen to reason. I see admins spending HOURS bickering over one single granting of rollback, but not spending 15 minutes reviewing the edit history of a problem editor, because they don't want to get involved.

Like I said, changing my page was fine, it made me smile for a moment - and I appreciate that - it's just that at the moment, I'm very disgusted with a lot of things here. I'm really questioning my abilities to provide any worthwhile or valuable input. I'm sorry to blow all this off on you and all, but when I try to explain it to my dog, she just cocks her head and wonders if it means she's gonna get any goodies .. LOL. Oh, and by the way, I did mention to that Ronz editor that I thought he should not have landed so hard on you. For what that's worth. Anyway, I appreciate your cheerful posts, and I wish you the best. — Ched (talk) 03:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey you!

Thanks — Ched (talk) 13:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming DYKs

ALT...a gallery commissioned fourteen of the world's best-known architects to design lifeguard towers, with specifications including 360-degree visibility, vandal-proofing and a hypothetical budget of $17,000? (The specific gallery would be nice)

(not very interesting, that is why I wanted to work it into the chocolate covered bacon)--kelapstick (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded Lifeguard tower those hooks look very fine.
Your MBM hook is lame. How about something about the Barcelona Olympics? Or something about their success but their latest design known as the stapler being rejected? Have you been staying up late playing video games, because your game is off. Or maybe these articles are lame? I'll try to fire up something stronger ASAP. Did the square milk jug get easier to pour as you emptied it?
I put up a hook for the State Fair. And I added a few characters so hopefully it's long enough. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. I don't think the Lifeguard tower article qualifies, but I hooked MBM up with a hook about their show of uncompleted (failed) work. Good luck crossing the animals. :P ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Who are you calling lame? Actually the articles just don't have anything provocative to extract, not like a casino owner/politician. Yes the square milk jug is easier to poor when it isn't as full, however we have reverted to cartons since the grocery store is open later (read actually open when I get off work) than the bakery, and we actually get other things there. And I use cartons because they don't recycle here so if I am going to be forced to throw out my milk container it will be cardboard not plastic. Maybe we should create a square milk carton (patent pending). Tonight is catch up on what we have taped on the DVR since I spend too much time on the Wii.--kelapstick (talk) 04:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to come up with something exciting and controversial for the next article I work on. Fakon... ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey you:)

A kitten

My kitten has run away... Wonder why?

and can everybody start wrighting all kinda interpretaions of policies and than want people to follow it? like User:Uncle G/On sources and content.

how about Cake decorating and Is It Really Better Than Sex? Cake ...? Warrington (talk) 22:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why, ChildofMidnight, in my opinion this is a very good external link, don't you thinhk so?

ps

Isn't it gravlox in English, lox not lax? Warrington (talk) 22:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think that recipe is fine. No, I don't think it's gravlox. What does spam is your grandmother mean? ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some gangmember removed this link, sumarizing his effort as: Remove spam. Spam is your granny would mean - when pigs fly, or No way, something like that, I just invented it now.


Wow! Forgot to tell you how enthusiastic I feel about the new Polkagris. God job! You do well with candy!

Oh, yes polkagrisar is simply plural.

Good night! Warrington (talk) 23:22, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

QIThis user is Quite Interesting.

Here are some userboxes to you:

|

-|

Is there a risk that I will get some messages from a moose? And I have a certain feeling that we will soon have a new article ob Jodejkoek...

Warrington

Libel is bad!This user Warrington may be under the control of a "Chinese secret service agent" named Xing.

(talk) 14:04, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, polka pig.

File:Piazza navona 0511-01.JPG

Pig
Polka

There is a guy around here who is a bit shy... Can’t really make up his mind. Yes, pigs are gris, do not ask me why, maybe some 18oo’s joke.


Warrington (talk) 19:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC) My talk page makes me laugh every time I see it. This guy is really funny. I like the article Polkagris,. Do you like my polkapig changes? Thanks for the new member in my animal collection, see you later alligator Warrington (talk) 23:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the appreciation. Actually, how are candy cane and polkagris related to each other? They look rather similar too me. Ancestor? And next? Jodekoeken maybe? But Jodenkoek needs involving a Dutch, my Dutch is kind of basic but not much more.

Warrington (talk) 23:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Something for You... http://www.panter.nu/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/polka.gif

Warrington (talk) 15:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Did you take a look at Ando now? And I do wonder if it was not Aunt Ammalia who is behind the peppermint and the stripes http://www.inventhelp.com/Candy_Cane_Invention.asp?


Well, I dod¨t know but it ssais: The first documented reference of candy canes in the United States goes back to 1847, when a German-Swedish immigrant named August Imgard decorated his Christmas tree by hanging the treats from its branches. Friends and family members were delighted by Imgard's idea, and they rushed home to adorn their own Christmas evergreens with candy canes. This tradition quickly spread across the country, making candy canes a staple of Yuletide celebration in the U.S. However, these plain white canes still lacked the colorful designs seen in today's versions. No one is sure exactly when the customary red stripes were introduced, but it was somewhere right around the turn of the century. According to Webb Garrison's Treasury of Christmas Stories, "Christmas cards produced before 1900 show plain white canes, while striped ones appear on many cards printed early in the 20th century." Additionally, the popular peppermint-flavored variation also emerged around the same time as the striped patterns. Italic text is from the source above Warrington (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Armet & Davis

Updated DYK query On February 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Armet & Davis, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 05:02, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs more photos, but I'm not sure about this addition [11]. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Holiday Bowl (building)

Updated DYK query On February 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Holiday Bowl (building), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 11:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Chocolate covered bacon

Updated DYK query On February 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chocolate covered bacon, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has more content and establishes notability since I nominated it. The article improved, a good outcome. Scapler (talk) 20:04, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't you supposed to be working on a photo for my Dutch oven (prank) article? ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I started a separate article for the ISC. At least it is more notable that the dutch Oven prank! Pustelnik (talk) 20:21, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Art takes many forms. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tell me when you find one that involves farting. :) Scapler (talk) 21:02, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FreeLinc

I added this reference from Urgent Communications, a reliable source, to the FreeLinc article. You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FreeLinc. -- Eastmain (talk) 01:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Versailles Cuban restaurant

Updated DYK query On February 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Versailles Cuban restaurant, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 06:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

A diversion

You may have an opinion on this deletion review or in deed on the user space created article that is the subject of the review. Whatever your opinions are I'd appreciate knowing them.

The whole thing was about 3 miles from my home in 1978. Not the review, obviously! Fiddle Faddle (talk) 18:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look and have pondered it, but it's a bit above my pay grade I'm afraid. I'll try to stay updated on it and see if I can offer or add anything. Thanks for thinking of me. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Chremzl

Thank you for calling my attention to the new article. This certainly brings back memories of distant childhood: my maternal grandmother used to make chremzl for Passover. I will see if I can contribute anything to improve this stub. Best, --Zlerman (talk) 01:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad it is of interest. Food is a wonderful part of life, part of many memories and joys. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


DYK for Florida State Fair

Updated DYK query On February 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Florida State Fair, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 01:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

two things...

...first of all, thanks for the cheese! But when I finish that plate I might put the boobies back since I really got used to them. Maybe not, we'll see. Then, congratulations on all the work and the DYK recognition! You deserved feathers in your butt (that's where the Dutch stick them). Third of two things: I made a snack yesterday--with apple-smoked bacon and a chocolate ganache. It was not bad! But it also was not so good that I'll make it again, I think. I took some pictures and will upload as soon as peace and calm have returned to the Dr's household, in a month or so, haha. Take care, and thanks again! Drmies (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, this wasn't me! Chicken fried bacon and waffles, that sounds great! Drmies (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For creating a sub page without telling me! It actually came in handy today, what me worry?--kelapstick (talk) 00:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm a bit lost

Hello, sorry for bothering you, I am really trying to find my way through Wikipedia without bothering people. However there are some things I do not understand.
First of all, I do not know what I have to do now. I've seen that the Award article is relisted, though I do not understand what this means for me or for the article - so what has to be done?
Then during the last days I've tried to find articles about the Award, unfortunately there were mostly press releases by companies for products that have been awarded. There was only a small article in the asiafoodjournal. And there was something written in French on lalibre.be. Within Wikipedia there is a link from the Greek company FAGE to the Award. Not really helpful. On the other hand, before I wrote my first two articles I looked up other articles in the food/drink and/or award area and I do not see that the notability or sources or references criteria differs much from other beer award articles (e.g. World Beer Cup or Champion Beer of Wales, where the articles behind the links are not only genuine journalism but also companys' releases). Somehow I still do not know what has to be done, to remove those flags or marks from those two articles that I've written. And who removes them. Is it my job to add something and then I am allowed to remove the flags until the article is checked/proofread by someone else? Or do I add something and someone else removes after re-reading the marks? And my last question: it is not only that the Superior Taste Award article was marked with the deletion flag. It is also that this article and the European Beer Star article are obviously not good enough. The problem is, that I just do not have a clue what else to write so that they meet quality standards ...
So I'd be really glad, if you could give me some more hints how to improve my articles. Thanks in advance. Joheba (talk) 00:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)joheba[reply]