User talk:Rintrah

Re: Wesleyan

You moved this thread to your archive, and I'm not sure if you'll get a new message notice if I post there, so I'm duplicating it here.

I think that there should be, at most, two naming conventions beyond the full spelling in the lead (and you might consider spelling it out the first time it appears in each major section, as well). For "shorthand" references, I suggest sticking to OWU and Wesleyan; the school is techinally a college but is called a university, and it might confuse readers if you use "school", "university" and "college" interchangably with OWU and Wesleyan. The latter two should provide enough variety to avoid repetition. Galena11 16:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I can take on OWU, but may not have much time to get to it until next weekend. If La Saltarella is cool with that, then I'm on board.

You're boiling down there and we're freezing here in Utah. The *high* temperature today, with windchill factored in, will be -14 C (6 F). Wanna trade? :o) Galena11 17:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wesleyan suggestions

Hi Rintrah,

My thoughts on the two questions that you brought up.

Alumni: I tried to follow the format of Alumni sections of the FA-articles of other schools. In particular, I considered Duke University, Michigan State University and Cornell University. I think some of them go too far in having a prose that reads like a list of their notable alumni. For the OWU article, I decided to consider a few names and provide more detail as this will be more engaging for the reader. I am not sure what to suggest...I preferred a more interesting and focused section over a more comprehensive, list-like one.
Names: Having reviewed some of the alumni publications, I'd go with Galena11's suggestions for using two names only and the two that Galena11 suggested. LaSaltarella 22:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fauna of Puerto Rico

Please be more careful with edits like these - in many cases you have changed the meaning of statements, and in one case turned a clumsy sentance into gibberish. Please be more careful, and make sure you understand the meaning of a sentance before you change it. Guettarda 14:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Jennings

Hey there fellow league member! I'm trying to ready this one for WP:FAC. If you're not too busy with OWU, would you mind running through the article? I've started a peer review if you wish to comment. Thanks so much! Gzkn 02:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elegant variation

I wasn't doing it on purpose...I suppose with just two variants I just tried to make it work out. If you'd like to take a crack at fixing it, be my guest. Galena11 19:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're not annoying. :) I'm all for making the article as good as it can be, but there's got to be some point where the ROI (return on investment) has to be taken into consideration. We've both been working on this for some time now, and I'm more concerned now with just copyediting to the end of the article with the conventions we agreed upon than making it "perfect". I think that kind of fine tuning can happen once it is actually submitted as an FA, and by the authors or FA reviewers rather than us. Galena11 20:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi both, I agree with Galena11's point. Thank you both for your continued help! On a slighly unrelated note, I was wondering if I could get your opinion on something else. Can you look at Template:Ohio_Wesleyan_University and [[1]]. Tell me which one you like better or if you have any suggestions? LaSaltarella 20:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like the first one. Galena11 21:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I like the first one, too. Rintrah 03:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A moment of your time?

Whenever you have the spare time, could you maybe proofread Sailor Moon episode 002? I've worked on this for a while, and after a preoofread from BrokenSphere think an opinion from another editor would be great. Your help is much appreciated;I've been anxious to finish that article and start with the next episode (according to another editor, almost all Sailor Moon episodes need copyedit :P) Thanks, --♥Tohru Honda13♥ 07:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so, so much, Rintrah. When I posted this I thought I would have to wait until morning here, but I forgot you live on the other half of the planet from where I do :P. Yawn... But anyways, thany you so much for your help. I'm so happy! --♥Tohru Honda13♥ 07:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help with Wesleyan?

Unfortunately, my work schedule this week won't allow me to get much of anything done on Wesleyan (or any other article, for that matter). Would you mind working on it, if you have a chance? I stopped at the "Traditions" section. Galena11 20:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adjusted it now. I have set up many starter articles on actors and films most though much better than this. Then eventually I will come back and research each article. I have a number of wiki contacts in Finland who maybe able to improve the articles using Finnish website info and then add these as sources. Each actor and direcotr should have a filmogrpahy table but I am working on this as part of wikiproject film and biogrpahy. Then as missing films are strated the can be written into the actor filmogrpahies - recently I have started writing Shilpa Shetty film career by starting all of the film so far up to about 1997. I am compiling the list of films by country see List of Canadian films and List of Argentine films. There is so much to do!!! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing your talk page comments

Hi. I noticed that you altered your earlier comments in Talk:Bull bar. Where you go back and alter your previous comments, it's generally accepted that you should strike out (~~like this~~) the removed words or add another comment clarifying the earlier one, not simply edit and change the meaning of a previous comment that has already been read by others. --Athol Mullen 22:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Lamest Edit Wars

Indeed! Wikipedia:Unusual articles makes for fun procrastination! Perhaps it may even prove useful someday if I ever make it on Jeopardy! Anyway, off to register my keep !vote at the MfD... Gzkn 00:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May 24

"This page officially became boring?" XD. I stumbled on it by chance. — Deckill e r 02:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Dear Rintrah,

How is it going? I wanted to let you know that I added two paragraphs, the last one in "Twentieth century: years of change" and the first one in "The last twenty years" for a better historical flow of events in the school and also in response to a long overdue request by Bluedog423. LaSaltarella 20:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just saying hi

Hi there, Rintrah! Just wanted to let you know that I laughed out loud at your vote for keeping Lame Edit Wars alive. I'd volunteer to take the photo of your self-immolation, but it looks like the page is sticking around. Its probably better that way--I always cut the top of people's heads off in photos, and we can't have your sweeping gesture end up being anonymous, can we? ;o)

It looks like another action-packed work week is ahead for me, so again, I might not be much help to you this week. However, let me know where you are in Wesleyan (if you're still working on it?) and I'll pitch in if/when I can.

We're in day 17 of a deep freeze.....not one day above 0 C in over two weeks. BRRRRRRR. Hope your weather has improved, at least! Galena11 04:35, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there... Of course Strine is better than UK/US English! (Although I live in Oxford, so I get top quality UK English here...) More a fan of Sydney variety - Hogan with some random Mediterranean undertones every now and then! --Cricketgirl 17:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

HI Rintrah,

How is it going? Sorry to pester you with questions regarding the article but I was wondering if you might have some time for more copyediting of the last two sections of the OWU article? I am shooting to get it in the FAC queue in the very near future but I would like to make sure that it is copyedited and proofread by the League before I can do so. Thanks again for all your help! I appreciate it!LaSaltarella 21:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thanks for the follow-up. I appreciate your help! I am sure it will pass...you and others have put so much time in improving the prose that everybody is impressed by its quality now. I know several people will support its nomination. I still want to improve it to minimize any objections though. LaSaltarella 07:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great, so only two sections left. Let me know if there are factual parts that need further details. Thanks again for your time, Rintrah! LaSaltarella 22:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Wesleyan again

Congrats on making it through! If you need a proofread, then I'm your gal! If you need more in-depth c/e'ing, though, I may not have time. Which do you need? Galena11 18:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Battle of Montevideo (1807)

You apparently introduced a series of modifications and added a 'need for editing' tag to this article. I have, as far as possible restored it to its original form, which was in correct English. If you have any objections, please be precise about them. I note that, at one point, you substitute 'battle' (already used several times) for the original 'action'. In military terminology, an 'action' refers to a situation in which combat occurs, especially if it is too restricted to be termed a 'battle' or is a small or short batlle, as the one in question was.

I note that Wikipedia guidelines state that, on topics relating to the Americas,American English should be used. However, the article is about a campaign by the British Army in what is now Uruguay. Uruguay is in southern South America, NOT Central America, and the dominant form of English used here is British English. As evidence, you might consult relative figures for people taking the Cambridge ESOL and Michigan exams, the student enrollment of the Anglo, Dickens, London etc. etc. language institutes compared with that of the Artigas-Washington institute, as well as the enrollment of the numerous bilingual schools using British English as compared to the American School. As you are, apparently, some kind of official editor for Wikipedia, I would request that you investigate the possibilities of changing this policy for articles relating to Uruguay. This point could also relate to other countries of the region, such as Chile and Argentina.

In over 50 years of using the English language, and I DO have an awareness of US usage and no prejudice against its use in appropriate circumstances, I have never been accused of having 'poor' style. Please educate me. 01:19 hs. 6 February 2007 ARAZATI

League of Copyeditors participation drive!

Dear League member,

We've started a participation drive for the remainder of February. If you can, please help clear the backlog by adopting the following goals each week:

Select an article to copy-edit from the backlog. After your copy-edit, list the article in the articles ready for final proofread section.
Select a different article to proofread from the articles ready for final proofread section.

Thanks for your help! Just in case you didn't get the memo. :-) BuddingJournalist 08:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Participation Drive

Yes sir! · AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 10:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Queries

Dear Rintrah,

Here is my response to your questions:

I have some queries about the Administration section:

It started as a girls' athletic fête held at the Monnett Athletic Club for Mothers Day. All events were held at the Monnett Campus...

The two sentences appear to contradict each other. They were held first at the Club, and then the campus? They were held in the club in the campus?

You are right...the sentence is not very clear. The Monnett Athletic Club was part of the Monnett Campus (part of the now defunct Female College). So, the event was held at the Monnett Athletic Club at the Monnett Campus. LaSaltarella 22:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disobedient students were tossed into the Sulphur Spring.

What is the Sulphur Spring?

There is a picture of the Sulphur Spring here: Image:SulfurSpringAdjusted2.jpg (also part of the main page. The process is depicted in this picture Image:SulfurSpringDunk.jpg (I decided not to include it because it would have made the second picture of the spring on the main page.LaSaltarella 22:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

focusing on an issue of concern to the liberal arts

Which one?

The Sagan National Colloquium (SNC) was established in 1984 focusing each year of on an issue of concern in the liberal arts. Each year, the forum explores a different interdisciplinary issue. This is a quote taken directly from the SNC's website: "— issues like the impact of science on society, race and reality, censorship and power, and the role of globalization."LaSaltarella 22:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orchesis... "Fresh-X"

What are these? Rintrah 13:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orchesis is an annual tradition celebrating the arts and modern dance.
Fresh-X is a program for first year students featuring an off-campus mountain retreat includig backpacking, rock climbing, whitewater rafting and other activities. LaSaltarella 22:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope this makes things more clear! Thanks for your time and help! :-) LaSaltarella 22:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brooks-Baxter War

I know you know your referencing; so you are the right person to ask! The Brooks-Baxter War has references placed in the body of the article, rather than in footnotes. Can you help with the minor task of moving these refrences to appropriate footnotes? Thanks. I should also be pleased if you copyedit the rest of it, but I know this is too much to ask. Rintrah 13:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Rintrah. You'd better check with The stuart (talk · contribs) before doing that. I recall that article from WP:FAC, and it is written with Harvard style inline citations. Somewhere in some Wiki guideline (can't recall which) it is stated that we should respect the original referencing style. Harvard inliness are an acceptable form of citation. I've learned from the school of hard knocks not to mess around with someone's Harvard inlines. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Felina Ivy

I outgrow some anime, and Pokémon is one of them. Ah, who cares. Thanks for suggesting that to me. Heh, I guess you've noticed that most of my copyediting is on anime/manga articles. Most, not all. :) And I've noticed there are a lot of Pokémon articles that need copyediting. Well, back to the subject, thank you Rintrah. Nice to hear from you again. Cheers! — ♥Tohru Honda13♥ 23:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, nice one! I forgot who Ling-Ling was, and when I clicked the link, I laughed like crazy! And about Ivy, I've finished her (or so I think). Thanks for the laughs Rintrah! Cheers, — ♥Tohru Honda13♥ 02:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Campaign history of the Roman military

Hi, the article above is currently in FAC. User Tony1 suggested that I contacted you to request you copyedit the article, since in his opinino the article is in need of copyediting and contains "Long, winding sentences and other problems, which make it a harder read than it should be". I am trying to copyedit it myself but I am not a professional writer or copyeditor and could probably do with some help. Any help you are able to give is greatly appreciated. - PocklingtonDan (talk) 08:48, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits made to Magic satchel

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Rintrah! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bexample\.com, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 15:28, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I accidently pressed a button in the tool bar, you silly bot. Rintrah 15:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cúcuta

What don't you understand in the section of Etimology? The most used name of the city is "Cúcuta", but the real name is "San José de Cúcuta". The latinamerican cities have long names but they are not used. For example...

Cali -> Santiago de Cali
Bogotá -> Santa Fe de Bogotá
Buenos Aires -> Ciudad Autonoma de Buenos Aires

Etc...

Thanks for your constributions in the article of Cúcuta..

--Ricardocolombia 15:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

File:Seal of Cúcuta, Colombia.png	File:Coat of arms of Colombia.jpg		City of Cúcuta
			This barnstar is awarded to Rintrah in appreciation of his contributions in the article of Cúcuta. --Ricardocolombia 00:21, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ricardocolombia 18:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Review

It looks great to me. I always find a very detailed synosis difficult to edit, but you did a nice job. <rant> Although I know this is an encyclopedia, I find that a synopsis more like the one you have in American Psycho is better than this "explain every detail" type. I feel like saying, "what's the point of seeing the movie/reading the book now?" </rant> :o) Galena11 19:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forever Odd Revised

Hey i saw u wanted me to shortent he summary so i did. its not completly down to the basics because otherwise main points would be lost, but its not as long now. Voshvoshka 03:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cúcuta

I'm translating it as I type this. But once I'm done, I'd like you to proofread it, just in case it has awkward wording. I think I'll help you copyedit that article as well. Glad to help you! — ♥Tohru Honda13♥ 23:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Rintrah; I changed the section heading here as it popped up on my watchlist and took me by surprise. Presumably, the person who typed the previous heading doesn't speak Spanish. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And Rintrah, I've asked another editor to help me translate it. The last sentence has gotten me confused; it's been a while since I've spoken/read Spanish. Don't wory, I still know it. :) Cheers, — ♥Tohru Honda13♥ 03:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heart of Eternity Diamond

Hi, after re-reading the article, I think "Heart of Eternity" is always used when referring to the diamond itself. Blue diamonds is only used to refer to...blue diamonds (the class of diamonds that are blue). Was that what was confusing to you? BuddingJournalist 08:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problema. As you may have already discovered from proofing the articles I copyedit, I tend to disagree with Fowler and use elegant variation too often. It's the journalist in me. BuddingJournalist 08:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, not at all. No offense taken! :) Anyway, my early experience in journalism probably solidified my love of thesauruses (thesauri?). We school newspaper reporters would often sit around brainstorming synonyms to make stories fit the alloted space. BuddingJournalist 09:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great Barrier Reef

Thanks heaps for the copyedit! :D I've just got a couple of questions - but I really do appreciate your efforts.

[They] (reefs)... cannot grow above sea level.—isn't that obvious to anyone that knows what a reef is?

I'm trying not to assume too much knowledge of coral reefs in the article. I figured it probably doesn't hurt to be reminded? The GBR is a really common school-assignment topic, so a lot of school-age kids will be reading this article.

the current, living reef structure is believed to have begun growing on an older platform about 20,000 years ago.—20,000 years ago, isn't the platform, by definition, older?

lol, yes. I was trying to give the impression that it was an older reef platform - ie. when you drill down in the reef, you find the 20 thousand year mark, evidence of erosion underneath that, and then you find some much older reef deposit.

The Australian Institute of Marine Science agrees, which places the beginning of the growth of the current reef at the time of the Last Glacial Maximum.—I don't like "agrees" here. It sounds like journalistic prose.

change agrees to concurs? or even chop out agrees? - the Last Glacial Maximum, by definition, started about 20,000 years ago.

and corals began to grow around the hills of the coastal plain - by then, continental islands.—"(which had formed coral islands)", perhaps?

'Continental islands' is the technical term that the references use. What happened was that long ago there were large reefs, attached to the mainland of Australia. When the sea level receded, and the underlying platform was exposed, the term for that is a coastal plain, (being a plain by the coast). By default, the large reef skeletons became hills. when the sea level began rising, the hills were surrounded by water and became islands again - but because their bases were attached to Australia, the proper term is continental island. I'm really not sure how to convey that, it's hard! I've tried to give a brief gloss-over from more detailed references - I figure anyone who really wants to know can visit those.

The research outcomes funded by the CRC Reef Research Centre—how can an outcome be funded?

Whoops, purple prose. :$ Changed that to The CRC RRC estimates...

In the northern part of the Great Barrier Reef,—doesn't the reader already know "the northern part" alone refers to Great Barrier Reef?

Quite possibly... :$ I'm hoping that someone will translate the German GBR entry which seems to have more detail on the geography... So far most of this section is weighted in terms of geology.

ribbon reefs and deltaic reefs have formed - these reef structures are not found in the rest of the Great Barrier Reef system.—does "these reef structures" have to be set off by a dash? A semicolon would not subordinate the second clause.

ok, semicolon it is.

Wouldn't "the reef" be less cumbersome than "the Great Barrier reef" everywhere?

again, quite possibly - we do use the full name quite a lot... It's not just one reef, though - it's a huge system of many reefs. Replacing GBR with "the reef" doesn't quite give that sense, I think.. and replacing it with "the reef system" sounds too technical.

D'you mind if I post your comments up on the Talk:Great Barrier Reef page? I'm not the only one who looks after the page, you see. Thanks heaps. -Malkinann 22:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Bishop of strategic sheep island

Ha. That would be because I forgot to copyedit the lede. Should be a bit better now (especially with the link to ordinary), but I'm no religion buff, so I don't exactly know what the difference between an ordinary and a bishop(ric) is. What did your father think of the whole Hand of God goal controversy? BuddingJournalist 07:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I recall seeing the replay of that somewhere (probably on YouTube). In America though, no one cares about the World Cup. :-/ We do, though, tend to internationalize things that probably don't deserve it (the World Series, Super Bowl champions being world champions, etc.) BuddingJournalist 08:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very good! If you haven't yet watched some of his stand-up, I highly recommend it! BuddingJournalist 08:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Atromotis

I think you made some boo-boos in your proofread; you seem to have changed the spelling of Atromitos to Atromotis in some parts. Also, a question: in non-American English, is it okay to interchange between "it" and "they" to describe groups, or is it always "they"? Sorry for the elegant variation. It's just natural to me... BuddingJournalist 09:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]