Jump to content

User talk:GoodDay

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jack forbes (renamed) (talk | contribs) at 17:15, 9 June 2010 (→They just don't dig it: move to Jeanne's page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello to all fellow Wikipedians. Be assured I'll be as courteous as possible & hope to provide worthy answers to your questions (about wiki edits), I'm looking forward to meeting you. GoodDay 22:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC).[reply]

You may be wondering why my archives only start at August 2007. The reason: I didn't archive my pages before that date, I merely deleted them (as I didn't know how to archive). Therefore, if anyone wishes to see material before August 2007? check out this talk-page's 'history'.

I've a secondary userpage called User:GoodDay/My stuff, which is where 'my stuff' has been transfered from my Userpage.

I'm trimming down my time on Wikipedia & so will be around sporadically. My Wiki-addiction is disrupting my real-life. GoodDay (talk) 17:39, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Non-free files in your user space

Hey there GoodDay, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User talk:GoodDay. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

  • See a log of files removed today here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. GoodDay (talk) 14:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that, GoodDay, as I was the one who unintentionally got you busted.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:53, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No prob. GoodDay (talk) 22:58, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doppelgangers

and her English twin Siouxsie Sioux
Demi Moore

Here is another pair of dopplegangers. You must see Siouxsie on YouTube to really see the strong resemblance between Demi and her.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, there's a resemblance. GoodDay (talk) 22:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changeling story

I have left several comments of Talk:James I of England. I wish people would get their facts straight before they make rambling claims like that editor did. What made me laugh is when he said the initials IR were found on the baby. Found where? Tattooed on its skeleton?! Jesus wept!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The newbie is putting too much stock in a un-reliable book. GoodDay (talk) 17:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's for sure; anyroad, he doesn't make a good advocate for the story, especially when he says the bit about the initials. Besides, with all the people present for a royal birth, do you think that changeling story could have been kept secret?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, the IR (if such a marking existed) probably meant Illigitmate Royal. GoodDay (talk) 18:20, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. The whole idea is ridiculous; besides, it began in the 18th century, not the 16th!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, all a hoax. GoodDay (talk) 18:48, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Remember royals had no privacy to do anything like switch a baby at birth; even adultery by a queen was difficult to manage, seeing as they were never alone.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. By the way, we're getting reports that former American actor Gary Coleman has died (of Diff'rent Strokes fame). GoodDay (talk) 18:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I'm sorry to hear that.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bizarre images

Some bizarre images are being uploaded to the image gallery in the 2000-2009 in fashion article.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those will likely get reverted & the page semi-protected. GoodDay (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How does a pair of cycling shorts illustrate fashion? That's exercise gear!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If they're on a female, that's distraction. GoodDay (talk) 19:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The editor is adding that image taken in 2002 to the 1980s and 1990s fashion articles!!!!! Jesus wept!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:07, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He/she will eventually be warned. GoodDay (talk) 19:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Check out the image gallery on 1990-1999 in fashion! LOL--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yummy. GoodDay (talk) 13:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What do cycling shorts have to do with fashion?!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking at the womens bare bellies. GoodDay (talk) 14:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I put that pierced-navel image on the article a while back. I found it on Commons--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yummy. GoodDay (talk) 14:58, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion is sought

I would like your input on a question I asked here : Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities about which US president is to blame for the 58,000 American dead in the Vietnam War.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. I think it was LBJ, although lately public opinion seems to be veering towards Kennedy as the culprit. He most likely unwittingly got the ball rolling which Johnson happily picked up.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)) 15:07, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The question always lingers. Had JFK lived (and assuming got re-elected in '64), what whould he have done? GoodDay (talk) 15:10, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That is the big question. Would he have sacrificed his popularity with the youth by sending so many of their numbers off to meet their needless deaths overseas?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:14, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One will never know. GoodDay (talk) 15:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is back in 1963, the average American didn't know what was about to go down in Vietnam. It wasn't an issue. The Missile Crisis and Bay of Pigs were still too fresh in their minds to worry about events in southeast Asia.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's quite true. The Vietnam War didn't become an issue in the USA, until the 'Gulf of Tonkin' incident. GoodDay (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I remember hearing about it in our home around 1965, when the troops were being shipped over, and my mother kept asking why "we had to get involved?".--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The first time the Americans lost a war. GoodDay (talk) 15:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because it was too dangerous for them to win. That was the sickening thing; these 18 and 19 years old were sent into a jungle to fight against trained guerrilla combatants because they weren't allowed to fight a conventional war.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:37, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A stinker, to be sure. GoodDay (talk) 15:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They really used a lot of propaganda going around to the high schools getting graduates to enlist. Most of the US Vietnam War dead were volunteers not draftees. Now, here Kennedy has to take a lot of blame for his "Don't ask want your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country".--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Now we've got the USA situations in Iraq & to a lesser degree Afghanistan. At the momment GW Bush gets alot of flack, but how long before Obama gets similiar flack. GoodDay (talk) 15:51, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The major two diffs between Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan is that there's no military conscription now and the soldiers get to vote. During the Vietnam War those kids weren't able to vote, yet had to go off and fight!!!! Many were fresh out of high school.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Floyd

Hi, long time...hope your well.

Sir Floyd, got into trouble and there was, or still is a thread at ANI. He put some comments about other editors on wiki biz and is blocked until he removes them and rather than remove them he has chosen to retire. Off2riorob (talk) 15:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There was a little bit of reverting about the talkpage, users from the dispute wanted to tag and comment onthe Floyd talkpage and finally floyd has removed them , which he can and he has replaced a comment made by me....or he has reverted back to his chosen position. Bit messy, but not a doppelganger. Another fallen amigo...CoMidnight , proofreader sir floyd.... perhaps its better to go rather than be pushed..oh well. Take it easy. Off2riorob (talk) 15:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will do (taking it easy). GoodDay (talk) 15:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

King James

That editor has made another comment on the changeling story! Sigh....--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's got no consensus to add what he wishes. GoodDay (talk) 21:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And his sources are derived from self-published blogs, not historians. The story began when the skeleton was found, not before. I think he's confusing the tale with the centuries-old rumour that Rizzio fathered Mary's baby, and not Darnley. Fraser debunks this as well.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:06, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
His changes won't be accepted. GoodDay (talk) 13:46, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
See what he's said now. I think I've fairly defeated his arguments with a reliable source and logic.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO, he/she (being a newbie) is merely grinding the axe. GoodDay (talk) 13:54, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've a theory as to why that baby was walled up. Back then there was no stigma in a woman bearing an illegitimate royal offspring; however, the child of a churchman is another story. IMO, a woman who lived in Edinburgh Castle gave birth to the child of a powerful churchman and the baby was walled up to prevent a scandal. Whether it was born dead or killed at birth I cannot speculate.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:48, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
'Tis possible. GoodDay (talk) 14:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One of my all-time favourite books deals with this theme. I read Green Darkness for the first time when I was 15, and it's about a girl who became pregnant by a priest and she was walled-up alive by her mistress, who also desired Brother Stephen Marsden.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:47, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How could the gals resist, the priest likely offered them eternal life (as oppose to just a good time). GoodDay (talk) 15:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He most likely offered them both things!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday, Clint Eastwood!!!!

Can you believe Clint Eastwood turned 80 today?!!! I wonder what Evelyn Draper bought him for his birthday? A gigantic stuffed animal and house slippers perhaps? LOL.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 09:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Go ahead, make me a cake". GoodDay (talk) 13:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"I'd love a coke".--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:45, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FNG syndrome

That newbie over on Talk:King James I has the temerity to tell me that "Wikipedia is not a forum"! What a big, swaggering pair of balls he/she has!!!! Jesus wept!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's the newbie, who foruming. GoodDay (talk) 13:53, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He's getting on my nerves with his rambling statements, lack of writing skills, and refusal to provide one reliable source.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Best to ignore'em or seek input from related WikiProject members. GoodDay (talk) 14:47, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He/she is a single-purpose account. All the user's contributions have been to that talk page.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:23, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I left a note at WP:ROY, letting them know of the discussion. More editors are needed at the Jimmy Rex changeling debate. GoodDay (talk) 15:25, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. I'll let other editors add their input to the discussion; I've said enough on the subject.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okie Dokie. GoodDay (talk) 15:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrats

See Wikipedia:Bureaucrats for an explanation of their role. Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►You may go away now.─╢ 14:59, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okie Dokie, thanks. GoodDay (talk) 15:02, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a full moon tonight?

They're all out today, I was thinking there must be a full moon tonight. See here and here. What next?! A grilling by Torquemada?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:26, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It can be rough. GoodDay (talk) 17:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, well what can I do? "I'm a mess"!!!!!!!!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Giggle giggle. GoodDay (talk) 17:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot believe the arrogance of some people.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
'Tis merely a human trait. GoodDay (talk) 17:49, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sad but true....alas...(sigh)--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hahahahaha. GoodDay (talk) 17:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Next time the OP asks about a song, someone should tell him to phone his local radio station and put the question to the DJ!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:59, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He might get visited by that gal who likes the song Misty. GoodDay (talk) 18:01, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a surprising event, The Gores (Al & Tipper) are seperating. Apparently his kiss at the 2000 Democratic National Convention wasn't so hot. GoodDay (talk) 18:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1927 Final

'by each Senators team'. ??? You could spend more than two seconds on an edit. :-) ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 16:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The way it was seemed to suggest the same franchise. GoodDay (talk) 21:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just razzing you over some clunky wording. On the topic, it said Ottawa won both times. What's wrong with that? I think you are reading into it too much. The phrase 'modern Senators' is really nearby too. The main point was that a guy saw the two games 80 years apart. I don't think he attended the next game, and based on playoff performances lately, I don't think he's brought his good luck to current games. :-( ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No probs, I just had an anxiety attack. GoodDay (talk) 21:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's the point...

I wanna gun

in having strict gun control if they keep handing out licenses to nutcases or should I say dodobirds?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-gunners will tell ya, "guns don't kill, people do". Though having a gun helps them in their killing attempts. GoodDay (talk) 13:42, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, he got his fire-arms certificate 20 years ago. Not an excuse (why didn't they check up periodically, etc...) I've always thought that the RKBA was a good idea (in that it was intended to prevent a strong, abusive government) but that it was somewhat irrelevant in this time of standing armies and weapons not available to the likes of us. TFOWRidle vapourings 13:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Same thing in the USA. The right to bears arms, was more for when there was a threat of a foreign country invading (mainly the UK). GoodDay (talk) 13:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was the US I was thinking of, to be honest. "My radical demands for the UK" sound quite tame in comparison with the US: an elected head-of-state, a written constitution and (and this one is way too radical to catch on anywhere...) the right to arm ourselves and overthrow the government if they become abusive... what's not to like (except for the huge number of fire-arms fatalities every year...) As I understand it, the founding fathers recognised that a US leader could become as bad as Good Ol' King George. TFOWRidle vapourings 13:53, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If a US President went that route, Congress would have him declared unfit for his duties. GoodDay (talk) 13:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Having a gun enables a maniac to take out more people than if he were armed with a knife, crossbow or axe. Howver, I fail to see the wisdom in an unarmed police force. How can they apply the latter sans firearms?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:58, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A police state is impossible in Canada, USA or the UK. The time for such a thing to occur, would've been in the first few years of each country. GoodDay (talk) 14:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In practice the police are armed, when they (feel that they) need to be. Ordinary police - "bobbies on the beat" carry truncheons (or the modern, plastic, telescoping, kevlar-coated, radar-invisible equivalent) and similar "non lethal" weapons. But armed police can be deployed when necessary. In the UK (England, Scotland and Wales - I'm assuming the Police Service of Northern Ireland is still armed? Could be wrong...) there are permanent fire-arms officers; in New Zealand ordinary cops volunteer as "Armed Offenders" (in that they deal with armed offenders...) and are armed and deployed as needed. Someone remarked in relation to this guy's killing that an unarmed police force is a wonderful thing, however it was even more remarkable that an unarmed police force managed to shoot and kill so many unarmed civilians. TFOWRidle vapourings 14:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've always visualized the bobbies clunking trouble-makers on the head, with their huge helmets. GoodDay (talk) 14:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, romantic notions! I've always thought the ideal police force would be these guys (mostly due to the horses). I'm guessing you might have a slightly less rose-tinted view...! TFOWRidle vapourings 14:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How about the fashion police? Hmm, not sure if they're armed though....--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I understand it, they're armed with "fabulousness". Janes doesn't provide any information on this terrifying new weapon, though. TFOWRidle vapourings 14:31, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then there is this Police force

An/I in the 14th century

Who asked for your opinion, knave?!!!
Whadddayaknowaboutit?

Imagine the fate of anyone daring to comment at AN/I in the 14th century?!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doing so in the 21st century AN/I can be dangerous, too. GoodDay (talk) 14:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bloody hell. They needn't take someone's head off when they comment like in your case!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's no prob. I just don't agree with the observations there, that an editor (GR) had special powers to avoid getting blocked. GoodDay (talk) 14:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wowsers, I argued that Giacomo didn't have special powers & ended up in dispute with those who wished him blocked. Go figure. GoodDay (talk) 15:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know I should be minding my own business, however, I think you should look carefully at the last image I uploaded here. Do you see the pack of wolves circling, but not attacking the bison? That is because he is holding his ground, not budging an inch. My advice to you is not succumb to put-downs and dismissals. You have the right to your POV, opinions, and observations of any given situation. You also have the right to be naive. Stick to your guns. Don't apologise, explain, or seek to please. Your insights and input anywhere carry as much weight and validity as any other editor's. Don't back down, otherwise to wolves will sense weakness and move in for the kill. Believe me, GoodDay, I know human nature; it's not so very different from that of the canis lupus.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well it looks like I'll have to return to ANI, as I see another dispute of British Isles usage, has erupted. As for the 'Giacomo vs Administrators' stuff, it was mostly drama. GoodDay (talk) 13:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I said before, you have the right to comment--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Until I get blocked, of course. GoodDay (talk) 13:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Even - especially - when it's a "kill them all, let God sort it out" comment. Not that there is or isn't a God or gods... Some areas eventually lend themselves to the "bang their bloody heads together" approach. I don't think your head should be banged for commenting, though. TFOWRidle vapourings 13:54, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank goodness there's no edit-warring over the usage of Irish Sea, which is odd. GoodDay (talk) 13:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see your fangs are bared today, GD. Remember the bison. SYG!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:20, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ain't nothing angers me more then edit-wars. GoodDay (talk) 14:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not only have they resulted in good content editors leaving the projecct, but I am sure they have prevented good editors from joining the project. My pet peeve is the deletion police, which is what sparked the previous debate at AN/I.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:25, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That Fastily bloke, seems to have alot of editors peeved. GoodDay (talk) 14:28, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't blame them as he nominated a user's school photo for deletion when it is clearly in PD-Pre1978. My school photos are all PD-Pre1978 as is my yearbook. They were never copyrighted.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:38, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fastily seems to be the ignore their complaints type aswell. That really riles editors. GoodDay (talk) 14:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pre-1978
Here is an example of a school photo which is PD-Pre1978.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can an administrator be stripped of 'roll-back' duties? GoodDay (talk) 14:48, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe they can't. Administrators get roll-back automatically when they get "the bit". There was a discussion somewhere recently about this, I'll dig it out if you're interested? TFOWRidle vapourings 14:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, I'd like to see that. GoodDay (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Anyroad, all school photos published before 1978 such as mine and the user in question are in Public Domain because the school photographers did not renew copyright and the yearbooks didn't either.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank goodness my 'Groucho Marx' image is safe. GoodDay (talk) 15:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is an editor who makes a point to chide me over at Ref Desk Humanities. He pointed out something about Regent Moray unaware that I had only last year created an article on Moray's wife!!!!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who's the editor-in-question? GoodDay (talk) 15:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly Aiken's comment in this ANI thread and the two following comments (you've probably seen this already). I'll dig around, I'm not convinced that was it. TFOWRidle vapourings 15:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's a possibility, Fastily may loose his administratorship. GoodDay (talk) 15:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why he was so gung-ho to nominate a good content editor's images for deletion, especially that school picture.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment, he doesn't seem to want to devulge his reasons. GoodDay (talk) 15:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, there are too many editors' personalities clashing. It's disrupting the project and preventing a lot of work that needs to be done.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's alot of strong egos out there. GoodDay (talk) 15:41, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll drink to that!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:26, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm one of them, hehehe. GoodDay (talk) 21:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WT:AN

Hey, I'm not sure if you we saying "sorry" to me too or not, but in case I was too unclear, I was just joking; I don't think there's anything wrong with your post there. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was apologizing to both of you. That's OK though, I got my point across in expressing my concerns about the growing edit war. GoodDay (talk) 22:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Check out these

Federico Garcia Lorca
File:AntonioBandaresJune07.jpg
And his doppelganger Antonio Banderas

doppelgangers.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, both Italian descent, eh? GoodDay (talk) 15:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, both are Spanish. See this: Federico Garcia Lorca.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, both are from Andalusia.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:16, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They do resemle each other. GoodDay (talk) 15:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It just goes to show that people are pretty much all related to one another. You said you resemble George Fox.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I do resemble him. GoodDay (talk) 15:28, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Better that Fox than this Fox!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is this GoodDay?
He was the red haired guy, who chased chickens. GoodDay (talk) 15:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fox on the Run........--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:39, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Giggle giggle. GoodDay (talk) 15:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I give up

I cannot believ the state of this article: 2000-2009 in fashion. I give up on it.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:00, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's some kinky stuff. GoodDay (talk) 16:04, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm out of there, man.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Giggle giggle. GoodDay (talk) 16:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see the fur is still flying over on AN/I. I just had a fight with my kids. I've enough problems in my real life without adding to them here.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:40, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, perhaps the Lennon song would help there ("Give Peace a Chance"). GoodDay (talk) 20:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment it's more like Helter Skelter!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:43, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Never a dull moment, drama is always present. GoodDay (talk) 15:44, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer to edit articles.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:47, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, my main habits are little fixes, here & there. GoodDay (talk) 15:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wanna hear something strange? Today is the anniversary of D-Day; it is also the anniversary of my first marriage; my second marraige occurred on Hitler's birthday! See a pattern somewhere?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Were your husbands German? GoodDay (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nein. The first was Irish (from Dublin), and the second is Italian (from Sicily).--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:16, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both Catholics, I assume? GoodDay (talk) 16:24, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, although Anto (my Irish husband) is now a Zoroastrian like the late great Freddie Mercury was.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:27, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe in marriage. It was 'originally' a way to enslave a woman, with the Church's blessing. GoodDay (talk) 16:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, it was actually a business arrangement to unite property and form alliances between families. It also served as a means to pass property down in a legitimate line of descent to keep rival offspring from killing each other when their dad died (well, that was the idea anyway!)--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:36, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There was that line "...to honour & obey". Anyways, catch ya later. GoodDay (talk) 16:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are right in that the Church instructed women to obey their husbands; but the wives didn't always follow the Holy Writ! Bye bye.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:41, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Giggle giggle. GoodDay (talk) 21:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moon photo caption

Honestly, I don't think there's a need to name anything in the picture besides the moon, we don't have to spoon-feed our readers. All we have to say is that the image is a "to-scale size comparison", they'll recognize the comparative land masses and topography it's being compared to. Dreadstar ☥ 22:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite true, no caption is best. GoodDay (talk) 22:27, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, probaly some basic, neutral comment on the "to-scale size comparison" nature of the image. Don't want readers to think the moon crashed into the chunnel... :) Dreadstar ☥ 22:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I mentioned before, thank goodness there's no fighting of the inclusion/exclusion of the term Irish Sea. -- GoodDay (talk) 22:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Only at Wikipedia could an article about one of Saturn's moons turn into a British Isles debate!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 08:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For sure, for sure. GoodDay (talk) 18:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. (Shakes head)--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thankful that Encaledus appears as white, not (British) blue or (Irish) green. GoodDay (talk) 18:58, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
White?! After my little drama today that could also cause problems. Why can't it be a neutral grey?!!!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You ain't alone

Jeanne Boleyn and her fellow editors

The wolves aren't just after your blood. See here: User talk:Sarah777. I made a few observations and I get fucking accused of being everything short of Attila the Hun! Why is it one can speak freely and frankly around anybody but white liberals?! The hours I have given freely to the project, my red eyes....Bloody hell, I'm really pissed off with this place. Jack1755 has retired, everyone is leaving.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 06:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Israel-Palestine relationship & the American Civl War can be very touchy topics. I avoid the former, as I'm pro-Israel. I avoid the latter, as I'm pro-Union, "down with Johnny Reb". GoodDay (talk) 13:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not trying to justify or apologise for the Southern cause. Bloody hell, can't the guy comprehend what I'm saying? If he hates southerners that's his problem, not mine. I've got my own 21st century problems without having to worry about the gripes of my ancestors. It's interesting how so many white liberals resent blacks with wealth and power. For instance, I wonder if he ever heard of the free, upper-class black communities in 19th century Baltimore and Washington DC? Be careful about citing Marx lest he acuse you of anti-Semitism. Oh, did you read where he likened me to Holocaust-deniers, BNP-supporters, KKK members, Bible-bashers, etc. Why doesn't he just go the whole hog and accuse me of being a time-traveller who gives assembly-line blow jobs to the SS?! Jesus wept.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC) (aka Jenny Reb)[reply]
Don't let'em ruin your day. React in Jeff Spicoli style. GoodDay (talk) 14:42, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey maaaan, you like, are you like making fun of me coz I'm from California? That's like totally uncool. You need to like mellow out, relax, and not bum me out. This rap session is like gettin too like heavy...I'm outta here, man. Whoooooaaaaaa!!!!!!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC) (aka Jenny Reb)[reply]
Giggle giggle. GoodDay (talk) 14:55, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's too bad about Jack1755. Perhaps one day, he'll return. GoodDay (talk) 13:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I hope so as he's one of Wikipedia's most promising editors.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 14:37, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MidnightFlashBlueMan

I guess just mark it "resolved" should do. The mechanical sock drawer - the checkusers - seem fully activated, I'd guess any stray socks will be laundered soon.

Cheers, TFOWRidle vapourings 15:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suspected MF & MBM were the same bloke, about a month ago. But, it was best to let'em get himself caught. GoodDay (talk) 15:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What was that all about? I've been so caught up in my own little Wiki drama that this passed right by me. What's the story?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 15:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a part of the dispute over the usage of British Isles on Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 15:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You asked another question on ANI, I think, regarding part of the resolution. I'm assuming that someone good posted an update while away from their main computer. No real reason for me thinking that, and I know there's been some nonsense over at SPI, but I figured if I'm wrong these things eventually resolve themselves... TFOWRidle vapourings 16:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which question was that? GoodDay (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Never a dull moment on Wikipedia. Jack forbes (talk) 16:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll drink to that!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thankfully, never dull. GoodDay (talk) 21:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They just don't dig it

Be careful what you say around this joint

I still see that my comments are being misunderstood. Had I conducted the discussion with a black person my remarks would never have been misunderstood. Does it ever occur to white liberals that blacks just might not appreciate being used as pawns in their arguments against other whites? That's how I see it anyway. I tell you, GoodDay, I shall think twice about commenting on other editor's talk pages lest I get bitten by a mastiff. Yesterday Wikidrama segued into my real world, and my son was involved in a minor car accident last night while he and his friend were going to get pizza. Luckily nobody was hurt but I was shaken all the same. A group of bitches rammed their car into my son's and then had the temerity to scream at him!!! A ggod thing I wasn't in the car otherwise it would most likely have turned into a brawl, given my no more Mr. Nice Guy mood yesterday!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GoodDay&oldid=367016521"