User:Akidd dublin/arc talk3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Actually, you are mistaken. Please check WP:OWN. You do not own this page. Additionally, you often make grammatical mistakes in articles, this has been pointed out to you over and over again here and on other forums. You also spell words incorrectly from time to time, though the grammatical mistakes you continue to make are much more significant. --Yamla 14:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I fond it ridiciulous this would have been explained at some BBS. As if they would have a legal right to declare a certificate of "not being fond of a language". I found them spelling various things, but not the irish word for rat, which is RADAN, and not luch francach (french mouse). These BBS do not have any legal significance. Akidd dublintlctr-l 14:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
The significance is that it shows it is not just multiple editors on Wikipedia who know you have significant problems with the English language. People in many other communities have also recognized this problem. --Yamla 15:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Many communties, at any time (not saying when). No way i would have been improved since then. Tell you, i have enough of Akidd_dublin. No one spells user id containing geo location. This also whitewashes these communities (two communites). I found them using bad words, see their avatar set, which talks for itself. Probably they have changed it to the good inbetween. Akidd dublintlctr-l 15:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
You could well have improved your English skills since then. --Yamla 15:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

mass-to-charge ratio[edit]

Regarding your weak keep deleteion vote on mass-to-charge ratio You may have missed "novel proposal to replace the accepted m/z with the new m/q notation". It is not original scientific research but a proposal to replace a notation system and unit system.--Nick Y. 21:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Akidd dublin/cleanup/they toldme[edit]

I highly recommend that you delete this. Many people (myself include) may interpret your page as an attack on various contributers of wikipedia. BigE1977 16:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't think so- i do not keep record who wrote it. Mad_Magazine.
People can save time to write these formula's. I do not include harrass terms, just funny things. I believe several user pages a very muchy attack on anyone who visits them. I dont want to get personal, and iam also not allowed to Akidd dublintlctr-l 16:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I promize not to include links to users, if that's the danger. I have read (years ago) that programmers are sometimes treated and looked at like schoolkids. I do not have the time to go through it again and again. Akidd dublintlctr-l 18:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
One of the users, probably the primary one, is me. I'm not sure I interpret it as an "attack"; just more evidence of kookiness and inability to comprehend. For example, what is the (incorrectly formatted, but funcional) Mad (magazine) link about? Pure randomness. Fnarf999 21:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
i do not understand you, but probably it is a good idea to express yourself using a blog. then, it is possible to experience, that different people understand sometinhg fully ifferent. Akidd dublintlctr-l 12:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Concern over language difficulties[edit]

Hello. I have followed the recent thread about "weak language" on the Villiage pump, and want to give you some feedback. I am quite sure that you have good intentions, but unfortunately I (and others) am finding that your edits are causing great difficulty, quite likely because English is not your native language. There are many good editors here whose native language isn't english, and generally there's no problem, sometimes the phrasing might seem a little unusual, but the meaning is quite clear. However, I'm finding that with your edits, many of them do not make any sense at all, which is a serious problem.

I don't know what your native language is, or whether there is a wikipedia in that language, but if there is, could I suggest that you might find it more productive to edit where there is no language barrier. Without trying to be cruel, I do honestly think because of the language difficulty, your edits, no matter how well intentioned, are creating more problems than they are solving.

As I said, I'm not trying to be cruel, and I hope you take this the way it was intended. Regards, MartinRe 02:21, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

this only occured when i caused the edit of Red_hair. native or not, it was low quality. i am not going to argue further. no one complained about the wrong information within this article. Akidd dublintlctr-l 12:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Hello again. In case you were not aware of it, there are wikipedia in several languages, a list is at Main_Page#Wikipedia_languages. If there is one in your native language, I think it would be a lot more rewarding for yourself as well.
My comment wasn't in regard to the Red Hair article in particular, I did take a quick skim though some other articles you have contributed to, and there are many other editors who are finding that your changes are proving impossible to understand. Your changes to Static random access memory, for example, have been reversed by two different editors, because they simply couldn't understand them.
Please understand that this is nothing personal, but I hope you realise on the english wikipedia editors do need a reasonable standard of english to be able to contribute. Unfortunately, it does appear that you have clear difficulties with english , which is why I would suggest applying your efforts to a wikipedia in a language that better suits you. Regards, MartinRe 15:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • For my new articles, I do not get any of what you mean. They are capitalized, no spelling mistakes, sentences like printed in books. I tried to make it fully Hi-Fi. However i found it convenient not to maintain links to posts on a few BBS. They are important, but it is not the world to me. I prefer not to have an opinion about them. Like elsewhere, some things speak for themselves. But everyone can improve. I really believe this. Akidd dublin (abandoned 5/2006) 13:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)~

Language barrier[edit]

Hi there. It seems some people are having difficulty communicating with you to explain their issues, so I would like to ask you what is your native language to see if we can all understand each other. Feel free to reply here or on my talk page. So, to put it simply, what language do you speak? Cowman109Talk 23:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

see user page. Akidd dublintlctr-l 12:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I have read your entire user page and all of its subpages (to the best of my ability, much of it is difficult to understand) and I cannot find any mention of your native language. Aguerriero (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
They (the sub-pages of this page ) are gone (because they failed to prevent misunderstandings). My new articles are not full of mistakes, neither they spell completely wrong grammar. I have abandoned this account. I found it ridicioulus: there was annoying information (article:red hair). It was removed. I was accused then of spelling wrong sentences. It does not have to be in usage by anyone (i.e. "Please understand it forehand"). It sounds better than: "You have been warned". It is not impossible to understand this writing. Akidd dublin (abandoned 5/2006) 16:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
No. Your English is, in fact, impossible to understand.
For example, the sentence "My new articles are not full of mistakes, neither they spell completely wrong grammar." is not correct. You MUST use correct Standard English in Wikipedia.
This is not a vendetta of me against you. Everyone who has taken a look at your writing here on Wikipedia and elsewhere has had the same problem comprehending it. Notice the many comments here and elsewhere. They all say the same thing: your English is inadequate for Wikipedia. I have no doubt that your Japanese is excellent, but this is not the Japanese Wikipedia. There is one; I suggest you go there and contribute to it. Fnarf999 17:02, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
YES. This is not a Vendetta. EVERYONE. I only stated to use correct english in articles. "My new articles are not full of mistakes, neither they spell completely wrong grammar." It should be: "The articles i created recently are NEITHER full of mistakes NOR they do spell a completely wrong grammar." - If this is required? I have seen a lot of "wrong" english (this means to leave out words): in printed manuals, on the net, i do not have list of it. Now i try to figure out: What is STANDARD ENGLISH? If i omit the NOR, that's wrong english? If it is that, then there are other articles in need, and it does not make sense to attack me. I already abandoned this account, because its past "political correctness", "special population groups". A manager of a boyband said that in an interview. I do not know how it can be helped right now but to do something different. Akidd dublin (abandoned 5/2006) 17:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
"Spell" is the wrong word. One does not "spell" grammar; one uses it. The sentence could have read "My new articles are not full of mistakes, nor do they use poor [wrong|bad|incorrect] grammar"; "My new articles are not full of mistakes, nor is their grammar bad" would be even better. However, though this would make it an English sentence, it would still be wrong, because your articles DO use poor grammar, and syntax. As for "special population groups", people use phrases and constructs all the time; that does not make them official stand-ins for meaning, as you appear to believe. I would be happy to help you with your English sentence structure, but Wikipedia is not the place for English lessons. Fnarf999 18:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
spelling language (by sentences) by applying grammar rules. do people really need this? i appreciate your offer to help out my ""poor grammar". It is not wrong, just weak, sounds like slang, a touch of foreign. Aren't i am entitled to do so? Just for articles i need to use correct sentences. I have put so much effort into it, to emulate a slang which indeed is misunderstood for coming from a foregin country. You ask to spell out all the fill words explicitely? then it gets this: "The language useage as it is right now, is not wrong. it is just a weak way of writing, this way it sounds like slang language, one believes the sentences spelled by a foreign person." VS "It is not wrong, just weak, sounds like slang, a touch of foreign." - SEE ADVERTISING. I really do not know what is required. I have read programming manuals. I guess they are difficult for a few. I assume some people may have difficulties to understand these manuals fully. It is not i would not know. It is that i do not see within other articles. I do not know why you (a couple of wikipedia people, not EVERYONE) do police me that way. there are worse cases, which go un-noticed. someone can police, but i doubt someone can microsoft something. this goes on further here on wikipedia. to spell microsoftifying- good grief. i put it to a bin, if i receive that letter. not on the bin. Akidd dublin (abandoned 5/2006) 18:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I think you are missing the point, Akidd dublin. No one is policing your edits for fun or folly; people are watching your edits because you have become a known menace. In general, when you edit an article, the section becomes nonsense. You are making points that you are using "slang" because it is too much trouble to write everything out; that is not acceptible for Wikipedia. You have also admitted (if I understand correctly) that your slang is poor, because it is foreign-sounding. That makes it even more inappropriate. You also seem to be implying that you "abandoned" your user account because of "political correctness" which I assume means that you had a problem with people reverting your "ghey" edits. That doesn't solve this problem either. Wikipedia should not read like a software manual, or like slang, or like foreign slang. That is the issue. Aguerriero (talk) 22:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • So far, so good. My new articles are not full of mistakes. I have not become personally offensive. I am not here to help out the avatar set of a few BBS. (see the wikipedia article about BBS, to understand more about BBS). I indeed abandoned this account, because people try to grave out talk which is two years old. This information belongs to a BBS, not to wikipedia. Some articles here would never make it through an editor for a commercial print. It is not non-sense. but do not say the articles were perfect, then i came and vandalized them with non-sense. This is just not true, and i assume you know it. I read TOC (of a country), and they spell: "slanderous against individuals". It is up to you to understand the meaning. It works without me. This would suit wikipedia policies. You do not have any proof that it is really me on these BBS. I am not a fan of BBS. BBS are not the world. They are required, but aren't a proof for anything. Often, they bend copyright law to a high extend. Indeed i do not do any BBS posting right now. I do not know what you are writing about. Akidd dublin (abandoned 5/2006) 13:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


I see that you just changed comments that Fnarf999 left you, changing 'gay' to 'ghey', 'homosexual' to 'people exclusively attrated to the same sex', and 'queer' to 'q-uea'. It is considered vandalism to change comments that someone else wrote and is completely unacceptable. Do not do it again. --Yamla 13:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I do not want to discuss marriage here on wikipedia. I do not want to discuss it at all. Man and Woman shall marry. I will not change my opinion. It does not make sense to start a discussion with me about that topic. (If it continiues) I probably change to another account because this is embarassing (and abandon this account). I do not have to display the information on my userpage. Akidd dublintlctr-l 14:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
This is not a discussion about marriage. I was telling you that you will not change the words that other people have used when leaving comments. For example, Fnarf999 used the word "gay". You changed this to "ghey". This is not allowed. I don't care what your opinion on homosexual marriage is. What I care about is that you must not change other people's words in comments. --Yamla 14:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
When i start another account, only editing articles which are completely unrelated to this, then, i believe, i can demand a removal of unrelated talk. It does not make sense to discuss it here on wikipedia. Doing so, is not valid usage of my user page. I believe the talk should be removed, as the spelling in the red hair article has been removed. It is not right to make it that long, repeating these words twenty times. Akidd dublintlctr-l 15:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I believe it a mistake to duplicate this writing again. I do not wish to discuss (and the policy does not allow it anyway) unrelated topics here on wikipedia. It is not related to red hair at all. there is no reason to include this. I will not modifiy other people's writing. Akidd dublintlctr-l 15:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
You are wrong. User talk pages cannot be modified in that way. And changing the comments left by others is a clear violation of Wikipedia's rules. You may of course start another Username if you want, but if you do so simply to lose the trail of critical comments about your English, and carry on damaging Wikipedia in the way you have using your new ID, you will answer to that. Your editing style is very distinctive, and your interests well known. Fnarf999 17:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I have put some answers to a place where they do belong - to a WEBLOG. my interests which people read on the internet, are the interests i have put to the internet. not ON the internet, this goes nowhere. you are welcome to read my blog, or not to read it. it is a public one. i do not have to. Akidd dublin (abandoned 5/2006) 17:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Removing comments[edit]

You said: "i am considering to remove the complete talkin which fnarf999 is involved. this is getting nowhere. i do not have to keep unwanted personal writing."

Actually, you do have to keep fnarf999's comments. You cannot simply remove his comments. What you may do is archive this entire page (I can help you do this if you wish). This would mean moving all comments from this page to an archive page, clearing this page, and putting a link from this page back to the archive page. Do not simply remove fnarf999's comments. --Yamla 13:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
You said: "I do not want him to put his personal opinion (which does not really anymore talk about an article) to my userpage. Do i have to keep unrelated talk?"
I have already answered this question. You must keep his comments on your discussion page, or move all comments to an archive page. This comments to you are relevant to your significant problems with the English language. --Yamla 14:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok. I am doing what people ask me to do. "I do not want him to put his personal opinion to my userpage" - I do not see a grammar mistake within this sentence. I preceive this as harassment. I really ttry to spell correct sentences (within recent articles). Akidd dublintlctr-l 14:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
The grammatical error is that you should have used "on" instead of "to". Thus: "I do not want him to put his personal opinion on my userpage." However, Fnarf999 is not harassing you. He is pointing out the huge number of problems you have with the English language. You know this is true. You've been told this over and over again by multiple people here on Wikipedia. You have been told this on other forums dating back to at least 2004. Your English language skills are very bad. I know you are trying. I know you try hard to spell things correctly and to use proper grammar. But the fact remains, your English skills are very bad. --Yamla 14:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Wait. I try to emphasize where he puts it. Because he should not. I express he could put it somewhere else, if i use "to". If i write "on", it sounds i do not want him to put anything on my user talk page. The other forums generally spelled harassment, but we leave it at this point. My weak spelling does not whitewash their otherwise questionable content.
"on" - He is putting stuff to somewhere.
"to" - emphasizing the action of putting itself. He could talk to someone else, somewhere else. He should not have talked (or have put talk to ...) that way.
The point is, you made a grammatical error in that sentence. What you wrote was incorrect English and did not make sense. I understand that you intended it to make sense but it did not. I understand the point you were trying to make but still, it was grammatically incorrect. --Yamla 14:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
As far as i understand it, "on my userpage" is emphasizing "my", but not excluding he could do it somewhere else. Indeed he tranfers data FROM his mind TO somewhere else. This does not sound nice. FROM=SOURCE and TO=DESTIONATION.
  • Also: "He is adding to my talk". He was at my site. He takes it on his reputation. It adds to his reputation. On his talk, he writes... There it goes. Akidd dublintlctr-l 14:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Please read WP:OWN. You do not own this page. Also, please note that I have caught you removing comments from this page. If you do not immediately add those comments to the archive, you will be blocked. I am sure you are intending to add those comments to the archive, however. --Yamla 14:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

You said: "Because i found it uncanny to have a geographic location connected to an user name, i am going to abandon it now. I find the user talk embarassing, and not-well-educated teenie-like. I had it in mind forehand, but now i am going to realize it. I do not have to suggest articles for Afd. Neither to scroll people's contribution."

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying. What do you mean when you say "not-well-educated teenie-like"? And do you mean "before" when you say "forehand"? I think you are saying that you are going to abandon this user and start a new user. That's fine, that is your right. However, you may be happier editing Wikipedia in your native language as I fear that the same problems are going to show up in the new user account. Another alternative if you wish is that we could take this matter to arbitration. This would allow you to state your case and allow a group of neutral people to give their opinions. I can explain this in more detail if you would like. --Yamla 15:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

"Please know it forehand" = coming from artifical inteligence translation. In old english: You have been warned. I am sorry for the misunderstandings this produces. I am working much with this software. Akidd dublintlctr-l Akidd dublintlctr-l

Are you saying that you are using software like Babelfish to translate from your native language to English? This would certainly explain the serious grammatical mistakes and difficulty in understanding what you write. If so, please stop. Babelfish is not particularly good at translating. If you need to rely on this or similar software, please refrain from editing the English version of Wikipedia. If instead you are writing everything yourself (without the use of translation software), I still claim that your skills in English aren't good enough. But this is probably opinion that could be clarified by arbitration. --Yamla 15:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

You said: "not-well-educated teenie-like -> When i see weak english superstition, i am trying to make it better, and not to produce long, long writing. I have now started a new user."

I'm sorry, that still does not make sense. --Yamla 15:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

You said: "I did not knew red-head people are so picky. I thought the article in disrepair before i arrived. I am not willing to take charge on me. My current english is not that bad. If you believe arbitration makes sense, i do not know how-to, where, why-because-of. Someone clearly misbehaved. If he is going to edit matsuri etc., it may figure an incident (because no understanding of the article itself). When i write that i like red-head people, does it help?"

I do not have red hair, this is not the source of our disagreement. Our disagreement seems to be that you think your English skills are good, I think your English skills aren't good. You can read about the RfA (arbitration) at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. The goal of this would be to get other, neutral people involved to comment on whether I am being unfair to you, or whether your English skills really aren't very good. That is, whether I should just stop bothering you, or whether you should stop making edits (or make different kinds of edits). I can give you more information if you wish. --Yamla 15:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I believe some my recent edits were good: SRAM, Yahoo! Groups, Superstition, Terms_of_Service. I do not deserve this, and i am going to abandon this account. These edits figure valid english spelling, and are not full of mistakes. Further, i find the superstition article full of wrong data, other articles full of weasel words. Akidd dublintlctr-l 15:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
You said: "not-well-educated teenie-like -> When i see weak english superstition,
i am trying to make it better, and not to produce long, long writing.
I have now started a new user."
:I'm sorry, that still does not make sense.  --Yamla 15:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • I know myself that's wrong spelling. I mean the spelling of superstition (1st section) was poor english before my edit. Akidd dublintlctr-l 15:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

You said: " He showed good will to be friendly. However he should not police me. He is new here. I do not know how to put this to arbitration. His user talk (talking about me) has nothing to do with wikipedia. I believe it is used for harassing links to an unrelated user account. He is stating your ID (Yamla) within a "Cabal" case. I do not want him building a gateway to my new page. The purpose was to get rid of him, even if his speech has improved lately. I do not exclude he plays a distraction game. Probably he does more damage than good."

I believe you are saying that you want arbitration. I do not believe I am the right person to arbitrate here. You can bring the matter to arbitration yourself by reading Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. However, I will start the arbitration proceedings tomorrow (too busy with work today), unless you tell me otherwise. I will list the goal of arbitration to be:
  • To determine whether other people also feel your English skills are lacking
  • If so, what to do about this situation as it relates to the Wikipedia
  • If not, how we can help you get a clean start here
The purpose of arbitration is to resolve conflicts. The purpose is not to attack you (or to attack me or Fnarf999). As I said, I'll start this tomorrow unless you want me to stay out of it (or unless you start it sooner). --Yamla 19:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Avatars[edit]

Template:Avatars has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Dr Zak 13:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)