User talk:71.166.132.232

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

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

Note: My reasons for not registering are not a topic for conversation ...

Noia 64 apps karm.svg This user has been on Wikipedia for 11 years, 6 months and 16 days.

I will simply let my edits speak for themselves ... besides, registering with a username will not make me any less anonymous ... so please, just cut a "recovering Wikipediholic" some slack, and MOVE ON.

BTW, until the recent service interruption, my Verizon DSL IP username was 72.75.58.211 (talk · contribs).

Happy Editing! — 71.166.132.232 (talk · contribs) 23:27, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Not A Problem[edit]

No problem. :) Sorry for taking a while to respond. -WarthogDemon 19:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

date formats[edit]

The key is conformity. That's the overriding principle. I don't believe I run that bot where there is already a uniform date format. In the example you refer to, I believe there were at least three different date formats in the article.

As to which format to use once there is a lack of uniformity, the non-ISO format has two advantages. One, it has no possibility of ambiguity, whereas that is not the case with a non-ISO-familiar person reading or writing the ISO format (more on that if you like). Second, the ISO format is deprecated for the text of the article, so by using a non-ISO format one achieves uniformity between the dates in the text and the footnotes.

You can reply here ... I'll watch this pg as long as this conversation is ongoing. Cheers.

And, btw, I've always thought people have less anonymity as IPs ... because with an IP I can tell, for example, if they are in Brentwood, Maryland! So I think whoever brought you to task for that was not just out of line, but somehow missing the point.--Epeefleche (talk) 10:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

ROFL! I haven't encountered the verb "deprecated" since my days working on standards ... that and "redacted" are no longer a part of my daily vocabulary. :-)
My anal-retentive side can relate to the desire for uniformity, but that's the same side that espouses the use of ISO 8601 formatting, which I do use on a daily basis (i.e., it is my default representation, even in the Windoze File Mangler), so I am not just merely conflicted, I'm really, most sincerely conflicted ... in this particular case, I think that I shall just MOVE ON.
As for anonymity, I've chosen user boxes (as The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome) that actually reveal quite a lot about me besides just geographic location and my gender ... Have a better one! — 71.166.132.232 (talk) 18:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
A pleasure making your acquaintance. Cheers.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
The pleasure was all mine ... for someone who has been contributing almost the same amount of time (just a few weeks difference over three years), we certainly have chosen Different Paths! :-) — 71.166.132.232 (talk) 06:48, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I did happen to notice that we were about the same age! BTW, just so you know, there was an effort to rid wp of all ISO dates in the refs, across the board, just as they are not welcome ever in the text of an article. It failed to gain consensus, though, as most saw it the way I gather you would have seen it.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

BTW, I came across these old threads from a previous IP:

I was 141.156.161.245 (talk · contribs) at that time, and the topic was consistency of behavior, very much like the date discussion we just had ... just an FYI. — 71.166.132.232 (talk) 06:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

John Fox[edit]

Thank you for your interest in this article but honestly this article needs quite a lot of work to be a featured article. Since you are asking though I will put some effort into building it up and getting it ready. Here are some of the things it needs. 1) It needs expansion on who he was, what he did, where he did it, etc. 2) The article lacks inline citations, 3) the lead needs to be expanded and 4) Some of the references that are listed on the article need additional data such as publisher or date. I should be able to get this to B within a week and possibly GA by the end of the month but it will take longer to get it to A or FA. If you want an example of a couple I am grooming for FA take a look at Kenneth Walker, Smedley Butler and Merritt A. Edson. --Kumioko (talk) 07:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Thnx fer the Quick Reply ... I'm about to enter the down phase of my cycle, so I can't promise that I'll get to them Real Soon Now ... my apologies if you don't hear from me again for a while. :-) — 71.166.132.232 (talk) 07:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

New IP[edit]

With the 2nd blizzard of 2010, my DSL IP has changed again ... Happy Editing! — 71.166.152.95 (talk · contribs) 16:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)