User talk:Fifth Fish Finger

Welcome!

Hello Fifth Fish Finger, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. McGeddon (talk) 19:08, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WPCITE

WPCITE was replaced by Cite4Wiki, based on the same code and in agreement with the WPCITE author, jehochman. WPCITE will not be updated. Thanks. Unit 5 04:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New version is out, that uses the correct {{Cite web}} parameters. WP:Cite4Wiki. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 23:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

10:10

No problem! And don't worry about not finding my article - I much prefer your title for it. Besides, we'd covered different material so it was just a case of merging it in. Have you signed up to 10:10 yet? Tdwright (talk) 17:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Facebook - watch this space. =] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdwright (talk • contribs) 23:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"human-made"?

I sympathize with your effort to make language gender neutral, but "human-made" is a ridiculous phrase that has never been used by people. Please don't put it into articles. To get rid of "man-made" you have to rewrite the sentence: for example, I turned "the structure had to be man-made, completed before 2000" into "the structure had to be built before 2000". Further, in some cases "man-made" is the term being used - e.g., the title of travel writer Howard Hillman's book uses "man-made," so changing it to "human-made" is also incorrect. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 01:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like neologism at best. Please stop putting it into articles. Awkward and strange-sounding. Simply not the way people talk. It may be an MOS convention or guideline, but I doubt its universal application is mandatory. Hertz1888 (talk) 01:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thirded. "Human-made" is in no way common in English, and Wikipedia is not in the business of dictating grammar. --Golbez (talk) 01:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop! These are ridiculous, superfluous, pointless changes ... they do not improve Wikipedia in any way. I don't sympathize with the cause, but if you were being constructive in any way, I would look the other way. But these edits degrade the project. What's next, no more contractions or abbreviations? Stop being the gender-neutral police. I think you need to look back into time for a minute and consider that quite a few languages (besides English) use "man" for human, humanity, people, etc. Hebrew's ish and isha come to mind, with essentially the same grammatical construct as English's man and woman. In both cases, the masculine term represents the entire race, depending on the context. I think you should go find a dictionary and look up the word man. I like to saw logs! (talk) 06:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I stopped making changes before I had received any feedback about this, and I am grateful to have your comments now: it's easy to see I have made a mistake in using "human-made". I tried to not change quotes, David, so thank you for pointing that one out too. I'm sure you understand that the edits were in good faith. All the best, Fifth Fish Finger (talk) 17:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Sorry - can't find these... can you help? Thanks for letting me know. Fifth Fish Finger (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]