User talk:Hippo43/Archives/2009/September

Rihanna

Hi Hippo
Just noticed there was some reverting going on at Rihanna, with Jimarey undoing your changes without an explanation.
I highly disapprove of this, and told him so. However, in this specific case, he changed it back to the styke suggested by the guideline concerning pseudonyms, you can have a look at it at WP:Manual of Style (biographies)#Pseudonyms, stage names and common names. If you disagree, you should open a section at the talk page to start a discussion, otherwise this will just escalate into WP:edit warring.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:05, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I've cleaned it up. The MoS is only a guideline, and allows for either format, but he's not going to leave it alone and it's not worth fighting over. My main objection was the clumsy language in the intro. IMO, the article needs a lot of work. --hippo43 (talk) 22:50, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, you're right, I should have read through the whole paragraph. :)
I sure agree that the article needs a lot of work. I personally am not a fan of the "mononymously" either, but since apparently there's at least one editor disagreeing I strongly suggest you try to find some kind of consensus on the talk page first (even though Jimarey probably won't be able to comment in the next 48 hours). Quite generally, if you want your version to persist during an edit war, the only way is through talk page consensus. I suggest you go there sooner next time, even if your changes are reverted without an edit summary.
Cheers, Amalthea 06:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I opened up a discussion on the talk page. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 16:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Rugby union

Hippo, nice edits recently on the rugby union page, but one thing has been bugging me about the article. If I read the article as a person who had never had any experience of the sport, then I don't think I would come away with the knowledge that this was a sport where the ball was handled, and that tries were scored by touching down the ball by hand. Apart from the Web Ellis part, there is little about carrying and passing the ball. Any thoughts? FruitMonkey (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Good idea. I agree the article has a strange feel to it in many ways. I'll give it some thought, but I think a sentence very similar to what you wrote above, placed in the lead, would help. --hippo43 (talk) 20:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

"Wrong kind of snow"

You may well be correct that Terry Worrall was mis-quoted but the fact remains that the term that has entered the language is "the wrong kind of snow" NOT "the wrong type of snow".

By changing the title you have in fact made this less "searchable" than it should be, as most people, and the British Media (and the book) always refer to it as the "wrong kind of snow".

Perhaps you might consider reversing your poorly judged decision (and one that you did not discuss on the talk page or gain consensus for). Bhtpbank (talk) 06:50, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your friendly message! I was bold, changing to the actual phrase used. I didn't discuss it, because there has been little discussion at the article, it hasn't been edited much, so I didn't think starting a discussion would get much response. You may be right that "wrong kind of snow" is more common, though it's certainly not universal, but it's not the original phrase used. In any case, either search term leads to the article because of redirects. If you think a discussion is worthwhile, please do open one on the talk page. Cheers. --hippo43 (talk) 14:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

British Isles

The wording in the RUgby team was agreed some time ago You have also broken the 1RR rule and may be within minutes of getting a block, suggest you self revert --Snowded ^TALK 08:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)