User talk:Mel Etitis/Archive 25

Caruso stuff on AfD

I didn't know what to make of your non-transcluded additions on Caruso to AfD for September 10, so I just removed them for now. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 10:39, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't know what you did last time, but never mind it looks like you have it right now. Cheers. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 11:15, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:OmegaWikipedia

Myself and User:OmegaWikipedia are having a disagreement over the "Shake It Off" and "We Belong Together" articles. Basically, I introduced Template:Single infobox2 to both of these articles, but User:OmegaWikipedia reverted my edits (twice on "Shake It Off", once on "We Belong Together"), believing that "raw" infobox syntax should be used, and also that U.S. single positions should be listed before other countries'. There are also other disagreements between the two of us on these articles, such as the level of detail on a section about Mariah Carey's performances of these songs, and reliability of a paragraph about alleged controversy surrounding a single that "dethroned" one of the Carey songs from the top of the U.S. charts. See also his/her user talk and mine. I don't mean to waste your time, but this debate is getting very heated (at one point Omega changed the WikiProject Song guidelines), and you seem to edit a lot of articles related to music, so I was wondering if you could offer a third opinion on the matter. Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 16:16, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mel, first of all, I hope I'm most wasting my time, as you know we've had our own differences, and I hope you look at this from a neutral opinion, but some random person changed the Wikiproject a week ago. Suddenly EM, decided that that's official policy. When the policy changed, there was no consensus, or debate. I changed it to show a point, that anyone could change it. And guess what? Suddenly, EM doesn't like it! What it seems is that EM took advantage of a random edit that worked to his favor. OmegaWikipedia 22:29, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How about using literal Greek characters in your signature?

Now that MediaWiki supports Unicode, perhaps you might wish to cut-and-paste the literal Unicode Greek characters Μελ Ετητης into your signature, rather than using Μελ Ετητη&sigmaf; (which shows up that way in diffs and in the browser editor). -- Curps 08:05, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

POV warrior at Sylvia Browne

Hey Mel. I'm heading off to bed, and I see from RC that you're still up. Do me a favor and keep an eye on/try to talk some sense into User:Cinnamix? A look at his/her talk page and contribs will tell you everything you need to know.

Thanks Mel. Leave me a note on my talk page before you sign off tonight and let me know what if anything becomes of this if you have time. I owe you one. Fernando Rizo T/C 09:09, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for picking up where I left off last night, Mel. Much obliged. Fernando Rizo T/C 19:15, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

POV warriors at Pedro Santana Lopes

I just read the discussion page. Thank you for your effort, really nice approach. Unfortunately it will be difficult to let an oppinion stand this early after he left the seat. Only time will provide sources in English that may address a more detached evaluation of the effect his actions while leading the country. Finding it impossible to improve the article atm, as sources are sparse and of dubious inclination, I just felt you deserved someone's praise the fight for that lost cause. Thanks. (the guy is still undoubtfully a poshy, incopetent cvnt -pardon the language, I know no closer word- for almost every people in the country -even some of his partisans-, as time and sources will prove, but that's a different issue). Congratulations for your approach. Edit: forgot to sign, sorry user: sobretudo 10.26 (UTC) 12 Sep 05

Supergroup

How many of the links to Supergroup (bands), or to Supergroup with that meaning, are actually useful? Susvolans ⇔ 10:27, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Opposition that is unacceptable

You seem to be opposing the rules of songwriting. "With" is a capitalized word in this form of English writing—I also have knowledge that you previously opposed this in a recent time, and that you chose to ignore this. Let me be the first to tell you (I can see that you are not a songwriter—don't worry, neither am I) that this sort of opposition is clearly unacceptable in my book of life. The Wikipedia policy doesn't indicate that "With" is not allowed to be capitalized when it comes to this form of English. And without any proof, I am afraid I will have to revert the edits.

However, I don't seem to understand what you mean by "cut and paste". (I am not familiar with computer nicknames and identities.) Winnermario 20:00, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well then (since you mentioned it), could we talk about the songwriting rules? We have to come to an agreement with the capitalization in "I'm With You" and "The Trouble With Love Is". Apparently I've heard that there is another user (DrippingInk, if I'm not mistaken) who has been having this argument with several people as well. Could we talk it out? Winnermario 23:11, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the "unenvious" and "unenviable" correction, however I will not change it since "unenvious" is another stupid nickname that I've been given—I will admit that I did not know I was sporting incorrect English on my user page, but you can blame my friends for that. Thank you, nonetheless.

To the songwriting, like I said before, I am not a songwriter (although I have attempted it with the 'I hate this!' pattern frequently occurring), but I consulted one of my professors–who is roughly about your age–and he said that there are only five words that are spelled with capitals in songwriting that are lower-cased in typical English: "With", "Up", "From", and "Of" ("Of" varies, however, sometimes being spelled slower-cased), and the fifth word I cannot remember. I will ask my professor immediately.

Oh, and on a more personal note, where is Oxford located? Country and city, I mean. Winnermario 19:55, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The fifth word is "Over". Winnermario 22:37, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Magdoff

Sorry to bother. I have posted a Request for Comment for the pages Talk:Harry Magdoff and espionage and Talk:Harry Magdoff. Endless revert wars and edit conflicts. Input welcome. --Cberlet 22:22, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Statement

Thanks for agreeing to take a look- I have just sent it to your email address. Please feel free to make any comments you like- even if you think it needs a complete rewrite. I don't know if I have talked too little about the subjects, or more maths than philosophy, etc. Do you think I wrote too much about myself? Thanks for your help, as I'm really unsure if this is what they're looking for. - sars 16:05, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is the part where I hope to God you saved the email, because I just checked the address Wikipedia had for me was wrong... :$ It should have been "@gmail.com" and not "@hotmail.com".

I should have checked before I sent it! Sorry. Don't worry if you haven't saved it. -sars 18:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna album covers and chart statistics

Please check these sources. The site is correct now. If this site should be US-American only you can remove all other singles. Note: "Dear Jessie", "Bye Bye Baby", "Fever", "One More Chance", "Love don't live here anymore", "Another Suitcase in the Hall" & "Drowned World/Substitue for Love" are NOT American releases.

anon edit on Naperville Central High School

The anon editor meant well, but couldn't spell poor Candace Parker's name correctly. I've added a "Famous Alumni" section including her and her older brother (whom I attended NCHS with, myself), as well as Paula Zahn. One of the members of Hootie and the Blowfish is also an NCHS alumnus (the drummer, I think). --JohnDBuell | Talk 12:16, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The three people I noted so far for that alumni list have all achieved fame for at least a (US-wide) national level, though I gather Anthony Parker is also known for his basketball playing outside the USA. Famous Alumni/Notable Alumni would probably be preferable to just "Alumni" - otherwise I could just list myself! ;) --JohnDBuell | Talk 18:40, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but I haven't been on ESPN, or ABC/CBS/Fox News/CNN, like the other three. :) --JohnDBuell | Talk 18:50, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sea of Japan naming dispute

Please take a look at the history of Sea of Japan naming dispute. Masterhatch and Tkh were handling this issue but they are worn out in revert wars against user:appleby. Because they can't block him and couldn't attract attention of any admin. I posted in Fab's talk page about this problem a few days ago but he seems like in his wikibreak. Thanks in advance. --Ypacaraí 05:30, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for adding some sanity to that surreal edit war. i don't know if you wanna get involved anymore, but i'd appreciate any suggestions on the structure or readability. Appleby 16:56, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mel Etitis. I noticed that on Ypacarai's you made a comment about the Sea of Japan naming dispute. You mentioned that I felt that Korea's claims were false. My problem wasn't (and isn't) whether Korea's claims are false or true as that is not for me or anyone here on Wikipedia to decide. My problem was Appleby using an undated and unverifiable study and giving it equal weight to studies (from both sides) that were dated and verifiable. What I mean is, that study that Appleby wants in there is not dated. We don't know when it took place. Secondly, there is no map list or link to a map list for anyone to look at. We don't know how Korea came to it's conclusions; for all we know, they could have invented the numbers (probably not though). Anyways, right near the beginning of the edit war (oh, so long ago now) I put at the front of the study "An undated and unverifiable study by Korea blah blah blah" so that the study wasn't given equal weight to the other studies that are all dated and verifiable. That modificiation was quickly rejected. Basically, I didn't (and don't) have a problem with the study being mentioned on the article as long as it is clear to the reader that that study is not equal in verifiablity to the other studies (done by both sides). If that site was missing just either the date or access to the map list, then this edit war probably wouldn't have happened. But as it is, it is missing two very important aspects: the date of when the study occured (there's not even a year of when the study was done!) and access to a map list (the other studies done by Korea and Japan all have access to a map list). So, to sum up, that site that Appleby wants used shouldn't be given equal weight to the other studies (as Appleby seems to want). It just doesn't make sense. Anyways, sorry to bother you with this dispute. Masterhatch 14:03, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Greek communities etc.

Hi Mel, the problem I had with "community" is that it is used for a special type of municipality (κοινότητα). The places listed in those lists were cities, towns, villages, parts of cities etc., so I thought "populated place" would be the best name for them. Maybe you're right about "List of ..", is that a naming convention? Markussep 16:16, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know "populated place" is such an unusual expression, I've seen it on more occasions here. "Settlement" looks fine to me. "List of..", I'm convinced now. "List of settlements in the X prefecture" it is then? Markussep 20:32, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

EM rule

Oh, thank you for the correction. Must have been a typo.

And can you please not include "Step to Me" as a Pepsi promo from Spiceworld? The song does not even feature on the LP. Winnermario 17:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't, when I joined Wikipedia, it was already there. Although I did look into history and found out that it had been posted a little bit before my presence on this site. I don't remember the name of the person though. Winnermario 17:46, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling

Dude, its John Kickjazz! Stop changing it and read Joe's friggin' book! Behind the Paint spells it as Kickjazz and I think he ought to know how a former member of the band's name is written! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiseguy100 (talk • contribs) 23:20, 17 September 2005

Coming of age anthem

Mel, why do you keep reverting the comment about the song being a coming of age anthem? Breakaway is a coming of age anthem? If you look at the coming of age page, it talks about growing up from childhood to adulthood, and that song is talking about it. So can we put it back in? OmegaWikipedia 22:24, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nosource

While retagging images, I ran into a unresponsive image uploader at User_talk:Manos, since you're active right now in purging nosources, I figured I could suggest you take care of his nosourced contributions (many of which are not marked as nosource). --Gmaxwell 11:35, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Israel Putnam images

Just out of curiousity, why did you revert User:PM Poon's image resizes in Israel Putnam? I don't have a burning issue with this, but I do tend to prefer images that I can see without actually calling up the image file directly, and the smaller image sizes are really too small to make anything out of as presently displayed in the article, especially the "Rescue of Major Israel Putnam". Seems to me that with the WP servers as overloaded as they seem to generally be, the fewer people clicking on image files to get a good look at them, the better. Or am I overlooking something? TIA, Mwanner 17:54, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, dialup! I'd all but forgotten. I'm sure it must have been discussed somewhere, but wouldn't it make sense for WP to have an image-free option for dialup access? It would also take care of those who are horrified by images of nudity. Mwanner 21:53, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on List of people who have said that they are gods

Could you comment on this RfC? Thanks. ≈ jossi ≈ 20:00, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the following

Please see When I'm With You for an example of a song with "With" capitalized.

I would also like to comment on "With" being lower-case in English—you said this is correct, and I said it is correct, but not in songwriting English. However, you failed to respond to my previous post, but since I've come to a conclusion: if "With" is lower-case in English, I'd like to ask how Since U Been Gone is correct English on an encyclopedia. How is the letter "U" to create the actual word "You" acceptable? There is no difference in this argument—"With" is a capitalized word in songwriting, but you choose to keep "U" over "You" (although the correct word is technically "You've").

Another thing is that despite songwriting regulations, all words on albums are capital. (Even ones that should not be.) Winnermario 21:38, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tara Reid

Curious about the removal of the liposuction link. Why?

Did I err?

I just happened to note that after my comment at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Egg_%28person%29, you put "Fourteen edits before this one".

Was there something wrong? Should I have not voted? I wasn't aware that someone had to have a certain number of edits behind them before they were allowed to (or supposed to) vote on things.

Sure, I don't have 50K edits behind me, I don't even have a page for myself (because I don't have a great deal of time to tinker with that sort of thing), but when I do see something to edit in a factual point in an article, I try to make it.

If you feel that I should not edit things, please let me know. I'll avoid making edits, changes, votes, etc. if more casual users are not welcome to do so.

Thank you. --Taniwha 19:18, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rebetika

Good point. I'm new to this; is it kosher for me to change the name of the article and sub "rebetika" under it? thanks - Her Pegship 19:42, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I don't seem to understand why you continue to fail to process my entire English. Every other person can follow a message I send them, regardless of how complicated it is.

As a minor songwriter myself, I've learned to recognize what is and what is not capitalized in songwriting—also my English professor stated this.

Then explain to me why on Wikipedia "Since U Been Gone" is not changed to proper English ("Since You've Been Gone")? If it isn't being changed, then "I'm With You" can certainly be capitalized. Winnermario 19:52, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I must apologize for the stupid inaccurate information my professor told me. (*eyeroll*)

You will not win this dispute. You may have won a couple battles, but you will lose the war. I may not be able to prove this–since I sure as hell can't–but I'm going to defeat you in the end.

And thank you for calling my grammar a little odd. I type like I speak. Who really cares if the grammar is a little bit off? You can most certainly follow everything I am saying—you just choose to ignore it. Winnermario 23:46, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Advice, please?

Howdy Mel (may I call you Mel?) - I'll take another look at the Greek dancec/rebetika/etc. issue. Food for thought. Meanwhile, I'm just curious about your revert to my copyedit of the Sturmgrenadier article - it *looks* like the only change that accomplished was to add the "copyedit" tag back at the top (presumably meaning that it needed more work). Is this so? If not, what was it about my edits that needed reverting? I ask humbly as a wikinoobie... thanks. Her Pegship 05:07, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2005 AFL Finals

Can you please give your reasoning for removing the "match reviews" in the 2005 finals series article. I thought they were a good record of each game. Thanks Anubis1975

Bryan Adams

Hi -- the person claiming to be working with Bryan Adams is posting from a variety of randomly assigned IPs, as she claimed that they're on tour in Germany. She might not see your comment. You might want to consider copying them over to Talk:Bryan Adams. --Nlu 18:44, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am not John FitzSimons, he happens to be a famous student, and I thought that it might be a good to put him on it, albeit if you do not want me to put it up there, then I stop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.65.188 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 20 September 2005

He is a model, and very well known. He is often associated with Browning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.65.188 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 20 September 2005

I dont know, I dont want to cause you any trouble, I just thought that maybe you would want to put him on. I am sorry again for any proplems that i have cause you.

Bryan Adams

i noticed you have left a message for me to give a futher explanation for editing the page. i'm delighted to do so, the information that was posted was inaccurate and i took the liberty to edit it. as i was not aware that people were leaving messages for me i occasionally checked back to see the page an noticed that the information had been reposted! so i deleted it again..etc etc.

anyway, i got around to seeing the posts addressed to me and i thought i had explained myself accurately to whoever was cyber attacking me!

i work for Mr. Adams, we are on tour, hence the mulitple IP addresses from various hotels and we love the site, so i was simply updating things. I hope this explains things, if not please leave me another note and i'll respond immediately

best

michelle info@bryanadams.com

hi mel

i left this message for you yesterday, and i noticed today things are back incorrectly on the BA page again today. my information comes from the source, BA himself. i could verify it further if you send me an email, and i'll have him verify it if you wish. futhermore, the guy that keeps changing things back is vandalizing his page and i strongly object to it. tell me what i need to do to stop this. best, michelle

Regarding the "Respect" Article(s)

Hi, you being an admin and having cleaned up a bit after OmegaWikipedia before, I thought you might be able to help with this. He seems to have split the original Respect (song) article into separate ones for Respect (Otis Redding song) and Respect (Aretha Franklin song). Though I don't think this is necessary, this isn't so much as a problem as an annoyance. What is the problem, is that OW did nothing to tidy up the Otis Redding version's article and remove to huge portions of text regarding just the Aretha Franklin version. I think this is obvious bias, and as said before, question the necessity to split up the previous article, which didn't seem long enough to split, and was still concise and informative for both versions. Your thoughts on this are appreciated. I have not yet taken the problem to OW, because he's over-reacted to such criticism before. Volatile 01:23, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue: not only did he fumble with the split between the articles, he redirected Respect (song) to Respect (Aretha Franklin song), instead of creating a disambig link. Volatile 01:28, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clearing that up. As soon as he is RfC'd or otherwise dealt with, the article is going back to the way it was, since I don't see the purpose of separating two related versions of the same song. Until then, it's alright. Once again, thanks. Volatile 12:01, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mel. I've explained the situation to Volatile, but it was not my intention to be biased against the other article, and I had meant to clean up the article. OmegaWikipedia 12:01, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, OW is adding false information to the Redding article (AF "co-wrote" the song, changing the chart info), as well as re-writing essentially everything in such a matter that leaves much to be desired. While I don't mind him keeping the Franklin article as a "pet project," I would greatly appreciate it if he didn't add incorrect info to the Redding article, since he knows so very little about the song and the artist. Volatile 12:35, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, the song is far from my "pet project". I thought my info was right, but if it's not, you can talk to me directly about it, and let me know. OmegaWikipedia 12:51, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You did post incorrect information, and that information may have stayed had I not mentioned this to you. I also fail to see any "new material" you have added, all you've done is re-written (rather sloppily I might add) previous text written by me and other editors. If this isn't a "pet project" I don't know what is. Also, you left the Otis version of the article sit for three days - if you were going to "fix" it, when exactly would that time come had I not mentioned the bias? I can understand perfectly well why Fred left, or at least one of the reasons.

Anyway, to Mel: for future reference, a copy of the previous article (or as much that I could gather from the page histories) is here. And thanks for the help, I understand your hands are tied with some things. Volatile 23:51, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification of real/stage name entries

Mel: For quite some time the entry for professional wrestlers have been under the main entry of their stage names, as this is the name 99% of the public would know and recognize. For instance, when searching 'Hulk Hogan" on Wiki, 'Hulk Hogan' comes up as the main name, not his real name of 'Terry Bolleau' (or however you spell it). It has been this way for some time. However, Chad Bryant has seen fit to begin changing the entries to their real names, despite not asking the people who have been doing 90% of the work maintaining the pro-wrestling entries and despite the fact that 99% of the general public and indeed the vast majority of wrestling fans either do not know or do not care about a wrestlers real name. I don't want to start reverting all of the entries he has started to change because he will again accuse me of harrassing him or whatever. He has also been notating his reverts as 'repaired vandalism' despite the fact that the edits were in NO WAY vandalism and were, in fact, correcting the real/stage name reverts Chad was doing. Please advise as to the set standard policy, the entries were always main entered by their stage names long before Chad or i even came to Wikki, and I and others feel it must remain that way.

TruthCrusader

Naming conventions for professional wrestlers

The majority of the entries for American professional wrestlers are under their real names, as evidenced here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_professional_wrestlers

Despite any claims to the contrary from certain Wiki editors who seem to have a presence here only to argue with and cause disputes over everything I do, it appears that this is the Wikipedia standard, and I am inclined to keep this standard. Chadbryant 19:09, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

user talk: Anittas

I had a little chat with User: Anittas about gathering support from blocked editors (e.g. enviroknot) for her cause against you. I think it is only fair that you know about this discussion as you are involved. Yours, a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 20:03, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. :) Well, just wanted to be fair. See you around, a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 20:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Caruso stuff

No problem...Jtkiefer wanted someone to close it, and I had nothing to do at the time, so it wasn't that big of a deal. Ral 315 21:00, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist tool

I've recently coded a watchlist tool. It does some nice things like remember the last date you looked (potentially decreasing server load, making watchlists load faster, and making it less important to check it regularly) and docking to the left screen edge.

Since maybe other people might find it useful as well, I was thinking of putting the source code on wiki (12 kB). Where should I put it? A subdir of my user page? Wikisource? A subdir of Wikipedia:Tools even?

Please let me know your opinion.

Yours sincerly, Shinobu 03:30, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mel Etitis!

First of all, non of the links I put up there are commercial sites. They are merely sites showing lyrics.

Why lyrics? Well since the lyrics are not prevelent in the article, it would make SENSE to add a link for people who are interested in the contents of the song.

I can bet you that am not the first on wikipedia's history to put a 'Lyrics' link on page.

I have not put 10 or 20 links on a page, just a single link ...

Your arguments are weak & poor, namely advertisement & private collection of links.

Mel, I have a feeling you don't like Michael Jackson very much. That's cool with me. You can't be liked by everyone. What's not cool with me is people like me trying to do a decent job, and people like you making it hard. Go and work on projects you are interested in. I know the typical response I'm going to get. "But I'm an admin ...". NONSENSE. I've got a suggestion. There are over 800,000 articles on wiki. Go on check and make sure that the other 800,000 pages are OK. When you are done, you can finally come and work on MJ's articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.74.11.24 (talk • contribs) 11:56, 22 September 2005

Hi 161.74.11.24, sometimes I just wonder whether some of the people who become admins are power-crazy people with a high n-power, who enjoys sadism and pushing their weight around. It is obvious to me during my short experience with Wikipedia that although some of these admins have high IQs, they definitely lack EQs. And for a portal that claims itself to be a community portal for everyone, I wonder whether these maladjusted individuals are doing the community any justice by serving as admins if they have no EQ at all. Hopefully, these type of admins are in the minority, failing which, I will just call it a day.

In any case, I do not know whether it is right or not for you to put your particular lyrics link, although I know that Analog Pussy did put hers in the Wikipedia article about her. I edited that article, and it was fun, with no interference whatsoever. &mdash PM Poon 14:31, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]