User talk:Paul August/Archive20

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

Unprotection of TFA[edit]

"Typically" being the salient point. Nice bureaucratic edge, there. Funny you had to block an IP pretty much immediately. Tan | 39 19:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes I blocked an IP (I wouldn't say that I had to though). Paul August 19:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for consulting me before redacting my admin action. As a courtesy, I'm informing you that I'm going to re-protect it. Tan | 39 19:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry that I didn't leave a note on your talk page. But you really shouldn't reprotect the article, consensus and standard practice has been that Main Page articles should not be protected, except in the rarest of circumstances. Have you seen Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection? Paul August 20:02, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi Paul, I've reprotected the article. You're correct in that TFAs are usually unprotected; however, this article is obviously very popular and subject to particularly severe vandalism. I've thus protected it for six hours, until it's off the MP. Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 20:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict, reply to Paul) Of course I have. Standard practice is that the page isn't usually, or in your words, typically protected, and I don't know where you got your "rarest of circumstances" verbiage. What you cited there is a guideline, and as stated at the top, it needs to be treated with common sense an "the occasional exception". Now, what you had here is an admin who has frequented WP:RFPP for years, assessed the situation, and determined that protection needed to occur. It's being called a hoax article in various media circles - CNN and The Guardian being two of the most visible - and it's garnering way more vandalism than usual. As the actual visibility of the page is much higher due to this media exposure, the frequency of the vandalism goes up - along with repercussions to Wiki's credibility when people load it with "APRIL FOOL YA NIGGAS!!!!1!" on it. Screen shots can be taken. At any rate, it's exceedingly rude to a) undo my action without any consultation at all, and b) to assume that I naively did it without knowing what I was doing. Tan | 39
I apologize (again) for not attempting to consult with you. As for the issue of TFA protection, I've been following this issue for six years. Quoting from Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection: "Administrators only semi-protect the page as a response to extreme levels of vandalism" and "The Main Page featured article is rarely semi-protected. However, there are some extreme circumstances in which semi-protection is appropriate". I drew on those two sentences for my "rarest of circumstances" characterization. Paul August 20:28, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Apology accepted. Frankly, you are out of touch with the current climate of protection consensus. What "issue" have you been following for six years? The evolution of a disputed and possibly outdated guideline? I don't see any participation on your part on either the main page or talk page, and given the handful of edits a year to it, "following it" must be a roundly stultifying endeavor. Strictly adhering to a guideline, when policies aren't even binding on this site (see WP:IAR) isn't a good practice. Tan | 39 20:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Well perhaps I am "out of touch". Can you please point me to where a new consensus has formed on this issue? Paul August 20:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I sure can. Follow WP:RFPP for the next year or so. Tan | 39 20:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I was hoping for some past discussion. Paul August 20:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
There's isn't one that I know of. Look, I have utmost respect for you. In most measurements, you're a "better" Wikipedian than I am - you do way more article editing and content work. I have utmost respect for that. If one of us left Wikipedia, it would be better for the project if I did. That said, when it comes to admin actions in the current environment - be careful overturning actions. Since 2005, you have protected exactly 8 articles. I have protected over a thousand, and much more recently (over the past two years). Climate in various Wiki arenas ebbs and flows, with interpretations of policies and guidelines changing as Wikipedia grows. In 2005, "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" was gospel. Now, not as much. Life here moves at about ten times the pace of the normal world, in terms of shifting priorities, consensuses, and overall texture. I'm not saying you can't go on your merry admin way - I'm saying be careful when you think another admin is wrong and you are right. However, that's probably enough rehashing; apology accepted, and I apologize for probably losing my temper. Tan | 39 21:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I will take to heart your advice to be more careful. And I'm sorry that my unprotecting the article made you lose your temper. However you still have not convinced me that protecting the article wife selling is for the best, nor have you been able to show that Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection no longer represents consensus or standard practice. You may be right about that but I have nothing with which to substantiate that. Paul August 21:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


Hello, Paul. I´ve notice Python (mythology, computing language..etc) has many different meanings...Can anyone help me with desambiguation for this word? Tks!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Louansa (talkcontribs) 17:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Help how? Do you mean disambiguating links like this:Python? Paul August 18:13, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Peter Damien[edit]

Do you know why User:Peter_Damian banned? I've still to reply to a question he asked 18 months ago (I know, I've been busy!). Stephen B Streater (talk) 22:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Not exactly no. Paul August 23:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
What was the question you want answering? I can try and get in touch with him for you off wiki if you want. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 23:38, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Why was he banned and is he coming back? Stephen B Streater (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, he was initially blocked for a while for making a legal threat against another editor. Then he returned under a new account, but he got banned under that because he was creating a battleground in particular areas. Since then, he's used a number of accounts to sock. That said, the accounts he's used to sock with have generally been to make fantastic content contributions (there's been a little trolling, but not too much). I think it's unlikely that he'll be coming back - I don't think he particularly wants to edit here, certainly not with restrictions against him and it's unlikely that the community would be wiling to unblock him without any firm restrictions in place. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 14:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
If I had been around, perhaps I could have soothed the situation in one or two places. Still, time is a great healer, and he may well be able to contribute here again eventually. Stephen B Streater (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

DOB query[edit]

[1] = does this cite verify the asserted specific dates of birth/death? -- Cirt (talk) 23:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

And/or feel free to answer at Talk:John_Vanbrugh#Specific_dates_of_birth_and_death.3F. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 23:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
It simply gives the years (1664-1726). Paul August 23:24, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Okay, thanks very much. Removed the uncited portion of it, from the article. -- Cirt (talk) 23:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Wiles students[edit]

Hi. Was there any reason to remove the students you removed other than the fact that they were redlinks? Several of the removals were very well-established mathematicians who should have an article on wiki, but simply don't. Cheers. RobHar (talk) 17:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Just that they were red links (which tends to indicate non-notability). Feel free to add them back if you think they deserve their own article. Paul August 02:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Uranus (mythology)[edit]

Hey Paul, thanks for the correction on Uranus (mythology). I read the damn thing at least five times and I just didn't see it. Now I understand why the other editor put replaced the semicolon with a comma. Your parentheses make it clearer though. SQGibbon (talk) 04:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Paul August 11:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Trojan War Talk Page[edit]

Just wondering, were the comments here deleted unintentionally? --Edward130603 (talk) 20:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, apparently an unreported edit conflict. Thanks for telling me, I'll try to fix things. Paul August 20:28, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Bessel function[edit]

Just for the record: do you oppose replacing <references /> with {{Reflist}} in this article? —bender235 (talk) 17:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

No. Paul August 17:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Some context: Bender235 has been going around large numbers of articles making this change via AWB. I noticed these edits when they overlapped with our math articles. — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:26, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Paul August 17:29, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Campus Ambassador at Harvard[edit]

Hi Paul, thanks for inquiring about the Wikipedia Campus Ambassador role! More details about the Campus Ambassador role can be found at Here is also a little bit more information; in a nutshell:

The Campus Ambassadors are crucial components of the Wikipedia Public Policy Initiative. Volunteers in this position will be in charge of training and supporting the participating professors and students on Wikipedia-related skills, such as how to create new articles, how to add images, how the talk pages work, etc. Campus Ambassadors will also help recruit other people on campus to contribute to Wikipedia articles, for example by setting up Wikipedia-related student groups and by organizing "Welcome to Wikipedia" social events. In general they will become known as Wikipedia experts on the university campus (in your case, on the Harvard University campus). The estimated time commitment for this role is 3 to 5 hours a week, possibly slightly more at the very beginning and very end of the semester. The Wikimedia Foundation will hold a mandatory three-day training for all Campus Ambassadors in August, and will continue to stay in contact with and offer full support for the Campus Ambassadors throughout the academic semester.

If you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador at Harvard University, I would like to send you the application form. What email address can I send this to? (Feel free to email me this info if you prefer:

Thanks. I look forward to hearing back from you soon!

Annie Lin, Campus Team Coordinator
Alin (Public Policy) (talk) 21:33, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I've sent you an email. Regards 17:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day (2010)[edit]

Nuvola apps cookie.svg Happy First Edit Day, Paul August, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!

Armbrust Talk Contribs 23:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


When you get back, please look at the IP's recent edits adding Marduk, etc. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Ignore this, the IP turns out to be one of Jackiestud (talk · contribs)'s many socks.


In metric systems it represents the point of reference or origin. That is "metric systems" (ie. numeric systems that measure something) not "the metric system" (ie. the European standards). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:41, 7 August 2010 (UTC) Metric Space is probably the more common term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes I misunderstood what was meant. Your subsequent edit is better. I'm not sure if it belongs in the lead, though. It seems a bit too technical at that point in the article. Paul August 16:28, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


Hey, Paul, I know you watch Persephone and guard against some of the worst impulses there, but I was wondering whether you had any thoughts on why this article attracts such capricious editing, or what sort of approach or reorganization might help. This is such a key figure for the mystery religions that in writing my obscure little articles on ancient religion I often have occasion to link there, but I always do so with reluctance. Eros, as you know, is also a problem, and a pretty skimpy article at present. Cynwolfe (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid that, off the top of my head, I can't think of anything particularly useful to say about any of this. I will say that I've seemed to notice, over the last half-year or so, an increase in the number of low quality IP edits to many of our mythology articles (including the two you mention). Perhaps as a result of the Percy Jackson books and Clash of the Titans movie? But I'm sure you could do wonders for those two articles if you chose to be inspired (I might be willing to lend a hand) and it might be more fun and productive than fussing over some silly list of wars between democracies ;-) Paul August 21:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but fussing there has taken eons off my time in Purgatory. I hope. IP editing and the Hollywood connection together — yep, that's a good perception. Also reminds me that I wouldn't like articles on major mythological figures to be so brainy that they immediately turn off smart 13-year-olds who become interested through Percy Jackson, either. Aiming articles at their most likely readers has struck me as one of the trickier things on WP. I'll keep these two articles in mind, but they're pretty peripheral to what I'm working on at the moment. Wish this were gainful employment; I could move mountains. Best, Cynwolfe (talk) 22:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Reverting a legitimate edit[edit]

You reverted one of my edits without giving a single reason. This is usually done for vandalisms, non for normal edits. Please, give a reason for that revert. --TakenakaN (talk) 09:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm very sorry about that. I have no memory of editing that article, and I don't know how this revert occurred. I was editing from my iPad at the time and I may have inadvertently touched the wrong part of the screen. Regards, Paul August 12:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Epic Cycle[edit]

Paul, what makes you say that it's silly to specify that Venetus A was written in the 10th century AD? The Trojan war was in the 12th century BC, so it's certainly possible for someone to write about it in the 10th century BC. I myself was confused when I was reading about this topic. (Huey45 (talk) 10:13, 16 August 2010 (UTC))

Dates without a date era are assumed to be in the present era (i.e. AD/CE). So no one reading "10th century" should be confused. Beyond that, Homer's Iliad, dated to around the 8th century BC, is widely known as one of the oldest works of Western literature. Few will suppose that a manuscript of the Illiad, called "Venetus A" (whose name refers to Venice, a city which didn't exist until around 400 AD) will have been written in the 10 century BC. Paul August 11:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Not everyone who reads the encyclopaedia already knows this stuff though. Besides, adding "AD" to an old date is no detriment at all. It appears that you're opposing a helpful change either just because you're ganging up with User:Wetman or because you don't like writing "AD". Whatever it is, it's ridiculous. (Huey45 (talk) 07:02, 17 August 2010 (UTC))


Paul, I know you watch Eros too, but I have no idea what's happened to that already dubious page. It's a disaster and I don't have time to do anything about it at the moment. You've been watching it longer than I, so perhaps the course of events will make quicker sense to you. Cynwolfe (talk) 03:43, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I've repaired a bit of recent vandalism, by reverting to the 05:06, 16 October 2010 version. I haven't time now to do much more, I'm off later today to Italy for three weeks. Ciao. Paul August 07:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Have a great time! I was supposed to go to Rome in November, but the trip was canceled. Am now rerouting a quart of my unused supply of "will to pleasure" to you. Cynwolfe (talk) 12:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
So I'm getting the interest on your pleasure principle am I? How nice, though I have quite a stock of my own. Paul August 14:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Ooh, financial language. I'm now struck dumb, after my brave attempt to banish envy through good wishes. I just keep repeating "Rome will always be there, Rome will always be there." So it is pleasure and not a business trip? I was hitchhiking on a relative's business trip. Since I'm feeling a bit stir crazy at the moment, three weeks of travel sounds like heaven. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Business? What's that? Only pleasure for me. And yes the eternal city should still be there for a while yet. Paul August 14:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

coins of Philetaerus[edit]

Perhaps you could add your input here, instead of just reverting with no comment. Lt.Specht (talk) 16:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I hadn't seen that you had left a comment on the talk page. I'll respond there. Paul August 20:59, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Contribution team[edit]

Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team (WP:CONTRIB for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.

If this sounds interesting, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the team talk page. Regards, DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 22:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

By the way, this is a human edit (not a bot). I'm specifically contacting you as you expressed interest in the Campus Ambassador position, and the Wikipedia Contributions Team has a lot of commonality in working along with the Campus Ambassadors. You can reach me on my talk page, or by email at with questions; I can't guarantee that I'll be checking back on your talk page often enough to hold a sustained conversation there. Regards, DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 22:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Are you out of your mind and lost common sense?[edit]

EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD, EVERYONE, EVERY SINGLE PERSON knows that Orpheus was a Thracian, so why on earth, in the galaxy if you will, wont that be part of Thracian mythology as well. It sounds to me like you people are trying to cut all links of him with Thrace. Ive also seen a similar thing with Dionosys - saying it was Greek - thats just ridicolous,what next Spartacus will be greek as well?. If you want sources for this I am glad to post,well, like a million of them. I am going to revert it. Please dont be difficult in this please leave it there - I know my history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:57, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

What sources say that Orpheus was an important figure in Thracian mythology? Paul August 01:17, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello Well basically its the sources that guy Jingiby posted on the talk page plus the one I posted in my last edit, where it says he was of thracian origin. I hope you can understand professionally at least why I am upset at the situation here. I have read a lot of history - it is a hobby of mine and I ,ove it, and in a lot of places I read he was a Thracian. Also, according to wikipedia neutrality rules - all "significant" viewpoints have to be mentioned in order for there to be no bias - by mentioning one viewpoint - that he was in only Greek mythology, is basically ignoring the rule and will confuse a lot of people, where, the first place they look for information, is wikipedia (especially if they are newcomers to Orpheus and the whole deal). I am simply shocked and surprised that you guys are ignoring all the sources that the guy Jingiby put on the talk page,plus the one I put - I will try ti find many more when I have time. I just dont understand - whats wrong with those sources, why are you people ignoring a major viewpoint and only including one viewpoint (thus ignoring a rule) - that sounds a bit like POV at the least. All I am trying to do is make wikipedia a better place, and contributing to the greater knowledge in the world - I am just trying to help, but again now I see someone reverted my edits - it seems that this (most unfortunately - i.e: was uncalled for and unneeded) has become a problem now. I dont understand why there is so much fuss about including that he was also in Thracian mythology - logically if he was a Thracian, then he is automatically in Thracian mythology - doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure it out. Please bear with me on this and understand what I am trying to say, I mean no harm.

kind Regards (talk) 16:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey, here isone more source from an education website (.edu) - - saying he was a Thracian - my point being that if he was Thracian then he is automatically in Thracian mythology, because,well....he was a Thracian. Another one (part of OXFORD education group) By the way, here is another previous edit which was completely neutral and fair to both sides, respecting all the rules - why did you people have to go and change it - now the page certainly looks POV, Im sure any non Greek and non Bulgarian editor would agree - here is the edit: Orpheus (Greek: Ὀρφεύς; pronounced /ˈɔrfiəs/ or /ˈɔrfjuːs/ in English) is a legendary figure, probably of Thracian origin,[1][2] venerated by the Greeks and Thracians[3]. The part where it says venerated by Greeks and Thracians is completely neutral and fair, you know. Here is one more link -, where the famous poet Virgil "persistently reminds us of Orpheus' Thracian affiliation". Another one - - in the top paragraph it says orpheus the thracian. ANother one - - it says Orpheus the uxorious poet. Another source that is named Thracian history and "myth" (i.e thracian mythology -and in it is mentioned orpheus) - Another(in addition to the ones mentioned by Jingiby and mine) - Another - —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Alexander the Great/GA1[edit]

Alexander the Great is being reviewed for Good Article listing. It has been put on hold for an initial 14 days to allow for minor issues related to coverage and authorial tone to be addressed. Any assistance would be welcomed. SilkTork *YES! 23:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)