User talk:Tocharianne/archive1

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


Hello, Tocharianne, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  RJFJR 15:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


What a cool username! Chris 02:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. You probably already guessed it refers to the Tocharian language. Linguistics is a hobby of mine. Tocharianne 23:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, and since you went with the name where I thought it was going, I want to invite you to join WikiProject Central Asia! Chris 03:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the offer but I'm afraid my knowledge of Central Asia doesn't extend much beyond the Tocharians! At any rate, so far I prefer to just dip randomly into Wikipedia and edit whatever catches my eye.

Regarding Hobbits & Halflings

You might think that Hobbits are not Halflings, but even if there are no other type of Halfling (Hobbits being the only one in Middle-earth), halflings and hobbits are very alike. The term Halfling represents any being with the shared characteristic. It is not as much matter as the Hobbit body compared to other Halflings, but rather how they live. There have been Halflings that have become wizards and such, but not Hobbits. Hobbits were made to be less magically inclined than the other variants of the Halfling. Halflings and Hobbits could be the same thing, they could not be the same thing. One thing is for certain however, Hobbits represent Halflings in Middle-earth, even if no one has ever seen another type of Halfling walk the face of their planet. I just wanted to clear this up with you. I do not wish to start a revert war so I will let it be. Eiyuu Kou 16:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The article on Halflings explicitly says that halfling is just another name for hobbit. You might be confusing Tolkien's halflings with those appearing in other fantasy genres (D&D or video games for instance). Tocharianne 16:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Halfling may be another name for Hobbit, but the model for the Hobbit encouraged the creation of other Halflings. Nevertheless it is a Halfling, is it not? Eiyuu Kou 16:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
No, because other people's expansion of the use of "halfling" does not retroactively affect how Tolkien used the word when he first applied it to hobbits. The article is explicitly about Tolkien's conception of hobbits where halfling=hobbit. Note that there is section called "Usage outside Tolkien" where non-Tolkienen concepts of hobbits can be included. Tocharianne 16:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Soviet montage theory

On Talk:Soviet montage theory you state, "You're right about linking to the html pages, thanks for catching that. The external links look useful as well." But then you appear to have reverted/deleted those changes. Was that an error? Did you mean to only do this: "making 'montage' link to wiktionary instead of disambiguation page". Sign me, confused... and Jeremy Butler 12:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

My mistake! Thanks for catching that. I must have made my changes to your previous edit somehow. I think I fixed it though [1]. Tocharianne 15:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Cool. Looks good now. Regards --Jeremy Butler 01:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


Nope, we are not supposed to duplicate references in the external links. Thanks for the clean-up. Gohiking 15:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Proposed mergers

Thank you for your effort in merging androgyne into androgyny.

Wikipedia is a huge and complicated place and it's easy to overlook little details - I know that I do it all the time! Just in case you weren't aware of it, there is a list of proposed merges at Wikipedia:Proposed mergers. When you merge pages, it's a good idea to check if the proposal was listed there. If it was listed, you can strike out its entry, add merged and sign it so that other editors don't go looking at those articles only to find that the merge has already been done. I've now done this for androgyne into androgyny but you might like to remember this for future merges. Thanks. --AliceJMarkham 23:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Tocharianne 23:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Data remanence

I was looking through old merge tags and found data remanence/file wiping/shredding. Do you feel there was any consensus to merge? It seems like everything could go under a generic title, like Data deletion, with wiping and shredding being two methods and data remanence being an unintended side effect. Tocharianne 03:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Tocharianne. Thanks for your interest.  :) I have replied on the article talk page. (I feel that's the best place to discuss proposed changes to an article. Hope you don't mind.) Cheers! --DragonHawk 07:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Old State House, Boston, Massachusetts.JPG

This image is being used on unicorn to illustrate a heraldic unicorn, but it's barely visible in the picture. Do you by any chance have (or could you make) a blow-up of the unicorn? Tocharianne 21:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey there - sorry to be a bit slow. If you click a couple times on the picture, you'll get the original 5 megapixel version. That has fair resolution of the unicorn; maybe you could edit it down to what you want? Otherwise I might go on another photo expedition but it will probably take me at least 6 months. BTW, nice to see Tokarian in the mix. Cheers, Daderot 22:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I cropped your picture into Image:Old State House Unicorn zoom.jpg. You can see it in context on Unicorn#Heraldry. Tocharianne 01:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

re: Champagne talk page

Just so there's no confusion, why did you want to speedy-delete the talk page for Champagne? I didn't understand the reason given so I removed the tag. Tocharianne 22:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, here we go. Champagne was recently moved to Champagne (beverage), and Champagne (disambiguation) was moved to Champagne. Simple enough, right? But here's the catch: the old Champagne had a talk page (Talk:Champagne), which is now at Talk:Champagne (beverage), so, when the page was moved, a redirect was automatically created (this happens when a page is moved). Normally, then, the administrator goes in and deletes the redirect on the main page and talk page, in order to make way for the move. But Talk:Champagne (disambiguation) never existed, so the administrator forgot about the Talk page; he should have just deleted it. That's quite complicated, but I hope it answers your question. Patstuarttalk|edits 18:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I guess I didn't think it was possible to delete a talk page separately from the main page. Tocharianne 23:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Mary I

No problem: I may or may not have got the gist of what you were saying, and I do think Mary I would be considered half-Spanish by most standards; however, Rhode Islander's reply was an unnecessarily rude and harsh response to a serious (and genuinely important) question. Michaelsanders 20:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Dutch Low Saxon

I deleted the sentence: Veluws, highly similar to East Frisian Low Saxon, belongs to the North Low Saxon main group.

I speak Veluws but I don't think it looks a lot like East Frisian, especially since it's not located anywhere near the German border (it's located in the West part of Gelderland), and as far as I know Veluws falls under West Low Saxon. So I'm curious where you got that information. Sεrvιεи | T@lk page 13:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I got that from the merged article Low Saxon dialects in the Netherlands. Looking at it now, the sentence was actually ambiguous and I was probably wrong to interpret "latter" as "Veluws". Thanks for fixing that. Like I said on the talk page, the description and organization of the dialects was different in the two articles. Tocharianne 14:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay thanks, the articles seems to be alright now :-) Sεrvιεи | T@lk page 15:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Princess Elizabeth

You can't just redirect a referenced article with many links, to just one line a long article. Given we have an article on a son of Edward VII of the United Kingdom who only lived for a few hours, I think we can have an article on Elizabeth of Clarence, who would have ruled as Queen and Empress had she lived. Astrotrain 17:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

  1. The references can be included in the Issue section of her father's article.
  2. You can't justify one article by comparing it to another--and Prince Alexander John of Wales should probably be merged as well.
  3. She wasn't Queen and Empress so it's irrelevent what might have been.
  4. There was a consensus on the talk page--everyone except you wanted to merge the article.
I understand that you think Elizabeth justifies an article of her own but no one else does and you need to compromise with other editors. Tocharianne 17:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Inflatable structure

There was more linkspam which I have deleted. Albatross2147 05:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Invite to WikiProject Spam

Hey there! I saw you reverting or removing linkspam. Thanks! If you're interested, come visit us in Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam so we can work together in our efforts to clean spam from Wikipedia. Hu12 16:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

List of pasta

No problem. I just added them one by one because my connection here in Spain is a bit wonky and I didn't want to lose my modifications. Plus, I was also moving some of the pictures from en:wp to Commons so I could use them in my translation for fr:wp (see fr:Liste de pâtes). In any case, happy editing! :-) Arria Belli | parlami 16:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

QWERTY effect discussion.

Copied from the discussion page...

I fail to see how the example that was removed is conceivably an argument for or against Intelligent Design. The only possible argument I can make is the use of the word design in quotes. That Intelligent Design itself makes provision for micro-evolution (last I heard anyways) seems to counteract even this idea, and the removal seems overzealous and only serves to reduce the information content of the article.

Of course, a better wording of the example is probably an even better idea.

Intelmole 04:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


I began reworking your proposal for List of Pasta. I started removing the horizontal bars. Look at it and tell me what you think. Yours Truly- DannyQuack (My name is Danny... and I Quack) 18:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I certainly like it sorted alphebetically as opposed to by shape. I like the new version much better and I'll see if there's any improvement it could use. Yours Truly- DannyQuack (My name is Danny... and I Quack) 03:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Scots, Attacotti and Deisi

Hi! I would like your opinion on the above short addition I made to Prehistoric settlement of Great Britain and Ireland. Cheers. Fergananim 14:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Unicorns in popular culture

Hi Tocharianne, I notice you made this page, but I don't think the information deserves its own article, don't you think the non-trivial content should be merged to Unicorn and this page should be changed to a redirect? PeaceNT 14:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the state of the Unicorn article on Feb 23 ([2]) you can see how big the "pop culture" section was. There was a brief discussion about splitting the section out but then someone deleted it instead. This was fine, since most (all?) of it was irrelevant trivia, but now people want to start adding the stuff back so I made the separate page to prevent the main article from getting cluttered. (A similar things was done with Spear of Destiny in popular culture and probably a lot of the other "in popular sections" as well.) If you think any of the info currently in Unicorns in popular culture is non-trivial feel free to add it to the main article. Tocharianne 19:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


Hi Tocharianne, Thank you for providing a nice figure for Imperial House of Japan. I have a favor. Emperor Heisei will be posthumous name and Reigning Emperor or current emperor is proper name. Would you mind to update it? I appreciate your help. Jjok 17:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)