User talk:Tomalak geretkal
Nottingham Exchange Students Society
[edit]
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Nottingham Exchange Students Society, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Phgao 13:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Stride Gum Response
[edit]Added a response to your article on stride gum talk page. NitrogenTSRH (talk) 00:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Back in November, you made this edit to the article Luc Bernard, expanding the term 'rpg' to 'role-playing game' and adding Category:Tools. I don't have any problem with the first of those changes, but could you explain the second? I've removed the category, as I assumed it was vandalism - as you're probably aware, 'tool' can be an insult. If there was a good reason for him to be in that category, feel free to re-add it with an explanation. Thanks. Robofish (talk) 23:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hmm I had not noticed the category. I don't remember specifics now but presumably it was a side-effect of some revert that I tried to do: you'll note going back two revisions that the category was already originally there; I did not initially add it. Either way it was a mistake so thanks for pointing it out, and for fixing. Tomalak Geret'kal (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
This particular name is most popular in North America, which is why it is written from the perspective of the United States and the word fall is first, etc. If you can find statistics for England, Australia and New Zealand for the name, it would help to add them. The only stats I found were for the U.S. and I've noticed that people in the British media comment a lot on what an unusual name the wife of Peter Phillips has and how American it sounds, etc. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 16:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- It seems bizarre to me to have "fall" first and "autumn" last on an article about the name "Autumn", which is *clearly* derived from the latter, and not the former at all. Also, there is no citation on the article for the assertion that the name is most popular in the USA. Tomalak Geret'kal (talk) 16:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- "Fall" is the commonly used term in the United States. "Autumn" is generally a poetic word for the season. As far as statistics, I have removed the sentence you objected to. I've looked at statistics for various countries and I have not seen Autumn listed in the top 100 names, at least, for the UK or Australia or New Zealand for the past few decades. If you can find it, by all means add it. The United States has statistics going back to 1880, which I did look up. The website Behind the Name also lists it at 80th for British Columbia. Canada often follows the United States in the popularity of names, but I am not aware of a nationwide statistical database for names in Canada. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 16:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- I'm well aware what the terms "fall" and "autumn" are, and how they are used. Given that the assertion regarding the name "Autumn's" popularity has now been removed due to unverifiability (thanks for that), I can't see any backed-up reason that "fall" should be first, when the name "Autumn" is clearly first and foremost derived from the term "autumn". If nothing else, the sentence flows much better linguistically with "autumn" first! Tomalak Geret'kal (talk) 16:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- Also, perhaps re-read WP:ORIG. Being unable to find statistics on the name for other countries is not a good excuse to assume a USA point-of-view for an article. Such an approach itself suffers from US bias. Thanks. Tomalak Geret'kal (talk) 16:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- It's also not a good reason for there not to be a U.S. bias, particularly when the name is most popular in the United States. But go ahead and add to the article if you want to improve it. I object to putting autumn first. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 00:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- National biases are frowned upon and actively rejected on Wikipedia. This is an international site. As for "particularly when the name is most popular in the United States", you have repeatedly failed to provide any evidence for this claim. Claiming it over and over again in your rationale is... pointless. It's also fairly irrelevant; even if the name "Autumn" does turn out to be predominantly North American, that still does not mean that the audience of Wikipedia is, or that it would even matter. Tomalak Geret'kal (talk) 23:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- It's also not a good reason for there not to be a U.S. bias, particularly when the name is most popular in the United States. But go ahead and add to the article if you want to improve it. I object to putting autumn first. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 00:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- "Fall" is the commonly used term in the United States. "Autumn" is generally a poetic word for the season. As far as statistics, I have removed the sentence you objected to. I've looked at statistics for various countries and I have not seen Autumn listed in the top 100 names, at least, for the UK or Australia or New Zealand for the past few decades. If you can find it, by all means add it. The United States has statistics going back to 1880, which I did look up. The website Behind the Name also lists it at 80th for British Columbia. Canada often follows the United States in the popularity of names, but I am not aware of a nationwide statistical database for names in Canada. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 16:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Thnxs
[edit]you want to make the proper corrections, continue on. (This is not a hate comment btw, just a kudos ).M4pnt (talk) 17:25, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
File:Button earth.gif listed for deletion
[edit]A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Button earth.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 21:51, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
RfC: New helper policy
[edit]Hello member of Category:Wikipedians who use IRC! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "#wikipedia-en-help connect" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".
To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from Category:Wikipedians who use IRC.
Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page.
This message has been sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c)
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) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Tomalak geretkal. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
JavaScript RegExp problem
[edit]I noticed you have experience in JavaScript. I'm hoping you can help me with a problem I've run into writing a userscript.
Please see my post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject JavaScript#Nested RegExp.
Thank you. The Transhumanist 12:27, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Tomalak geretkal. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Tomalak geretkal. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)