User talk:Angela/Archive1
| Cricket |
Welcome to my talk page. You could e-mail me, but I read this page more often than I check my e-mail. Please use the e-mail this user link, or try angelaatwikipedia @ yahoo.co.uk if that doesn't work. I might reply here or I might reply on your talk page. Anything you write here may be archived (1,2), summarised, moved or deleted. Vandals posting here will be eaten by Anthère's Cricket.
|
.jpg){kind=link}
Offensive
Offensive terms per nationality is it proper english, or would you have a better title ? Or do I go on reverting that article till someone take "pity" and offer me a better title ? Please Angela Anthère
Disambiguation
Foo! Any TLA is going to have more than one expansion! I was just trying to get ahead of the game and avoid having to fix all the links to LSI when someone added another expansion. If I'd known you were going to apply that rule, I'd have dug up some more instances on the spot and added them. I have done so now. Noel 23:12, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- I'm not saying we should create a disambiguation page for every TLA, even if there's nothing at all in them, just so that we have a complete set. However, I do think it's good to avoid work down the line, when 50 articles have been linked to "xxx", and we then discover we need to turn "xxx" into a disambiguation page. Having done quite a few of those now, as I'm sure you know it's no fun, and it just seemed so much easier (given how widespread TLA's are in the world, and therefore the likelihood of a later collision) to take one simple extra step now to avoid the chance of that extra work later.
- I don't know if anyone is likely to link to LSI when meaning Latent Semantic Indexing, but I can point to actual cases of people who meant Movimiento Social Italiano (which I would consider equally obscure) linking to MSI, so your hypothetical may not be as unlikely as you think. Noel 00:00, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Wiktionary
- Okay.. sorry. I'll do it from now on. Evil saltine 00:23, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Personal attacks at VfD
I apologize for not being more careful in my edits on the VfD page today. I was not attacking you personally. I was trying to make what you posted easier to follow. I failed in my attempt. And I apologize. Kingturtle 00:26, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Main page
Hello, Angela, I suppose that you after 7 minutes of my post on the Talk Page corrected the Arabic Link. Thanks, the main page now work well.
Possible solutions:
- Write:
Arabic Text Backwards without using the code for bidirectional text (I suppose that exists, but I'm not sure) - Use the arabic Tranliteration
Elnoyola 00:56, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- I realized I made a mistake in writeing some text here, it caused a proble with my browser with reverted some text (i.e. instead of Wikipedia it was read aidepikiW) This lasted a few minutes, though, sorry if someone was affected by that post, fixed it. I hope nobody saw it.
Elnoyola 00:56, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Bedrich Hrozny
Dear Angela,
The Bedrich Hrozny is not in Hungarian, I believe it is in Czech. We, the Hungarian editors cannot do anything about it, but welcome your concern and thank you for reporting it — but I'd suggest warning those at cs.wikipedia.org. -- Ralesk 01:06, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- It is done OK. But is necesary correct my terrible English.
Miroslav MALOVEC
Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark
I moved "Frederik André Henrik Christian" (I think) back to Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark. It's where he's likely to be looked up, and it's also probably where it belongs as per wikipedia naming conventions. No offense meant! -- Someone else 03:33, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- I concur entirely with your review of the "conventions" page. Actually, some sleepless night I may avail myself of its soporific value<G>. - Someone else 04:08, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Multiple usernames
Spoilsport. -- Cyan 19:42, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- It's all part of the fun of having an "alter ego" in the article namespace. One time, someone left me a message on Talk:Cyan instead of User talk:Cyan. (Redirecting to Cyan was supposed to be a subtle hint for those who didn't realize it was a joke; redirecting to User:Cyan just spills the beans.) -- Cyan 19:52, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- Just wondering, is there some way of finding out if someone is using two or more usernames G-Man 20:04, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Stub boilerplate
Thanks for adding the line to my stub article. I'll do that myself in future. User:MrJones 12-10-2003 21:07 (UTC)
Eager Beaver
Look again at the deletion log entry with my name on it. -- Cyan 00:46, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- He has a floating IP, so it's just as well that the thing stay protected until Eager Beaver is deleted. -- Cyan 02:00, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Copyvio
Angela, why are things copied from http://www.conigliofamily.com not copyvios? RickK 02:35, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Nicknames of George Bush
Thanks for your reply at the pump. I understand the Bush list situation now, I mistakenly thought it had been resolved. It looks as though the community is close to keeping the Bush list after having deleted the Clinton list. I find that inexplicable, very disturbing...and sad. If it turns out that way, I have some thinking to do.Ark30inf 21:16, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
The state of Wikipedia
<rant> How can I not. I came here very open about my own personal POV as a conservative on my user page in the spirit of openness. I vowed not to allow that personal POV to get in the way. I defended the community against the antics of JoeM and BuddhaInside who were essentially trolling to try and prove hypocrisy and liberal POV here. Rather than engage in an edit war I went in and inserted Wesley Clark's own view of the Kosovo incident in an effort to calm a draft-Clark supporter who was erasing the incident even though I can't stand Clark. I voted to delete the obnoxious Hillary list because it is ridiculous. I inserted critical statements about the Republican governor of my home state, a governor I have voted for multiple times. I wrote neutral articles about a reconstruction governor of my state Isaac Murphy. I wrote fair articles about 100 years of Democratic governors of my state. I rewrote the article about gay poet James Merrill so that it would not pass its VfD vote and be deleted. I have supported the homosexual list and fought the heterosexual list and the white people list. I supported LittleDan in his Non-liberals are stupid antic. I went in and rewrote the homophobic hate speech article to de-emphasize the overemphasized derogatory term that was causing such a fuss. I did all that because I promised to be neutral.
This week I tried to take out some POV comparisons inside the J. William Fulbright article that were basically making a critical analysis of George Bush's foreign policy in the guise of a biography of J. William Fulbright. I tried to neutralize the text not be critical of the particular administration of the moment while still keeping a generic criticism of American interventionism in general. What did I get? I got someone accusing me of being partisan for wanting neutral text and only one liberal defender chiming in to defend my neutral edit. I tried wikilove, I compromised, I tried to make suggestions, I explained why my text was less POV. But I didn't win because I decided to just let it stay rather than engage in an edit war.
What do I see now? This community willing to be blatantly hypocritical in deleting the partisan list of Hillary nicknames and keeping the partisan list of Bush nicknames. Will they feel the same when the first neo-Confederate arrives with the long list of anti-Lincoln nicknames? The list of derogatory Sun Myung Moon nicknames? The list of Joe Lieberman nicknames could get ugly. If I tried to put those nicknames in the article I would be booted out here but lists are ok. But the precedent is set with George Bush to keep all those (except Hillary so far). I feel pretty bad telling JoeM that he was wrong about this community and wrong to make silly tit-for-tat lists.
So how do I not judge this project now? I can do a few things, I can continue to do my little thing and try to be neutral and nice and watch Talk:J. William Fulbright happen a thousand times. Or I can change my utopian concept of NPOV to match what I see and instead of being neutral, be POV in a fair and balanced tit-for-tat way (add an Lincoln nickname list, put a little Bill Clinton analysis inside a George Washington article, etc.). Or I can say, thank you, it was fun, good luck, but its not what I thought it was.
I will not do the tit-for-tat game playing idea and I don't like looking the other way on obvious POV just so I can get a reputation as the resident wimpy little conservative doormat, so what else am I to do except take my last suggestion?</rant> User:Ark30inf 23:18, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- All right, I was preparing an opus for the mailing list. But I will chill. I'm not angry just sort of sad. Ed Poor's vote just sort of tipped me over the edge.
- I've sat here tonight watching someone adding homosexual murderers to the homosexual list. My interest is Arkansas and his is homosexual murderers and derogatory terms for people. He isn't violating the rules of NPOV, but he is attacking the spirit. To me, NPOV is not dueling partisans, its people leaving partisanship at the door. I am glad you caught the ballot stuffing, I am not completely stupid and saw it also. Ark30inf 01:06, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Listing of pseudonyms
I was totally just about to do that. -- Cyan 00:56, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Deletion of Bush nicknames
Angela,
a couple of comments on your deletion of the List of nicknames for George W. Bush page.
- I do not think that we have any policy that determines a percentage of votes necessary for deletion. If such a policy has been formed recently, let me know. Otherwise I will assume that our policy still stands that a "rough consensus" has to be achieved. What this usually means is that a couple of objectors can be ignored, especially when they are not regular users of the site or primary authors of the article. But if regulars strongly oppose deletion, this needs to be debated further, and it is quite possible that deletion cannot take place. I do not know if this was the case re: the Bush nicknames, but I don't think saying that "2/3" voted for deletion is proper justification under our present policy.
- When you delete a contentious page, please do not delete its talk page. Long debates about deleted pages, except for the obvious cases, should remain accessible to everyone as a matter of public record. We can collect these on Wikipedia:Archived delete debates and refer to them when similar cases arise.
I'm not sure if the Bush nickname list should be undeleted (it did not provide many references for the nicknames, so I'm not too heartbroken about it), but please do keep in mind that, while "Votes for deletion" has votes in the title, it is not a formal vote but an attempt to reach consensus, especially among regular contributors to the site.—Eloquence 17:33, Oct 14, 2003 (UTC)
Who banned Anthere?
Indeed, it was Jimbo not Ed. Thanks for telling me. I knew about the comment on User:Mediator, and I still think a log may have prevented the situation, because I think Jimbo would have been more likely to read a log than User:Mediator. As it was, he assumed it was Martin who unbanned the account. -- Tim Starling 07:08, Oct 16, 2003 (UTC)
- The fact Martin would have unbanned the account is no more motive to admit the unblocking than the fact I did. There was all the explanations for the unblocking on the page. The reason given for initially blocking the user is that it was held by a banned user. When I unblocked the account, I was not a banned user, so I had the right to edit; I also did it in good faith, and did not breach any rules, since the account was not held by a banned user any more. But it is obvious that very very very few people admit I was acting in good faith. Anthère 10:49, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- I thank you Angel for unblocking me, so that I can clean up my page. I hope Jimbo will not frown at this :-) He is the one deciding the block, and usually he has the final word. Anthère 10:49, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
BBC Whatever
Hi Angela. I wasn't actually voting on "BBC ONE", though it's true I do think this all-capitalised style is a bit of an affectation. It's just a style thing the BBC have currently got, and I have no doubt that sometime within the next 10 years they'll rebrand their channels again to a more sensible BBC One or BBC 1. To my mind the numeric form of channel name seems more natural, but that's probably because I can remember when they first started having two channels, and they've used a digit for all except the last few years! :) I think if we were having a vote on channel names I'd settle for BBC One or BBC 1, but ONE makes no sense as it doesn't represent an acronym. Regards, -- Arwel 00:04, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Selected articles for the main page
Thanks for the quick reply on the issues around the main page. I'll look at the links you suggested and get back to you then. Pakaran 01:44, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Current events
Oh - and are events listed on current events automagically added, or do you just check and add them every now and then, or what? thats a bit unclear... Pakaran 01:49, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Strange maths stuff
Hello. You are mistaken in saying the concept of a hereditarily finite set makes no sense. (But perhaps it could be more clearly explained.) Michael Hardy 05:02, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Recent Deaths
Sorry to keep on about the main page - recent deaths - but there doesn't seem to be a consistent policy or a workable mechanism for this. I still think that Eugene Istomin deserves to be up there - but time is moving on, so in a few days he won't. Who reviews this sort of thing? David Martland 09:32, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for moving the info on the main page - hopefully someone might notice - the recent deaths hasn't been updated for days. David Martland 19:47, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Fav quotes
I meant that like "a bad day and YET ANOTHER thing goes wrong. Sorry--twas underappropriate. 戴眩sv 15:54, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- Sorry for misinterpreting you. Angela
Good work
good work. I enjoy.
yours, god bless america.
- Who are you? Angela
Confusion over University of Bristol
What's wrong with saying "public school"? America has public schools too - why would it be confusing to use the term. "Non-state schools" sounds clumsy and PC. CGS 12:52, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC).
List of websites
Good job! Lirath Q. Pynnor
Zionism
Angela: I'm not sure I really understand the difference, but I don't really mind what "space" it is in so long as people can see it. What would you suggest? Adam 15:21, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Oops - sorry. Will put it right.2toise 16:41, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC) Hang on - did you already fix it? Thanks! 2toise
Non-existant pages and watchlists...
You can as far as I'm aware - go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User:Angela/test&action=watch
to do it... Evercat
Odd. Works for me - though it only shows up once the page exists. If it doesn't exist, it doesn't appear on the watchlist... Evercat 17:48, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Heh. When you go to a non-existant page in non-edit mode, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/moo it should give you the option to watch it, at least in standard skin... Evercat 17:54, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)
List of Baby Names
Thank you for redirecting the list of baby names. It was a brilliant tactical move. --Two Halves not on a pogo stick, unicycle or any other form of transport.
ISBNs
Thanks for your replay on Frankin's book I was trying to be funny, but thanks anyway and thanks for the good work you do around hereSmith03 01:08, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)
What is about 2 am over in England ? get some sleep:)Smith03 01:15, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Paul Levesque
Hrmm. I wouldn't call reverting vandalism "editing". :-) Evercat 17:49, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Regarding the deletion of Space cakes
First, I was all for the deletion. Second, it made me hungry for Space cakes. Lastly, I am compiling a list of possible Baby names, including 'Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark' and 'Space cakes.' Paul Klenk
Image deletion
Oh yeah. Well, I now have the handy link for later on my talk page, eh? :-) Stan 02:25, 20 Oct 2003 (UTC)
MediaWiki and meta
Answer on my talk page. --mav 05:54, 20 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Norway
I should have removed it myself from the disputes page. I have been away for a few days and simply forgot. -- Gustavf 06:53, 20 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Missing photos
Hi Angela. You say "no photos have been deleted" as "software issues mean that no-one can delete images at the moment". Well then, where are they? Chris K is right that Andie MacDowell's wasn't good; it was some kind of screencap or whatever it's called used by me precisely to avoid the copyright problems Chris K seems to have now. Jacqueline Bisset's wasn't so bad I think. In any case, they were colour rather than B/W.
This is really no major issue, but if you take the trouble to write to me, which I appreciate, I'd also take the chance to learn a bit more about the mysterious goings-on inside Wikipedia. All the best, --KF 19:46, 20 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- These are of course not the photos I meant as they have (only recently) been uploaded under the same file name as mine by Chris K, not by me. As I said before, mine were colour photos. But please leave it at that, it isn't important, and thanks again. --KF 20:11, 20 Oct 2003 (UTC)
The more misspelled links, the merrier
Thank you, now you mention it, it makes sense. Still, the policy on vfd seemed to be 'the more misspelled links, the merrier', so, I guess there's no great harm in it. Will not do it again...2toise 09:12, 21 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Refactoring
refactor fair use section - if you want to have a go at each other - do it elsewhere please
- Thanks! That's much better. Daniel Quinlan 09:07, Oct 21, 2003 (UTC)
History merging
Hi Angela, I think you can help me. I want (on fr:) to merge two history, I know there is a page about it here on en: but I can't find it. Can you redirect me to this page? Thanks. -- Looxix 21:23, 21 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will be carefull. -- Looxix
Simple, Simpler, Simplest
Thanks Angel !
Say...I understand quite little (if not none) what 142 is trying to suggest. What is that 3 forks idea ??? Anthère
I remember that at some point, on fr, someone suggested that for every "a bit complicated" article, there were 2 parts in an article, a clearly separated top with a very easy to understand definition (or introduction) to the topic. Then a line, and below a very fleshy complete article (complete, so with a new introduction fitting the complete article. Noone seems to really disagree with the idea.
Another proposition (which was an approach for NPOV actually) was that on most controversial topics, there be a sort of central and easy to understand at many levels of understanding from where several articles, each presenting a point of view, would branch. I know that severak people are interested by this notion of pov branching from a main article, these pov being very clearly identified as such.
That was just a thought. A topping in very very simple english might make sense, on top of a simple article. But at the maximum. Three is horribly confusing. Do you think we could agree on this ? A top in very simple, then an article in simple. I must say I am not seeing well myself the level of english that must be respected. And still find confusing not to see very well who that wikipedia is adressing too. If it is for kids, it must be easy to read and very simple in content. If it is for adults, the content of some articles is not far from being insulting toward our intellectual abilities. I am still wondering...
- LOL, be tough Angela. Do not ask Brion again wild deletions of the whole project. He even did not answer my question about blocking myself :-( But I talked with someone yesterday, it gave me strength. Will figure what to do.
R.K. Narayan
Regarding the pages and redirects- R.K.Narayan to R K Narayan to R.K. Narayan, won't there be a "direct redirect" (oxymoron?:-))from link 1 to link 3? Right now it goes from link 1 only to link 2. KRS 13:56, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. KRS 17:49, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I'm not a problem user
Hello, can you please remove me from the Wikipedia:Problem users page. I was added by the problem user I was reporting. I removed myself, then I was re-added. Maybe you could move the whole discussion to the talk page of Heimatvertriebene. Maximus Rex 04:24, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
ETS and naming conventions for exams
GRE vs. Graduate Record Examination
I'm under the impression that Wikipedia encourages people to use full names rather than abbreviations in article names, but I am not sure of that. The page GRE does also exist, it just redirects to Graduate Record Examination, and so does Graduate Readiness Exam because I got it wrong myself to start off! Maybe we should should get some more input from other people. Unfortunately, I already moved TOEFL to Test Of English as a Foreign Language before you and I started this conversation, but it too has a redirect now. Also, the SAT pages are kinda inconsistent with the naming format they take, so we can't really model after those. If you want to move it back to GRE or TOEFL, feel free, I'm not attached to either format. I think it's an issue of consistency (throughout the Wikipedia) vs. ease of use.
--zandperl 04:26, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
responding to comments on User talk:zandperl
From what I've seen, either common usage. or acronyms could apply here. Also, what about ETS, Educational Testing Service? Meanwhile, I've put comments on the talk pages of GRE, TOEFL, and Educational Testing Service asking for feedback. My confusion about SAT was actually why there were separate pages for SAT college entrance test and Scholastic Aptitude Test. It's not worth an edit war over this, so unless we get a bunch of comment back otherwise, I'll go with what you say.
--zandperl 04:45, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- I am definitely not NPOV
<chuckles> ditto that. bitter grad student here, and you?
I'm gonna leave the pages alone for a while too. We can get back to them later, maybe someone else will have put in more info.
--zandperl 05:04, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)
---
Re vandalism, sorry. Thanks for your vigilance o panoptic one. Adam 04:35, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)
I tried, but this just isn't going to work out for me. I was hoping for a more cooperative atmosphere. Thank you for your assistance and support, you have been great. Ark30inf 04:38, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)