User talk:Nightstallion/δ
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Nightstallion. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Dogon
Hi NS, I think your archival of the requested move of Dogon people to Dogon is a bit premature. As it happens, most regular contributors to the article became aware of the request as late as today. Besides, there is one oppose vote that in fact was changed to support, which would make for a quite clear consensus to move. In any case, I think it needs some more time. Because of this, I undid your archival of the request. I hope you don't mind! — mark ✎ 11:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, no problem; I'm a strong supporter of WP:UCS. =] —Nightstallion (?) 11:41, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- It turns out that I was wrong about your counting error; you were right. Anyway, glad you agree that it's good to give it some more time. Kind regards, — mark ✎ 11:42, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Molise Croatian dialect
Hello! You were the administrator who closed the voting on the page name, so I'm asking you for help. On 5 March, user Mikiolo moved the page without following any of the required procedures. The next day, I informed him of the voting and the appropriate procedure on his talk page. Today he did it again. He didn't actually move the page, but copied its entire contents to another page and placed a redirect sign. I'm not sure it's vandalism, but it's certainly close. What should I do to stop him? --Zmaj 15:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Help me out
Can you edit my userpage so it makes sense?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tim_teddybear
- I went ahead and took care of helping him out correcting the userpage code etc :) Cheers, --Naha|(talk) 04:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I kept wanting to get to it, but I regularily forgot. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 05:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
It's only a stub, but... Hope you like it. I just couldn't resist any longer. =] —Nightstallion (?) 10:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Schloss vs. Palace vs. Chateau vs. Manor
Please comment on the talk page for Chateau Schönhausen regarding which word best to use for small country Schlösser". Thanks. --Mmounties (Talk) 12:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
LibDem logo
Any particular reason why did you remove the Official Party Logo? Asterion 20:32, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- Aye: Because it's used on Wikipedia under fair use policy, and using it in userboxes for decorative purposes is not allowed under fair use. Sorry! —Nightstallion (?) 20:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Set
Hi!
I added some more information to the mathematics of set. However, it was you who claimed that there are 18 ways to pick 20 cards without any sets, and I don't have the intention to find out why myself. Could you add some more information, please?
lG Shir Khan 21:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- I did? Really? When? Can't quite remember that... ^_^;; Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) 21:32, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- Well, at least you reverted an edit of someone who claimed that it might be wrong... lG Shir Khan 22:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- It seemed sensible; probably, one would only have to check the number of permutations for the table at the end of this page to be certain. —Nightstallion (?) 22:07, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- Have fun. And have even more fun proving that this is the only way to construct such a choice of 20 cards. ;) lG Shir Khan 22:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC) (P.S.: Antwortest du eigentlich auch noch gelegentlich auf mails?)
- Nimm's raus, mag grad nicht nachdenken. (Ja, morgen.) —Nightstallion (?) 22:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- Dann geh schlafen. ;) Hab mal einen Vermerk angebracht. (Okay.) Shir Khan 22:41, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
List of unrecognized countries
In the List of unrecognized countries article why did you add Tamil Eelam after I had removed it (with justification stated too) because what it says is not accurate. The LTTE does not have exclusive control over tha area claimed as Tamil Eelam and the Tamil Eelam article says:
"However, Tamil Eelam is not recognized as an independent state by any de jure independent nation or by the United Nations. The government controls most parts of these regions. The LTTE has control over Vanni, Kilinochchi, Mullaiththeevu, most of Mannar and portions of the Eastern districts of Trincomalee, Batticaloa and Amparai."
The government referred to is the Sri Lankan government which controls most of that region. The LTTE only has exclusive control over Vanni, Kilinochchi and Mullaiththeevu. Furthermore Tamil Eelam doesn't appear in the List of countries article and the reason given for its exclusion is given in the Annex to the list of countries which states that "Places under the control of secessionist or guerrilla movements" are not counted as a country and the LTTE would qualify as a sessionist and guerrilla group.
So could you please revert your change to the article. Thanks! 203.212.138.224 09:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Mh, fair enough. I see what you mean. —Nightstallion (?) 09:23, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Parsi move
You moved while I was typing. :) Should at least let a few days (other than a weekend) pass:
Here is my text:
- Oppose because it isn't right (see comments below). Fullstop 10:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
(===Discussion===)
- In the abovementioned examples, "Parsi" is not comparable with "German", "French", et al because all the examples provided have a geographic connotation: German → Germany, French → France, etc. Not fitting in this pattern is Parsi → the Indian subcontinent.
- Just because others use it, doesn't mean its right. To native speakers of English, the use of "xxx people" sounds wierd when the adjective is also a noun. Native speakers of English don't use "German people", or "French people" when they speak of "Germans" or "the French", "Kurds", "Persians", "Catholics", "Muslims", "Hazaras" et al. The "people" suffix only makes sense when it is used as a plural "peoples", which means quite something else.
- The word "Parsi" already has an appurtenant suffix.
- Moreover, the change of "Parsi" to something else was discussed in talk, and no concensus was reached.
- The article for "Parsi" in other encyclopaedias (Columbia, Britannica) cover the same subject matter. As such, there was absolutely no pressing need to change Parsi to something else in the first place.
- -- Fullstop 10:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, it was filed to be checked today, and it seemed as if it were uncontroversial, since nobody spoke up against it. Should I revert it, then? —Nightstallion (?) 10:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- yes please. -- Fullstop 10:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- many thanks. -- Fullstop 11:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Regarding the requested move here. I proposed the article be moved to Parsi people, not just Parsi. You missed the "people" part. AucamanTalk 11:14, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- No, I did not. I initially thought the move was unopposed, and moved to Parsi people. As you can see from the comment above, it was not unopposed, and the result was therefore "no consensus"; since Parsi just redirected to Parsi (ethnic group), anyway, I moved it to Parsi instead, which is simpler than either of the other two options. —Nightstallion (?) 11:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Well this guy just voted today and I never saw it until you closed the deal. His reasoning is a little shaky. He's saying the "people" in all " -people" articles should be removed. It is already a convention on Wikipedia to use the -people suffix for ethnic groups. I was hoping Parsi would turn into a disambiguation page, because it has a lot of meanings. AucamanTalk 12:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your moves
I just wanted to say a quick thank you for taking care of the moves on Black Rock Ranger, Machine elf, and Mysteria. Your work, however much effort was involved, was appreciated! Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 10:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Gladly. After all, that's what administrators are for. ;) —Nightstallion (?) 10:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Peerage
I notice you once again removed Peerage from Requested Moves. Can you explain why? Only 9 people expressed their opinion, not really what you would call a significant panel. Moreover, three of the four users who opposed the move are precisely those who have edited most of the peerage article, so it is not surprising that they oppose the move. The article peerage don't get many visitors, so we need to leave peerage at Requested Moves to allow more users to come and have their say. To end the debate now is premature. As it stands now, not only the article is totally devoted to the British peerage, but there is not even a link on top of the article linking to peerages in other countries. Wikipedia is not a British encyclopedia, it is a world encyclopedia, and the article peerage is a shame for an encylopedia that intends to have a world audience. You can check the American Heritage Dictionary ([1]), "peer" entry does not refer specifically to British peers, but to peers from any country where such a system exists. Hardouin 15:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Wait, so you're saying the opinion of those who actually edited the article and know the topic matters less? That's an interesting point of view. Moreover, requested moves typically don't run forever. Mackensen (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm one of those most strongly in favour of disambiguating between the different types of peerage, but I already extended the usual deadline for the vote, and the result was a clear no consensus. —Nightstallion (?) 21:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- If procedure is winning over substance, then it's sad for Wikipedia. It is not the Wikipedia I became a member of two years ago. So just because a "usual deadline" (set by whom? isn't Wikipedia supposed to be a free place exempt of red tape?) is passed, then an important issue like this one cannot be discussed any longer? You can't be serious. What your "usual dealine" and red tape does is just to favour conservatism. If people are not given enough time to express themselves, then nothing will ever change on Wikipedia, and this encylopedia will soon become ossified. FYI one-and-a-half year ago I suggested to move Qin Shi Huangdi to Qin Shi Huang, because that's the real Chinese name of this historical character, and if I remember correctly it took more than three weeks to reach consensus and eventually move the article, because people knowledgeable enough about Qin Shi Huang don't visit Wikipedia every single day, mind you (same for people knowledgeable about non-British peerage). With your "usual dealine" of just 5 days, the article would still be at Qin Shi Huangdi for lack of consensus. Hardouin 22:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, I don't make the rules; and nobody forbids you to keep discussing the proposed changes. File a WP:RfC, if you feel so inclined, but it seems that a number of editors at Peerage are adamant about not having it moved aside in favour of a disambiguation page, and unless you get around eight people to comment through an RfC and all of them are in favour of the dab, I don't think it's likely we'll achieve consensus on this at this time. You're invited to prove me wrong, however. Take care, —Nightstallion (?) 22:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
User page... AGAIN
Hi, markup guru! ;)
I've got another problem, which has been bugging me for some time, but up to now, it was not so immediate; now, it is. The navigation thingummy at the top of my pages doesn't seem to want to let itself be centered, no matter what I do. Could you help me with that?
Thanks a lot! —Nightstallion (?) 08:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm short of time, so I've fixed the box on some of your subpages, but on the others, just "align=center" to the line of code that controls the white box around the contents ("<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="2" ''add the "align=center" here'' style="background: cornflowerblue; position: relative; float: center; align: center">"). That should fix it. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 08:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for the speedy fix! I thought it was something along the lines of align and center, but... ah, never mind. Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) 08:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Neo-Gothism
Thanks for the move. The old title "Neo-Gothic" is in universal use for Victorian art and it would be very confusing, as this article is about a small contemporary movement. Best Tyrenius 12:45, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Gladly. —Nightstallion (?) 08:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Schönhausen Palace
Could you please explain on the Talk:Schönhausen Palace page why you moved "Chateau Schönhausen" to "Schönhausen Palace" and claimed that "The result of the debate was move to Schönhausen Palace." There were three votes in support, and three votes opposing. That is not a Wiki consensus. Indeed, if one looks at the discussion, then the consensus seemed to be moving to "Schloss Schönhausen." If you want to be part of the discussion, then please do so. But please don't misrepresent a vote and make a change contrary to Wiki consensus. Noel S McFerran 22:41, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- As I've stated on the talk page, "Wiki consensus" does not overrule WP:UCS and our naming conventions. If a majority were in favour of moving "Germany" to "They're fucking Nazis!", that would still not be good, would it? Wikipedia is WP:NOT a democracy... —Nightstallion (?) 06:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- There are good arguments to be made for the name "Schloss Schönhausen" and also for the name "Schönhausen Palace". But instead of allowing the results of the debate to settle the matter, you have decided that your opinion is the decisive one. It is absolutely ridiculous to compare this to a change in the name of the "Germany" page. Please have some respect for the opinions of other people. Perhaps you could read the second sentence in "Wikipedia is not a democracy". It doesn't say anything there about an individual coming in and just overruling other editors during a vote. Noel S McFerran 09:08, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- There were good arguments for both, yes. Nonetheless, the debate was inconclusive; I researched a bit and found out that there is an official source with the official English name. That's why I decided not to close the debate as a no consensus, but instead move it to its official English name, mirroring the two other moves that were made. You are, of course, welcome to ask other administrators what they think of my decision. —Nightstallion (?) 09:16, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Sinŭiju SAR
You seem to know a few details about this curious entity. Do you happen to know whether the region would get its own ISO code, akin to Hong Kong and Macau, once the laws are enacted? Thanks! —Nightstallion (?) 12:57, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure, but given that for all practical purposes the Sinuiju SAR doesn't exist yet, I would guess it doesn't have it's own ISO code. If the SAR were to exist, all the previous residents would be evicted save a handful of skilled workers to provide for the service industry, a mini-Berlin Wall would be built to keep native North Koreans out, the city would allow visa free entry to all foreigners, it would be a democracy ruled by a council of elected foreigners, and the courts would be staffed by imported European judges. None of this currently exists, and it's been a few years already, so it's possible that North Korea may have already abandoned the idea. --Yuje 07:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's likely that Korea will be reunified before that happens... Thanks, either way! —Nightstallion (?) 07:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi there! How are you? Regarding this move, I've responded to your comment on that article's talk page; I've also made minor edits to the article to reflect this. Have at it ... thanks again! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 09:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Slightly stressed, but I can't complain in any way, I suppose. How's life with the Tories in power? ;) I've made the move now. Take care, —Nightstallion (?) 10:00, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Nightstallion, I have reverted your move of Sheffield Midland station you made this morning since the consensus concerning Sheffield Midland station was reached and as Sheffield Midland station serves more than one mode of transport it should not bare the exclusive term 'railway'. Cheers, Captain scarlet 11:30, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Alright, that's fine. —Nightstallion (?) 11:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
You said on the user's talk page that this had been deleted "apparently because the font used in it qualifies the whole image as fair use", although I cannot find that information anywhere, since the deletion log reveals only that it was deleted as an unused fair use image. But it was tagged as fair use by the creator, so perhaps wires have got crossed? Or do you know by some other means of the reason for deletion? (Reply on User talk:ElAmericano is probably best.) -Splashtalk 13:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I was more asking how you had determined that this was the reason for deletion, since it's not stated anywhere. I thought perhaps you had been talking to the deleting admin. Anyway, I have looked into the issue a little and posted a long, detailed response at the bottom of that talk page. In short: you can copyright the file a font is in, but you can't copyright the typeface it produces (in the US) nor the output the file produces since you didn't make the output: the operator did. If you could copyright the output of copyrighted software, we probably couldn't upload any images to Wikipedia at all! -Splashtalk 22:35, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
My RFA withdrawal :(
Hello Nightstallion, it is my apologies to bring you that I've withdrawn my RFA. Due to the lack of experience, I would go under admin coaching first before trying again later. I would thank you for your vote in this RFA whether you voted support, oppose or neutral for me. I appericiate your comments (if you do have) you made and I hope to see you here in future. --Terence Ong 14:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry to hear that. Hope you succeed the next time, and that the next time is soon. —Nightstallion (?) 14:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Admin source code
Hi Nightstallion, I was wondering whether you can help me. I'm developing a version of my caction tool for admins, and I need a copy of the source code of the page cactions toolbar.
Could you please e-mail me the source code from
<div id="p-cactions" class="portlet">
to the end of that div? Thanks. haz (user talk)e 21:51, 18 March 2006
- Done. Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) 07:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Would you like to employ your deletion button?
Since you have a mop, would you mind to delete some 70-80 images from Category:State symbols of Lithuania because they all have been transfered to commons (commons:Category:Coats_of_arms_of_Lithuanian_cities). Since images on commons in quite a few cases are better quality and almost all have a link to source, I would like to get these local copies deleted. I uploaded them under {{coatofarms}} and only later discovered the Lithuanian law that says they are inellegible for copyrights. There are only 2 images in the category that should not get deleted. That is Image:Pazaislis coin.jpg and image:Vytis.gif. Everything else can go. It is not a priority, so take your time :) I am the sole uploader and thus there should be no problems. I could tag them as {{NCT}}, but it would take months to delete them. I don't want to add to WP backlog anymore. Renata 00:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm on it. Take care, —Nightstallion (?) 07:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Done. —Nightstallion (?) 07:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Darn, that was fast! 12 minutes!!! :) Thanks a lot. Renata 03:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Gladly! I strive to serve. =] —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 07:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Darn, that was fast! 12 minutes!!! :) Thanks a lot. Renata 03:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Done. —Nightstallion (?) 07:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for clearing up behind me mate. (re: Orr (Catch-22) etc). --Mal 08:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, no problem. Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) 09:27, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
RE: You might be interested in this?
Take a look at WikiProject Psephology, feel free to participate (I know you're technically on a wikibreak... ;)), and to spread the word. ;) Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 11:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hi there! Yes, I'm interested; I'll sign up shortly. One suggestion: I seriously recommend renaming it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections, ...Voting, or the like. I did learn a new word today (and this coming from someone who has been accused of verbosity) but the current title/term is too esoteric and might act as a deterrent for participation. TTYL! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 12:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hrm. I liked psephology in particular because it easily encompasses everything from elections over politicians to referenda, while all of the others are not as all-encompassing... Mh. I'll think about it. Thanks! Take care, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 12:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I hear you and understand ... even create a redirect or similar. Also (eventually), add defs and a summary to the article page so that a Wikipedian (with varied attention span) can easily size up what they're consigning to. :) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 12:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oops. I just now noticed that there's a Wikipedia:WikiProject Campaigns and Elections, but it's apparently hardly active. What now? scratches head So much for my plans... —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 12:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Merge the two – update with your notions, rename, and move forward. Given its inactivity, it's begging for your leadership and a shake-up. Then invite prior participants to sign up. I don't like the other wikiproject name ('campaigns' is a broad term), but (as noted above), I'm unsure about the appeal and utility of the current title. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 12:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I guess as covering anything but elections and referenda would create a substantial overlap with the other subprojects of WikiProject Politics, it would probably be best to use WikiProject Elections; what do you think? Or possibly Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections and Referenda? —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 12:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Either just "Elections" or your proposal "Elections and Referenda" seem fine to me ... actually the latter, which is more inclusive. Have at it! :) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 12:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
All right, I've moved it now and proposed the merger at the inactive WikiProject's talk page. Would you mind joining me on the WikiProject's talk page for discussion about activities we should plan? Thanks for your strong interest! =] —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 12:38, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Great; I'll comment shortly ... glad to help! Now, on with my break. ;) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 12:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
New caction tool
Version 2 of my caction tool has now been released for admins (with your help - thanks!). To change to the new version, add the following lines to your monobook.js
{{subst:js|User:Haza-w/cactions.js}}
var ctIsAdmin = 1;
and then purge the browser cache by hitting Ctrl-F5. Don't forget to remove the link to Interiot2.js – it will be deleted on Wednesday. Please report any bugs to me. Thanks. haz (user talk) 14:02, 20 March 2006
- Gladly, and thanks! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 14:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Cactions bugfix
Hi Nightstallion. I think you reported the "whitespace" bug in the caction tool, whereby a large blank area was added at the end of every page. I'm glad to inform you that the bug has been fixed. If you find any more bugs, please report them. It may help to check the buglist at User:Haza-w/Caction tool. Thanks again. haz (user talk) 16:45, 20 March 2006
- I don't know whether you still use Cologne Blue. Whether or not you do, can you please remove the reference to the old Interiot2.js script from cologneblue.js? Also, could you please tell me whether or not admins get an "undelete" tab on non-existent pages, and what the id of the <a> tag in the source code is? Thanks. haz (user talk) 17:46, 20 March 2006
- I've deleted my cologneblue.js, which I wasn't using anymore anyway, I don't get an undelete button if there's nothing to undelete, and I'm not quite sure which <a> tag you're referring to, I'm afraid; good work on fixing the bug, and great work in general. You rock. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 18:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry for my token lack of clarity. Basically, the cactions toolbar takes the form of
- I've deleted my cologneblue.js, which I wasn't using anymore anyway, I don't get an undelete button if there's nothing to undelete, and I'm not quite sure which <a> tag you're referring to, I'm afraid; good work on fixing the bug, and great work in general. You rock. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 18:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
<div id="p-cactions"> <ul><li id="ca-name">Tab 1</li> <li id="ca-name2">Tab2</li> etc...</ul></div>
- and I was just wondering what the ID of the undelete tab was. (Not the <a> tab, my bad!) Also, as for the watch/unwatch button, it's just a mixup so that it only appended the button when keepOriginalTabs was on, not when it was off. I've fixed it. Thanks for the feedback, it's really helpful. haz (user talk) 10:56, 21 March 2006
- Ah, perfect. Watch/unwatch is back again, even if one removes the keeporiginaltabs option. Regarding the undelete button, its code is
<li id="ca-undelete">
; as I've said, for me it only shows up when it should show up. ;) Great work, and glad to be of help! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 11:01, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, perfect. Watch/unwatch is back again, even if one removes the keeporiginaltabs option. Regarding the undelete button, its code is
- and I was just wondering what the ID of the undelete tab was. (Not the <a> tab, my bad!) Also, as for the watch/unwatch button, it's just a mixup so that it only appended the button when keepOriginalTabs was on, not when it was off. I've fixed it. Thanks for the feedback, it's really helpful. haz (user talk) 10:56, 21 March 2006
Template: Infobox Country reverts
Hey Nightstallion,
I ran into some revert trouble updating an infobox. I know you are from Europe and probably have never used the English measurement system but your opinion would be much appreciated. Go to Talk:Israel#infobox and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Conversions to see what I am talking about. Much thanks from Detroit (where we use these measurements everyday). MJCdetroit 03:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Please take another look
I have tried to address your concerns and the concerns of others at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of largest suspension bridges. I've decided that since redlinks seem to bother so many people, I am going to create stubs for all the missing bridges. I hope you will take another look. Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 07:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Would you be able to move Anne-Marie of Greece back to Queen Anne-Marie of Greece? Aleksandar made the move and signifigant, sweeping changes to the article without even discussing it and it contravenes common usage and conflicts with Wiki practice on the naming of consorts. Charles 01:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Would you be able to vote at Talk:Anne-Marie of Greece to assert your opinion, whatever it may be? Charles 22:33, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- I prefer not to vote in WP:RM decisions in which I will later have to decide what to do; it's likely that this will be closed as a no consensus and that I'll move it back to where the NC say it should be, unless a substantial majority votes for the current title. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 22:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- That makes sense... On a related note, could you check out that page as well as User:Arnegjor? He is inserting things I posted on other pages in the middle of votes, etc. Charles 22:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Disregard the above... User wrote up for vandalism. Charles 22:52, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- I prefer not to vote in WP:RM decisions in which I will later have to decide what to do; it's likely that this will be closed as a no consensus and that I'll move it back to where the NC say it should be, unless a substantial majority votes for the current title. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 22:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Just an FYI, user jtcd is also a suspected sockpuppet in this vote. At the time of his vote he only had a handful of edits, all on the page in question (if I remember right). As of this post the total number of posts for that username is 9, 7 of which are relating to his userpage and user talk page setup. --Mmounties (Talk) 23:00, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- I've had them be CheckUsered and will present the results on the talk page shortly. Just let me get to my workplace first. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 04:42, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- I wonder why, on English Wikipedia, you add the title to some articles, and not to the other. For exemple why Pope Benedict XVI and not President George W. Bush, and why Queen Anne-Marie of Greece and not King Constantine II of Greece ? Why Hugh Capet of France and not Švitrigaila of Lithuania ? Wouldn't it be simpler to use just the name alone (Benedict XVI, Anne-Marie, Constantine II, Hugh Capet, Švitrigaila) and to use a dab in parenthesis only when there is a need for it. For exemple: Louis XIV, but Louis II (king of France). It's just a suggestion. Švitrigaila 10:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Question
hi Nightstallion, how are you? I could use some of your input if you care on this topic, Talk:Marie Josepha. As usual your help is greatly appreciated, thanks. with kind regards Gryffindor 13:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for voting. Btw I don't know if you are aware of this project here Wikipedia:WikiProject Vienna, maybe you wanna drop by or even become a member? lg Gryffindor 14:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Member to your new WikiProject
User:Electionworld seems to be highly experienced and interested in elections. I suggest asking for his help. Renata 14:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks; as there's been no reply at all to the message left at the defunct Wikipedia:WikiProject Campaigns and Elections project's talk page, I've written directly to the three persons who were members of it, Electionworld being one of them. If you can think of any others, feel free to suggest them to me, or better yet, write to them directly; you yourself are, of course, also welccome to join. ;) Thanks, and take care! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 15:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Merger
I do not mind the merger. I would like to refer you to User:Electionworld/Watchlist Templates, where all the templates with the latest election results are listed. Naming convention: election is more used than elections. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 18:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- don't mind the merger either. Heck, might as well remove my name from the project list. Scott Ritchie 09:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
font?
What font is that png of your username?--Sonjaaa 09:29, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- "Parchment", I believe. Why? —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 09:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Cuz it's cool, that's all! --Sonjaaa 22:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks! Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 22:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Cuz it's cool, that's all! --Sonjaaa 22:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
There is another stawpoll on the disputed offensive image currently underway at Talk:Lolicon. Hipocrite - «Talk» 21:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Your opinion
I created for all the commonwealth realms articles on the monarch of. See e.g. Monarch of Belize. I did this because every country has a Politics of series. In this series allways a head of state article is included. It helps to find your way quickly. It would be nice if these Monarchs of XX could be enlarged, but at the moment this is what I can offer. Now it is proposed to delete these articles at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monarch of Jamaica. Because of the consistency of the Politics of series, I oppose the deletion of these articles. Could you give your opinion? Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 09:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- I've voted. Seems I was late, though. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 17:09, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #1
|
|
A request...
Hey! Do you think you can help me out with something? There's a really great user here who has a lonely red linked userbox on his page. I really don't know how to make it, but do you think you could come up with something fitting for him? If you could, that would be really great. Let me know how it turns out if you can do it. Thanks! --HappyCamper 12:09, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I've got little to no interest in religion, spiritually speaking, so I don't really know which colours/logo/whatever would be fitting for such a userbox... —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 12:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks anyway :-) --HappyCamper 12:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry I couldn't help! Take care, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 12:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks anyway :-) --HappyCamper 12:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
You may want to participate in the disussion involving googles copyright--Cool CatTalk|@ 15:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I prefer not to take part in copyright discussions if at all possible. Lots of headache for nothing. Sorry! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
HP Userboxes
This and this and this -- it's legally impossible to use the logos you inserted into the templates. Their presence on Wikipedia is covered by fair use provisions, and ornamental use in userboxes does not constitute fair use, I'm afraid. Take care, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 12:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, very sorry about that. All that copyright stuff confuses me. pm_shef 21:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's no biggie; now you know. No damage done. =] Take care! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Sockpuppets
Shouldn't someone as off-balance as Stevepeterson is to go that far to sway a little vote be banned? Just asking... Thanks for doing what you did though. Charles 06:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm definetlynot a sockpuppet of Stevepeterson and either are most of the others (apart from cocos and the jtcd) and would be pleased if I had my user unblocked. We are friends that at some point used eachother's pc to add one or two edits, when visiting each other houses. You cann't indentify sockpuppets by just using the IP check, when most of the world uses dynamic IP; if we were sockpuppets we would just disconnect and reconnect out modems prior to the vote or switching account. If you see most of the times one or two users might share the same IP as we might have use the same pc, while others at the same time edit from different IP. Thank you very much in advance. Svetlyo (i can't sign because I'm blocked)
Charles, I won't even think of replying to your "off-balance as Stevepeterson" language. This is at least funny and highly offensive and you are not the person to say who is balanced and who is not. Nightstallion, I clearly have no sockpupets and I request you revert your accusations that gave the right to your friends (Charles) to speak of me in this way. You are not sure if all those users (most of them happen to be friends of mine, one or two I don't even know, they must have used Aleksanders computer to vote). How do you know that I'm not a sockpupet of Cocos for example, and not cocos being a sockpupet of Aleksander? You very easily (ab)use your adminstrative rights in wikipedia to help your friends appear cool and right while make people who just happen to have different opinions appear as "proven off-balance" persons. Wikipedia is not a place to do that, and IP check is not a proven way that can prove sockpupetry. I know nothing about sockpupets and I have only used my account. Stevepeterson 15:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's no my task to prove that you're *not* sockpuppets of each other. If you are unhappy with my decision, you are welcome to bring it up at WP:AN; you shouldn't be surprised if this won't change anything about the situation. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 05:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe it was not your task to block my and my friends' accounts (for ever), either. I'm sure that you did that because you wanted to make mine and my friends' votes invalid in your to bring the desired result at Anne-Marie's site, a result that is useless anyway as we decided to use wikipedia's convection for the title. It's not difficult to prove that we are not sockpuppets, as we were editting simultaniously from different IP's while in other edits we use the same IP but with some time difference. I have no user account just for having shared the same computer once with Stevepeterson (that's not sockpuppetry and its crazy). If I was you I would feel ashamed for kicking out of wikipedia so many people, just because I don't agree with their vote. Blocked Svetlyo at 213.16.187.103 21:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- As you said, there was no need to have you blocked solely for the purpose of "bringing the desired result" to come, as I could have done that just as easily by referring to the naming conventions. You'll understand that I trust one of the most trusted users of Wikipedia (we've got around a dozen users with CheckUser rights, from over a million users total) more on this than yourself, I'm afraid. As I've said, though, you're welcome to bring it up at WP:AN or WP:BN or file a WP:RfArb in this case; there *are* mechanisms in Wikipedia to rescing questionable decisions by users with authority. If you feel you've been unfairly treated, by all means get a third, fourth and fifth opinion on it. Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- ...I think it's worth trying. Feel free to go ahead with it.
Thanks for the green light to giving this a try, Nightstallion. I was going to ask whoever implemented the bot that sets up CfD each day (appears to be NekoDaemon, by User:AllyUnion) whether or not it could be used to set up the table for WP:RM each day, but it seems s/he is away (see here and his/her user and talk pages). Instead, then, I'm thinking of asking User:Uncle G whether s/he'd be willing to assist, as I recall some mention somewhere that a bot of theirs does something similar...? Confirmation/advice please, with apologies for the unforseen complication. Best wishes, David Kernow 12:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I really don't know; should be fine in principle, though. The worst that can happen is that (s)he doesn't have time, either. ;) Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 05:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Because I dont speak english
Hi! With the amount of edits you make here on the English wikipedia, why don't get an account here to? It doesn't hurt, and it gives you lots of shiny edits on your counter. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 11:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Absoluty noboddy Polish speak English 81.190.3.168 16:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- shrugs Fine; you could use {{user en-0}} on your user page to express that, though. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 05:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- My English is very bad. Only my editions, this links to polish wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.190.3.168 (talk • contribs)
- No problem, was just wondering. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 17:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Nightstallion. I have an account at the Polish Wikipedia that I only use to add interwiki links, but it is still useful to have. Olessi 17:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I stole your userpage!
Thanks, it's really cool ;) --Naha|(talk) 21:05, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- You're welcome! One thing you need to watch out for are the "height" definitions; currently, almost all of your pages look screwed up (at least in Firefox at 1024×768). Take care, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 05:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, I use IE and everything looks fine to me, I'll have to jump on my bf's computer and see what it looks like in Firefox. Thanks again :) --Naha|(talk) 07:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- EWWWWW Gross! Yes, it looks horrible in Firefox :( But for some reason, the page I created for User:Tim_teddybear does not...it looks fine in both IE and Firefox. If you have any time at all I'd appreciate a bit of help figuring out exactly what the deal is, I didn't think I changed any of the height definitions from your code =/ Its not a pressing matter, but I know a lot of people use Firefox and I don't want my page to look poopy to them :P --Naha|(talk) 07:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- The problem is that Firefox takes the height values you give him and keeps them, come hell or high water. (As it should be, according to W3C standards, of course. =]) IE says "ah, screw the user, I know better" and increases the height so everything fits into the box. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 07:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, but if I copied the code exactly for my page and Tim's page ..why does his page look fine in Firefox and mine look like crap lol? --Naha|(talk) 08:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Because he has got *less* content in the same space, whereas you've got *more*. This breaks the defined height limits. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 08:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Ahh I see, so I need to increase my height limits? :) --Naha|(talk) 08:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- That would fix it, yes. The only problem I've encountered is that it botches the page up for resolutions different from the one you optimized it for. Mhrpf. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 08:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Awesome! And thank you for helping me to figure it out myself instead of just telling me what to do, learning is good! :) I just increased the height limit on my user page and subpages and it looks great in Firefox on my bf's computer now as well as mine, at least in our screen resolutions, guess I can't make everyone happy! Thanks again, I really do appreciate it :) --Naha|(talk) 08:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- Gladly! Take care, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 08:45, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank You and Your Wikiproject
Thank you for your kind words, hopefully your wikiproject can become a great NPOV resource for us(the biggest problem in my town's politics right now is a lack of information dissemination). However, I can't edit article space right now in good conscience, but please feel free to link from that wikiproject to my wikibook shelf on the politics of my hometown. Karmafist Save Wikipedia 13:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Pope Stephen π
Hi,
I had asked a few weeks ago for the renaming of all the articles about popes named Stephen. I posted something like this on Wikipedia:Requested_moves :
- Talk:Pope Stephen III – Pope Stephen III → Pope Stephen II – He is called Stephen II on all lists published by the Vatican since 1961 and the eviction of the "former pope Stephen II". The only reson this change has not been considered on Wikipedia (except in French, German and Dutch versions) is the lists are based on the 1913 edition of the catholic Encyclopedia because it's in the public domain!
On the same way, I wanted to move Pope Stephen IV to Pope Stephen III and so on untill Pope Stephen X to Pope Stephen IX (and to keep Pope Stephen X as a redirect page).
There was only one answer against the move, from User:Jerzy. And because of this, you answered me there is no consensus on this issue and then the renaming was impossible.
Since this time, I have had a long exchange with Jerzy (it's here), in which I exposed all the reasons I have for the move, and in which he replied long paragraphs full of slang hardly understandable for someone like me who doesn't speak English really fluently. He later decided to edit and put order in this talk page. Since that, he seems to have stopped debating. It seems we agree that the page's title must change because it's false, but we don't agree on the title it must have.
I don't ask you any kind of arbitration between us, but I'd like if some other users said their opinion. I don't know where to post this debate. I tried on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals), on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy, on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography... prompting no reaction at all. I don't want to launch again the debate with Jerzy. I want others' point of view.
So I ask: What can I do?
I thank you in advance for any advice you can give me.
- To be frank, I can't think of any other way to get comments; it seems to me you've exhausted all possibilities. Do you think you could try to come to an agreement with Jerzy, possibly through mediation? —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 19:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think Jerzy is the problem. Jerzy is only one user, and I am only one user. The matter is not between him and I. I think you can't prevent the renaming of the pages only because Jerzy opposes it, but I acknowlodge you can't allow it just because I want it. The problem is when I read on ten different encyclopedias something about "Stephen VI" or (rarely) "Stephen VI (VII)", I have to find him on Wikipedia at "Pope Stephen VII", and it won't change soon.
- Today, someone finally wrote something about the subject on Talk:List of popes. But once again, I have to explain all my point of view, point by point, and I'm pessimistic about my chances to have someone changing his mind. I'm a bit fed up of all that...
- Thank you for your help. Švitrigaila 21:34, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- I can understand how you feel very well (I've been in that situation a few times, as well), but I'm afraid I really can't think of anything to do currently. I agree with your viewpoint, but I'm reluctant to force a move down the throat of one of three persons involved... —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Nevermind. I tried. But... is it possible to organize a vote on this issue? And if it is, would you vote yourself? I may try to ask for the delation of the page Pope Stephen II just to provoke a vote. >o) Švitrigaila 08:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- That may actually be feasible – AfD always gets an enormous amount of attention. I'd try that, I think. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 08:27, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Nevermind. I tried. But... is it possible to organize a vote on this issue? And if it is, would you vote yourself? I may try to ask for the delation of the page Pope Stephen II just to provoke a vote. >o) Švitrigaila 08:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- I can understand how you feel very well (I've been in that situation a few times, as well), but I'm afraid I really can't think of anything to do currently. I agree with your viewpoint, but I'm reluctant to force a move down the throat of one of three persons involved... —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Back to square one! But let us not get discouraged. Next step, I'll try to bring the matter on another ground: here! :oD
(I've added an answer to Jerzy's proposition here). Švitrigaila 21:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Re: Recent move
Thank you for moving the page Command & Conquer to Command & Conquer series, but in my haste to get the page moved I forgot to request that Command & Conquer: Tiberian Dawn be moved to the page Command & Conquer. This was entirely my fault, I got caught up in collage work and forgot to check to ensure that all pages got moved, so I was wondering if you could move the page for me. The issue was already resolved in requested move vote, so there should be no problems with this move. Thanks in advance. TomStar81 23:54, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi there
Can you please protect Persian Jews? I think the page needs protection until the disputes have been resolved on talk. --ManiF 08:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for protecting the page, but I think you forgot to add the {protect} tag on top of the page. --ManiF 09:10, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oops. Of course. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 09:11, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
While you're protecthing things ...
A few of us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling have wondered about the possibility of protecting the article John Cena from anonymous editors? It is a daily source of both vandalism an "fanboyism" - by the latter I mean (typically) kids that feel like they need to add the match results of every match into the article and add how great they think Cena is or how much they hate him etc. The majority of these edits seem to come from anonymous users.
In all honesty, I sometimes wish the majority of susperstar wrestler articles could be protected from anon editing because as a whole they are all subject to this type of thing on a constant basis, and it seems like too many good users spend more time reverting nonsense than adding good content. However, at the moment I think we could settle for the largest source of problems (especially in the days leading up to Wrestlemania 22 this Sunday), John Cena. Would this be possible? Thanks, --Naha|(talk) 09:23, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you sir! --Naha|(talk) 09:35, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Page move request
I appreciate your attention to the page move request discussed at Talk:Simon's Rock College, but would you please consider reopening the discussion? It hasn't even been posted for five days, yet you closed it out as "no consensus." At least give it through the weekend so people who may not check Wikipedia regularly but who may have an opinion one way or the other can have a say. Please? Thanks. ⇒ BRossow T/C 13:20, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
- Feel free to reopen it, but requested moves at WP:RM *are* meant to be open for five days at most. You'll have to get my attention manually, though, if you reopen the discussion. Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 13:48, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick reply! I resubmitted the article to requested moves and reopened the discussion on the Talk page. In addition, I have posted an RfC to solicit more experienced input from presumably neutral editors. Thanks again! ⇒ BRossow T/C 15:31, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, great! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 17:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick reply! I resubmitted the article to requested moves and reopened the discussion on the Talk page. In addition, I have posted an RfC to solicit more experienced input from presumably neutral editors. Thanks again! ⇒ BRossow T/C 15:31, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Could it be closed again? It's been up for almost a week now and there's still no consensus. It's also gone through the weekend, as BRossow suggested. Jesuschex 13:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Let's just wait those few days; who knows, maybe someone who's interested will come in through the RfC. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 13:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
I thank you for your attention on Simon's Rock College of Bard, however, I must disagree with your judgment of the debate. There are a few reasons why I don't feel that the result of the debate was move, as you said.
- After you first closed the debate, there was one support and one oppose. You judged this to be no consensus. However, after one additional supporting vote, you judged this to be a consensus. In other words, 1-1 is not a consensus but 2-1 is. There was still no consensus.
- The first time you closed the debate, it had been five days (minus maybe a few hours), which is contrary to User:Brossow's statement above (which is the reason why he re-opened it). You allowed him to keep it open "at least ... through the weekend," which turned into an additional five days. The debate was open twice as long as it should have been. I would have supported this had it led to an actual consensus, but as I stated above, it didn't.
- WP:NC#School_names, which is the only evidence in support of the move, is itself selectively enforced. To prove this, I'd use my former examples of Stony Brook University and University at Albany, but shortly after I mentioned those, User:Brossow took it upon himself to move those to their "correct" names. However, Stanford University still remains, along with all of the Penn State branch campuses (which are Penn State [city], instead of Pennsylvania State University [city]).
- Have patience. Someone will get around to other flaws on Wikipedia eventually. Holding up examples that are wrong but which simply have not yet been addressed is hardly support for your position, which the majority says is wrong by a 2-1 margin. I've fixed several mis-named school articles and will fix more as time allows. I'm focusing on expanding several school-related articles at the moment and will proceed with new ones when I'm ready. Just fixed University of Wisconsin and am fixing redirects as I type. :-) ⇒ BRossow T/C 16:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- Further discussion moved to Jesuschex's talk page.
- Have patience. Someone will get around to other flaws on Wikipedia eventually. Holding up examples that are wrong but which simply have not yet been addressed is hardly support for your position, which the majority says is wrong by a 2-1 margin. I've fixed several mis-named school articles and will fix more as time allows. I'm focusing on expanding several school-related articles at the moment and will proceed with new ones when I'm ready. Just fixed University of Wisconsin and am fixing redirects as I type. :-) ⇒ BRossow T/C 16:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- WP:NC#School_names is itself a flawed policy. No where does it explain why it is an exception to WP:NC(CN). Just like the examples in WP:NC(CN) of unnecessarily long names, I think some schools have "official" names that are different from the common name. As WP:NC(CN) states, of course, this is not to be overdone. For example, University of Pennsylvania should not be Penn and Simon's Rock College of Bard should not be Simon's Rock. That's why there are some exceptions to WP:NC#School_names. And that's why Simon's Rock College of Bard should return to Simon's Rock College.
Once again, I thank you for your time. Please don't take this as an attack on either you or User:Brossow, I just disagree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesuschex (talk • contribs)
- I certainly don't take it as such, and want to thank your for your objectivity and coolness on this issue. Let me explain my reasoning:
- I saw no harm in extending the deadline for another five days, since two participants is not too much, and since a "no consensus" result would have only resulted in the move coming up again sooner rather than later again. I honestly expected to see an increased input from the RfC and other means employed by Brossow to ensure additional input.
- Unfortunately, only one other person participated, and her/his opinion was to move. In its own right, this does officially constitute consensus (defined at 60% for WP:RM and related discussions); I also took it upon myself to work through the established guideline for this and foudn that the proposed move agreed with it. That's why I moved it.
- WP:CON does not have numerical values for what constitutes a consensus ... in a way, a consensus, by definition, has no numerical value (unless that value is 100%). Wikipedia:Supermajority assigned the value at 60% for a page move, but supermajority is neither official nor a policy (it is a proposed guideline ... even WP:CON isn't a policy).
- The fact that the naming convention violates the "common names" policy is curious, but it *is* an established NC -- and it's certainly not the only one that violates "common names". (The fact that I think "common names" is one of the greatest flaws Wikipedia currently has to endure -- I'd be much more in favour of a "most correct name" policy -- adds to this.)
- Finally, Brossow does have a point: Other examples violating NC will be moved, too, sooner or later.
- Either way, thanks for your calmness again, and hope you've got no hard feelings. Take care and cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 18:52, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Page Move TOPGUN
The consensus is clearly to move the page to United States Navy Fighter Weapons School with a redirect; that's the one thing that all involved agreed on. The current name is confusing and violates common WP naming conventions. "TOPGUN" is not an acronym, is not the most common usage, and is not even the way it's spell on the badge in the image in the article (it says "TOP GUN"). --Tysto 19:32, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Playboy move request
Grüß Gott! Would you mind taking a look at Talk:Playboy (magazine)#Request Move? It looks like you removed it from RM, although no administrator ended the move request. Olessi 19:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
- Oops. Must have overlooked it somehow. Very sorry; have moved it now. Take care, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 17:32, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking care of that! A similar situation I noticed today is Starlog redirecting to Starlog (magazine). Would that have to go through RM as well? Olessi 00:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Nah. Done. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 04:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for that one as well. Olessi 20:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- Nah. Done. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 04:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking care of that! A similar situation I noticed today is Starlog redirecting to Starlog (magazine). Would that have to go through RM as well? Olessi 00:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Dankeschön
| Hallo Nighstallion, wie gehts? Thanks for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (88/3/1), so I am now an administrator. I am very humbled by your vote of support and your kind comments. Please let me know if at any stage you require assistance, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an administrator. Once again thank you and with kind regards Gryffindor 18:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC) |
Platypus
If your platypus vote on Can't sleep, clown will eat me's newest RfA is to be taken as support, then it was the one that made the RfA the most supported ever. JIP | Talk 13:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Neat. "Platypus" means "platypus", but the intent of my vote should be clear from the section it's in. ;) Thanks for telling me! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 13:03, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
OmegaT
Thanks for putting the page Samuel created directly on Wikipedia. Jean-Christophe (OmegaT user support)
- Gladly!
ps: I have played "L'Œuil Noir" when I was in junior HS in France :) about 20 years ago...
- Neat! How did you like it? ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 13:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- (not familiar with wiki syntax, sorry if I break something)
- Well, it was in the craze of the D&D red box French edition, along with the Tunnel&Trolls release (which was great fun too). I wanted to have a German edition to improve my language ability, but could not find one. Which maybe a reason why I forgot most of my German but work daily in English (I had to read the later D&D boxes in original version...)
- Well, if you do want to start again, it's now in its fourth edition (I think the French one must have been in the first, possibly second edition), and character creation's more point- than dice-based now. (Which is good, in my opinion.) I would've liked to read some T&T books for a laugh, but I can't really imagine playing it... (Read an excerpt from a solo adventure somewhere once.) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 04:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello; how are you? Well, after some quiescence, resulting from a conciliatory article introduction that I helped devise, the Republic of Macedonia article has been locked for editing due to intractable edit warring and positioning. (The current version is not the conciliatory version, BTW.)
Apropos, I've devised a poll to resolve the RoM issue. I'd appreciate if you could review it and weigh in; once done, I will post on the RoM talk page and disseminate. Thanks for your co-operation!
PS: I'm still on a wikibreak ... go figure! :) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 22:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hi there! Thanks for your input. Note, though, that the poll is currently in draft form and will soon be placed on the Republic of Macedonia talk page. So, I'm going to nix your proposed option and it should be retitled (like Detailed version, as the current heading implies that the other options are not balanced) ... but please add it once the poll is underway and vote for it, OK? :) Let me know if you've any questions. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 06:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't read through all of it, since I quickly whipped up my version before having to leave home and get on the bus. I've de-POV-ed it now, I think, and added slightly to it; should be fine now, no? Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, it's fine. As above, though: I'll place it with only the two initial options (since those are the contentious options and yours hasn't at all been discussed), but please place yours once the poll is underway. Make sense? And please feel free to read the rest and tweak if necessary. Again, thanks for your persepctive. :) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 06:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, okay. Would be appreciated if you could give me a prod once the poll's underway, as I'm liable to forget it otherwise. ;) Hope you officially end your wikibreak soon! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi there! OK, I've placed the poll: please carry over your option (others have since been added, which might have the effect of splitting the vote) and comments there, and assert anything else you like. Thanks again! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 02:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've added my option; seems likely we'll have to have a run-off, though. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 05:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey NS, would you give me a hand adjusting the borders and rows and columns for Template:Counties of Iceland that I just made? Knowing how you excel at these codification things, you're my number one choice for such matters... ;] // Big Adamsky • BA's talk page 14:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- I'm flattered; I've enacted some minor changes, hope that it's now the way you'd want it. If not, just tell me. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 05:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Pink-collar worker
Thank you for your help in moving Pink Collar to Pink-collar worker! ConDemTalk 15:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Spanish leet-speak
Very impressive! The way you changed your signature, too... wow, that was cool. |-|48145 31 1337, (14|*\4/\/\3/\/73. Mad props. ;) Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 18:21, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- Gracias. ^_^ —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 05:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Nighstallion, what's up? Listen, I didn't know this discussion was taking place, I would like to participate or at least voice my comments and thoughts as well, but I am not sure if I am allowed to? is this only for those who were nominated in February this year to be in the mediation committee? cheers... Gryffindor 16:49, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, feel free to voice your opinion; note, however, that only acceptance by those people who were originally part of the case is *required*, though additional opinions are, of course, welcome.+
- I personally am *very* happy with the outcome; finally, there has been some formal agreement on the use of diacritics and unicode in a field where it's of vital importance. ^_^ Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 18:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- Gryffindor, you are welcome to voice your opinion. I'd like to suggest you wait though if your issues are with the smaller details. The group has a history of going off track and getting bogged down in small things, so I'd like to get the large issue settled first. The mediation case is designed to solve the large issue of article titles and the details will be hashed out later on the policy page so understand that the case is by no means the last word on naming, however, it was neccessary to gain useful consensus as a starting point. pschemp | talk 19:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #2
|
|
Request for review of closing conclusion of two Requested moves
In light of these findings:
... I would like to request that you revise the "No consensus" conclusions to "No move", here:
Thanks. --Mais oui! 10:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
NVIDIA page re-title
Could you please explain how it was resolved that the NVIDIA page was renamed to NVidia and why the article states that the preferred spelling is nVidia? What were the arguements that swayed your favor to this capitalization scheme? --Jorge1000xl 13:42, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
- The Wikipedia Manual of Style, which states that CamelCase *is* acceptable under certain circumstances, while all-caps isn't. At least, that's how I understood it. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 13:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
You added the incorrect link, it should be: Bait as it was on the original template. SirIsaacBrock 23:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks; I've changed it accordingly. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hello, you will have to take the protection off, so I can add other baiting activities to the template in the future, it is not a finished template, it is a work-in-process. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 09:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Country templates
I guess Template:HKG (edit | [[Talk:template:HKG|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Template:HKG-PRC (edit | [[Talk:template:HKG-PRC|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) would have to be closely monitored. :-) — Instantnood 23:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, indeed. sighs —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks so much.. but I'm afraid they got reverted again. {{MAC}} and {{MAC-PRC}} need attention too. — Instantnood 14:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Sanssouci FAC
Thanks for your understanding comment on the above page. Sanssouci has now been much altered, and the FAC page is back in business. Perhaps you would now like to review the page. This is not meant to be a soliciting spam, I'm just contacting those who have already shown an interest, as I'm just concerned that people may not realise, the FAC is back and running. Thanks. Giano | talk 13:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Signpost
I noticed a message you left, about having the Signpost delivered to your talk page. In case you didn't know, we actually do that, though it's under-utilized. Feel free to sign up if you wish. Ral315 (talk) 17:21, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
- Didn't know that; thanks a lot for telling me! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Community Justice
Welcome to Community Justice! Computerjoe's talk 19:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Glad to have joined! ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 19:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
your revert of User talk:Encyclopedist
I think that was him, editing anonymously. See Special:Contributions/65.32.158.193. I am not saying you shouldn't have reverted it, but I just wanted to point that out. --rogerd 01:13, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Oh. Thanks for pointing that out, I've reverted myself. Cheers, —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 04:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 10th
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 15 | 10 April 2006 | |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
(Additional note: I'll work on making it look nicer on your and other custom user pages next week; right now I have a paper to work on :)) Ral315 (talk) 01:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
This is a notification reminding you all, especially councillors, that we are having a meeting where we will try to review progress so far and make a few decisions.
This meeting will be held on a wikipage, and well end on Saturday 15th April.
You can partake in the meeting here.
Thank you,
Computerjoe's talk 17:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC) (Chairman of WP:CJ.)
Message delivered through AWB.
Closing polling at Talk:Jew#Poll_on_possible_name_change
Hi,
I saw that you had closed the name change poll at Talk:Jew#Poll_on_possible_name_change. I think you may be a bit pre-emptive in the closure because: 1) the poll was started at 17:20, 6 April 2006 [2], which means it has been running fewer than 5 days; 2) one of those days, Wikipedia suffered a major downage and was unavailable; 3) people are continuing to comment, and the discussion is still on-going. Thus, I would ask that you revert the poll to be open. --LeflymanTalk 17:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, feel free to reopen it, then. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 06:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the prompt attention. As I was a participant in the poll, it would probably be more appropriate for you or another neutral party to reopen the poll. Regards, —LeflymanTalk 08:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
| Thank you! Hello Nightstallion/δ. Thank you for your support in my RfA! It passed with a final tally of 91/3/5. I am quite humbled and pleased by the community's show of confidence in me. If you need help or just want to talk, let me know. Cheers! -- Fang Aili 說嗎? |
Hi again! Given the opinion you gave at the request for comment on archives I thought you might be interested to know the issue has now been put to a straw poll and could use your vote! Staxringold 00:42, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Cherwell (newspaper)
Nightstallion, thanks for moving 'Cherwell newspaper' to 'Cherwell (newspaper)' - and sorry for my own ignorance in not knowing how to do it myself, though I did try to find out.
Can you make 'Cherwell' a disambiguation page, instead of a page on Cherwell the English district? There are several articles that have equally valid claims on the name (newspaper, district, river). Thanks very much for your work, it is appreciated AndrewEvelyn 13:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Move
Hi Nightstallion, I noticed you recently moved the Treaty of Welawa article. Had I known of the proposal to move, I would have voted against it. Do you know of any way to look out for these types of things, other than constantly monitoring WP:RM? It's a high traffic page, so it's not enough to keep it in your watchlist--you have to visit it often. Appleseed (Talk) 13:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Mh. Nah, not really anything I can advise to you apart from monitoring pages you're interested in or WP:RM... Sorry. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 14:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
I think is better impor the page from Raska projek or samthin like that.--Hipi Zhdripi 22:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Inclusionist template (I think)
Hi. I really like your user page, I saw the 'inclusionist wikipedians' template near the bottom of your page and I wanted to copy it to my page, but your userpage is so full of stuff I couldn't figure out which one it was. Could you possibly copy it to my talk page? I appreciate it.--Anchoress 05:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for supporting me in my RfA. I really didn't think people appreciate my work here that much, but it's nice to see you do: my Request was closed with 66 supports and 4 opposes. I'll do my best not to turn your confidence down. If in any point in the future you get the feeling I'm doing something wrong, do not hesitate to drop me a line. --Dijxtra 11:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Userboxes/NEAT
Viewing and restoring deleted pages by sysops The procedure at Wikipedia:undeletion policy should be followed before undeleting a page, unless the initial deletion is considered 'out-of-process', in which case immediate undeletion may occur. For example, if the page was deleted without being listed on AfD, and did not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. Undeletions associated with page moves/merges may occur immediately without the need to list the page on Votes for undeletion.
Wikipedia:Userboxes/NEAT
Probably it is possible to understand my arguments. The user box structure is quite annoying. The majority of people does not shop for the present imagery.
If it is possble to follow my logic: i do not believe it is unrequired. It was not listed on AfD, and i request it.
alex 13:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
- You did not discuss these major changes at Wikipedia:WikiProject Userboxes, which you should have done. Please present your plan for reorganizing the userboxes there first. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 14:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
A deletion decision of yours has been called into question at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Wikipedia:Userboxes/NEAT. Looking at the undeletion request and at the deleted page, I can't make heads or tails of the question. When you have a minute, would you please join the DRV discussion and help the rest of us to understand the issue? Thanks. Rossami (talk) 17:38, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Help With Latin
Hi NS,
My name is Rose. I am 18 years old and I am currently studying Latin on my own. It's going fairly well so far, but a few nights ago I ran into some translation problems and I am having trouble figuring what to do. Would you mind helping me? I would greatly appreciate it, because I don't know anyone else who is studying Latin.
Thanks, Fuzzyslippers 00:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, I'd be glad to help. Just toss it my way. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 00:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response! I feel terrible because this is such a little problem, but here goes...:
For the translation, "What are the boy's horses carrying?" I was given the verb portat for "to carry". What I don't understand is: how do I write the sentence with the copula "are" in it? Does the verb portat already compensate for that? "Is carrying, are carrying..."?
If you need more explanation, just let me know... I know it isn't very clear. Thanks again!
Fuzzyslippers 00:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- Mh, I believe you lack some basic understanding of the language currently. Unlike English, Latin has different forms of the verb for different persons (the only remnant of this in English is the addition of third person "s" in singular, and some irregular verbs like "to be").
- portare (this is the infinitive form) is a regular verb, and therefore conjugates according to the standard rules; the present tense third person plural active indicative form you'd need in this case is portant, and the sentence as a whole is: Quid portant pueri equi?
- Hope that helped! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 00:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks NS, I took Spanish for almost 10 years while I was in school, so the conjugations are not new to me... The book that I have is not very clear on some of these nuances of the language. I just have one more question, though: I thought that verbs came at the end of the sentence?
Thanks! Fuzzyslippers 02:08, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- There is no kind of word order in Latin at all. If you have the phrase frater tristis for "sad brother", you don't even have to have those two words next to each other.
- I have to add that if the book "was not clear" on the way verbs work in Latin, then you should choose another book instead. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 20:32, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Khaleeji
The only sources I've been able to find only say that the name has not yet been decided on. The most recent article I could find is from the Arab Times, dated April 15th. I hope that helps, somehow! -- Natalya 01:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- That only supports what I had been able to find, but still, thanks for the effort, greatly appreciated! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 01:37, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Happy Easter
As Wikipedia:Community Justice has over 30 members, we are beginning the elections process.
If you are interested in becoming the chairman, the chief executive or councillor please add yourself, and a statement, to Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections.
Voting shall begin on April 24th, and end on May 1st. To see if you are eligible for a vote, please see Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections.
Thank you,
Signpost updated for April 17th.
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 16 | 17 April 2006 | |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Re WP:RM layout
Hi Nightstallion,
Further to my musings about using a table format for WP:RM, I've shelved that idea for the time being. However, I've altered {{WP:RM}} so it includes a divider and have just amended it to include the user's signature. Hopefully you also think WP:RM is now a little easier to read. Best wishes, David Kernow 19:14, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for trying! ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 19:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
CJ election reminder
Hi Nightstallion
I noticed that you are not registered for voting or nomination in the CJ elections, and would like to remind everyone that all Candidates Must Submit Their Statement By April 23rd. Voting will begin April 24th, and end May 1st. More details on how to nominate yourself can be found HERE.
I hope to see you at the elections!
• The Giant Puffin • 20:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Euro
Why did you revert the changes I made ? The Chinese Yuan is obiously not the same as the Cape Verde Escudo - thus the two different rates ! Travelbird 21:16, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, wasn't looking close enough; please remember to add more descriptive edit summaries in the future. Sorry for the confusion. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 07:04, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
HAPPY EARTH DAY!
Happy Earth Day. Or early Earth day. Or, hell. It's Earth Day in a few hours. Happy on wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelllsssssssssss! __earth (Talk) 16:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Consequence of rename
Please be reminded to fix the links pointing to special administrative region, as well as those pointing to Special Administrative Region, to special administrative region (People's Republic of China). Thanks. — Instantnood 16:22, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- I'm currently hard-pressed for time as it is, so I'd kindly suggest to ask the WikiProject related to disambiguating to do that if you yourself lack the time, as well. Thanks for your understanding. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 16:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for telling. You may consider bot request too. — Instantnood 18:35, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Popes... again
Hi,
I have another question about a pope related article, but it has nothing to do with the numbering system.
I've written a long article on the French Wikipedia, called fr:Nom de règne des papes. To my great surprise (and pleasure) it has been translated into German by Senax under the name de:Pabstname. But then, it seems there is copyright problem in German Wikipedia about that. I am very surprised such a problem can occur and since I understand German very badly I don't understand exactly what the problem is.
I think I've understood they need my agreement to translate the article because I'm its main author! It seems to me ridicculous because articles are not signed and I don't pretend to be the owner of the article. When I write something on Wikipedia, it's for everybody, and it seems to me it's in the public domain. But they seems to need my sign somewhere. The concept of "main author" (Hauptautor) seems to have a great importance on German Wikipedia, when it has no importance at all on French Wikipedia for exemple. I'm surprised to see that in place of our "history" thumbnail, there is a "Versionen/Autoren" thumbnail on German Wikipedia. Maybe the rules are not the same in the English and German versions?
If you have time to lose (and i know you have not), you'll see all the controversy here. I dare to bother you with it because you speak German and because you're an administrator, so you know the rules far better than I do.
Švitrigaila 10:13, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- I really don't know what all this is about. A short note "this article is based on the French version from [link to the relevant revision]" should be more than enough to comply with GFDL, and they've already written something like that; if you still think I should get myself involved, just tell me, though I don't think I'll be able to contribute much. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 11:11, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your answer. It's all I wanted to know about the subject. I was afraid to have missed something. Aside from that, I'm still at a deadlock about my old controversy on numbering Popes Stephen. The discussion is now here but it has attracted only one new user, who is on Jerzy's side. You told me here "I agree with your viewpoint, but I'm reluctant to force a move down the throat of one of three persons involved..." You're not the only one to tell me you agree with me. I don't want to have you losing your time, I understand this controversy doesn't interest you at all, but if you agree my viewpoint, would write it on the discussion page? Up to now, only those who don't agree my viewpoint deign to write it. :o| Švitrigaila 23:41, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
RE: East/ern Africa
Hi there! I hope you're well; I'm still on a hiatus of sorts.
Anyhow, thanks for weighing in regarding that map, et al. While I appreciate the suggestion, I think mediation would be useless. I reckon that the antagonist has minor challenges coping with anyone who challenges their perspective (and I don't think this is hypocrisy! :)): remember way back when regarding the mere renaming of a particular map of Europe? I believe the current map clearly and rationally exhibits various interpretations of Eastern Africa – and particularly those that hark of or coincide with the UN subregion – more so than simpler and contestible approaches advocated by the antagonist. I've acknowledged and am willing to alter the map (colours) or create multiple ones that exhibit various interpretations (as per the talk), but see little need (given other regions, like Central Asia, et al.) and I think the antagonist's (solitary) attitude just generally sucks.
Anyhow, enough of that. Let me know if you've any questions. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 13:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- Fair enough, that. Good luck, then. ;) Take care! —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 16:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- Great! And I'm going to strike a hydrography wikiproject shortly; for more discussion, see User_talk:Big_Adamsky#Norway.2C_Skagerrak.2C_and_passing_water and sxn below. Merci! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 16:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Old Skool Esperanzial note
Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
One question
There was indeed a consensus on the move from "haemophilia" to "hemophilia". And why were those other guys with Random struck out? 207.179.172.217 10:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Because (s)he had been creating multiple accounts and used them to vote in his favour. See WP:SOCK. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 10:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- No, at least some of them aren't. I know KNexpert, Sonicandpals, and Wonderfulauthorofsap. But I did find out that Wonderfulauthorofsap was a sockpuppet of Sonicandpals. 207.179.172.217 13:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- The dispute has been settled. They were all meatpuppets except Sparky, Wonderfulauthorofsap (only true sockpuppet), and Chaoman. See my talk page. Random the Scrambled 23:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
I have reverted your page move.
At the timeline page you , stated the result of the vote was move , when in actual fact it was no consensus. Pleas do not do that again .--CltFn 12:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Septentrionalis was principally in favour and only objected to a minor wording issue. I've moved to Timeline of Muslim presence in Iberia, which has a 6 to 3 consensus majority. Please refrain from undoing or moving to nonsense names (what's a "peninsulal"?). —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 13:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 24th
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 17 | 24 April 2006 | |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
question on introduction
hi Nighstallion,
you once voiced your support in the case of Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Countries#Proposal on how to introdue an article of a country. I've posted my final proposal, however it seems to be lost in action. I just wanted to ask you what you think and what are the steps we need to take to make it official? I have posted the text for you underneath
The country introduction reads: Xxxxx, officially the Yyyyyy of Xxxx (Republic of Xxxxx, or Kingdom of Xxxxxx, etc.), is a country located on the Xxxxx of Xxxx. It shares borders with Xxxx to the east, etc. For example the introduction to France should read: "France (pronounced /fʀɑ̃s/ in French), officially the French Republic (French: République française, pronounced /ʀepyblik fʀɑ̃sɛz/), is a country...."
Exceptions: If the official name and the most common name are synonymous, the entry is left with only one name, as is the case in the articles United States, United Kingdom, Romania, Mongolia, etc. For example: "The United States of America is a federal republic situated primarily in North America." or "Romania (Romanian: România /ro.mɨ'ni.a/) is a country in Central Europe." In cases where there is a thorough explanation of the official name, the official name in the lead sentence may be dropped, as long as it is explained later. This exception is illustrated in the article Canada.
looking forward, thanks alot. Gryffindor 18:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC) ps: thanks for voting for me in the Commons btw :-)
Schönhausen Palace
Hi Nightstallion;
A user from German WP moved Schönhausen Palace to Schloss Schönhausen after you had moved it to the former, stating "it's the German name". As you and I both know, this is English WP, where we use English names if they exist. As you found Schönhausen Palace to be the correct name, could you move the article back? Thanks. Charles 15:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Done. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 15:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, that sure was speedy! You're on the ball. Thanks ;-) Charles 15:13, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Gladly. ;) —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 15:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, that sure was speedy! You're on the ball. Thanks ;-) Charles 15:13, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Rollback
Hi, probably a mistake on your part. But please don't use admin rollback to revert possibly good-faith edits you disagree with, unless they are vandalism or otehrwise disruption [3]. Thanks. --Doc ask? 17:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, my mistake. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 17:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Check this out
http://www.boreme.com//boreme/funny-2006/banana-god-p1.php Random the Scrambled 18:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)