User talk:Pedant/2004-11-19

Hello. I'm offline until Thursday... the kids are on the computers.

I know this page is getting long, but I have long discussions, I'll archive soon, I promise. Use the table of contents, or just deal with it for now. I'm really really busy.

Just noticed this project: Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax take a look.

Pedant 05:24, 2004 Nov 6 (UTC) I have a page that is on votes for deletion that is part of my currentclown project. If you have any expertise or knowledge of clowns, pop on over and read the page and the discussion, even if you don't vote, it might be of interest to you. If you'd like to participate in the clown project in any way, dive right in. I recommend starting by reading through the clown page and it's What Links Here link, and then go for it.

You may add any material whatsoever to this page. I do read this page, and anything you place here, I will read, and possibly use, if it's of any value. I will not take offense at anything put here.

Devil Stick[edit]

What's up with all the orphaned redirects to a nonexistant article? Try Devil stick as opposed to Devil Stick. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 06:41, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Moved page to 'Devil Sticks' - neither or both terms should be capitalized.

since I expanded the article to encompass the sport/art of Devil Sticks as a whole, it should not be 'devilsticks' as that just refers to the sticks, the equipment for the sport/art. (similar to calling the sport of hockey, 'hockey stick and skates'}

Also the common usage is the plural, as in 'a set of sticks'... in the singular it refers to the 'center stick' or baton, or just stick. without the controlsticks/sidesticks/handsticks, it's just a baton.Pedant 06:58, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

see how nicely I was corrected by this friendly wikipedian?:

Wikipedia: Article of the week[edit]

Hi - you will need to removed the <nowiki> </nowiki> tags and " " from your vote for Babylonia to get it to display properly, I am afraid. (Given your username, I have a suspicion that this may be a deliberate comment on the instructions in Wikipedia: Article of the week, but could you fix your vote anyway, please. Thanks.) -- ALoan (Talk) 20:08, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Merely a newbie mistake, though it _was_ caused by "taking things too literally"

thank you for your help. Pedant 20:19, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This one's not so nice[edit]

the 'talk' is 20 times the article: Talk:Sovereignty and Sovereignty if you can tell me how to avoid this sort of thing, I'll custom make you a barnstar!

Reply[edit]

My Reply is at My Talk Page. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 21:07, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Guantanamo Bay[edit]

The full text of the decision is the first external link in the Rasul v. Bush article. (But here you go :)) Jkeiser 04:41, Aug 7, 2004 (UTC)

my very first wikistress, and what a doozy this was. I may even have to censor this one

FLASH: User:Pedant accused of vandalism[edit]

note: I have never vandalised wikipedia. This was all a misunderstanding due to me posting original research, which I personally knew to be true. The info will be back eventually, when I can show proof. Be patient. Meanwhile, the following might be considered a good historical document from my first week on wikipedia. see User:Pedant/Terry Teene the following has a lot of missing spaces in it, as I was typing with both a bad keyboard and an injured arm... I'm leaving it as is for historical accuracy Pedant

Please refrain from adding false information to articles. This is considered vandalism, and if you continue to do this, you will be blocked.

Your edits to Ronald McDonald have been reverted, and Terry Teene and George Voorhees have been put on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. Ambi 14:28, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:No original research. Several people have tried to substantiate your articles, and failed. Unless you can provide evidence that they actually existed, the articles and content will be deleted, and you will be blocked for vandalism. Ambi 01:30, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

first,if you think I am a vandal, or am frivolously posting, ask David.Monniaux

( I know,justbecauseyou areboth sysop doesn't mean you knowhim,butreally,what referencesI have,you arebusliy deleting, andI knowsysopsdon't getdeleted.)if he thinks so. We've both been working on Sovereignty for days just to bring both neutral point of view AND factuality to the openingparagraph/definition of a highly controversial article and I believe we have all just now reached consensus.

second,hello ,it's good to meet you, thank you for your interest... please don't mistake my abrupt tone for rudeness, that'snot intended., second, forgive my failing spacebar:

People have tried to substantiate the articles? How? Using google? The very nature of these folk is that they are somewhat obscure...

ever seen a photograph of Bozo the Clown out of his makeup? NO! you have not, because Bozo, being a syndicated character, does not exist without his makeup. Whatdoes Bozo mean? Can you find that out on the net? Not until it's put there.

Why is "monicker" the preferred clown spelling of moniker?

How do you confirm that?

What is the code of non-infringement?... well pretty much what it sounds like, but what does that mean to a clown?

Why is a clown alley an alley? What is the significance, in terms of status, of being 'on the door' of the alley - to a clown?

Who goes first in the clown car?

the answers to all of these questions arealmost universally known (and important) to clowns, yet almost unavailable to the layman. The answers might not be on the net, but there are answers, and they are verifiable and they areof significance culturally, worldwide, as EVERY culture has some version of the 'clown'

Say YOU were writing an article on the subject, where would you research it? Not on the net, yet in any country of the world there are experts available who could quickly accurately and unambiguously answer those questions, I am one of those people.I can referyou to other, if necessary.

Want to substantiate who was the first live and first tv, ronald mcdonald?

not on the net, and not from mcdonalds, they are very secretive about it, as they have been involved in messy lawsuits about it... includingone with georgeVoorhees that even he can't discuss, but which resultedin an injuntion preventing him from using the character or likeness. It's public record though,someoneableenough to go to the courthousecouldbuy acopyfor6 dollars once they knew the titleof the case... I don't so I didn't mention it,,,

but you can contact willard scott, he will tell you he was the first television ronald mcdonald this can be verified from an archived copy of the mcdonalds website, which I posted alink to, which Icould find if you hadn't deletedit.

and from the 3 ads themselves, which I will happily post if I can get permission. or can email to you if you are interested.

You can note that on the first ad, A child states,"you really are ronald mcdonald!"

Ronald is already a known character before the ad! the first ad!

How? digging further, you find a picture of "Ronald Mcdonald (George Voorhees)entertains his fans at the Grand Opening of a localMcDonald's restaurant"

Why isn't this on mcdonald's site? they have a corporate interest in ronald , and want a younger clown with a more clean cut appearance, the original 2 versions ronald were a little bit 'old' and a little bit 'icky' looking by TV advertising standards of today.

I've seen the costume, saw the newspaper clipping, this is not original research it is a compilation, the willard scott material, at one time, was on the net but apparently you can barely even say McDonald's without cease and desist orders from on high, no matter where you are hosted, so maybe it's not there.

but really? is the wikipediasupposedto be a repository of informationof encyclopedic nature? or only things that anyone can find on the web? if the latter is the case, why a wiki at all?

and I have seenshort-lived websites with the geo.voorhees stuff,but I personally haveseen the costume and interviewed both terry teene(who has nevereven tasted beer, he's so moral) and george, additionally there were hundreds of unavailable witnesses.

if it has to be verifiable on the net,then delete Art Carbecause you won'tfind Guitcycle, Eelvisa, or Nevada Car on the net... you won't get a quote from the owner of any of these cars...

What is the World Record longest time in the Fast Catch event in boomeranging? Not on the net,it would take good research just to find that one at all...unless you hadadozen eyewitnesses who all would eagerly tell you the drama a man with two throwing sticks can create in one minute,eightpoint nine seconds, in an event that is supposed to be over in well under 20 seconds. Find that on google.And yetthatrecord has heldandwilllikely hold a long time. 12 years so far.

If its a matterof it being false, well, actually it's true, everything I posted, except one glaring error (goldfinger was the movie, not octopussy, the one Terry Teene wrote pussy galore for (wasn't in the movie,but it's on vinyl)(personally, I'd be quite happy not to see that on wikipedia, I was just transcribing stuff wholesale from my notes. Actually I'd be happy if I never see that word again unless there are are mammals of the species felis involved)

if it is a matter of not being notable, well,it IS, you noted it...

if it is a matter of it not being written well or bad POV, well wiki up, it's open source, my new friend,

if it's just unwelcome material, tell me why, other than 'hoax' 'vandal', patently untrue. You can quite trust that if there is anything untrue in an article I touched, it's likely becauseI haven't read that far. "Like I am still mostly just past the first paragraph of Sovereignty

if it needs to wait until it comes out in my book it will be too late, I won't live that long, and I don't think too many people are left that can tell thesomeof these stories should they be lost to history?

finally, if, just want me gone, put the word LEAVE on my talk page, and you'll never hear from me again, gone and no hard feelings.

Or I can run anything intend to post past you first, before I agonise over presentation issuesthatway you won'tfeel you havetofllowmearoundfixingstuff,which I should hope is not fun for you.

I've seen your contributions to the Sovereignty discussion, and good on you for that. However, unless you can provide sources, be they online or in books, the George Voorhees article is original research, and is not allowed in Wikipedia. You did yourself no favours by adding information (in Terry Teene) that was proved false. Ambi 05:37, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

I quite understand that. I just read the 'original research link you provided.

thanks. Is it possible in any way to obtain the deleted information, so that i can defend it one point at a time. I had done that( I have been typing for almost 5 hours, wellovermy limit.) but it got lost, in trying to save to the 'talk portion' of the Terry Teene article .BTW,did you read the thread on Glenn? If so you might note that I discussed the ronald/george/terry arc of information first solicited advice, and attempted to post it in the best neutral POV.

A question. 33 years ago, something is published in a newspaper. How is that less valid than a book or online source? If were avandal bent onf alse information, wouldn't it be easier for me to publish a website or five websites, than to somehow sneak it into a newspaper 32 years ago?

If I can provide the date of and a copy of the picture would that be sufficient for me to post at least what it says in the caption of the pic?

If I can provide a web-based for the willard scott material? Actually that is in his book as well.

If you can, would you post me the missing material, so I can fix it? It's quite a lot of work to throw away.

One favor, would you mind when you can spare the time, looking over my other work and telling me of any other issues that exist? I think we are often on at the same time.

I'd like to 'get right' with wikipedia before I continue, as I intend to become a pillar of the community, I'll be contributing daily, so it's best I get straightened out now than later. I have a lot more than clowning to add to.

Thanks very much for your time and patience. I sincerely appreciate your efforts and I'm sorry we had to encounter one another adversarily the first time.Pedant 06:10, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. What missing material did you want? I've added the text to User:Pedant/George Voorhees, but please do not re-add it without evidence.. For the record, there's no POV problems with your writing, just accuracy ones (and I did notice a few other good contributions when I went through your edits, such as those to Art car).

I don't think anyone's disputing the Willard Scott material - that's fairly easy to confirm. It's that (at least online, anyway), there's no record of a George Voorhees having anything to do with McDonalds, so the onus is on you, I'm afraid, to prove this is the case.

As to the newspaper article, that's a hard call, as it's not very easy to verify. A book would be much easier, in that respect. Ambi 06:22, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

____ if I could get the most recent version of the George Voorhees and Ronald McDonald it would be nice... thanks

I'm not quite clear on the concept.. 'easy to verify',does this mean easy to verify the authenticity of the picture itself? or the original source? or the person? A book would be easier, yes, but it clearly doesn't exist or this would not be so shocking to people. And since:

George is likely dead by now
Terry has mysteriously disappeared as mentioned in his biography (who was it that found a mention of his'messy house conviction' ? I'd like to see that material,as I'm trying to piece together that mystery)
No book
Willard Scott is quite happy not to have to admit he was paid to violate "The Code' to some degree (while working as a clown himself even) and is happy tohave the world assume he 'invented' the character (which he seems to make pains to avoid actually claiming outright, saying he 'created the character' of ronald)(notice also how carefully I avoided accusing him of wrongdoing,and in the most recent version went to pains to explain how he could be considered not to have broken the code)

then it boils down to the picture in the paper, a caption,no article, and possibly some court papers (maybecertified true copiesby the court?)from the suit with mcdonalds (was some advertising co.that sued him so not even Mcdonalds restaurant v Voorhees) but would that be enough: Court Papers(copies), the News Photo, and the use of disclaiming verbiage such as George Voorhees has claimed that...." would that be sufficient documentation to consider it verified?

I for one would be suspicious if this story turned upon the net now, it'd be too much like a clever vandal to pull that rabbit out of THAT hat. I'll let you go now, let me know if I can help you relieve some of your wikistress. Pedant 06:54, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Your version of Ronald McDonald is available in the history section of that article. Based on the information you've given above, I can't see a way that an article could be created on this guy without becoming original research, if, as you say, there's no book and not even a newspaper article. I'm afraid I don't see a way that it can be proved that you're not making this up. Ambi 07:03, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Not even with a court record showing that he was sued not to be ronald AND a pic of him in the costume with his name on it? (how about a notarised affidavit from a contemporaneous witness? -not that there is one, it was DooDoo the clown and I never knew HIS name, I'mjust asking hypothetically, because sadly, this looks like it will never be told) frankly, even if this piece of the truth is destined to fall through the cracks, it's good to know there are some'antibullshit provisions '

Do you,personally believe me? Just so I know, I'm curious, it would give me some insight to know if you are being patient with a liar or are helping someone that you believe is telling the truth. just for the insight into your character, I guess, and maybe it's too personal a question...?Pedant

I don't know. But you've been very polite, so the least I can do is give you a chance to prove your case. Ambi 07:21, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

fair enough. maybe I can, but I guess not well enough, and it will take some time and expense.gonna drop it for now, unless I stumble across some miracle I don't think is in this box. the most frustrating thing is I helped Terry (who ended up with the costume itself )clean out his house once (that 'messy house conviction'was kinda trumped up, the fire department wouldnt say it was a fire hazard,as the police wanted them to but it was sloppy...) anyway, I think ironically enough that I was the one who told him to just throw the costume away, I could have kept it.

I'll talk to you next time.

Can you scan and upload the newspaper picture and court documents? Place them in a subpage such as User:Pedant/newspic and link to them as verification. That would be enough for me. I happen to believe that there's a lot of stuff that can't be found on the web :> The Steve 20:05, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)

I would upload them as soon as I get them, first I have to locate a source for them (if I scanned the clipping might it not be argued that I altered it in photoshop?) better would be a copy of the picture from the newspaper (better quality, known provenance) court documents too...best to have a certified copy from the court than whatever copy I might have (but I don't have and never possessed - or even saw - the court documents I was only told by the 2 that "George was enjoined..." and that "Terry was not" (which is why Terry still had the costume.

I saw the clipping long ago. The newspaper has gone through several incarnations since then,and I'm noteven sure of the presentname. At one time it was the 'Valley News and Green Sheet' (I recall that, because I remember it was printed on green (color) newsprint. Which means the front page,so that will help in locating it.)

The court documents will be harder, I'm not sure what court (there are several overlapping jurisdictions involved) or date the suit occured, or even the name of the plaintiff, as it was not McD's but the advertising agency, I believe)

still, I believe that the information is obtainable, I have wordout through the clown community that I am trying to contact anyonewith info on George Voorhees in the 60's. I won't drop it, but it may be quite sometime before I get my hands on any of these materials, and even then it might be considered 'original research'

The thing that really seems unfair is the Terry Teene article being summarily deleted, just because he was involved in the 'Ronald creation myth', as a hoax... he's well known throughout the 'dj' world and in the 'clown world' (there are several clowns on the clown article list that were trained as a clown by Terry Teene and by the recording industry (and rock&roll hall of fame)...he's just not currently well-known... but neither are thousands of others that nobody objects to. But there's other stuff to write about that is maybe of more universal interest, that can be 'verified from the net'... though being googlable is not what I consider a valid criterion of notability: I myself am googlable, yet completely unworthy of mention in the wikipedia, and obviously some things that ARE worthy will not have been searched for or might not be findable on a net search.Pedant 20:40, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Text dumped from Talk:Terry Teene[edit]

ok,I wrote the article, as well as significant portions of the clown constellation of stories. I have worked witha nd personally know a huge number of clowns jugglers and performers in related circus arts, i have worked for several circuses and have booked clowns and hired clowns and trained clowns for over 20 years. I am not a vandal, I am a clown historian, and I try to be scrupulously correct in all I do, particularly with something of the level of importance as this. Additionally I hold some minor expertise in quite a few other fields and have made extensive corrections and important revisions (I removed metallica from the taper-friendly article,and checked very band on it's policy with an authoritative source]and minor style revisions to numerous articles across the board. I'm working on bringing the article on Sovereignty more in line with the actual legal meaning of the word, I'm not a vandal.

I just got through doing an exhaustive reply to your points above that took me 4 and a half hours to write, meanwhile,the page was blanked summarily, and the information I typed was lost. I am almost a cripple as regards typing,so it would be considerate of you to allow me to defend my article's source and verifiability in some way before making sweeping deletes.

and please don't delete my response while I am typing it. I am beginning to suspect ulterior motives, almost.

I don't have the strength for more typing tonight. If anyone wants to contact me,use my talkpage. thatwon't get deleted.

If this is going to end with you wanting me gone, or if its that way now, just tell me, or if you think my material is too obscure,incorrect,oryou just don't want a particular thing said or done, tell me I'll be happy to oblige. But I dislike tolerating rudeness, and I consider today's actions by ambi rude, summarily deleting and labelling as a hoax my articles and expansions without the possibility of retrieval... that material took most of 2 days out of me. I'm not even supposed to be sitting up for more than an hour right now. If you want me to leave just say so, stop being rude.

Sealand, etc.[edit]

If you want to contact someone on here, use their talk page (i.e. User_talk:Ambi. I've moved your comment there.

If you're interested, I've recently started Wikipedia:WikiProject Unrecognized countries. I've only been going back to about 1900 with that, however, as before the League of Nations, it's a bit hard to draw the line as to what is and what isn't a recognised state.

As to Sealand - I try to stay away from that (micronations, IMO, are another matter entirely). I'm fascinated by those places with a real, historical and ethnic territorial claim, that still manage to maintain a functioning society, even though they're ignored by much of the world.

What do you mean by the Sovereign United States? I'm not sure I've heard of that. Ambi 13:09, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Soverign Citizens[edit]

sovereign states[edit]

the term refers to the 'shadow' state, in the case of california republic - pardon my 'no caps' my keyboard is dying- california was a state (nation) before it federated with the other states, which were already 'the united states '...

california had a constitution, enacted by a properly convened and convoked representative assembly.

after joining the union, a constitution was once again enacted,substantially the same except for several 'small' but crucial differences notably the previous constitution was never repealed, disenacted etc.

but the present state , the state of california behaves as if the second constitution holds sway.

state of california is a corporate identity, under corporate law and admiralty law - theirs is the great seal of the state of california

california republic is a political entity, under common Law - theirs is the bear flag which says california republic

the state uses the same flag, but typically displayed as a flag with a gold fringe, symbolising a military entity.

this is poorly known doctrine, but which has been upheld by court decisions.

very short thumbnail sketch of the situation.

Most of the fifty states have a similar thing going.

the united states itself has an even more complex issue, but which similarly plays the original constitution against later amended forms.

I'll show you the article when I get enough together to be coherent, (you might review it before I post it?) you would probably be interested.

yes, sealand is a unique case I agree, but apparently a valid claimant IMO, though a trivial case, and nations are understandably leery of recognising them explicitly, but in the case of the UK, the doctrine of estoppel by acquiescence might prevail, by both not explicitly reserving the right to rule sealand, and by not exercising the right... as "there can be no actual sovereignty without both de facto and dejure sovereignty" is one of the 'checkpoints' of sovereign status.

please delete this when you are through reading, I don't particularly want such an unthorough exposition of these facts around with my name on it.

thanks for pointing me at the appropriate place for leaving messages, btw. Pedant 18:38, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Answer at My Talk Page. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 23:15, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikisource:User talk:Pedant[edit]

Replied on my talk page. --Ardonik 06:26, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

Supadawg[edit]

No Supadawg is not me! I expect the reason he is linking to my talk page in messages he leaves is beacuse he's taking my boilerplate text from User:Angela/useful stuff. A few people have done that. :) Angela . 18:13, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you very much for the Barnstar, and for taking the time to make it. It is now proudly on display. SWAdair | Talk 07:59, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Uploaded Files[edit]

The following Ogg Vorbis music clips have been uploaded to Wikipedia"

Cocaine merge[edit]

There is now duplicate information in the article, and the history of cocaine addiction is not very accurate or good (it's more like an overview). That's one of the reasons I didn't think it was a good merge, and the reason I moved the section. I dunno, if you can fix this go ahead. I've done some tweaking, but this is not a subject I'm that familiar about. - Ta bu shi da yu 10:12, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It was a 'requested merge', and I agree the 2 should be in the same article, but I agree with you as well, that the quality of the merged-in article was below par, and somewhat spoiled the well written and edited host article cocaine. I don't think it was a 'bad' merge, per se, but I appreciate your effort on this, and I'll do what I can. I think that just being in the project article (cocaine addiction wasn't 'in' the project I think) will gain the merged source the editing attention it needs. I'm not that familiar with cocaine myself, my only experience was getting my nose repaired while anesthetised with it. I'll watch the article, and do what I'm able. Thank you Pedant 16:53, 2004 Aug 16 (UTC)

New Bush vote now under way - please vote[edit]

Here [1]

Rex071404 15:56, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Bush[edit]

I like your v.3 version. Rex071404 07:16, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

or N on recent changes views[edit]

Hi Pedant, you wrote about css, to avoid and not to use <font> tags. Unfortunately, I don't know how to "compose" a proper tag with css - which you would like and with which you could live.

I'd rather like to ask you kindly to come up with a counter-proposal/solution, which fulfill all needs

not ruining the current (standard or enhanced) recents changes view layouts
not using unwanted tags
being rendered as N
eventually an option under user preferences

Can you help ? Have nice day --Nyxos (Talk) 16:45, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Good Day[edit]

I just popped on in and I see you've done quite well on Wikipedia. Good luck. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 05:23, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the recognition. You probably have no idea how much that made my day, I was at low spot in my week.Pedant 17:09, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)

The Dog Picture[edit]

Done! Glad to be of service. Ambi 06:33, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

NASA[edit]

since your willing to scan thru some of the 500 or so pages of 60's era NASA historical material, please leave me either an email address or a phone number so i can be in touch to discuss shipment of said material. Alkivar 00:07, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

pages are in the mail sir, expect them relatively soon. Alkivar 04:22, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'll email you whenthey arrive, andmake a note here as they are uploaded. Pedant 16:04, 2004 Oct 21 (UTC)

The package of NASA material has arrived. It appears to have survived the trip well. I haven't opened it yet, will try to start tonight.Pedant 19:51, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)

This is a priceless trove of info, I am scanning it in nowPedant 19:27, 2004 Nov 10 (UTC)

3RR[edit]

I understand and respect that you have an interest in the future of the 3RR on Wikipedia. Please realize that the Mediation page to which you posted your opinion is not an appropriate forum for this issue. Thanks. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 17:28, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC) the comment:

"I think we definitely need a clarification on the 3 revert rule. Also what is the policy on editors with vested interests, ie: agents of the government, or corporate employees performing edits on issues related to theri corporation or agency?"

was with respect to VerilyVerily's behavior being mediated on the page in question. Dante being the mediator, I absolutely respect his wish to delete it, however I think that both issues are realted to VV's actions. What forum WOULD be appropriate to discuss issues related to an ongoing mediation... MY talk page does NOT seem to be the place. VV seems to me to edit with a lot of vested interest.Pedant 17:44, 2004 Oct 16 (UTC)

You are not a party to the mediation. VV is not (to my knowledge) an agent of the government. VV does not (to my knowledge) edit articles regarding any issues in which he has a corporate interest. Case closed. Please bring up these issues elsewhere. I would suggest you either request mediation yourself, if you think it necessary, or else discuss it on VV's talk page. As for clarification on the 3RR, ask Jimbo or the Arbitration Committee. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 08:47, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)

wikifun[edit]

hey don't worry about the missunderstanding once the tenth task is posted one or two days later i'll open it up for everyone to post tasks. if you have any questions, comments or ideas i'd like to hear them.--Larsie 18:43, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Cocaine "pages needing attention" listing.[edit]

Could you clarify a bit what in the article needs tending to? Thanks :) porge 00:28, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

Wiktionary[edit]

Thanks for your comments on my Wiktionary talk page. At first glance I can see how not having a password can be a matter of some concern. Nevertheless, there exist people who do not like passwords because they are difficult to remember. They choose not to have passwords at their own risk.

How you can be of help is as much a matter of your own interests and temperament. I have never worked for government, and have no experience in generating government-style make-work projects. If you expand your Wiktionary user page with your views on language, I may be able to devise something appropriate. Eclecticology 00:50, 2004 Oct 25 (UTC)

Christian views of women[edit]

Hi Pedant... appreciate your work, but don't you think that "Jesus' stories often centered on deeds of compassion and generosity, traits often associated with womankind. An example is the Tale of the Widow's Mite, in which a tiny gift from an impoverished woman is regarded by Christ as being a generous gift, equal with a lavish gift from a rich man." is a bit of a long bow to stretch? - Ta bu shi da yu 07:22, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure I follow you. I don't recognise the idiom "is a bit of a long bow to stretch" . Could you restate your question?Pedant 16:08, 2004 Oct 26 (UTC)

I mean that it's a bit of a stretch to compare Jesus' compassion and generosity with those associated with women. There are many others who also are associated with this, ie Ghandi, but they are never associated with womenkind! I just don't think that one point follows the other. Incidently, that doesn't mean that I think your point about Jesus being compassionate and generous: I believe he was the supreme human being and the model for all behavour of mankind. But I jsut don't think the point your raised on this is valid (and that's not a personal attack on you either). - Ta bu shi da yu 14:22, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Srivener Dam Photo[edit]

Thank's for spotting the typo in the name of my Scrivener Dam photo. Actually the photo was taken by my User:nyctopterus, but uploaded (under the wrong title) by me. I have marked the original for deletion, if you are an admin feel free to delete it. Martyman 22:34, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Operation Defensive Shield[edit]

Notes for you on Talk:Operation_Defensive_Shield#Jenin_false_allegations_of_massacre Lance6Wins 17:50, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC) thanks for the heads up. still needs work, please, I left some notes on the discuss page.Pedant 00:59, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)

department of fun[edit]

hey there thanks for participating in wikifun hope you try the next round as we have changed the format somewhat. also check out this link Department of Fun i'll add you as a member as i would love to hear some ideas for fun activities or links to etertaining articles. --Larsie 19:44, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

hello, just wanted to ask you to replace your link on the dept of fun page w/ signiature/timestamp so we can record when we became members of the department --Larsie 16:45, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

(No Relation)[edit]

Salutations, Pedant!
I've seen you around and just wanted to say hello since our handles, if not our interests, are similar. If I can help--see my user page and User:PedanticallySpeaking/Articles for what I'm working on--do let me know. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 15:55, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

Greetings, again. Was surprised to see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/PedanticallySpeaking come up on my watch list from your vote since my candidacy was withdrawn six weeks ago or longer. But thanks for the kind words all the same. PedanticallySpeaking 16:50, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

- It's about due to come up again, I think. I only vote for admins if I have met them, or edited with them. Now that we've met, I thought it appropriate to weigh in on the issue. I'm not particularly kind, but I strive to be accurate and polite nonetheless.Pedant 17:08, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)

Category deletions[edit]

(to [[User:UtherSRG|UtherSRG]) Would you please be so kind as to give me some clue why you are deleting categories? I'm wondering why that would be necessary. ThanksPedant 01:07, 2004 Oct 29 (UTC) Theres a few dozen listed as ready for deletion on Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. - UtherSRG 01:09, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC) Thanks for the quick response, was not even aware there was a categories for deletion page, thank you.Pedant 01:14, 2004 Oct 29 (UTC)

Jesus[edit]

You added a comment that I should not be an anonymous user on the Jesus page. "I'd feel a lot more comfortable taking your assertions seriously if you (81.156.181.197) were not an anonymous author" I do not see why that would should make you take assertions seriously. I am just as anonymous if I invent a nick. Its just that if I have a nick, you can trace my edits, and seek to counter them (which would be non-NPOV).

Could you please replace/add to your comment in the Jesus-sexuality section so that people (myself included) are aware as to which assertions it is that you are uncertain about, and also mention why? Otherwise I will remove the comment as it is somewhat nebulous (i.e. devoid of meaningful (in the context) content).

Heh, I systematically bias anons more than named users, named users have much more acountability. Whatever, I finished the re-write of the paragraph you wished me to;

Christian scholars belive the four Cannonical Gospels contain the most detailed historical information about Jesus's birth, life and death. These Gospels chronicle Jesus' divinity, miracles, and teachings. This has lead to various debates of the historicity of many facts of the Jesus of Nazareth.

I added the cannonical reference because there are more than four gospels. I also removed the "written to" infront of the chronicle. I figure in a book you can chronical even fictious event, Tolkein chronicled the Lord of the Rings. This opens it up to a broader interpretation. Sound any better? worse?

Welcome to Wikipedia Maori[edit]

Registered User Number 25! I've commented in some detail on your User Talk page there. Keep up the good work everywhere. Robin Patterson 21:25, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

wikifun pick[edit]

{{spoiler}} hey is that pic supposed to be ___________(redacted)? larsie

Yes it is!Pedant 17:16, 2004 Nov 3 (UTC)

links[edit]

where can i get to the klingon wikipedia and wikijunior? --Larsie 19:10, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The complete list of all wikipedias has it, but the tlhIngan Hol (Klingon language) wikipedia is here: tlhIngan Hol wIqIpe'DIya ([[tlh:wikipedia]] -- the language code is 'tlh', for "tlhIngan")

Wikijunior is being discussed at: Wikijunior ([[meta:Wikijunior]]) on meta, it's a new project, so it doesn't have a real name or namespace yet.Pedant 20:07, 2004 Nov 3 (UTC)

Cultural and Historical Background of Jesus[edit]

copied from Pedant's discuss page: Please take a look at the section of the talk page on "edits as of Nov. 1." I am in an editing dispute with CheeseDream and someone has protected the article until the matter is resolved. I would appreciate it if you would look at the last version of eh article by me, before it was protected, and compare that to the last version by Cheese Dream, and then go over my discussion with him on the talk page, and comment. Thanks, Slrubenstein

Ok, I made extensive comments, not sure why you think I'm the one to ask, but thanks for the implications that seems to make. I'm going to consider it a complimentPedant 03:07, 2004 Nov 4 (UTC)

I notice Slrubenstein is trying to bring people who he sees as supporters of his POV into the discussion (see his contributions list). I do not think this is a very NPOV thing to do. CheeseDreams 00:13, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I agree. The point is not to get one's POV into the article, the point is to make a good article, that's factual. I hope you read my comments, and that you see that my point of view is that the article's subject is defined in its title, and that it's an article that presupposes an actual man named jesus from 1st century Judea, and that all information in the article shoould relate to that, as its subject.

You should note that I didn't agree with either of you entirely, and that in one case I disagreed with you both. So what, right? My agreement doesn't make either of you right or wrong, and I suspect you both know more about some aspects of the topic than I do. Good information that doesn't belong one place can always find a home where it fits perfectly. This situation won't go forever, let it play itself out. The wiki always works, it just sometimes takes a while. we all have tha same goals here, writing a good encyclopedia... people that don't share that goal just slip away unnoticed, the articles they worked on get polished to near perfection and nobody get's hurt. It really works.

I actually think that if you two are both really good wikipedians that you can find a way to make a good team. Opposing viewpoints work great together, if they are trying to make good articles, and not just debate. You both have added value to the article and to its discussion. Feel free to link to this thread, on my page or yours, or copy it somewhere... and let me know if I can be useful in any way. Thanks for dropping by.Pedant 00:34, 2004 Nov 5 (UTC)

copied from my talk pagePedant 00:36, 2004 Nov 5 (UTC)

I am not accusing you of POV bias. I left the note to merely point out to Slrubenstein that I have discovered what he is up to. By the way, he has started threatening to delete a whole section which disagrees with his POV from the Historicity of Jesus article now. As well as slandering my name on the Talk page for Cultural and historical background of Jesus against thencivility policy. CheeseDreams 00:41, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Posting this to both your pages: Would you and he like me to mediate this? I think we could wrap it up pretty quickly, and I am interested in the topic, and you both are, and seems like a lot of others don't want to get involved. I'd think some sort of informal friendly discussion on a neutral page would be good ... we are all active so we can probably work this out fast. I'd be happy to do it.Pedant 02:20, 2004 Nov 5 (UTC)

Main page[edit]

Thanks for letting me know about the main page, but you might have got a quicker response from reporting in on Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress instead. If you want to find out more about how to edit the main page, please see Wikipedia:Editing the main page. Angela . 16:01, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

Canadian football[edit]

I started watching Canadian football when it first was syndicated in the States, late-night, in the 1970s. I was always a sports junkie, especially football and hockey, I guess, but really baseball and basketball, too. My dad was the mailman for most of the married players on our town's old minor league hockey game in the 1960s, and one of my mother's best friends was married to a Newfoundlander, so Canada was never very foreign-seeming to me, even before I'd ever been there. Of course, the CFL gave it a run south of the border about ten years ago for a little while, too. Also, I had a "big ugly" satellite dish and the CFL was on it "in the clear" up to five or six years ago (also Hockey Night in Canada, quite possibly the greatest sports program in the history broadcasting and certainly the longest-running!). Now, the Canadian football article was quite good before I ever had anything to do with it, with facts that I would not have known (like, "the size of a size 3 rugby ball").

I like what you've done with the article(s). I guess the biggest thing that I want to see back in there is something about how the converts can be "reversed", in other words how the team on defence can block the kick, pick up the fumble, intercept the pass and get the two points for themselves, which can be a huge play and cuts the effective value of a touchdown from seven to four points. I also think that it needs to be mentioned how this can happen in U.S. college football, but not high school or pro ball, so here, it is the collegiate game that is the most like Canadian. (Looks like we almost need pages on "Differences between American high school football and American college football", and "Differences between American college football and NFL football" too, doesn't it?)

The article is also right about the CFL being too big and too good to be a minor league. Also, do we need a redirect from CFL to Canadian Football League or do we need a disambig there? I just searched for "Canadian Federation of Labour" and didn't find anything – wasn't there/isn't there such a body, even one called that at least at some point and the counterpart to the American Federaton of Labor? (I know that there is a Canadian Auto Workers counterpart to the United Auto Workers.)

Rlquall 01:28, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Canadian football[edit]

Rlquall 01:31, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Canadian football[edit]

Rlquall 01:35, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wiki Junior Project[edit]

We are currently in the process of deciding what the first topics will be. We have already decided that the first humanities topic will be Countries of the World:South America. We need to decide what our first science topic will be. We already have plenty of pictures available for Big Cats, The Solar System and Human Flight. We're having a little vote to decide which one we should work on first. Please come to Meta:Wikijunior project first topics. Cheers! Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 07:56, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks, but I already am an admin. I did, however, self-nominate, so I'll consider you my official nominator. :) Happened a couple of months ago. Thanks! --Golbez 09:08, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for pic comment[edit]

Nice of you to comment on my flybe pics. Aircraft photography is my hobby whenever I can get to a UK airport. Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 09:27, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

wal-mart[edit]

Hi, I reverted your edits on wal-mart... critcism of it was so consuming the article that critcism is now on the Criticism of Wal-Mart page... please put critcism there Thanks! Chuck F 17:33, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Frank, thanks for the heads up, that was considerate. Please see my note on Talk:Wal-Mart, I think my original form of the edits was appropriately brief, however, I have reworded the text and cut it by about 80 percent. Take a look, and see if you can live with the edit I made after your revert... new text in criticism section and in milestones section. Nice to meet you, I'll come back and say Hi again after I browse through your contributions. Thanks again for the polite notice about your reversion of my edits.Pedant 18:08, 2004 Nov 8 (UTC)

Test wiki[edit]

Hi, there are a few admins on the test wiki (see [2]) but I doubt they actively watch it. Stewards can't make admins there, unlike all the other wikis, and my own account there is unusable (hint: do not change your skin on that wiki - it could break your account). I'll see what I can do about getting you made an admin there so you can delete the images. The only policy on the wiki is don't get in the way of development. Nonsense images can be deleted immediately since there's no community as such, so no point trying to have a vote. Thanks for volunteering for clear up that wiki. Angela . 21:34, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Pedant. I've become a bureaucrat instead of a bot and made you a sysop on the test wiki. Unlike Angela, I didn't break my account :) AngBot 21:45, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 rofl, thanks AngBot.Pedant 00:17, 2004 Nov 9 (UTC)

Atlas Award[edit]

I love the idea, but we should probably pick a less male-oriented image. I'm sure our female contributors keep the sand clean now and again as well. :-) I'm a little busy translating an article right now, so sorry if I don't respond immediately. Oh, and thanks for awarding me, of course! blush :-) JRM 22:35, 2004 Nov 9 (UTC)

The above is exactly the sort of thing an unselfishly great editor would say, of course. The Atlas award is named after Charles Atlas and is taken from his 'they kicked sand in my face' advertisement, and is in no way merely a masculine image. It is a symbol of self-empowerment. Charles Atlas was once a self-styled 98-pound weakling, and through his own diligence and effort, became a very succesful businessperson and body builder. And his business empire began with the ad that this image is from.

In that case, we need a less U.S.-centric image, because that explains why I didn't catch the reference. :-D No, just kidding. As long as we alert people to the context, it's fine.

Incidentally, I'm still very much a newbie. Is there an accepted policy for responses on talk pages? I noticed you moved my comment to here, and now my natural inclination would be to copy this entire thing back to your page as well. Is that sort of sane or do people generally keep it to one page? JRM 22:55, 2004 Nov 9 (UTC)

Liripipe[edit]

Origin of word: no one knows. [3]

Pictures of liripipe: [4] [5]

and

[6]

The costumes.org would be a good resource if you have any other costume questions.

All this is from a fast google. I'm much better on Victorian clothing than I am on SCA or Renfaire type garb. Wikipedia editor Katherine Shaw is better on the latter, I think. Zora 00:48, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Zora! apparently you can find better info if you don't spell it wrong. You've been a big help. I thought you'd be good to get me started at least. Cheers!!Pedant 00:53, 2004 Nov 10 (UTC)

I haven't forgotten to reply[edit]

I'll reply to your comment soon (I've shifted the comment to a subpage - see Ta bu shi da yu/Christian views of women - remove this if you want). I haven't had a chance to reply with any intelligence yet! - Ta bu shi da yu 03:35, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Atlas Redux[edit]

See User:JRM and User:JRM/Atlas Award. I hope you're happy, now. :-) JRM 01:49, 2004 Nov 13 (UTC)

yeah, thats what you'd expect from someone who keeps the sandbox clean, lol. The bears are in trouble and the sidewalks are in trouble. You forgot Poland.

23 skidoo, and will nobody help the widow's son? :-) Excuse me, I've got a cabal to set up somewhere... JRM 02:44, 2004 Nov 13 (UTC)

I saw the fnord the first time, but now I'm not sure. ;) Pedant

Culture & history of Jesus[edit]

Hope you're still on line and will comment on the paragraph Wesley and I are working on.

- Amgine 03:19, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Cultural and historical background of Jesus#New Messiah paragraph.

Thanks for the suggestion! I've submitted a version on your page User:Pedant:CaHBJ. - Amgine 20:30, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Los Angeles Transportation[edit]

Hi, I've been contributing some bicycle and public-transport stuff and noticed in the history that you'd done some re-arranging. No objections to them. Glad you thought my content was useable. See Transportation_of_Los_Angeles

- Jumble 10:00, 14 Nov 2004 (PST)

Request for mediation[edit]

It is a requirement of Wikipedia policy that you are informed of the following link's existence: Wikipedia:Requests for mediation#Slrubenstein

It is also a requirement to inform of the following link (although Slrubenstein failed to comply with the requirement): Wikipedia:Requests for mediation#Users CheeseDreams and Amgine

Slashes are better for user sub-pages[edit]

I was confused by User:Pedant:Vote, then I noticed the link above to User:Pedant:Terry Teene. If you go to those articles, and click on "user page", you will note that the Wiki software considers them separate users, rather than sub-pages under your account. It would be great if you could move them to User:Pedant/Terry Teene and User:Pedant/Vote, along with any others you may have created, then put {{delete}} tags on the old pages that the move leaves as redirects. Thanks in advance. Niteowlneils 21:54, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No, thank YOU! I have moved them as you suggest.Pedant

Thanks for your note[edit]

Hey, it's nice to feel appreciated, so I guess I'll spread it around to authors of the articles I like. ←Humus sapiens←Talk 08:55, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Magic project[edit]

Hi there,
Thanks for showing interest in the project. I'm a mere hobby magician myself, but I do have some limited access to actual magicians and their knowledge. The only thing that is really problematic in my opinion is the copyright rules regarding certain magic effects, so if you know anything about that it's very much appreciated, as well as any other criticism you have. Head over to my talk page and give it to me! :-) [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 20:10, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Great copyedits[edit]

I noticed some of the edits you made to the footnotes of Infinite monkey theorem, and I just wanted to say you have an excellent ear for the fine details of language. Keep up the great copyedits! Deco 21:49, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wikinews demo up and running[edit]

Hi!

I'm writing to let you know that the Wikimedia Board of Trustees has approved the first stage of the Wikinews project. There's now a fully operational English demo site at demo.wikinews.org. This will be used for experimenting with various review models and basic policies before the site is launched officially in about a week. demo.wikinews.org will become the English version later.

You voted for the Wikinews project, so I'm asking for your participation now. Everything is open, nothing is final. What Wikinews will and can be depends in large part on you. There already is a global Wikinews mailing list for discussing the project. If you are interested at all, please subscribe -- coordination is of key importance. There's also an IRC channel #wikinews on irc.freenode.net. Realtime discussion can help to polish up articles.

If you're looking for something to do, check out the articles in development and articles in review. Or start a new story in the Wikinews workspace, or ignore the proposed review system - it's up to you. I hope you'll join us soon in this exciting experiment.--Eloquence * 01:58, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Image:AtlasAward.jpg[edit]

First of all, Hi, nice to meet you, thanks for all of your valuable contributions...Pedant

Image:AtlasAward.jpgI'm worried about the copyright status of this image. I don't see the justification of "fair use". Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 21:23, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It's a tiny piece of a picture from a reduced size, (the original of that portion is over 2 inches) low resolution scan of an ad from a 1960's comic book, famous enough to be the single most notable thing about its owner. It's attributed to the owner. The image description points at an article about the owner. The image is being used in a symbolic celebration of the owner's main claim to fame: the 98 pound weakling who had sand kicked in his face by bullies. I don't see any fairer use than that. Image:TrangBang.jpg

If you are looking for images that aren't fair use, though, I'd suggest you lean on Image:TrangBang.jpg if you want a clear-cut example of abuse of fair-use doctrine, the AP has specifically stated it may not be used in an encyclopedia in any form without payment and will not be licensed for free distribution in any way.

I do appreciate you looking out for 'bad' images, but I don't think that the Atlas image is one of those. If you just don't like it though, feel free to replace it with something suitable. Just upload to the same name, any 100 pixel square image, and explain why, and all that in the upload history. Thanks again for your concern. Let me know if there's anything I can do.Pedant 00:22, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

PS: there's this one too: Image:Book the illusion of life.jpg and this Image:Ronmcd.jpg one, to which you added the 'fair use' tag... how is this one fair use? The arches, the clown character, the name of the clown character, the facial makeup, and the costume are each individually trademarks... please explain?Pedant 01:11, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

The point of "fair use" is that the copyright owner doesn't need to give permission. In fact even if they expressly forbid the reusue of the image it can still be used legally under fair use. Never the less i am not convinced that the TrangBang image is actually fair use. A book cover? clearly on a page that discussed the book it would be fair use. Ronald macdonald? Yes on an article on Ron or an article on macdonalds, that's clearly fair use. Trademarks don't come into it. Your image? Hmm. I don't know. I might try replacing it. I could have a go at drawing an Atlas image myself if I get time. Watch this space (and if nothing happens, then I've probably forgotten, or had a go and didn't like the result) Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 15:39, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)