User:Hafspajen/Archive

Alex
Thanks for the compliment. I ought to upload some more pictures. As for user:Bogdangiusca, I'm confident that he is not Alex. User:B has been around since 2003, is an admin, and I don't see any complaints about incivility. But given past history I suspect that Alex will be back. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, maybe. I hope he can learn to be more patient and polite.

Warrington (talk) 09:57, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Based on Future Perfect at Sunrise's commitment to keep an eye on him, Alex is unblocked. Please let him or me know if there is any recurrence. And thanks for the barnstar! Mine must be the simplest page ever to get an award. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 17:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Hope for the best...

Warrington (talk) 20:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Polite
Unfortunately there are, as you have found out, many instances of editors who aren't as polite or as civil as they could be. There are, indeed, policies set in place that attempt to prevent this from occuring, such as WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA; however, these policies aren't always followed as well as they could be. I guess the trick is to have a thick skin and let these types of comments roll off your back. If it gets really bad, you can make a report at Wikiquette alerts. Useight (talk) 00:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Alex

 * Also be mindful of how you edit. Aggresive, obstinate and/or sloppy editing can aggravate other editors. In many cases, there would have been no incivility had the other editor been more mindful and polite. A from L.A. (talk) 13:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

What on earth are you talking about?

Warrington (talk) 13:08, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * There you go again. I was talking about your editing at Palatschinken and the phrases you used when you reported my incivility. There is a section on this talk page right above my post that is titled Re:Polite (see above). What did you think I was talking about? A from L.A. (talk) 13:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

That re polite in not about me, being unpolite, but others, User:Wikid77, Mountolive and JBsupreme.

I was NOT unpolite. I simply added again what an other editor, Bogdangiusca added before and which happened to be left out from the new (quite well formulated) version.

And I added "sprinkled with sudar". I do not think any of these things werw sloppy or unpolite.

And there was nobody complaining about my words on the Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts, which probably would happened right there.

Warrington (talk) 13:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Warrington (talk) 13:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The edit history of Palatschinken will show why I refer to your edits there as aggresive, obstinate, and sloppy, not very polite. I don't know why you linked that diff, when there are many more:, , , , , etc. Your phrasing at Wikiquette alerts was rude, aggravating, incorrect, and misleading. If you don't want incivilities, you should also try being more civil. A from L.A. (talk) 13:36, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry if you were understanding it this way. I wanted that the article should be easy to read and not confusing, and to have a logical begining and and a red line to follow. Sometimes edits do not fit in into the whole article, as a logical part of it. But your personal attacks was not making things easier, either.

Warrington (talk) 13:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm fine with it now, but regardless of your intentions your manner of editing in that case provoked me, you were too aggresive. I was also in a bad mood because of previous occurances not involving you. I read what you posted on that admin's page about impoliteness and incivility in Wikipedia (section titled: Polite(. Well obviously you are interacting with human beings and we all should know by now how things can get when human beings interact. Wikipedia is not edited by bots; you can report incivility and you can also try to prevent it by being more mindful of whether you are provoking editors or whether your manner of interacting is thorny. I'll be improving my editing as well, take care, A from L.A. (talk) 13:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that you had personal problems in your life.

Warrington (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, you are sorry to hear. Sorry to hear you are User:Warrington]. A from L.A. (talk) 22:30, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Images 2
Here's a good discussion of how many images to use: Layout. There's no fixed limit and many variables. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There's no requirement to respond to other users. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 23:23, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Never (word)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Never (word), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * WP:NAD

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --Unpopular Opinion (talk · contribs) 10:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, in my opinion, although wikipedia is not a dictionary, some articles such as Like do stay if they have something more than just a definition. Please expand the Never (word) article and feel free to remove the proposed deletion tag. --Unpopular Opinion (talk · contribs) 10:26, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

You wrote: While there may be a way. What did you mean? Adding it to the Wiktionary?

Warrington (talk) 13:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea why you have left a comment about this discussion on my talk page ... WorthyDan (talk) 13:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Your comment on my talk page
Hi! I just got your message about this AfD, but I think you should know that on the English Wikipedia what you're doing is considered disruptive canvassing and is discouraged. From the guideline page: "To avoid disrupting the consensus building process on Wikipedia, editors should keep the number of notifications small, keep the message text neutral, not preselect recipients according to their established opinions." -- Explodicle (T/C) 13:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I did not knew that. I stop than.


 * I've also taken a look at the AfD ... I think I actually have to agree with the decision on the AfD: WP is not a dictionary, and "funny sayings" would be like adding "trivia sections" to other articles, which are all in the process of being removed. I appreciate the overall attempt, but I can't agree with the purpose of this specific article.   ►  BMW  ◄  13:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Here is some articles about words Category:English words if you want to see what some other approached have been. -- Banj e  b oi   13:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * While there may be a way, right now WP:NOT would point otherwise. ►  BMW  ◄  13:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Croquette‎
I took a look at the article's history and its talk page and I see that three of the international variations are still there, each of which has a citation. Is it possible that you find citations for the remaining international variations that were removed? That would be a really fast way of solving this dilemma. Useight (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Technically, yes, unsourced content should be removed, but not all editors will actually remove it, many will tag it as "citation needed" with the optimistic hope that someone will find a source. I will help you in finding a source for the Philippines; I speak Tagalog. But no promises, as I don't know anything about Croquette, only Croquet. Useight (talk) 16:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow! It looks great. Excellent work. I'll take a look for a Filipino source or two. Useight (talk) 19:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Another problem. There appears to be some word-for-word copying from this site, a bunch of rewording will be necessary as well. Useight (talk) 19:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can see that, but I think that is the other way around, they were taking it from the Wikipedia, since Wikipedia is free. It is not the first time I have found articles taken from us.

It has the following text in that site: ''This article needs additional references or sources to facilitate its verification. ... For other uses, see Beef (disambiguation). ... External links Wikibooks Cookbook''

Well, that is proof, the text is clearly copied from Wikipedia!

(Like List of soups, for example) By the way, do you need any support? I think you were great today. Warrington (talk) 19:56, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Buchta
I did create Buchta only to redirect it to Nut roll as Buchta is a small geographic name for what is essentially the same dessert. Nut roll seems to be the most common American name, indeed that is what is listed on the Library of Congress website. And it seems that that Buchteln and Nut roll have a lot in common: yeast bread, and a type of filling (jam can be in a nut roll), however I cannot confirm this for you as of right now. I could try to dig up some new information, but you'd have to give me some more time.

Honestly, I think we may need to get an expert opinion on this article, and/or un-redirect it as all my research seems to connect them, but I'm only familiar with the American form of nut roll. The name Nut roll itself may be too narrow for such a dessert due to the variety of toppings it can have. If you have any additional or conflicting information, please feel free to edit or forward pertitent links to me. Many thanks. :) Zidel333 (talk) 05:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Linkspam
I have replied on my talk page. Useight (talk) 17:50, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I did ask an administrator about the link (see above) and the answer was, that is not a spam. So I added that again.

Warrington (talk) 19:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If multiple people feel that way, then, sure, go ahead and bring it up on the talk page. Useight (talk) 19:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Re
Oh my bad may be I shoulden't revert for a while, I tried to revert vandalism, however it looks like Im not so good at that. --Zaharous (talk) 02:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks merry Christmas to you too Warrington --Zaharous (talk) 21:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Hello
Hi! Well, I'm not an expert, but some suggestions:
 * Christmas: gingerbread, fried fish, turkey, halászlé.
 * Easter: ham and eggs, lamb, gingerbread, almond milk, egg liqueur.

I don't think adding too many "Cuisine by country" categories helps the reader navigate in food articles. Example: if a food originates from Germany, I think adding "German cuisine" is enough, I wouldn't add "Hungarian cuisine" unless the food was further developed etc. in Hungary. And vice versa. Squash Racket (talk) 15:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * See? I'm not an expert, I even forgot to mention Bejgli... These were very basic suggestions from some Hungarian websites. If you want some specific info, I can help you with translating from Hungarian.
 * What I meant was look at for example Sour cherry soup: if it's a Hungarian soup, add only "Cat:Hungarian cuisine". If it's characteristic of Austria too (or a new version was developed there), then add both categories. But just because it was adopted by other countries, you don't need to add many "Cuisine by country" categories, because the reader wants to know which is the most important. (Is this a Hungarian or a German or a French etc. food?)
 * If you can't name the country where a food originates from and the food is popular all over the world, then I think you needn't add any such categories. Squash Racket (talk) 15:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * BTW, so you are a Hungarian American? Squash Racket (talk) 15:45, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, I see. "Orphaned" means that few or no other articles link to this one. That is true and the tag was valid. Click on "What links here" on the left side of your screen. Solution: insert the link of Sour cherry soup into other relevant articles. For example I added a link in Hungarian cuisine. Your other question: I'm simply Hungarian. Squash Racket (talk) 16:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If you need help with Hungarian language stuff, don't hesitate...Merry Christmas to you! Squash Racket (talk) 16:40, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Rd of cherry soup
Before we get into an edit war, I'd like to ask whaqt your reasoning was for redirecting cherry soup to soup as opposed to sour cherry soup. I think it makes more sense to have the rd point to the "sour" article, given that it covers the topic that the redirect is a name for. Tealwisp (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem, if you want to redirect to sour cherry, its fine. I just basically thougt that sour cherry and cherry are a completely different fruit and there is a good description of cherry soup there, in the Soup article, under Fruit soup, (Cherry soup, made with wine and no cream, a different kind of soup.) I thougt that some day somebody will write about that soup and until than they can read about it there. But it is not a big deal, do as you wish! Merry Christmas

Warrington (talk) 21:54, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

If they are different soups, I'll leave it as is. My mistake. Would you know where to find sources on cherry soup? Tealwisp (talk) 22:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * What's your opinion on this as a reliable source; I'm pretty sure this is a reliable source, anyway, but I prefer to have more than one to ward off the notability jackals. Tealwisp (talk) 22:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Article creation is precisely my intent; it's very difficult to write an article that's good, notable, and not already done. Thanks very much.  Tealwisp (talk) 22:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you again for your help. Tealwisp (talk) 03:15, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Naxos (Crete)
Thanks for the note. See my comments on Talk:Naxos (Crete). Hope this helps. --macrakis (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the gold star!
And a merry Christmas to you as well! Zeng8r (talk) 21:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Preview
Hi Warrington, could you please use the preview before saving? Thanks! --X-Weinzar (talk) 15:21, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, think about it: By now, there are like 25 edits by you in Stollen/ talk:Stollen (today only). Adding the ones of Thursday there are like 50 edits by you. So yes, a little crazy;-) So you have heard of the preview, right? ;-) I mean okay, the article has been improved but it's just tough on my watchlist and also it becomes difficult if you want to look up something in the article's history for example if you don't trust some sentence in the article and want to find out who added it. So please try to improve your editing style by making up your mind before saving the article and also by using the preview. Thank you! Regards, --X-Weinzar (talk) 15:56, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Improving the artricle was the point. 25 edits is not that much, considering that.

1.Cleaned up the article.

2 I realised the an information about one ingredient is wrong. Fixed that.

3 I realised the an other information about an other ingredient is wrong. Fixed thattoo.

4 I realised that an other information about the time period wrong.

5 I realised that an other information about a Pope was wrong. Found a new Pope but it was wrong,

6 I found a the righ Pope. I thougt I was done.

7 searching for more info about the Pope I found a new source and added more info, and things needed to be changed in the article.

8 when I was ready found a new source by chance again, and again everyting changed a bit.

9. Found more info when Stollenfest stopped

10. Found the "butter-letter"

11. Found Zeithainer Lustlager.

13. Found The giant oven

14. Found the court architect Matthäus Daniel Pöppelmann

15 Found the giant Stollen knife

Warrington (talk) 17:48, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
Hey Warrington, best wishes to you and your close ones, Cheers! --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 17:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC) Obwarzanek mak.jpg

A new year
.

Christmas Card
Hey thanks for that Christmas card That really warmed my heart thanks, I Hope you enjoyed your Christmas too.--Zaharous (talk) 17:17, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome. Yes, that was the point! Warrington (talk) 19:01, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

IP vandal
I reported the vandal here Administrator intervention against vandalism. Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the gemstones. Looks like that fellar got a six month block. But there'll be more of 'em for certain. Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry character described it well as but a wave in the ocean. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Was the Dark and stormy night reference inspired by my Dirty Harry reference? Thanks for the link to an interesting article. When I did some ocean sailing I was surprised at how bright and light out it can be at night with a full moon and stars. It was interesting. And when a storm comes it can be quite dark. So I'm okay with the dark and stormy tempestuous night language. :) Seems like good fun. Reminds me of ghost stories and creative writing class. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome.

Warrington (talk) 22:14, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the haiku. It is much appreciated. My username is in fact a literary reference, but it has more to do with a kind of political dawn, so I suppose I forget about the middle of the night part. "It's always darkest before the dawn" :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:21, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Not so political, that's just one part of the story really. Maybe I should have said historical dawn. "Born to the tumults of history". The photo of the couple you added is darling. Wunderbar! ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Your lions remind me of those in front of the New York Public Library. Imagine, if you will, a character born at the moment of a critical tearing and birth in the world's history. A nation (two actually, and later three) are born, but their birth is terrible and bloody. The illegitimate parent is sent off as the nation and the child become independent. The newly born nation and child are cast into the currents of various legacies, histories, religious traditions and ideological rifts. Born at this time, the child is not only a witness and participant to the events as they happen, but embodies them in its very artifice: its blood, its morphology, its intellect, perceptive powers and emotions. This is the story of the ChildofMidnight, as I understand it, and I think the character is all the more significant as being in some sense the story of every child born to this world. I think we are all to a greater or lesser extent children of midnight. :) Born to the glory and the horror of dawn. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:08, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you kindly for the very attractive barnstar. I have to find a nice place to put it. Did you add the Elkhound photo? Terrific shot. Makes mine look quite amateurish, but I'll try to work on my skills. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:03, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Sunshine
I'm happy to report that it's very sunny here where I am. How about where you are? That US Air flight landing on the water is something to behold. It's terrific that everyone made it off okay. I see that mohnstrudel is mentioned in the strudel article. Drmies thinks apfelstrudel should be its own article, but I wonder if a more complete article on strudel including information on the various types wouldn't be better. There are many types of strudel after all, should they all have their own article? The redirect could point to the specific section. There's also the issue of whether the article should be named apple strudel of apfelstrudel. I suppose it will get worked out on the talk page. In the meantime, I would like to see an article on the poppy seed. Are you in? ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "The others are not so outstanding." Not even cherry? What about the one with cheese? It's pretty good my friend. Do not be biased! I would like an article on poppy seeds, and of course the mohnstrudel and other delightful culinary creations based on the ingredient. Perhaps you're not a poppy seed fan? What about sesame seeds? Bird seed? Sedum? I understand there is a mohnstrudel, but is that the same as the swirled poppy seed cake? I'm not sure that it is a strudel. Do you know what I'm talking about? Maybe if you didn't stay up so late you wouldn't get so grumpy at insubordination? :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Good news! I found a cake for you to try: Makowiec. And here I thought it was Austrian or German! ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Uh oh, now I see there is also something called Mohnstriezel. So who's cake is this? Could be the start of another food war! ;) ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * America is known as a "melting pot" after all. Do nut rolls have to have nuts? I have an assignment for you, should you choose to accept... Pick some nice photos for the Pastry article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I thought a Gugelhupf was the predecessor of the bundt cake? You should read the bundt cake article, is it true tha pan was invented in Minnesota??? Did you know we also invented schnitzel, crepes, pizza, sushi, and spatzle? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, and what about Pearson's Candy Company Salted Nut Roll??? Hmmm???? Minnesota based! Ya sure, you betcha. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try to get a Pearson's Nut Roll picture for you, but don't try to steal it and pretend the Europeans invented it like you did with hamburgers. I'm off to enjoy the sunshine. Be good! ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the delicious pastries. What about this Bezgovo cvrtje. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I like all of them. I haven't picked a favorite yet. I'm just enjoying them. How was the skiing? I like skiing the moguls, but there's less of that in Europa. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:09, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Was machst du mit die Studel und Sinterklaas? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC) A doughnut is filled with jam as the jam is actually inside the doughnut. But filling is a bit confusing for me with a pancake, because it's not clear whether the jam is actually inside the dough or just rolled up in the pancake. So I think you can say "the pancake is rolled up with XYZ" or the "rolled up pancake is filled with XYZ", but it's best not to say the pancake is filled with XYZ unless XYZ are actually inside the actual pancake and not just rolled up in the pancake. I'm partial to banana pancakes and raisin pancakes. What is ORDNUNG? Organizing? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Slovenian cuisine
Thank you for the excellent resource. I always have trouble loading pdfs, but once I got it going it's great. Lovely pictures. And of course they a poppy seed cake: prekmurje gibanica with poppy seeds, cottage cheese, walnuts and apples. Sounds yummy. Indeed I used a bit of German, but bitte forgive me I'm not fluent. :) And where are you from Mr. Warrington? ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Regarding the article that was deleted, I didn't see the dessert mention in the source you've given me. I think the problem was that no one had a source for it. At one point it went from being made of berries to flowers... ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

My dearest Warrington, if you look at the edit history of the poppy seed article I think you will find that your fine recipes were added and some credit was even directed your way. I hope you aren't falling under the influence of a certain Dutch miscreant and well-known trouble maker. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Translation of "Sorgenfri"
Hi Warrington! Thanks for your input. I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you saying I ought to change it from "free of sorrow" to "without sorrow"? I originally thought sorgen meant "worries" the plural sorge. Rather like the French Sans souci... ;) Best, --Cameron* 19:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for putting me right, I've changed it. My Danish language skills are non existent, I usually derive it from the German! You may also be interested in Residences of the Danish monarch and Schackenborg Castle, which I created yesterday and today respectively. Tell me if you come accross any mistakes! ;) --Cameron* 19:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking the articles! I won't add the Rosenborg and Kronborg to Residences of the Danish monarch as they are no longer owned by the monarch. I will however add them to Template:Residences of the Danish monarch! By the way, when you say property in France, you don't mean Château de Cayx, do you? I created that one earlier today. ;) --Cameron* 21:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Kerststol‎
Hey, nice! Or should we have an edit war about which nuts, or fruits, or whatever? (I don't know about hazelnuts, really--they're a tad luxurious (or rare) for Dutch cuisine...) The picture made me lust for one. Especially that almond paste center...delicious! Thanks for the link, Drmies (talk) 21:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, if your source says hazelnuts, hazelnuts it is! I'm just me, little Dutch OR-boy. Drmies (talk) 21:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Peanutbutter haga sounds good. Can someone make one and let me know if it works? ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Also here an article for you to check out: List of terms of endearment. It somehow survived a recent AfD. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Translation
Hi, I have answered to your question posted on my talk page. --Ajgorhoe (talk) 09:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Translation
Hi, I have answered to your question posted on my talk page. --Ajgorhoe (talk) 09:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:AIV
Thanks for the info about WP:AIV, but I'm way ahead of you on that. :-) Actualy, I did report that anon IP, but the incidents were considered to be too old and no action was taken. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 05:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

That's too bad. This looked pretty bad too me. Ithougt Administrator intervention against vandalism will block him.

Warrington (talk) 09:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Bugger
Hi, I saw that you renamed the headings in this article and moved the Wiktionary references to the back.
 * 1) The convention is that where there is a Wiktionary entry, it is noted at the top right of the corresponding article or section - where the word appears. See bugger to see the same convention applied in the sister project.
 * 2) The headings group usages of the word as a noun, as a verb and as an interjection. Under each heading, it gives several different usages. Why change these headings to Usage 1, Usage 2 and Usage 3?

I don't want to get into an edit war, but think these changes reduce the quality. What was your reasoning? Aymatth2 (talk) 15:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I love that article! we all need the bugger.

Warrington (talk) 15:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * So you have no objection if I restore the more meaningful headings, and put back the Wiktionary boxes where they belong? Aymatth2 (talk) 16:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

No not at all. I was just trying to protect it from ...deletion, if you understand what and how iI mean those changes...

A lovely article.

Warrington (talk) 20:51, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think it is unlikely to be deleted given the support for keeping it in the AfD discussion. If there is a general view that it should stay, presumably it will. I still think that technically the article does not belong in an encyclopedia - it really is about a word and its many uses rather than a topic. But I don't feel strongly on the subject. I am against advertising, bigotry, stuff like that staying because it may cause damage. In this case, there is no harm if the article is kept. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Exactely. I don’t know, this restriction about words, it is sometimes driven to far. You can not add all this information to a standard Wiktionary, and sometimes words or phrases are worth an article or two.

Warrington (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Check the Wiktionary version. It includes all the information in the article, but in the typical dry and boring format of a dictionary. Wiktionary will never have a light article like this on a word and the way it has evolved and is used. A dictionary will never be light reading. But I confess that sometimes I dip into Fowlers Modern English Usage just for fun: maybe I need counseling.

On a different subject, straying into the comment below from ChildofMidnight, I have doubts about the accuracy of these dog IQ ratings. There is a large Newfoundland in my house that I bump into many times a day, an anchor of sanity with a wonderfully positive outlook on life. According to the scale, she ranks just above the Elk Hound. On matters concerning food, she does indeed display amazing intelligence. But on other matters, without in any way wanting to insult her, I am not so sure ... Aymatth2 (talk) 02:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, i agree on all points you made, Both on the dictionary subject and on the dog intelligence, especially Wiktionary beeing dry. People do not read dictionaries and phone books for fun, unless a bit crazy. And I actually left a message on the Stanley Coren's The Intelligence of Dogs, talk page about an other race, Saluki, which in my experience, (and I walked and took care of 3 of them), are extremely elegant dogs, but unfortunately not very intelligent ones. Newfoundland is a good working dog when it comes to saving people from water, for example. Very nice, warm harted dogs and also obedient. But if they do not have much to do they just hang on like that, not doing much... so it depends on. I really think that the list is rather simplifying things. As I wrote to ChildofMidnight, obedience, intelligence and working capacity is not the same thing, and is a bit difficult to squeeze everything in one list. The author used "understanding of new commands" and "obey first command" as his standards of intelligence, Elk Hound being of above average working/obedience intelligence, well... they are gennerally exellent hunting dogs, very good trackers and very courageus, but obedience?? if you happen to leave the door open, bye bye Elk Hound. They even jump over the fence to run off. Also some dogs gota very low ranking, which is strange. Like Lakeland Terrier, Wirehaired Pointing Griffon or Boxer and some to high, like Pharaoh Hound and Ibizan Hound.

Which one are your Contributions I have made that cannot be improved upon?

Warrington (talk) 10:53, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

In Newfoundland they used the dogs for hauling carts or sleds of wood around. I can see that they would be good at that - certainly strong enough and glad to help out. Our dog is happy to try to rescue small children from the water, or at least give them a tow. Her main fault is a tendency to charge up to total strangers, tail wagging, bump into them and drool on their clothes. Jumping fences is not one of her problems. Lazing around doing nothing is a strong point - right now she is dozing in the snow in the back yard. But learning to obey new commands? Maybe it is just this individual dog that we have. Obedient? Probably, if she could only figure out what she is meant to do. Oh well, the personality makes up for a lot.

The contribution I have made that cannot be improved upon has yet to be written... :~) Aymatth2 (talk)

WHAT A LOVELY SUPRISE! :~) A cute Newfoundland portrait that appairs in the middle of the talk page! Really nice. Why isn’t this picture in the article? I think i am going to add it... Yes I understand your problems with her bumping or juping on people, Newfoundlands are huge and heavy dogs. Did you try to see if she can pull a sled in the  snow?  I have a feeling that your dog knows very erll what you want, she just doesn’t fell like doing that. About water rescue, they have emergency groups with trained Newfoundlands who are part of regular Newfoundland emergency rescue force who saved many peoples lifes. They also have competitions in this. http://www.osanewf.com/Newfoundland_dogs_Rescue.htm and http://meetthekarazans.blogspot.com/2008/12/newfoundland-takes-to-rescue-duties.html

Warrington (talk) 14:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

You may be right about obedience. No problem getting her to do things she wants to do. We did put Belle in water rescue training last summer, but she was still a bit young. We will keep it up. She loves the water and is a very powerful long-distance swimmer, with huge webbed paws. As I said, she will happily tow people if they hang onto her hair at the back, which is probably the most important thing. The harder bit, which she was starting to get, is to carry out a float with a line attached. I am sure that will come. A couple of weeks ago we tried hooking her up to a toboggan with a four-year old in it. A lot of fun, but it didn't really work. It needs the proper harness and sledge, and a lot fewer distractions. We may try getting her to pull a cart first. What I really want is some sort of snow plough attachment so she can clear the drive, but I don't think that has been invented yet ... Aymatth2 (talk) 17:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I think Bella will be all right. She is just a teenager now, but she will mature and will get more serious. Life is full of exiting things one have to jump on and drool over :). Dogs mature when they are 2 years or more. But I think she will need that training These dogs need to feel that they have a task. That they are doing something important. Swiming is obviously a thing she wants to do. Belle will probably be a god water rescue dog if she gets some more training-

To carry out a float with a line attached, that is only a matter of getting used to it.

Pulling a toboggan with a four-year old in it is also a god thing, she neds to feel that she can work or do something. Or carrying a bag on her back, when shopping or something like that. You can surelly find the right equipment in a pet-shop. But you shoudn’t let her drive your car! :)

Warrington (talk) 22:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Your vigilance against vandalism
Thank you for your vigilant protecting of die Strudel. I noticed that this interesting tidbit was added regarding the Elkhound, "They rank 36th in Stanley Coren's The Intelligence of Dogs, being of above average working/obedience intelligence." If I'm not mistaken that puts them just behind Terriers and Pugs and well ahead of Veinerschnitzel and Dachshunds. They did have some struggles on the math portion of the SAT. ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Did I not thank you for the terrific photos? How gauche. Thank you very kindly. They are lovely! I especially like the jars. And I like that the photo has an extra-ordinarily horizontal shape. It's a fun little tweak on the usual presentation. I even mentioned how handsome they made the article in my DYK nom update (under Jan. 17). I believe your user page says something about architecture? In an effort to divert the malfeasance of a certain Dutchman, I created Wiel Arets (which went unappreciated) and Kees Christiaanse who Drmies seems to have lived next to and practically grew up with in the same area of Windmills. What kind of architecture are you interested in? Working on? ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Interesting. My next project is to do a write up of this landscape architecture firm [.They're Dutch! Just like tulips, the paint and the best poppy seeds (supposedly). [[User:ChildofMidnight|ChildofMidnight]] (talk) 22:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Edwardian? She worked with Edwin Lutyens? Very British. How tradionalist of you. :) Are you a fan of the architecture, furnishing and decoration that I think were also part of that movement? The gardens over there are beautiful indeed. I used to work at Wave Hill. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:57, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I shoveled mulch. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:03, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Warrington (talk) 16:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Friendly note regarding talk page messages
Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:68.192.223.254, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors like this one- from deleting messages from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or IP header templates (for unregistered editors). These exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 16:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

This is an IP adress, if he-she removes varnings that is for concealing that he was vandalising articles before, Warrington (talk) 16:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps that is the case, but that opinion is not supported by policy. If your are not familiar with it, you may wish to read Don't restore removed comments.  --Kralizec! (talk) 16:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

He or she can get an account and than he had a talk page. Next time you will not block him because he was not warned enough, And this guy would really earned himself a block already.


 * Admins look at the talk page history when reviewing AIV block requests, so blanking warnings is not going to fool us. Additionally, the rights granted by WP:USER (such as being able to remove warnings from your own talk page), apply equally to both registered and un-registered editors like this IP.  --Kralizec! (talk) 16:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Well that is good to know. But what about this edit of this IP, from today? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Toyota_Supra&diff=prev&oldid=266125475

Warrington (talk) 16:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

re: Gigantes
Ah good find. I'm just getting used to Wiki - how do I remove that article? -- George

Topgear4383 (talk) 00:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi
If anything, paprika is a typical Hungarian spice. I don't know about saffron having a special "cultural status" here. Squash Racket (talk) 09:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Problem is I think there are other kinds too that I wouldn't call "common": for example I barely ever heard of chervil. Squash Racket (talk) 09:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, I added a comment, but I'm not an expert on this. The Hungarian text you showed me says that it's typical in French cuisine. It still can be common in Hungarian cuisine, but cooking is not really my hobby. Squash Racket (talk) 09:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, there are dishes in which it is used. I'd say the Hungarian Wikipedia should rather have this spice at the title "Édespetrezselyem" which to me sounds way more familiar than the current title of the article (turbolya?). Cheers, Squash Racket (talk) 09:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

You DO understand Hungarian? Yes, the links you added say that saffron (sáfrány) was widely used in the Middle Ages, but nowadays not so much. Squash Racket (talk) 10:23, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

At User:Warrington/Archive I told you everything I know. You had to remind me even of Bejgli, so believe me I'm not an expert on cooking/food. You can find three different kinds of "Karácsonyi halászlé" here. One more suggestion: contact Hungarian Wikipedians! Most of them speak English very well and some of them surely can answer any kind of food-related questions. Just register there with an account and ask your questions. Squash Racket (talk) 10:56, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, glad I could help. Squash Racket (talk) 06:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Gigantes (Greek Dish)
Hey Warrington, I think you have a point there. Why not simply be bold and merge, even though there is little to merge? I think the redirect can be deleted on request by an admin--right? Or put it up at AfD. Bon appetit, Drmies (talk) 15:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Good move, thanks. If you like monsters at all, I'd suggest Jeffrey Jerome Cohen, Of Giants: Sex, Monsters, and the Middle Ages (1999). Later! Drmies (talk) 17:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * ChildofMidnight once berated me for merging without proper edit summary and he straightened me out, but I don't know exactly what he did or how he did it. Also, I did some copyediting--please look over the article to see if I got it straight. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 17:51, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Poppy seeds, opium, the moon and pastries
Interesting tidbit. Did you know that or did you stumble on it? Thanks for adding it. I did see you add the pastry photos. Sorry I took too long. I was having a long philosophical contemplation about what a pastry is and how pies, danish, tarts and other dishes fit under the pastry umbrella and whether there are certain pastries that are "pure". ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Requested diffs, not warnings
I realize that the IP was warned. I want to see why they were warned. --Onorem♠Dil 14:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Kralizec! added the ISP header with this edit, and there is nothing wrong with the IP removing comments from their talk page. I agree that his comment to Kralizec! was incorrect, but I disagree that it approaches anything blockworthy at this point. --Onorem♠Dil 15:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that this was a bad edit, but that doesn't make it vandalism. Camping World Truck Series is the correct current name of the series. WP:AGF? --Onorem♠Dil 15:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Bad edits made in good faith are not vandalism. And, for the record, I changed the Supra article back to 'is' myself a little while ago when I was looking through his contributions. The cars still exist even if they aren't currently being produced.
 * If he vandalizes, warn him. If he vandalizes again, warn him with the next level template. If vandalism occurs after final warning, take it to AIV. Their removing the warnings doesn't change the process. You just need to look at the talk page history to see which warning should be left next. Make sure to use descriptive edit summaries that indicate the warning level to make it easier. --Onorem♠Dil 15:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Scones
I've been paying a lot of attention to this article, but I'm not any sort of food expert. U.S. sources on scones are very hard to find -- most books only have a paragraph or two, plus some recipes. I see you're involved in food -- do you happen to have access to any good (maybe British) sources on scones? I've been looking everywhere for such a thing. Also, I deleted the picture of scones and honey. There was discussion of it many months ago, and the conclusion was that these are really U.S. Biscuits and honey. If you strongly object, just put it back. (There was also a long discussion about the difference between biscuits and scones. It took over the article for a while, but now it's just a sentence or two.) Lou Sander (talk) 16:09, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

http://www.instructables.com/id/Perfect-English-Scones/ http://www.cakebaker.co.uk/history-scones-griddle-cakes.html

http://www.kitchenproject.com/history/Scones.htm http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/HighTeaHistory.htm

http://www.thenibble.com/REVIEWS/main/breadstuffs/scone-history.asp

Warrington (talk) 19:39, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I took another look at the pastry article and it really looks great. Nice job. Oh, and I checked out ESStonia and won't be making any phone calls to putin, at least I hope not. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Christmas dinner
Please note that since original removal, all I have demanded is the inclusion in the main article of a reliable source that confirms "duck" and "glazed ham" are traditional Dutch Christmas meals.

I thank you for finding the sources you did (although the 101 source is blocked as spam by wiki, so we can't use that); the about.com reference may help to build from. All your sources list "gourmet" and I don't have problem with that. None of them mentions ham or ducks, so based on the sources, that bit has to go.

Stubbornly reverting that removal without providing references (as ChildofMidnight) is close to vandalism. After all we are trying to build an encyclopedia with knowledge that is at least verifiable (and hopefully true). Personal ideas, however likely, should be avoided as much as possible.

I know I may have overreacted by reverting that often, but my only motivation here is to get the article right; and I am deeply worried by the original list which I really don't recognise (I added the fact tags with the Christmas dinner article. I hope we can find a way to get this solved in a constructive way. Arnoutf (talk) 11:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I used you about.com reference to build the Christmas Food section in Dutch Cuisine. It is slightly different from your list (the duck and glazed ham have gone), I also added Christmas brunch with "Kerstbrood" and tried to explain Gourmet in more detail. Can you have a look. Arnoutf (talk) 12:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, perhaps turkey is in. I have not found a source that absolutely confirms it, but this suggests it's well possible to think of turkey as more or less traditional Christmas fare. More later. Drmies (talk) 01:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Funny (perhaps Arnout will get a kick out of this): Jan Cremer has a kerstdiner with gans in De Hunnen and one with kalkoen in Ik Jan Cremer. There are no hits in Gbooks for kerstdiner and ham, so that's a relief. Drmies (talk) 03:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Warrington, when your done with dinner, I think it was you who mentioned the ESStonia article to me? There's a merge proposal you might want to have a look at under discussion on the article's talk page here. Cheers! ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: Edit war
Thank you for the message you left on my talk page. The actions you are describing may be a dispute, but are not vandalism. If you are not familiar with Wikipedia's official vandalism policy, you may wish to review it now, as improperly accusing editors of vandalism is generally viewed as being a bad-faith move. The vandalism policy states, in part, that "any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." Personally, I always recommend that editors follow the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which suggests that if your bold edit is reverted, you take the matter to the talk page, rather than engage in a revert war. However, you should also note that the image use policy discourages use of galleries in articles. Please feel free to let me know if you have any other questions or issues. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, than that means that it is not vandalism, only an edit war. Sorry. The other editor seems to revert me without dicussing anything. I have to note that have been encouraged many times to add galleries to articles, when there was a lot of nice pictures which were not used in the article on Commons. That because many readers do not know how to find them. A dog article, I belive should show good pictures about the dog breed, I think this is one of the main reasons why people want to read dog articles. I think that pictures are an important part of the articles, which, if you remove the pictures, will consist of a large amount of text without any visual documentation.

Warrington (talk) 19:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)