User talk:Chaoborus

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

--Pymouss44 Causer  04:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Kandawgyi National Gardens
Sorry about this very delayed response. I've been relatively inactive on Wikipedia lately due to schoolwork. I believe I got the information from the Ministry of Forestry website link, but the website now oddly appears to have been redesigned and the web pages are now gone. Sorry about not citing it beforehand. I'll keep searching for another citation to back this up. -Hintha (talk) 00:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Adequate paraphrasing
No, I stated the paraphrasing was adequate because I didn't think it was adequate. It was opposite day that day, you see. But my facetiousness aside, if you feel the paraphrasing is inadequate, I do more than respect that though. It's pretty darn subjective, and an AfD or PROD wouldn't be a move I'd at all find unreasonable if you wanted to get other input. Or, heck, ask another admin if you see fit. I'm by no means any sort of final authority, just somebody making a subjective judgement call. At any rate, the image is a moot point. There's no need to ask me to confirm my opinion on a picture I've never voiced an opinion on. - Vianello (Talk) 04:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh. I apologize if my way of speaking was confusing. My first comment in my reply was sarcasm, just to make sure I am being clearly understood. But I do quite mean the rest. No one person has the final ultimate say here, so it's okay to talk to somebody else for another opinion if you disagree. - Vianello (Talk) 03:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Type 59
Hello.

Like in the Soviet T-54, T-54A and so on, the heavy anti-aircraft machine gun is mounted on the loader's hatch. As far as I know there's no such thing as the gunner's hatch in the T-54/T-55/Type 59/ Type 69/Type 79 family of vehicles. It's most probably the loader's hatch called "gunner's hatch" by mistake.

Regards. - SuperTank17 (talk) 14:24, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Western Satraps, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Broach and Castana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

RE: SUL
Thanks for the usurpation on fr, and thanks for being very fast!  Wagner u t   c  23:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Colossochelys atlas redirect
Does the redirect † Geochelone atlas have any purpose? Can it be deleted? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have requested deletion of the redirect. 18:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SunCreator (talk • contribs)

Talkback
Fai zan  13:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 16Volt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carrie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Problems with fr:Pierrot (commedia dell'arte)
Bonjour!

Please forgive me for writing in English; my written French is, quite frankly, crude. You and I corresponded briefly last year about a detail in the French Jean-Gaspard Deburau page. I wonder if you could help me out with another problem.

Over the last few days, I've been making small corrections of errors (of which I am, alas, the source) on the Charles Deburau and Paul Legrand pages in French Wikipedia. Yesterday, just out of curiosity, I took a look at the French fr:Pierrot (commedia dell'arte) page. I was, I regret to say, shocked and appalled. I immediately wrote the following paragraph, intending to post it on the corresponding "Discussion" page:


 * There are many false statements and inaccuracies in this article. The biggest mistake is the confusion of the French Pierrot with the Italian Pedrolino (see the English Wikipages on the two types), as well as the confusion of both with other zanni.  (Such confusion stems from early and now out-dated 19th/20th-century scholarship on the Commedia dell'arte, especially that of P.-L. Duchartre.)  Pedrolino does not appear in comedies by either Castelletti or Cecchi; the valet is "Pierro" in Castelletti's comedy, and "Pietro" in Cecchi's I Bernardi (not J. Bernardi).  There is indeed a "Pedrolin" in Groto's La Alteria (not L'Altiera), which was published in 1587, several years after the actor Giovanni Pellesini (unmentioned in the article) had created the role&mdash;Pedrolino&mdash;and made it his own.  Why Storey's two books (and no one else's) are listed in the Bibliography is a mystery, since, in the earlier of the two, he makes the distinction between Pedrolino and Pierrot very clear.  Has this writer done nothing but jumble together some half-digested (and obsolete) secondary&mdash;or maybe just tertiary&mdash;sources?

Since writing this, I've had second thoughts. I don't want to alienate any of the editors of the page; I certainly don't want to come off as the typical arrogant American. How do you think this should be handled? At the very least, the crude errors should be corrected (J. Bernardi, L'Altiera, the implication that Pedrolino appears by name in the dramatis personae of the Castelletti and Cecchi comedies). But I think it's important that the "first" and "second" zanni distinction be drawn (see the English Pedrolino), even if the author still thinks a case can be made that Pierrot is a descendant of Pedrolino. As for the other zanni mentioned in the article&mdash;Bertoldo, Pagliaccio, etc.&mdash;I think they should be removed. Lumping all these types together is like saying that Jerry Lewis, Lou Costello, and Stan Laurel were all portraying the same character, since they can all be dumped into the category of the "stooge" who plays to the straight man.

I regard the character of Pierrot as an extremely important French contribution to art&mdash;a character that was pivotal, in fact, to the emergence of Modernism in literature, music, painting, and dance. (Jules Laforgue's Pierrots taught T.S. Eliot "how to speak," as he himself acknowledged. Without them, J. Alfred Prufrock may never have been born.  And what would Rouault have done without Pierrot?)  I think this Wikipage does a grave disservice to that contribution.

Thanks for whatever help you can give me. Beebuk 12:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Many thanks! I very much appreciate your time and help!  Beebuk 01:41, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Salut
Je ne peux plus rien faire sur le wiki français, contrairement aux autres wikis, alors que je trouve souvent de quoi y apporter ma contribution. Je travaille surtout dans le wiki breton. Bianchi-Bihan (talk) 21:50, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Votre blocage sur mon compte sur fr.wikipedia (de Cvrx)
Bonsoir User:Chaoborus

Le 20 juin à 1h49 de Paris, vous m'annoncez sur ma page de discussion que je suis bloqué pour 150 ans et précisez :

« Ce blocage est effectif sur l’ensemble des pages de Wikipédia, excepté votre page de discussion. »

C'est faux : je suis bloqué aussi sur ma page de discussion ! Pouvez-vous y remédier ? Grand merci d'avance !

J'ai en effet l'intention d'exercer la possibilité que vous me laissez : « Si vous estimez ce blocage injustifié, ajoutez le texte suivi de vos arguments sur cette page. » Je compte bien le faire.

Je n'ai pas eu le temps matériel de rédiger ma défense entre la demande de blocage par [[User:Azurfrog|], le 19 juin à 14h08 et le blocage.

Ce qui serait équitable, d'ailleurs, est que je puisse publier ma défense sur la page sur laquelle est présentée la demande de blocage, ici : Requête aux administrateurs#Demande de blocage significatif contre un contributeur « ayant du goût pour Asselineau »

Merci d'avance : je tiens à ce compte qui existe depuis le 24 juin 2008, et qui est intervenu sur de multiples sujets parfois très controversés qui n'ont strictement rien à voir avec le sujet Asselineau dont je suis prétendu monomaniaque (c'est bien cela que veut dire CAOU ?)

Ma dernière intervention sur un article remonte au 17 juin à 13h27

Ma dernière intervention sur une page de discussion d'article remonte au 19 juin à 12h53

La demande de blocage par Azurfrog remonte au 19 juin à 14h08.

Le 19 juin à 23h20, je prévenais sur ma pdd Azurfrog qui avait eu la bonté de me faire part le sa demande de blocage, que je me mettais à rédiger ma défense et que j'espérais que les administrateurs me laisseraient le temps nécessaire…

Le blocage était effectif le 20 juin à 1h49.

Tout ce que je demande, c'est le moyen matériel de présenter ma défense. Pour l'instant je n'en ai aucun, même pas celui de publier sur ma propre page de discussion, contrairement à ce que vous avez écrit.

Cvrx (talk) 01:05, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅ Chaoborus (talk) 01:15, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Merci Chaoborus ! J'ai pu faire ma demande de déblocage ! Cvrx (talk) 05:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)