User talk:Deor/Archive2

Re: Tolkein and WWI
Your explanation makes perfect sense. In the context, it seemed strange to jump from a discussion of World War One to a mention of World War Two. But, rereading the quote, and your edit summary, it now makes perfect sense. Thanks, and sorry for the misunderstanding. --- RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  19:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin
Hi. I just wondered if you've considered becoming an admin. You seem experienced enough, so I'd be happy to nominate you if you're interested. Regards. Epbr123 (talk) 19:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your correction. I had simply thought that when the deletion discussion is relisted, everybody may vote again. It was honestly not intentional. I now have changed my "keep" into "comment" for clearity. Again, thanks for your attention.Wild firebird (talk) 19:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Editing...
I really don't see how removing "that" will make a sentence incomprehensible. It states directly and saves time. I was wrong about putting the punctuation in sentence fragments. However, I would have not put them there in the first place if the punctuation wasn't there. As for changing whom to who, I changed it because who is more direct in saying "Heydrich ordered the Jews executed" (whatever was said) as opposed to whom which is more objective. It was very minor and either would have been okay.

Also I removed two sentences that were not necessary.

75.37.206.111 (talk) 21:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * FYI - this user is a sock of banned . He is not permitted to edit Wikipedia and any edits he makes may be reverted. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 21:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Page move
Sorry for that breach of etiquette without using the move function for the Percula clownfish page. Since I already created the Orange clownfish page the move function will not work. Should I wait for any discussion to take place about the name change before soliciting an admin's help? Esoxid (talk) 04:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Thanks
Thank you for tagging 163.153.24.40. The district has reported that the "students have been identified and will be disciplined by their principal. Also their computer access has been disabled." --NERIC-Security (talk) 16:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Clark Ashton Smith dates
Thanks for checking the dates, and for noting that I hadn't signed! I'm something of a newbie here so expect possible further gaffes. Humphreyswill (talk) 16:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Ezra Pound
Hi,

Was wondering if you knew this poem by Ezra Pound.
 * 'And when I woke,the marrow
 * Out of my bones ran out
 * That you were the friend I dreamt for
 * But not the dream I woke for
 * And so I put this down for
 * Doubt for doubt'

Google search turned up only 1 result. http://forum.quoteland.com/1/OpenTopic?a=emf&s=586192041&f=5511096101&m=8161958295&p=1

Thanks in advance :) Gingerjoos (talk) 15:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. That's what I thought too. Gingerjoos (talk) 15:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Wonderful news :) So we can put that to rest. Thanks for clearing the doubt and showing me what to do when Google search doesn't give the answer. Gingerjoos (talk) 00:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

BARBARO FAMILY TODAY
Hey Deor, how ya doin- good to be talking to a fellow Wikiperson. I left info on the Barbaro family talk page about the point that I cited. I don't know a whole lot about existing Barbaros- but I would like to find out more about them, and I think indicating that the house is still alive is very relevant. I think the point should remain. Go Giants!!! Mctrain (talk) 00:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

McTrain

Hey Deor- what's goin on? The Barbaro page has got my attention right now- but I will close it up soon- writing history is too much hard work- but I guess it is rewarding. I scooped up some good resources from the library- I will finish the section I'm working on right now about the paintings in the palace- then I will add another section about the Barbaro's bid over the building of the Rialto bridge- That should give a pretty snazzy over view of the house. I'll also keep my eyes pealed about any info of current Barbs- but right now I got nothing really juicey except some references to their southern Italian holdings as well as divisions between Venetian barbs and Malta barbs.

Keep it cool!

The one; the only McT

P.S. I'll try to cut down on the number of edits, but I hate the type on the edit page- it makes it difficult to see mistakes- Wiki should do somethingabout that- or add a spell check or something- any who- take care Deor.Mctrain (talk) 03:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta (LCIA)
You've removed all links to the LCIA from Wikipedia, and while I understand where you are coming from, there is no consistency. As an example, in the list of Canadian Hospitals, the Ottawa Heart Institute is listed under Ottawa, Ontario, yet you removed the Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, which I added under Calgary, Alberta section. Both of the institutes mentioned have similar mandates.

The LCIA, a partnership between the University of Calgary and the Calgary Health Region, is certainly a content area expert, and I do also believe it is fair to list it as an external link for pagest discussing Cardiovascular Sciences and related clinical areas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.48.148.189 (talk) 16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Bobby!
SOME ONE DELETED MY BOBBY PAGE!!!

WHY?!?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.240.140.66 (talk) 23:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Please advise
Hey Deor,

What's going on- have ya checked out the Barbaro family page I have been working on- lookin pretty good!(lol) I just finished adding the notables from the pre-fall Venice grouping- the next pahse is to add a "New Directions" section that will talk about the titles, holdings, and notables that follow. Now, I need your expertise- I know that there has been some issue with the "Vitus" dude being a hoax, which he is not. I have info pertaining to a Bruce Goff exhibition about him from the Art Institute of Chicago- and official records about him taking on his title.

There seems to be some fools that found out about him, and decided to play games with him- when he took on his title, he was required to post his name in the Chicago Newspaper ( He is/was from Chicago) Check out [](www.avoision.com/2004/08). The guy is completely innocent, and deserves to be recognized.

I would like to get to the point where we are completely up to the present with the House, and I especially like that he is an American and one of our own- but I don't want to open up a hoax can of worms again. if it is cool, I would like to add him in briefly somewhere.

Shoot back a reply!

McTMctrain (talk) 05:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Mctrain (talk) 05:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey Deor, I don't know if that link is working- it may be better to: www.avoision.com/2004/08 Then, go to Aug. 26, 2004- open up, if you are gonna do something. This seems to be like a group of trouble makers that must have come across his name in wikiland. Mctrain (talk) 05:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey Deor,

what's up! I think stopping at the fall of Venice is good enough, but do not remove the Roman roots section- the family is completeley recorded as such- and if you like, I can even write out completey the way it is recorded in Italian too- that information is not copming from some author's ideas or hear say- it is contained within the official historical record of the house. It is part of their official and authentic history as recorded as such.

Stay cool, McT

Ps. I just might give the article a once over from this point forward for clean up- and just a little closing section to tie it all together.Mctrain (talk) 14:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

FantasyLiterature.net links
Hi Deor, You've removed my links to FantasyLiterature.net, and I understand the reasons you mention. However, I'd like to ask you to reconsider for a couple of reasons:

1. Our pages at FantasyLiterature.net have extra, relevant information that is not on Wikipedia. We have publisher's descriptions of novels, novels listed in order by series, author interview, reviews, upcoming publication dates, and we display the cover art of each novel. These are features that any person interested in a fantasy author definitely wants to see.

2. Current Wikipedia author pages have external links to very similar websites. Fantastic Fiction is just one of several. It is similar to our site, except that it does not have interviews or reviews or the latest coverart. You have removed my link from Joan Aiken's page, but kept a link for a very old page (updated 20 years ago) of a personal website: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tibsnjoan/JoanAiken/  How is my page not more relevant?

3. I AM affiliated with the website, but I'll bet that many of your external links are created by people affiliated with the sites they list.

4. I am not promoting a product or trying to alter search engine rankings. I think we have an excellent resource that would be extremely useful for people who are looking for information about particular fantasy authors. If I were looking up these authors, I would certainly want to know about FantasyLiterature.net.

Thanks for hearing me out, and I hope you'll reconsider. I admire your work (mostly). :)  Kahooper (talk) 19:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)Kahooper


 * Note this discussion WLU (talk) 22:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

FanLit Links again
You have deleted links to FantasyLiterature.net, saying they don't fit Wikipedia's guidelines. However, number 4 of the guidelines states that links SHOULD be included to:

"4. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews."

FantasyLiterature.net contains reviews and interviews and therefore, according to Wikipedia guidelines, should be included. I own the website and will ask our readers not to add links to author articles that we do not have reviews or interviews for.

Thank you. Kahooper (talk) 19:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)kahooper

Revert needed
Some anon keeps putting unverified statements into John Amos (history). You deleted these comments once and I have deleted them twice. I have already reverted once today and I don't want to do it again today. Would you mind deleting the comments again? Thanks. Life of Riley (talk) 20:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

redirects
You suggested Ancient Canaan be redirected to Canaan. Instead, ASEOR2 redirected ancient israel to ancient canaan: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ancient_Israel&action=history - did he have any authority to do so? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 23:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Barbaro
Hi, sorry for not replying earlier- unfortunately I don't have access to any of those books- ideally we need someone with access to a University library in Italy or the US which would likely have those and the Spretti book so we can check it all in one go? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 20:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

hi!
If you're so concerned about the middle earth articles - perhaps you'd like to have a go at -

a. Removing copyrighted images that DO NOT fall under the fair use category under any realistic measure

b. removing excessive fan cruft, speculation, original research, repetition accross articles, etc

c. removing excessive use of single line quotes from various books by replacing them with your own work

d. Adding references to the articles.

If you feel the need to respond why not do so at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Middle-earth77.86.8.83 (talk) 16:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

McT Here, Howz it Goin Deor
Hey, Deor- got your message and posted on the Grace TdC board. That article is a keeper, great info and super nice tie in to 50/60's high fashion and high society, make sure you read the "Roma" appendage to that florentine exhibition catalogue, there is two great fashion photos of her! Take it easy, Deor! McTMctrain (talk) 03:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Deor, I am writting to just notify you that a riot has started against perfectly good work. I see now that people have attacked the Lucien Ruolle article too. I will no longer contribute to writing any Wikipedia articles any longer from this point forward. It is too much work on my part, and not appreciated. I will only edit trivial stuff from this point forward that does not require any real work on my part- I will not waste my time with those who love mindlessly to destroy rather than build- what a shame.Mctrain (talk) 06:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I forgot to also add O. A. Thorp Scholastic Academy has also been attacked- How pathetic!Mctrain (talk) 06:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Let me just close by pointing out- how rediculous this all is. The O.A Thorp page got flagged for needing citations, when it is completely cited. Then it got flagged for not being notabale- What? It is a magnet school that even on the talk page has a marking of being part of project Chicago. Then the person who flaged it says the sourcing doesn't reference the article- What?Every bit of info on that article comes from those sources. Good bye- I don't waste time with stupidity- or people that send bad karma.Mctrain (talk) 06:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Archiving
Hi Deor,

I noticed your talk page is massive! Have you considered archiving? Any pages that are extremely long are harder to navigate and takes a very long time to load when the editor is using a slower connection. If you paste the following template at the top of the page, it'll archive automatically, using Miszabot.

By changing the algo to other figures, you can adjust when the sections are archived - 7d is 7 days, 30d is 30 days, 72h is 72 hours. maxarchivesize adjusts how big the archive will get before it starts a new one. You can also just delete old posts once they're resolved - it's legit, but most other editors consider it less preferable. Misza is automatic and works pretty well from my limited use. WLU (talk) 14:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Well Deor, You Have a Lot of Explaining to Do
Please do tell, how an article based on a magnet school is not noteworthy, and how is EDWARD 321 able to justify the page being flagged when it is completely sourced by the sources given. There are tons of school articles out there, of schools of zero consequence, yet an important MAGNET SCHOOL is an issue. You started all of this DEOR- you are the one at fault for causing all of this damage- speak up for your actions, and your lack of doing anything about this. Mctrain (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I added 3 links now to the Ruffo fact of a Skull and Crossbones being his emblem, and EDWARD 321 reverted yet agin, giving a bogus answer. With all do respect Deor, you are to blame what you started, and at fault for not steppin up and fixing this. You are honestly going to tell me that if you google "Ruffo di Calabria Skull" that you are not able to find sources proving his emblem, you are honestly going to tell me that a magnet school is not a noteworthy topic. Enough and Good bye, becuase I know your types, you pour gasoline on to fire and light a match and then walk away pretending that you were not responsible for what you did- but you are completely at fault and have done nothing about it.Mctrain (talk) 17:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Mctrain
I just reported him for using his dynamic IP to edit around the block. Edward321 (talk) 00:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

O A Thorp Scholastic Academy
Hi, why did you put back the flag to the thorp school article. I left a message about it on the discussion page. thank you65.141.156.1 (talk) 03:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

There is no need to flag thorp school, I have the bungalow book. thank you65.141.156.1 (talk) 03:23, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing the thorp page- I am from chicago- I know the school thank you.65.141.156.1 (talk) 03:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, stop vandalizing the page! Also, can the photo from the book be added if the photo is an old one. thank you65.141.156.1 (talk) 03:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you help me with adding a picture? Please leave message on O A Thorp Scholastic Academy talk page- I'll check tomorrow, thank you65.141.156.1 (talk) 03:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi again today, never mind, I see the link you left on the talk page has some of the book's photos on it that says copyrighted-so never mind then. thank you65.141.157.60 (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Julian Z. Gilbert
Hey. I've nominated Julian Z. Gilbert for deletion for violating WP:V. Let me know what you think. Corvus cornix talk   —Preceding comment was added at 21:33, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, I've sort of decided to stop responding to Mctrain. Corvus cornix talk  23:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The Courtly Love Article
Okay, I understand how it wouldn't necessarily fit with the material, but the things written are crazy! Catholics don't believe the things that the words written in "Analysis" imply - it is not a "cult" of the Virgin Mary. We honor her, not "worship her". So how would you suggest it be written? The words written currently are not accurate. I'd like to hear your suggestion. Respectfully, Austenfann. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Austenfann (talk • contribs) 20:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message, Deor! I still feel as though the article is written from a bit of a secular, indifferent view. Thank you again for explaining. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Austenfann (talk • contribs) 21:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Frank Hoidas
Hi Deor, Could you please give me some guidelines for my research on Frank Hoidas (ie. what sort of things should I concentrate on?)  I do not wish to waste time researching to have an article deleted. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitetail 31 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my mistake
On the recent AfD...I hadn't considered that adding a heading would mess up various pages where an AfD is transcluded. Thanks for catching that. Wikidemo (talk) 19:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Stumped
Hi Deor:

I'm stumped as to what this edit did, so thought I would ask.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=False_document&action=history

Was there any change made?

Thank you,  Wanderer57 (talk) 05:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Response
Check here for more details to the message on my talk page. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 01:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

DRV
If you bothered to check my actual rationale for the close, you would see that what I did was in fact, a part of process. Regards. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 15:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

New policy proposal that may be of interest
I'm tapping this message out to you because you were involved at the AfDs of Eve Carson or Lauren Burk. Following both of these heated debates, a new proposal has been made for a guideline to aid these contentious debates, which can be found at WP:N/CA. There is a page for comments at Wikipedia talk:Notability (criminal acts)/Opinions should you wish to make a comment. Thanks for your time, and apologies if this was not of interest! Fritzpoll (talk) 15:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

proposal to merge WP:PROF into WP:BIO
There is an ongoing discussion of a proposal to merge WP:PROF into WP:BIO at Wikipedia talk: Notability (academics). Since you have commented in AfD discussions for articles about academics, you may want to participate in the discussion of this merge proposal. Regards, Nsk92 (talk) 12:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
For this! Van Tucky 21:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

(Heading added for clarity)
Yes i am aware of this, i beleive that someone is logging in as me and or posing as me. since am at a public cafe —Preceding unsigned comment added by Triippe (talk • contribs) 12:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Foot and Mouse
Thanks for looking up this cryptic oath in Partridge's Dictionary. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 01:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

???
Can I enquire as to why you persist in deleting my posts on the M.R James page? We are just letting M.R James fans know that a new adaptation is due for release, which I'm sure they appreciate. Can you please stop this in future, we are not spamming as all our services are free of charge. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr mega drive (talk • contribs) 13:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Rolling Hills Middle School
Hi, I wonder if you would consider a merge/redirect !vote now I have written a page on the school district, please? TerriersFan (talk) 16:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm slow today
I'm afraid I don't get the Seneca reference. --Relata refero (talk) 20:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, a very good one, all the better for the work I had to do for the payoff. Relata refero (talk) 20:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, though I find it difficult to avoid doing that sometimes. I don't know if you've seen this, but its been going around recently, and people seem to agree that it summarises that dire temptation. -- Relata refero (talk) 20:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

trouble
excuse me? i have nominated pages that are clearly deletable, if they were so clearly notable they would be automatically delisted so don't whine at me for trying to erase an article you may like. Why not improve it instead of threaten me. You wikipedia people are so full of it. As for that redirect, i was just being bold.NewAtThis (talk) 03:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

What's this all about anyways?NewAtThis (talk) 04:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm so Sorry
I was unaware that you are a world authority on M.R James I was also unaware that you are also an expert in film production. I humbly beg your pardon Lord Pedia, may your superior intellect never impair your ability to walk through doors. You have no right to decide what a notable adaptation is or not we have hundreds of M.R James fans waiting for this adaptation and therefore it is notable.

I strongly suggest you reappraise your misguided appraisal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr mega drive (talk • contribs) 11:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
This is just a quick thanks for the stress you've relieved me. Thanks again :)-- penubag  (talk) 01:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Requests for checkuser/Case/Boomgaylove
Hello! I don't know if you've looked back at that page, but a number of additional sock farms have been uncovered for accounts that participated in some AfDs you and I also participated in. Anyway, you may want to check the updates. Best, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 03:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The Barbaro hoaxer is back
See here. Edward321 (talk) 23:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Argus-Bot
Thanks for catching his/her date changes in Oakie Doke and Video CD I currently have posted my concerns over at AN/I AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 19:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Windows Vista RTM software compatibility list
Hello, I recently made a page called 'Windows Vista RTM software compatibility list' and a tag has been placed on it. It says it appears to be a repost of material, would you be able to give me a link to the original one because I can't seem to find it. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshK123 (talk • contribs) 10:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry about that :S I didn't even see your tag when I started mine up with twinkle. (Twinkle doesn't do anything until I finish writing up my nomination, so I didn't see the page reload with your nomination until after I submitted mine). Best, -- B figura (talk) 03:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Ibn Battuta
Thanks for your comment. I've looked for the multi volume version on Amazon, but none of the sellers seem to indicate if it's the copy made up of selected passages or the entire work. I will contact each seller, but that will take a while for their replies. In the meantime, do you know where I could find the full version? --Ghostexorcist (talk) 23:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I found the full set on bookfinder.com for $530. I have no problem paying a little more for scholarly books, but that is a bit too much. How much did you initially pay for just the first three volumes? I've contacted the Hakluyt Society to see how much they are offering the set for. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 09:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I found someone on Alibris that was selling the first three volumes for $40. They claim the books are brand new. I can always report the seller to Alibris and get my money back if the volumes are not as they claim. I purchased volume 4 and the index from two other sellers for $30 each (minus S & H). $100 for the lot is not bad at all. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 02:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Volumes I-III arrived today and they are in very good condition. I'm still waiting on IV and V. Thanks for referring me to the best edition of his travels. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Archiving
Can you help me archiving the Barbaro family talk page? Alot is old talk and can be filed away. I did not want to purposely clean the page, but got screwed up in the process-archiving is very tricky. I tried to follow the cut and paste method and the directions that were given, but I screwed up in the process, if you can archive for me that would be great. I would appreciate your assistance. Thanks14:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, nice to hear from a fellow Wikipedian! It's fine to leave it too, I just thought that since most of the talk is old stuff pertaining to the construction of the article, that it can just be filed away- and a clean page can be left for relevent talk about the constructed article. I think it would be better archived away, if you know how to that that sort of thing, you would be a great help, but I leave it up to you, since I tried several times- and screwed up in the process. Thank you for the reply, hope to talk to you again. Best, Mctrain.Mctrain (talk) 15:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Friendly notice
Only can admin can remove a copyvio I will report this to the Admins if you revert it again. Sur de Filadelfia (talk) 01:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: your message on my talk page.
Sent you an email. --barneca (talk) 16:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * And, in that email, I mentioned my sandbox, but I think it was the wrong one. Try User:Barneca/Sandboxen/Page1. --barneca (talk) 16:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks....
for your support on my recent RFA. I appreciated the kind words about my answers... they took some work and care so good to get positive feedback on them! Thanks again! --Slp1 (talk) 21:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply
Oh, thank you for telling me. Regards, RyRy5  ( talk ) 12:16, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's back to normal now. I'm sorry for the trouble. If your going to reply, please do so here. Best, RyRy5  ( talk ) 12:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Ruben Serrano
Thanks for correcting my entry :) Wpedzich (talk) 19:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

amovrvs
what's ur problem, why u keep deleting my stuff. Amovrvs (talk) 03:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

amovrvs
what dont you understand about sestertia milia, it's very straight forward, is roman money mathematics. who are you to delete something that is accurate especially of the roman money system. Amovrvs (talk) 03:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

amovrvs
you dont even know what ur talking about, you sound like some sort of moron saying because you dont understand something that it's not real. you really piss me off, punk.Amovrvs (talk)

Barbaro family
I engaged in a long conversation with Daniel yesterday- and he also presented to me the case file that showed where the nature of the hoax was. Someome is trying to attribute some groups known as the Pugilist Club and the Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent to this family. I have never heard of any such groups, and more importantly, I have never seen any attribution of such groups ever to this family. The info and sourcing that I am restoring is good, but make sure that none of these two organizations are ever connected to the barbaro family- those societies/clubs are surely a hoax- or at least, unable to ever be verified by anyone.Chiboyers (talk) 18:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Random userpage question
Dear Deor, regarding your userpage bit about "I once walked...", are you referring to Hjaðningavíg? Best, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 19:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

ANI
"Recrudescence" - wow, I think I just found my five-dollar word for the day. =) Cheers! Tony Fox (arf!) 17:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

"Großdeutschland"
Howdy, Deor, and thanks for helping on my Language RD query. Now my focus is on the term Großdeutschland, if you'd be so kind as to have another look there, I've explicated my options and could do with further advice... ''Thanks again! Deborahjay (talk) 20:43, 10 June 2008 (UTC)'' Further: The Großdeutschland page is an excellent direction, thanks to you, and spurred me to come up with what may be the solution... confirm or challenge, please? -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Red rot
Some days ago, you answered my reference desk question about red rot. Two more questions I'd like to ask: because the box with which I most recently worked was filled with somewhat redrotten books, my clothes are now more dusty than before. (1) Is the black dust from the books also red rot, even though it's not red? (2) When I do my laundry in a few days, I'll not want it to come out stained. Will I have to take special measures? Thanks for all your help! Nyttend backup (talk) 04:21, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your quick response, though :-) Tonight's time (I'm allowed to look around while not officially working) revealed a lot of these books; I may well end up taking a big picture of a redrotten book next to my redrotdust-covered hand, to demonstrate what it looks like.  Nyttend (talk) 04:36, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

The unjustified disruptive deletions of Deor in the Celestial spheres article?
Please see Celestial Spheres Talk of 20 June for this contribution:

Logicus writes: User Deor has adopted McCluskey's practice of unjustifiably deleting highly relevant and informative material on the celestial spheres added to the article, in compliance with Wikipedia's request for expansion in general, and in particular in line with the views of Edward Grant, whose views were advocated by McCluskey above on 19 June, that discussion of the physical nature of the celestial spheres was a central topic of medieval science.

Logicus added at the beginning of the section 'Middle Ages': "Since it was unanimously agreed [in the middle ages] that the planets and stars were carried round on physical spheres, numerous questions were posed about the nature and motion of those spheres. How many are there ? Does God move the primum mobile or first moveable sphere, directly and actively as an efficient cause, or only as a final or ultimate cause ? Are all the heavens moved by one mover or several; and if by several, what kinds are they ? Are the celestial movers conjoined to their orbs or distinct from them ? Are the spheres moved by intelligences, angels, forms or souls, or by some principle inherent in their very matter ? Do celestial movers experience exhaustion or fatigue ? Does the celestial region form a continuous whole, or are the spheres contiguous and distinct ? Are the orbs all of the same specific nature or of different natures ? Are the orbs concentric with the Earth as common centre, or is it necessary to assume eccentric and epicyclic orbs ? The nature of celestial matter was widely discussed. Was it like terrestrial matter in possessing an inherent substantial form and inherent qualities such as hot, cold, moist and dry ? Does it undergo change involving generation and corruption, increase and diminution ?"[ref>Quotation from Edward Grant's Cosmology, Chapter 8 of Science in the Middle Ages Lindberg(Ed)1978 Chicago p268. To this list should surely be added the following two most crucially important questions: Do the spheres obey the laws of terrestrial motion ? Do the spheres have any inherent resistance to motion or not ?

Arguably this list also provides a most useful guide to issues that need discussing in the article.

But Deor deleted this addition with an untenable justification, namely "noninformative long quotation". Why ? It is surely highly informative about the issues discussed on the nature of the spheres in the middle ages.

Deor also deleted the highly informative centrally relevant section added by Logicus on the Parisian impetus dynamics of the spheres. This issue is traditionally regarded as of great relevance in the history of physics and astronomy because of allegedly being the very first elimination of animistic explanations of celestial motion that explained the sphere's rotations in terms of their supposed souls instead of its explanation in terms of terrestrial physics, namely impetus dynamics.

Logicus had added the following text to the end of the 'Middle Ages' section

Parisian impetus dynamics and the celestial spheres In the 14th century the logician and natural philosopher Jean Buridan, Rector of Paris University, subscribed to the Avicennan variant of Aristotelian impetus dynamics according to which impetus is conserved forever in the absence of any resistance to motion, rather than being evanescent and self-decaying as in the Hipparchan variant. In order to dispense with the need for positing continually moving intelligences or souls in the celestial spheres, which he pointed out are not posited by the Bible, he applied impetus theory to their endless rotation by extension of a terrestrial example of its application to rotary motion in the form of a rotating millwheel that continues rotating for a long time after the originally propelling hand is withdrawn, driven by the impetus impressed within it.[ref>According to Buridan's theory impetus acts in the same direction or manner in which it was created, and thus a circularly or rotationally created impetus acts circularly thereafter. He wrote on the celestial impetus of the spheres as follows: "God, when He created the world, moved each of the celestial orbs as He pleased, and in moving them he impressed in them impetuses which moved them without his having to move them any more...And those impetuses which he impressed in the celestial bodies were not decreased or corrupted afterwards, because there was no inclination of the celestial bodies for other movements. Nor was there resistance which would be corruptive or repressive of that impetus."[ref>Questions on the Eight Books of the Physics of Aristotle: Book VIII Question 12  English translation in Clagett's 1959 Science of Mechanics in the Middle Ages  p536

However, having discounted the possibility of any resistance due to a contrary inclination to move in any opposite direction and due to any external resistance, Buridan obviously also discounted any inherent resistance to motion in the form of an inclination to rest within the spheres themselves, such as the inertia posited by Averroes and Aquinas. And in fact contrary to that inertial variant of Aristotelian dynamics, according to Buridan "prime matter does not resist motion". But this then raises the question within Aristotelian dynamics of why the motive force of impetus does not therefore move them with infinite speed. The impetus dynamics answer seemed to be that it was a secondary kind of motive force that produced uniform motion rather than infinite speed, just as it seemed Aristotle had supposed the planets' moving souls do, or rather than uniformly accelerated motion like the primary force of gravity did by producing increasing amounts of impetus.

Logicus proposes Deor attempts to justify his arguably vandalous deletions in this forum or else desists from such deletion.

--Logicus (talk) 15:53, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Kansas Jayhawks
Thanks for joining the discussion at Kansas Jayhawks, wondering what you think the best course of action is to deal with the continued edit warring. Do we let people remove information sourced with reliable third-party sources? It seems to me consensus must be formed to remove the information, consensus is not need to keep it in the article. Anyways, I've left it removed for now, I've already gotten too close to edit warring. Grey Wanderer | Talk 20:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Chunk-aretha
Deor! Haha (lots)... Julia Rossi (talk) 09:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your answer to my question on signature songs, that had been gnawing at my head for a while.... 71.125.116.230 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Careful
Scorn or not, tripping-over-ourselves or not, please be careful to not call people nicknames which they could perceive as insulting (like "Pumpkin" for LGRDC). Okay?

(and I really am not familiar with the scenario at all)

DS (talk) 03:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)



Everyme has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, and remember: "All men are created equal, but ambition, or lack of it, soon separates them."Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
 * lawyering, passive-aggressive, disruptive — spot on. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 18:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

José Aboulker
Thanks, Deor, for your input and explanations clarifying the terms of my recent query on the Language Ref Desk. I'm compiling some material on the subject's WWII resistance activities, but thought to look over the extant text before I make any changes. I hope my French is up to making the comparison with the French WP source text; most likely I'll recruit a better-qualified editor to undertake the task. -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Robert Baron (Freiher) von Heine-Geldern
Hi there. A week or so ago you said you suspected this article of being a copy violation. I noticed Wikipedia already has an article on this person, Robert von Heine-Geldern, so I've changed the dodgy one to a redirect. Not that it'll be particularly useful as "Freiherr" is spelled wrong in the article name, but anyway. Cheers. Reyk YO!  07:21, 29 June 2008 (UTC)