User talk:Grandscribe

Tone
Hi. In your most recent comment on Talk:Linux, starting with "There was never a "consensus", your tone sounds like you're trying to argue against someone, but the person you're replying to has already express an opinion similar to yours. I just thought I'd point this out in case there's a miscommunication and to avoid friction. --Gronky (talk) 22:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thaks for pointing that.I'll fix it.--Grandscribe (talk) 06:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

A "short" list of publications only from 2007 and 2008 using the term GNU/Linux.
There is discussion going on right now in the Linux Talk page proposed by some who want to remove the term GNU/Linux from Wikipedia. The list below is just a small example that the naming GNU/Linux is actively used by a long list of authors. All of those books use the name GNU/Linux. Wikipedia should continue to use the name GNU/Linux.

Continued edit warring
Constantly shouting me out in edit summaries is not helping your argument. I have agreed not to edit articles which says "GNU/Linux" to say "Linux" in the general case; in the interests of not edit warring, you would do well to follow the same policy. For now, take the time to contribute to the current discussion, as you haven't replied to it in some time. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

gNewSense introduction
Regarding this comment, do you mind trying to talk some sense into User:Mion? He just summarily reverted the edit you agreed with. I would rather end this feud. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Edit Summary
In your revert of Kubuntu (here) you provided the edit summary "Anonymous user should register before editing.". This is not policy, and not required. It has been proposed in the past, but failed (see Editors should be logged in users, Disabling edits by unregistered users and stricter registration requirement). Wikipedia is open to anyone to edit, and not being logged in is not valid criteria to revert. --Falcorian (talk) 19:25, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Falcorian. Thanks for the information. I left a reply in your Talk page. --Grandscribe (talk) 13:54, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Jacqueline Saburido
I removed the tag, changed one link, and added the TX DWI link. Why didn't you just add the link yourself? Bearian (talk) 21:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Mozilla Firefox
Something I always failed to understand, being a open source free browser, how does Mozilla make profits? Do you know?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 08:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 08:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Linux distro's “Unix-like” family
I feel that putting “Unix-like” on distro pages, while technically correct, is misleading. Unix is not just the culmination of idioms common in ... Unix-like OS (filesystem hierarchy, just to name one simple thing), but could very well refer to the ancient technology from the 80s and 90s, and I think Linux has set itself off enough from Unix to be considered its own entity. Still counting Linux to Unix is a bit like declaring Vista “DOS-like” because they are still using the filesystem non-hierarchy aka drive letters. Comments please. —j.engelh (talk) 02:08, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I left reply on your talk page.--Grandscribe (talk) 08:19, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Chris is back to his GNU/ removal campaign
I just noticed that Thumperward has gone back to his Summer '07 hobby of removing mentions of "GNU/Linux" from Wikipedia. As usual, he does this with either a blank edit summary or with a mention of "consistent terminology". But it's not hard to find the edits. When I checked his recent edits for articles that look related to desktop software, all were for the purpose of removing "GNU/Linux".

If he uses his old edit flood tactic, then I won't be able to stop this vandalism. He has way more free time than I do :-/ Anyway, just thought I'd let you know. If you can limit some of his messing, that would be great. I'll try to do my part too.

BTW, his edit summary justification of "use consistent terminology throughout article" could equally be used by anyone who wants to replace all "Linux" with "GNU/Linux" :-) --Gronky (talk) 21:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

If you two really think that "Linux" is incorrect and should be referred to as "GNU/Linux" in all instances, how about you have some balls and try to get the "Linux" article moved. Instead of running around quietly editing all the links to point to a redirect. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 16:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Please be more careful with your edits. Please try to make sure that your edits actually make sense. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 02:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Stallman.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Stallman.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Stallman.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Stallman.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Mirko Kovats
I have nominated Mirko Kovats, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Mirko Kovats. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Source models
You might want to note that open source and closed source are source models. Free software is not a source model, it's a licensing model, as is proprietary software. Yworo (talk) 17:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You'll need to show me that the term has been accepted. I see other knowledgeable editors removing the same terms with the same reasons. Show me on what talk page a consensus was reached on the matter. Yworo (talk) 19:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It's not a "source model". Period. It accepted, yes, but not in the context in which you are using it. Take it up on the talk page. Yworo (talk) 19:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

ASUS Eee PC
Thanks for your note. Nope I am not a software developer, just a software user. As for the fact that there is no operational GNU operating system, I am going by what Richard Stallman told me when he was speaking here in my home town on 2 June 2009, when he stated that the GNU operating system is incomplete and only under test use due to difficulties with the Hurd kernel that have not been overcome. He actually delved into the subject at some length and in great detail. It seems to have been a source of some disappointment to him personally. - Ahunt (talk) 13:22, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


 * According to Stallman, systems like Debian, Ubuntu and gNewSense for instance, are what he calls "GNU/Linux" and not what he calls "the GNU Operating System", although most of the rest of the world calls them "Linux operating systems", as he admits too. As he said in June this year the GNU operating system is incomplete at this point in time. I accept Stallman as the authority on this point. - Ahunt (talk) 12:56, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not sure why you keep bringing up "my personal feelings" on this subject, since I have never expressed any, makes you sound very evangelical. I am just going by what Stallman said this past summer, that there are currently operational operating systems, like what he calls "GNU/Linux", that uses GNU components and that there is a project that will one day produce an operational GNU operating system, once it is finished, particularly the Hurd kernel. I am not reporting anyone's feelings, just what Stallman's expressed opinions were at that point in time, 02 June 2009. Saying that "there is GNU operating system today" is like calling a poured foundation a house. It will be a house one day when it is finished, but not today. - Ahunt (talk) 22:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:BLP
I'm going to put this very straightforwardly: You can't make an edit like this to any article and cite it to a blog. As for making such an edit to a BLP, it would have to be overwhelmingly sourced to sundry, highly reliable sources, be done by consensus and even then, most likely put in as a quote (rather than as article narrative). Please don't do that again. Gwen Gale (talk) 08:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * For the curious. My replies on Gwen talk page. He/She(?) did a great job.--Grandscribe (talk) 15:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

FLOSS
Yes, in general, abbreviations should not be used. One can't expect all readers to know what the acronym stands for. It's in the MoS, but I'm not going to find it for you.... Yworo (talk) 16:42, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Synaptic
Hi. I reverted your edit after I've just cleaned up this page. Please see the style guide for disambiguation as to why. Also changing Linux to GNU/Linux is commented upon above. Widefox (talk) 20:19, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Your 3RR complaint
Please see the result of your 3RR complaint at WP:AN3. I suggest opening up a WP:Request for comment to get opinions about the lead. It is surprising that there is such strong disagreement about wording differences that (to an outsider) may not seem all that significant. Try to use the term WP:Vandalism correctly -- it is a conscious attempt to harm the encyclopedia. I don't think that applies to any of you. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 23:14, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I apologize for calling your edits vandalism. Msnicki (talk) 14:20, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Fixed Bash a little, giving up now
I managed to improve the Bash (Unix shell) article a bit. Msnicki reverted me 9 times and is now even refusing to allow fixes for grammatical errors that make the intro misleading.

Thanks for having pointed me to the article. Gronky (talk) 19:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pwytter


A tag has been placed on Pwytter, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  Captain Screebo Parley! 13:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Philippe Bruggisser


A tag has been placed on Philippe Bruggisser, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another Wikimedia project, or was transwikied out to another project. Please see Translation to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from foreign-language Wikipedias into English.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Inks.LWC (talk) 22:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Philippe Bruggisser


The article Philippe Bruggisser has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. &#32; The nominator also raised the following concern:
 * All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Lady of  Shalott  22:58, 21 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I have added one reliable source as reference. I will add more soon.--Grandscribe (talk) 23:30, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

L. Rafael Reif
You wrote in L. Rafael Reif:
 * The prosecution of Aaron Swartz by Federal prosecutor Carmen Ortiz and her threats to imprison him for many decades led Swartz to commit suicide.

That's a pretty bold claim and not one there is evidence to support. It's just not NPOV. Check out the history and debate about this on Swartz' and Orotiz' talk pages and histories here. I've removed the sentence in entirety. Thereare reasonable statements to be made here, like "Swartz committed suicide while being prosecuted," etc. But I'm not super-comfortable crafting one. Perhaps you would care to do so. But I don't think the language you added is appropriate given the limited facts we know. Suicide and depression are tricky things; the human brain wants to think that they are causal and to establish logical reasons for them, but that's not how they work. Mentally ill people do inexplicable things. It's surely true that Swartz was under a lot of stress and that a huge amount of that stress was caused by the prosecution. But you need to be very cafeful. Especially in an article like this one covered by WP:BLP. Thanks! jhawkinson (talk) 14:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of ISafer Firewall


The article ISafer Firewall has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable software product

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Atlantima ~ ✿ ~ ( talk ) 16:52, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Nabilla Benattia
You are more than welcome, even encouraged, to make such edits yourself - see WP:PROD or WP:AFD for how to. GiantSnowman 16:43, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

the removal of GNU/Linux term on the GNU article
You are invited to join the discussion at the talk page of the GNU article, and to help improve its neutrality against the POV edits removing the "GNU/Linux" term. Thank you. Fsfolks (talk) 21:57, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)