User talk:Mel Etitis/Archive 37

Contact
Hi Mel, It is a while since we were in touch off-Wiki. Yes, please send me your up-to-date details. Thanks SMeeds 23:43, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Will Mcwhinney
Err... I'm a bit confused by the whole history of this, but I've just protected this as deletedpage. And while I'm on your talk page, might I say that I'm glad to see a more magnificently cluttered example than my own. - brenneman  {L}  01:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Postgraduate Education
(1) The sarcasm lies in you saying "there is a little field named...." if that is not sarcasm, I don't know what is. Everyone should know that there is such an entry field, if you had simply asked me to use it, it wouldn't been an issue, but to be so rude is not neccessary. (2) You quote your experience in higher education as evidence of your point, truth is, you have experience in only one institution as far as your user page suggests. I have worked in several HE colleges and universities accross the UK, for several decades and have come accross the term "quaternary education". I do not claim that the term is popular, as I even stated in my edit to the article, but it is used. Moreover, just because the term is not generally used by the public does not mean it is not encyclopaedic - the names of computer programming languages are not generally used or known to the public, but they feature quite heavily in wikipedia. Helzagood 11:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Is
I've come across multiple textbooks and paperbacks insisting that the word "is" is not capitalized in the titles of books, reports, documents, etc.; yet I've also uncovered several encyclopedias and biographies&mdash;although the biographies were of little use&mdash;which believe "is" should be capitalized in this case. While I conducted a worldwide-web search, I came across different theories which are likely to have come from anonymous and constant contributers of separate websites, but I've drawn the conclusion that I am officially confused. Even though you explained that the common majority of manuals read "is" as capital, I am no longer positive about whether it is one or the other. Are you aware of any books and/or websites where I can investigate? &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 21:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Tasha Schwikert
We just crossed posting on Talk, look again. Talk:Tasha Schwikert Fra nkB 22:15, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Your comment at Jimbo's talk page
Was this comment addressed to me or to Jimbo? If it was to me, I'll be glad to respond. By the way, it seems like I've been following you around all day. I promise I'm not stalking you. :) -- Tantalum T  e  lluride  23:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I was pretty sure you were referring to Jimbo's message, but I wanted to make sure. You could have been referring to my "approval" of the message. -- Tantalum T  e  lluride  20:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Little Match Girl
I definately agree with Rabsctle - the external link is pertainent to the article, to that line and really belongs there. 67.113.99.253 01:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Ho Mel! I realy do think that the external link is a good idea to include for the Little Match Girl article. If not, I do think some points (as pointed out) from that external may be good to include. Also, there is a discusssion started on that article about this.Raabscuttle 05:39, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

A Night in Tunisia
I changed one of your revisions to what I had added to Art Blakey's A Night in Tunisia, specifically, changing "alternative" back to "alternate." The two words do not have the same meaning and "alternative" is non-standard usage in this context, in my opinion. Also, I added back some relevant content you deleted. I hope it is OK to change an admin's changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaygarden (talk • contribs) 11:27, 23 March 2006

Fairy tales
Okay so I see you've taken upon the task of cleaning up those fairy tale articles. Very good. But a few sore points I'd like to discuss:


 * A short synopsis is fine, but should be written in the present tense. Nitpicking perhaps but if *you* wanted to get this done right then it's best to get it right completely.
 * To take Bluebeard as an example, I see you've edited out this sentence "Anne, sister Anne, do you see anyone coming?". Perhaps you feel this has no place in a synopsis but I *do* feel it has a place in this article. It *is* the most famous sentence from this fairy tale, which is why it is even mentioned. Be careful what you're axing out.
 * Look we can discuss analysis endlessly, and what is NPOV and what not. Yeah sure I agree some of it sounds a bit too much like someone's random opinion, however a lot of it is actually true but simply unreferenced. For example you edited out the comparison between Bluebeard and Henry VIII but you are wrong to think it is misplaced. Type it in Google and you'll see. Sometimes it's more worthwhile to try and source included analysis than simply editing it out. And another thing, simply observing "The Little Match Girl" deals with poverty and afterlife does not constitute "original research". Do I have to reference a reputable source if I want to observe an apple is green as well?

I care because I did a lot of work on these articles in the past. I'm the first to admit that they're far from perfect. The plot synopses have always bothered me as well, but a lot of the analysis I consider very worthwhile, and more informative in this "enclyopedia" than a simple plot summary. I've tried to strive towards a standardized outline for fairy tales (as shady as it is perhaps) as much as possible in the past. I quit because it was too much work, but good luck with it. --Steerpike 22:22, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Alternate
Having voiced my support for you in the silly RfC, I will add here that the use of "alternate" for "substitute" actually is standard American, and a technical term in sports. OED (second edition) alternate definition B.2.Septentrionalis 17:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

You've Been Away A Long While

 * Everyone following Talk: Tasha Schwikert is waiting for your response to my follow up post two days back suggesting a 'Duh' compromise word. You and I had an edit conflict at the time I was posting same. I guess I should have followed up with a message. It doesn't look like you've been there since.
 * How does 'Substitute' do in the British usages (ear) instead of the other two. Duuuuhhhh! We all missed it.  See This Diff to catch up. No one has replaced the word 'reserve' pending your reaction.
 * I got knocked off line for most of a day losing at least four in preview and partial edits when my cable modem progressively died. Sucked. All the sudden the browser wouldn't behave, later, the email only gave me a partial list of messages, and unpredictably almost totally ignored what I tried to send out. Only one new email made it out at all, for some reason it was kinder to replys. Strange. Then it packed it in and died around 7:00 pm local!  I just got back from picking up a new cable modem! You were first on my list. Haven't even popped email open yet. Oh Yeah. And I wasted half last night and 2-1/2 hrs this morning restoring to previous state, running norton diagnostics which found a missing DLL w/seven cites in the registry, and so reloaded the browser... and on and on. Finally figured I should bypass the router and took my laptop direct to the cable modem. Tilt!!!
 * Just having loads of fun Fra nkB 19:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Bar Kokhba edits
Okay, here's my quibble with your removing my links from songs on the album to Hebrew terms. The article on George Harrison contains the following line, 'He could also wisecrack as well as anyone in the band; when a reporter asked what they did in their hotel suite between shows, Harrison told him "We ice-skate."' The words "ice-skate" are linked. This article about GH has absolutely nothing to do with ice-skating, and the article on ice-skating contains no mention of GH. So should we go around all articles cleaning up these kinds of links? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephconklin (talk • contribs) 06:13, 25 March 2006

Link revision
Hi - I added yesterday a link to the new chaplaincy website for Worcester College, Oxford (www.worcesterchapel.co.uk). This is an official website connected with the college. Could you please explain why you deem this not to be a relevant and valid link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.122.98 (talk • contribs) 09:06, 25 March 2006

Move request
(will need to start in the cat list and tab to, +edit about five members bottoms 1st)
 * Would you please move:
 * Category:163x--->Category:1632-163x alternative-history series
 * Alternately, let me fix after you break them. It's your time! Fra nkB 09:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Aw S___!!! I inadvertantly tagged your talk as the names above in my change summary! Don't have a clue how to insert an nowiki pair to fix either! Sheese! I doc'd the move request on the talk, and am precleaning now, so all you need to do is fix THAT weirdy, and the Move itself. btw- see misnomer. Fra nkB  09:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I think that this move was inadvised: while the original name may be disputed (as 163x redirects to 1632 series) the new name is way too long.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 *  ... We'll be alright... He didn't give time to respond, so I escalated: talk: 1632 series
 * Cherio! Fra nkB 02:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

hi
i m shahab salim i m surperised tosee that my page was out. please take care

thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahabsalim (talk • contribs) 17:00, 25 March 2006

Serbophobia
Mel, discussion on article deletion was interupted by User:Bormalagurski. I thought you may want to know this since you opened the discussion about the article deletion and I am not sure what is the policy about closing such discussions. --Dado 02:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Unbelievable
For the lighter side of Wikipedia, see Talk:Greeks. The Greeks and the Turks arguing, with maps and all, about whether the Empire of Japan was multiethnic or not...At least they're none of them editing the article...Septentrionalis 03:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * In watching the Japan arguments, I had forgotten "I'll give you all a little taste of 1922". In this context, a reference to the burning of Smyrna, and, yes, over the edge. Septentrionalis 17:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Cross-link
Dear Mel, please have a look at. Thanks, Luisa

z or s
You recently changed a number of "z"s to "s"es. Is this changing American English to British English? My dictionary, for example, has "philosophize" with a "z". Rick Norwood 14:34, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Masada: Alef
Indeed you are correct, I thought I had seen it many times with these hyphens - and not these –. What I was actually trying to fix was add jumblness of the hyphen next to the length of the song. --Blahm 15:08, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Who is a Jew?
Hi Mel. That IP you reverted seems to have made an honest mistake when blanking talk page material. Would you like to take a second look? HKT 15:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Blakey, Moanin'
I can't go into detail re: every change I made, but they are all correct as far as I know. First of all, re the title: take a look at the cover of the album which is already on the page. It doesn't have the word "Moanin'" on it anywhere. If you have the current RVG edition of the album you can check the Blumenthal liner notes for other factual matters like the fact it's Blakey's first album for Blue Note after several years away from the label (on Columbia &c). I don't know why you're calling "Are You Real" a blues, even Feather doesn't say this. It's not a blues, I can assure you--it's a series of straightforward descending II-V changes with an extra tag for the 2nd A section. I play the tune regularly & have transcribed it off the album, & know it well. -- The Blumenthal notes have their own problems (he seems to mix up "Are You Real" & "Along Came Betty" at one point) but do give a little more perspective on the album than Feather's original notes. The track listings on the wiki page are also wrong for the version of the album pictured on the page, since the RVG edition (which is what's in the photo) puts the alt.take at the end & adds a track of studio chatter at the start. -- ND 16:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Democracy
User:Croatian historian has deleted some of my posts on his talk page several times. Since you said it was vandalism, and you criticised me for deleting a post once, I ask for your help in punishing this user which is constantly doing it. Thank you. -- Boris Malagurski  ₪  20:44, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thats not very fair, there should be a universal policy towards deletion of any material posted on Wikipedia talk pages. Well, I guess the rules are always against me... Still, Croatian historian did call me a Serb nationalist, and I consider that to be extremely offensive, and wrong, because I'm half Croatian and half Serbian. Isn't there a rule against personal attacks? -- Boris Malagurski  ₪  22:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Kandern
It makes sense that many Americans would not know Johann Sutter's real name. I don't see why it doesn't make sense to use his real name in the Kandern article. While living there, that is the only name that he would have used. Also, since when is Wikipedia exclusively for use by Americans?--Evadb 06:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I am going to continue to disagree with you, but I have other things to worry about right now. It still makes sense to me to pipe it, but there's no sense in arguing if you are going to keep reverting it for what you think are good reasons.  Thanks for the time.--Evadb 11:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think you get it. I'm being the bigger man and leaving the page alone and I'm being the bigger man.--Evadb 11:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I've deleted the whole discussion from my page. Hopefully you can just leave me alone now.  Thanks.--Evadb 17:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify for casual readers of this page (if any). Evadb deleted my last comment in this discussion from his/her Talk page, and when I reinstated it, accused me of harassment. I pointed out that deleting comments was in general deprecated, but that making it look as though I'd just dropped the discussion when I hadn't was especially poor. This is apparently what being the "bigger man" involves... --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 17:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

User:202.182.131.21
Please see the user talk page. This is an Australian High School, and a number of good-faith contributors contribute from it. As noted on the talk page, an abuse contact is available, and contact with the school is preferred to blocking. Thanks, Werdna648T/C\@ 12:59, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Plato Thumb
"Hello! The point about thumb(-nail)ing images is that the reader can decide for herself whether she wants to see a larger version; the thumbed versions make the page load more quickly (which can be important for those using dial-up connections."


 * Thanks for your message. Yes, I think that some pictures should remain thumbs, especially where speed of loading is a concern. But not for others. In particular, this picture is B&W, so should be a very small file and it's illustrating an allegory that can be hard to picture in your mind. It's also a good picture, rendering a pretty iconic image. Keep these points in mind, but if you want to change it back that's no problem. Dast 09:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey Mel, how's things? There seems to be a problem with a webpage having the wrong spelling of a personal name. See Talk:Taki Theodoracopolous. I have done a check and (you might also be mildly interested in) Theodoracopulos, Taki, The Greek upheaval: kings, demagogues and bayonets, London: Stacey International, 1976. How do you go about fixing this sort of problem? Lao Wai 10:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Please help
Friends of Bormalagurski have blocked my account for deleting trolling from my own talk page. It started when I voted against adminship candidacy or Bormalagurski (see ). In retaliation he spammed my user talk page with user warning templates, threatening me with being "blocked for disruption" because I voted against his admin candidacy. He also attacked me in other ways, for example he wrote: "Allow me to make an impersonation of you: Serbs are guilty for everything. All Croats are saints. I love my pope, who let's me get away with everything. I'm so Serbophobic that I can't even allow Serbian posts on my user page. That's why I voted for the deletion of the article "Serbophobia", because it doesn't exist.". When I removed the bad faith use of such templates as obvious trolling as well as Malagurski's personal attacks he recruited people to engange in revert war against me on my own talk page, and then finally the same friends of Bormalagurski blocked my account (the account of an opponent in an edit war) two times and protected their own vandalism on my user talk page. They also deleted my own replies as well as other content from my own talk page. See user talk:Bormalagurski for proof that the person who blocked my account is a friend of blatant vandal Bormalagurski. Aside from his pro-Milošević POV pushing (which was noted during failed admin candidacy), Malagurski has a history of leaving inflammatory remarks and trolling on talk pages, and there are rumours of sockpuppetry (also see admin candidacy page). Please help, I don't know what to do. Serbs are suppressing those who disagree with them and vandalizing pages in user/user talk namespace. They do not respect the rules at Wikipedia. It's not fair. User:Croatian historian

Ram rebellion
It looks like I did and it was tagged as a speedy but it doesn't show a deletion history with the article which it should. It was a speedy but not on the 27th. It was tagged again I see. Hopefully it will work out to be kept and tidied up. Thanks.-- Dakota ~  °  15:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Croatian Historian
My block was on this basis:
 * As WP:TALK says "Furthermore WP:VAND states: Removing warnings, whether for vandalism or other forms of prohibited/discouraged behavior, from one's talk page is also considered vandalism."
 * This proposed arbcom decision also recognises the other issue of labeling people you have some dispute with as vandals.
 * The user had been blocked for the same reason a couple of days previously

However I did also list on on WP:AN/I for some further input, so thanks. Do you consider his watchlist to be appropriate? I certainly don't. --pgk( talk ) 17:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I protected the page based on above. --LBMixPro&lt;Sp e ak 19:31, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Mel, I saw your update on WP:AN/I also, I guess you looked into this deeper than I did since I was primarily concerned with the most recent edits. I think the removal of warnings from talk pages is basically a practical consideration, in that if people clean warning off their pages instantly then do something a few minutes later the next person to warn them may not be aware of previous issues, which clearly impacts the types of further action taken. --pgk( talk ) 18:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have also appologized to Croatian historian because of your finding. Hopefully this whole thing will now be over with. --LBMixPro&lt;Sp e ak 23:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Removal of warnings
From the page you referenced. 'Removing warnings Removing warnings, whether for vandalism or other forms of prohibited/discouraged behavior, from one's talk page is also considered vandalism.' So Croatian Historian did break the rules. -- Orbit One    [ Talk 17:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * He could also ask an admin to remove the warnings instead of doing it himself. From my point of view, he is removing warnings that likely were placed there with good reason. I am not going to investigate the whole issue, but I am not going to stop somebody from finding out which warnings have merrit and which ones are bs. -- Orbit One    [ Talk 18:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I should have looked more closely as to why he was given those first warnings in the first place since I didn't give them myself. You are right to say users will give each other false warnings. But what is done is done and I hope to learn from this experience. -- Orbit One    [ Talk 09:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Confucius
Thank you for commenting on my copy editing of Confucius. I am very new to Wikipedia but am anxious to contribute. I believe I have made the necessary changes where you commented. I simply saw a topic I was interested in and sought to contribute. --Michael Yates —Preceding unsigned comment added by Republicson (talk • contribs) 08:58, 29 March 2006

More problems
Now some kid born in 1991 and his friends are back to vandalism. Look at my talk page. Croatian historian 15:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a misrepresentation of the events and you know it. Please discuss further at WP:ANI, not here.  --Nlu (talk) 15:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I only know one thing. If you or others keep reinstating bad faith use of templates by troll and sockpuppeteer Boris Malagurski (as indicated in adminship vote), you will no longer call yourself an admin. Cleaning talk pages has widespread acceptance, vandalizing the talk pages of others has not. Editing a protected page is alone an offense which may lead to lose admin privileges. Croatian historian ([[Image:Flag of Croatia.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Germany.svg|25px|  ]] [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px|  ]]) 15:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Fine, then bring me up on an request for arbitration. I have full confidence that my actions were justified.  And if you continue this, you will be blocked.  --Nlu (talk) 16:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * And Mel, since then, Croatian historian has put up even more attacks. I'm going to block.  Feel free to look at the situation further later on, but your sympathy has not helped him; it has merely made his behavior worse.  --Nlu (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

AN/I
Please see AN/I: I've shown diffs to back my statements and justify warnings. &rArr;   SWAT Jester     Ready    Aim    Fire!  16:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Responed on both my talk page, and both sections of AN/I. &rArr;   SWAT Jester     Ready    Aim    Fire!  16:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
A good faith edit is not vandalism. Accepted U.S. definition of juris doctor is "Doctor of Law" or "Doctor of Jurisprudence" See: BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, sixth, seventh and eighth editions.

Drdouma 18:26, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
A good faith edit is not vandalism. Doctor of Law or Doctor of Jurisprudence are the accepted U.S. definitions of "juris doctor".

See: BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, sixth, seventh and eighth editions.

Drdouma 18:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

juris doctor
Do you describe the M.D. (medicinae doctor) as literally "teacher of medicine" or "doctor of medicine"? Drdouma 21:01, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Infoboxes
There was consensus to keep the images? Looking at this, I would say there was a consensus not to use them - I don't know if that's the discussion you're referring to. It's just text on the WP:ALBUM example too. I've only changed a handful, anyway, and I'll not do any more if it's contentious. Flowerparty ■ 21:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)