User talk:OttRider

Stay for Awhile
I moved the article back to "Stay for Awhile" because that is the name of the song. "Awhile" is the correct term. http://www.dailywritingtips.com/a-while-vs-awhile/ Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:20, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Oops
Apologies, you are correct. I found what I thought was a definitive reference for the other (correct) spelling, but turns out that was a different version, not the referenced song. OttRider (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Awhile vs A While
Having received a few comments about this edit:


 * "Awhile" is an adverb. It is used with a verb, without a preposition such as "for".  So you can write "I will stay awhile".
 * "A while" is a noun phrase, taking a preposition. So you can write "I will stay for a while".

Writing "I will stay for awhile" is incorrect. Since "awhile" has the meaning "for a while", that would be equivalent to writing "I will stay for for a while". See here for a more fulsome discussion. OttRider (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You keep making changes and in several cases did it against correct usage. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:41, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Response
Sorry, sir. With respect, you are incorrect. In one of your reverts you give as a reason "awhile is an English word". This is true - "awhile" is an English word. But it is the wrong word following the word "for".


 * Awhile can be used alone, as in "I will wait awhile".
 * "A while" may be used with the preposition "for", as in "I will wait for a while".
 * Awhile, used with "for", as in "I will wait for awhile", is always incorrect.

References: OttRider (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia's Own Grammar Errors Page
 * The Free Dictionary
 * Common Errors in English Usage
 * Daily Writing Tips
 * Grammar Mudge
 * Grammarist

December 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=584852674 your edit] to Andrew A. Skolnick may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:11, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * [:Category:Writers from Chicago, Illinois]

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Adam Rutherford at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:32, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Leila Schneps
I created a Wikidata entry for Leila Schneps - you can find a link to it under the "tools" menu on her Wikipedia article. You might like to take a look and see whether anything needs to be added. It's always a good idea to make a matching Wikidata entry, when you make a new article here. Good work on that article, BTW! Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:05, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the several constructive edits and for the advice. First new page, much to learn.

DYK for Adam Rutherford
Materialscientist (talk) 10:13, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Leila Schneps
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:08, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Faye Flam
Hello! Your submission of Faye Flam at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Antidiskriminator (talk) 18:34, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

WebCite archive
Hi,

I just wanted to pay your attention to WebCite archive which allows you to archive current version of web pages. It might be useful when you cite some web page which is subject of frequent changes. All the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 09:06, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Faye Flam
Gatoclass (talk) 03:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Faye Flam
Hello, OttRider,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Faye Flam should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Faye Flam.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Fiachra10003 (talk) 02:49, 18 August 2014 (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)