User talk:Pequod76

Welcome
Welcome! Hello, Pequod76, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Liberia. 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 my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 07:18, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:24, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know: Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
 * Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
 * If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Your Credo Reference account is approved
Good news! You are approved for access to 350 high quality reference resources through Credo Reference. Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 19:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Fill out the survey with your username and an email address where your sign-up information can be sent. You'll receive the email within about two weeks.
 * If you need assistance, ask User:Ocaasi.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Credo article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Credo pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Credo accounts/Citations.
 * Credo would love to hear feedback at WP:Credo accounts/Experiences
 * Show off your Credo access by placing on your userpage
 * If you decide you no longer can or want to make use of your account, donate it back by adding your name here

Your Credo account access has been sent to your email!
All editors who were approved for a Credo account and filled out the survey giving their username and email address were emailed Credo account access information. Please check your email. If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me. I hope you enjoy your account! User:Ocaasi 15:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * If you didn't receive an email, or didn't fill out the survey, please email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com
 * If you tried out Credo and no longer want access, email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email! If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia). Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
 * 2) Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code.  Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
 * 3) Create your account by entering the requested information.  (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
 * 4) You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID.  (The account is now active for 1 year).
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
 * Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
 * Show off your Questia access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

John of Patmos
Ciao sono colui che ha segnalato su FB la mancanza della voce it:Sette sigilli, a tal uopo, visto il tuo impegno sulla pagina, ti segnalo anche la mancanza della voce sull'autore (presunta, anzi ci vorrebbe una nota), del Book of Revelation (chissà perché da noi si chiama it:Apocalisse di Giovanni?). ;-) --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:43, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Purr purr....nice seeing you on IRC.

— Theo polisme  00:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC) 

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:37, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Itemirus (talk)  13:08, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

WP:JSTOR access
Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to JSTOR through the TWL partnership described at WP:JSTOR. You should have recieved a Wikipedia email User:The Interior or User:Ocaasi sent several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 21:19, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are recieving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved.

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) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Translation it -> en
Hello Pequod76, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. I had to revert to Catholic Church sexual abuse cases involving a translation of an Italian protest sign. In your version, the English phrase means close to the opposite of what is intended by the Italian. (I realize that the original translation wording is not yours, and in fact that wording has been present, in slightly altered form, for at least three years and that you are merely restoring it; nevertheless, it has been incorrect for that entire period, so please do not restore the incorrect translation.)

Most translators translate only into their native language, not from their native language into the foreign language. That's what I try to do, and if I have to translate in the other direction, I would ask for help from a native speaker to make sure I didn't miss some subtlety. I urge you to do the same. We could create a good partnership, if you like, where I could ask you on your talk page about the Italian half of some translation I was working on, and you could ask me likewise about the English on my talk page, whenever you had a question. I'd be happy to do that, if you would. Cordially, Mathglot (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi! Thanks for your help. I understand your concern about an Italian translating in English and I apologize for my misuse of the expression "to care for" (that I have unfortunately "inherited", as you saw, by former versions of the article). "To deal with" is perfect, but I have some observations about the formulation of "why doesn't he go deal with...?". Maybe it would be better "he should go deal with...". "Che si occupi" is a subjunctive, that we use as an imperative mood for third persons ("(Che) Dio salvi la Regina" = "God save the Queen"). It is well possible that a question fits to the meaning as much as "should": I wrote you to express my doubt, but with the aim of learning. I accept enthusiastically your proposed partnership, even though I hardly contribute to en.wiki: if you need some insight about Italian stuff, just ask me. :) Thanks again for your help and for fixing the caption. --Pequod (talk) 02:40, 16 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks Pequod. I totally understand the imperative sense of the subjunctive here (which is nearly identical with similar usage in Spanish and French) but thanks for pointing it out. There is nothing wrong with "He should go deal with..." grammatically, but it doesn't have the same punch and imperative force as "che si occupi."  In English, the negative interrogative, "Why doesn't he...?" in this context is neither a question, nor a negative logically, although it is grammatically; rather, it is to be understood as an imperative declaration, with the negative interrogative acting as a "wink" to "soften" the rude statement, while really not softening it at all.
 * Some examples: 1. Why don't you take a long walk off a short pier? Meaning: "Go drown yourself." 2. Why don't you take a flying jump?  Meaning: "Go jump into the lake."  3. Why don't you go eff4-letter word goes here yourself? Meaning: "Go eff yourself."  So, I find that the subjunctive imperative sense of "che si occupi di" fits very nicely with the negative interrogative.  If the sign instead read, (Il) dovrebbe s'occupare di.. the translation "He should go deal with..." would be both accurate, and have the right mood.  The latter is not wrong as a translation of "che si occupi", but it lacks that softening of the direct imperative, which slyly softens it grammatically, while not really softening it propositionally or logically.  In Italian, the subjunctive provides just the slightest bit of surface respect to the Pope while nevertheless using an imperative mood, which is something that is not done in the indicative mood to the Pope.  In English, the negative interrogative "Why doesn't he..." provides that identical softening, to give a modicum of surface respect grammatically speaking, while in reality he is telling the Pope what to do.
 * Does this make sense? It's late, and I'm fading. Mathglot (talk) 06:21, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * 'Morning! :) Yes, it makes sense to me. Actually I have learned something about the English negative interrogative, that exists in Italian as well ("Perché non si occupa dei suoi preti...?"). And just because it exists in Italian that I was looking for something different (as the placard don't use it). Also (but just to share some opinions), the subjunctive does not have this bit, however slight, of surface respect: as we say "vai/andate al diavolo", we also say "Che vada (lui/lei) al diavolo"/"Che vadano al diavolo". But you are right, it is the same for the Spanish "¡(Qué) viva Zapata!" or the French "Que Dieu te benisse". All these "che"/"que" imply a "voglio"/"quiero"/"je veux". (Sorry, I am fastidious at least once a day). Here, the subjunctive is a mere substitute for the imperative, that lacks of forms for the third persons. A phrasing with that surface politeness is present in formulations as "Hai voglia di andare a comprare il pane?" or "Ti andrebbe di andare a comprare il pane?": these are imperatives in disguise, much used addressing second persons. But this is not to say that your translation doesn't work. Lastly, we would say "Si dovrebbe occupare di" or "Dovrebbe occuparsi di", but not "Dovrebbe s'occupare di", that sounds Frenchesque to me. :D Thank you for your host of examples, I've really liked the one about the pier. XD --Pequod (talk) 11:05, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Storia dei concetti
Buongiorno, Pequod, ben ritrovato. Prima di farmi infinitare da Gianfranco, ho pingato te e Frognall con la richiesta di completare il lavoro sulla Storia dei concetti in una mia sandbox. Il lavoro non era molto avanzato - anzi, era appena iniziato - ma la mancanza di una voce su Conceptual history è una lacuna grave di it.wiki ed è anche una lacuna incomprensibile: molti studiosi interessanti da noi hanno recepito o comunque interagito con quell'esperienza, penso a Pierangelo Schiera, Alessandro Biral, Carlo Galli e Giuseppe Duso, più tutta la generazione dei loro allievi. Due cose sulla sandbox: 1) A proposito delle opere di riferimento, i Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe (GG) sono di gran lunga più importanti delle altre; dovrebbero venir menzionati per primi ed avere uno spazio adeguato. Se non è possibile, meglio allora accorciare la parte sullo Historisches Woerterbuch 2) Come stavo scrivendo in sandbox, alcune voci dei GG sono state tradotto in italiano e pubblicate autonomamente. Si tratta della voce Costituzione, edita da Carocci, e poi delle voci edite da Marsilio su Democrazia, Progresso, Politica e Libertà. Si tratta di libretti che sarebbero molto utili per perfezionare le vostre voci su quei temi: te li raccomando. Saluti, Gitz6666 (talk) 16:25, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ti confesso che sono rimasto sorpreso nel leggere questo messaggio. Hai letteralmente suicidato la tua utenza per una battaglia di principio, quando ce n'era un'altra, la battaglia di principio che ci fa scrivere l'enciclopedia e a cui hai rinunciato per la prima, tutta legata ad un mondo di analisi di relazioni dietro la quale l'enciclopedia quasi non si vede più. Io ho avuto discussioni di fuoco in quasi 15 di contribuzione, sono stato anche bloccato una volta, ma non ho mai smesso di pensare che il rapporto tra me e il progetto passa da quello che IO sento per il progetto. La mia adesione non è mai dipesa da quanto fosse bella o giusta la comunità, da quanta soddisfazione mi desse, da quante ingiustizie mi risparmiasse. Vale per wp quanto diceva (mi pare) Frank Zappa: nella battaglia tra te e il mondo, stai dalla parte del mondo. Quindi forse tu avevi ragione e molti che sono rimasti avevano torto; forse tu per una questione di purezza, certamente apprezzabile, hai scelto di non piegarti e di rispondere una volta di più, per rimarcare l'idea (secondo me preconcetta) secondo cui l'unico motivo per cui nessuno è venuto al tuo fianco a censurare certe parole a te rivolte doveva risiedere in uno schema sociologico in cui una supposta cuspide sente il bisogno di muoversi compatta. Chi se ne va ha sempre ragione. Ma non può chiedere nulla, non può mostrare legittima preoccupazione per l'inesistenza su it.wiki della voce x. Altrimenti si sarebbe attrezzato e sarebbe rimasto. Avrebbe spazzato dall'avambraccio la polvere di certe situazioni e sarebbe andato al centro delle cose importanti. Invece una fotucola è stata più importante del Corano, impuntarsi fino a infinito era più importante di tutto il resto. La sensazione di aver subito un torto ha definito l'ordine delle tue priorità. E noi che restiamo, con i nostri torti, con il nostro progetto imperfetto, in cui addirittura molti incoscienti partecipano in modo eccellente "sotto il dominio dei prepotenti"... noi siamo senza principi o troppo fessi per ambirvi.
 * Da qualche tempo sei andato a spron battuto su questa convinzione: "nessuno [ha] voluto intervenire a difesa delle ragioni di un outsider, contro un admin conosciuto da tutti, rischiando di compromettere l’armonia nella comunità degli utenti esperti (e le aspettative di "carriera" di chi vuole diventare admin)". Ma le cose non stanno così. Gli admin si scornano, anzi l'admin con cui ti sei scornato sulla PAS è (mia convinzione) un convinto fautore delle ragioni degli outsider. L'admin che si è scornato con te sulla PAS si è scornato con me in mille occasioni. E te ne potrei raccontare cento di storie di conflitti interni a questa cricca che secondo te sarebbe 'terrorizzata dall'idea di iniziare a litigare al proprio interno'. Hai applicato uno schema sociologico ad un sistema reale di interazioni e per forza di cose dovevi rimanere con un pugno di mosche in mano. Poteva andare diversamente. Tu per primo potevi sfuggire alla logica delle contrapposizioni. Per primo o per secondo. E' un grande peccato ed io sono molto deluso. Non me ne frega nulla dei Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe, di cui non sapevo l'esistenza prima che me li menzionassi. Né mi occupo di bozze, ma la bozza mi sembra sufficiente per passare in ns0 e dare un'informazione di base. Qualcuno forse vorrà spostarla. Io no. Sono intento a scrivere una voce molto impegnativa, con attenta consultazione di un largo ventaglio di fonti e non ho alcuna intenzione di deviare dai miei interessi per un'intrapresa senza capitano e una storia da cui sono sentimentalmente distante. Quello era lavoro tuo e hai fatto la tua scelta di purezza. --Pequod76 (talk-ita.esp.eng) 00:42, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Caro Pequod, per la ragioni che capirari leggendo, ho preferito risponderti sulla mia talk - vorrei fare arrivare il mio congedo e ringraziamento anche agli altri ex colleghi wikipediani. Un abbraccio, Gitz (talk) (contribs) 09:50, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ciao Pequod, ho visto che la voce sulla Storia dei concetti è stata pubblicata - per qualche ragione che non capisco, ho ricevuto una notifica. Secondo me sarebbe pietoso mettere un template S in cima alla voce; sospetto persino il copyviol, visto che si tratta di appunti che non avevo ancora avuto il tempo di rielaborare a dovere. Ma parte questo, ti scrivo perché vedo che c'è una frase mozza: "Alcuni di questi articoli sono stati tradotti e pubblicati autonomamente come libro, ad esempio XXX". Mi è impossibile completare la voce, come sai, e anche da sloggato non posso farci niente perché, con solerzia encomiabile, tutti i miei indirizzi IP sono stati bloccati (me ne sono lamentato con gli stewards, ma giustamente Vito dice che posso contribuire da loggato - solo altrove, non su it.wiki). Ma lasciare la frase così tronca non ha senso. Ti incollo quindi qui di seguito, in sintassi wiki-italiana, i riferimenti che completano il periodo. Puoi copiare e incollare, per favore? Ecco qui:

Alcuni di questi articoli sono stati tradotti e pubblicati autonomamente come libro, come le voci sui concetti di Progresso, Libertà , Democrazia , Politica e Costituzione. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 23:07, 14 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Scusami di nuovo. Rimettendo i libri a posto nello scaffale mi sono accorto di aver dimenticato questo: Crisi . Non so poi se questo libro sia rilevante, ma non importa. Grazie e buon lavoro wikipediano. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 23:20, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Phyrexian mi ha bloccato di nuovo! Siete proprio incorreggibili ;-). Ho controllato e il libro di Koselleck, "Il vocabolario della modernità", non contiene voci dei Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Puoi quindi, se vuoi, incollare il testo qui sopra; spero che tu lo faccia perché non è un favore personale a me, ma un piccolo contributo all'enciclopedia, più che giustificato da WP:BS (non si può lasciare in voce una frase tronca seguita dal segno XXX! Concorderai). Saluti, Gitz (talk) (contribs) 16:55, 16 March 2022 (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) 00:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)