User talk:Ponyo/Archives/July/2010

It's "none has"; not "none have"
This is a moot issue because the article Ken Talbot has been edited, but due to the rules of subject-verb agreement, "none" is singular and thus "none has" is correct.

"None” has both singular and plural forms. The singular verb form is used when “none” means “no one” or “not one”. The plural is used when “none” implies more than one thing or person. Nutmegger (talk) 18:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

double prod
Helmayer - Hi, I didn't know that was a problem, even if it is prodded for different versions? Off2riorob (talk) 20:15, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The PROD directions are pretty clear that it can only be PRODed once (e.g. "Confirm that the article is eligible for proposed deletion by checking that it has not previously been proposed for deletion"). The 'oldprodfull' template should have been added to the talk page to prevent further PROD noms, but many times no one actually adds it. Cheers, --Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 20:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Could you provide me a link to that guideline, please. Off2riorob (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Personally, looking at it and from experience, that is not happening in practice and it is quite common for secondary prods to be left on the articles to deletion, do you object to its deletion? Or have you got any suggestions as to what iyo is the best thing to do with it? Off2riorob (talk) 20:25, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The PROD page is here. If pages are being PRODed a second time then the admins aren't checking like they're supposed to. The admin PROD instructions are clear: "Before deletion, administrators should check the article, its history, and deletion log to confirm that:
 * The prod tag has been in place continuously for at least 7 days
 * No objections have been raised on the talk page.
 * The article is eligible for proposed deletion: never previously proposed for deletion, never undeleted, and never discussed at AfD." (bolding mine).

I have no opinion on its deletion, and made a note in my edit summary and on the BLPN page that it needs to be taken to AfD, which quite honestly is a more approrpiate venue for any articles wherein the nomination could be contentious. --Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 20:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 20:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Let's raise this pint together!


j &#9883; e decker talk  has bought you a pint! Sharing a pint is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:WikiPint}} to their talk page with a friendly message. To Hogan Stand!!! (And seriously, thank you for all the incredible sourcing work!) --  j &#9883; e decker  talk  00:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

re: Section order
I had it that way to begin with, but I wasn't sure. Thanks for fixing it and for the layout link. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Happy to help! --Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 14:20, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

copypasta
Those copypasta violations are a real pesto, don't you think? ;-) --  j &#9883; e decker  talk  21:01, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Is it good or bad that I intentionally put "copypasta" as slang?--Milowent • talkblp-r 21:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a goodness. A cheesy, tasty goodness.  ;-)  --  j &#9883; e decker  talk  21:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey, don't look at me, none of this is mafalde! --Jezebel's Ponyo shhh 22:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

haha!
Thanks!!!!, Laphroig will work fine--I love those peaty Islay malts! -- j &#9883; e decker  talk  18:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Just make sure you stay away from the shiny new extra buttons whilst celebrating, otherwise it could be the shortest adminship ever. (Which raises an interesting point - I wonder whether there's a record of that dubious distinction anywhere?)  --<b style="color:navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:navy;">shhh 18:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)