User talk:Stan Shebs/archive 4

Grand Admiral
I take back all the bad things I said about you behind your back! :-) User:Husnock

Medal of Honor
You wrote on Talk:Medal of Honor that it's called "Cong'l"
 * because Congress has to approve the awards specially, unlike others which need only be approved by SecDef or lower

If you have a ref for that, plz visit Talk:Medal of Honor again. --Jerzy 20:19, 2004 Jan 5 (UTC)

It misses some. I've always been of the opinion that to be a town, a place requires a) a post office, b) a church, c) a bar. :) - Hephaestos 22:20, 8 Jan 2004 (UTC)

We're voting on naming conventions for peers at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Peerage, if you want to participate. john 06:22, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Ships of the US Navy
Oh no trouble at all... I was eating and Wiki'ing at the same time, while at work. I'm gonna do a bunch tonight. - UtherSRG 22:06, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * Well I finally finished them. Thanks for the help, but I still had to go through each letter and look at all the 'disamb' pages and grab more data form them (as well as update a few of them. Wheee! *grins* - UtherSRG 04:46, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Sorry on the consuls. I'll revert if it's not been already reverted. john 02:48, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Yeti disagreement
I would appreciate your input on talk:Yeti. Thanks! - UtherSRG 01:31, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Fishes
Curse you Red Baron! *grins* Stop adding things I want to then go look up and add more info to. I want to go to bed!!! *grins* Ah... the fun I'll have tomorrow.... - UtherSRG 06:22, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Appius Claudius
Hi Stan, I was just wondering what the "PW 132" (and the other PW numbers) mean in the Appius Claudius article. I'm sure I've seen them somewhere else too, but I forget where...and I couldn't figure out what they were referring to. Adam Bishop 00:56, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks! My university's library seems to have the whole PW, although not in English, unfortunately. By the way, I noticed you had List of ancient Greeks on your page, I'd be interested in helping to start that...I'm not sure what you would want to include as "Greek" though...it seems much more complicated than a list of Romans! Adam Bishop 23:40, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Lupin/lupine/lupinus
Hi Stan, I have just been adding a bush lupin page, and searching for things that might need linking, I see you have lupin/lupine/lupinus down on your to-do list. You might want to have a look at that page (and at lupin) to see if I have made things any better - or worse. seglea 09:06, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

RN Ships & Stations
Stan- Thanks for the content on HMS Halcyon. Some kid is posting stubs to various RN ships. I came across a few of them and used Google-searches to make some sort of minimal improvements. Thanks for your efforts. I suggest this area might need a lot more of your help. Also, your talk page is getting too big. Propose you prune it a bit.

Paul, in Saudi

Stan-I discovered this unknown (and unregistered) contributer has started a stub on HMS Gibraltar. I added a darn little to it an appeal to you for help. I also, for the first time included a photo which came out overlarge. Could you give it a look?

I am about to retreat from the realm of RN Ships and retreat back to military codewords. Thanks,

Paul, in Saudi

Can you please delete Awolf002? I accidently created it instead of his userpage as a new user linked to it on my talk page. Sennheiser!

Cetomimiformes
Thank you! One could say I'm building upon the framework you and others before me have already laid down. I tend to be wordy in my writeups, it seems, so I'm glad you've enjoyed them.

I noticed the problematic placement of the Cetomimiformes while researching them (very scant info available online, sadly) but decided FishBase's placement must be the most current one(?). I've done as you suggested and made mention of the alternate placement within the Stephanoberyciformes, so hopefully potential confusion has been mitigated. I don't know if it's just Nelson who places the whalefishes that way, therefore I've gone with the safe phrasing "Some authorities...". Taxa is rather fun, in a befuddling sort of way. ;) Hadal 05:19, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Arcade
Thanks for writing the Arcade article. I've been meaning to get to that for a long time, but never quite managed to do it. &mdash;Mulad 19:08, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

172
I've been having a little back and forth with User:172 in Hcheney 23:11, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Ancient Greeks
Hi Stan, I made up a List of ancient Greeks...hopefully it's close to what you had envisioned. I'm sure there are hundreds of people I missed...I also wasn't sure whether to include really ancient semi-mythological people, or all the kings and archons of Athens who are nothing more than names. But there is now a list to work with, at least! Adam Bishop 03:45, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Sure, extending it to later antiquity is fine, I just arbitrarily picked 200 or so to give myself less work :) Adam Bishop 05:30, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Also a good point...I cut and paste most of the descriptions, which is why they are usually linked. Ah well. Anyway, if we include people up to about 600, that would bring in a lot of Christian writers, and even some very late Roman/early Byzantine people, would it not? Adam Bishop 05:44, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * They are MS Word dashes...they probably should be regular hyphens. To fix that I think you'd have to copy the whole thing to Notepad or something, find/replace them all, and copy it back into the article. Adam Bishop 05:55, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I was thinking of not editing the page for awhile - everytime I add 8 or 10 new people, I almost immediately find another 8 or 10 and have to edit it all over again. I was going to make a list of all the new people I find, and add them after a couple of days. So, you can do what you want to it until, say, Friday afternoon :) Adam Bishop 19:21, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi, for the Paideia site. I need to add information under the Term Arete. Arete goes to a mythological figure. I am wondering how that can be seperated to two different wikipedia names. I am a novice. You are more skilled than I am. An extensive article on Arete shouldn't go under the mythological name. Can you solve conundrum.WHEELER 17:05, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Got a second problem, I will be adding the cultural meaning of the golden mean under that title. But it is redirected to Golden Ratio. I need to put also extensive material under that heading and i am wondering about the technical aspects. Need your expertise.WHEELER 17:09, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Got another question. Need Classical definition and category assistance on the Golden Mean. I was going to start a "starter" paragraph under Paideia to segue to the golden mean. But I got to thinking, does it go there Or do I start a "Greek Spirit", that is Edith Hamilton's tone and direction. and then segue the major body of the golden mean to its supposed to site. Questions Questions.WHEELER 17:39, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Or do I put a section under Paideia called "Greek Spirit"? Or am i being anal rententive?WHEELER 17:47, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Got another question. Paideia is spelled in many different ways. The Golden mean is under different names and Kalos Kagathos can be said Kalokagathia. Should I be making a bunch of redirect sites so people using google can find this information better? WHEELER 14:58, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I have ended the redirect of Western culture to Western world and have been giving substance to Western culture. I was thinking of melding the section "Western thought" from Western World into Western culture. Please notify me. Thanks.WHEELER 00:29, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Bureaucrat status
There's a new class of users who can turn other users into sysops. This could previously only be done by developers (such as myself). These users are called "bureaucrats". I've picked a few users from Administrators who I think would make good bureaucrats, and you're one of them. Please don't take that as an insult. ;-)

Do you want to be a bureaucrat? If you say yes, I expect you to keep an eye on Requests for adminship and turn users into sysops in accordance with community consensus.&mdash;Eloquence 04:24, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

query
Stan, I would be interested in your opinion on something. On the page Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions Eclecticology declared that holding a vote on the matter of formatting initials was "an abuse of the voting process to attempt to impose the Tyranny of the Majority." On the one hand I appreciate that not every issue can be settled here by means of a vote, but it would seem to me that people are well-qualified to judge an essentially aesthetic matter. What does this "tyranny of the majority" argument imply? That people as a rule are too ill-informed to make "correct" judgements on such matters??? Troubling implications... -- Viajero 09:45, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Suwannee
Ack! I usually do include a link to the source; you'll notice I do it with all my other images. I simply forgot to this time round (I've since included it). The image is from the Gainesville office of the USGS, so I just assumed.. which, I know, is a dangerous thing to do. I've removed reference to the town. Sorry. :\ -- Hadal 05:43, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Whew.. I'm thankful we've vigilant factcheckers like you around to catch my blunders. :) Cheers, - Hadal 05:58, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Disambiguating Rivers
We are having a discussion on river names at WikiProject Rivers. I would appreciate any comments. Rmhermen 21:22, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

OEDs
Ever get the urge to put ancient usage notes from the OED in wiktionary? I know I would if I had one handy... I figure anyone with his own OED can't be all bad. +sj+ 23:28, 2004 Feb 21 (UTC)

Yellow Pigs
I figure anyone with his own OED can't be all bad. Come vote on YPD on Votes for undeletion so it can be restored and we can put up a proper YPD page; there isn't a page anywhere online that gives a back-history more than 25 years old... and it would be an excellent place to put some of the extensive 17 trivia that might not be 'important' enough to go on the official page. (# of trees Dosteovsky could see out of his window while he was in prison, &c.) +sj+ 23:28, 2004 Feb 21 (UTC)
 * Looking better now, I reckon! Do add any anecdotes from your past... +sj+ 09:44, 2004 Mar 5 (UTC)

invitation
Please see Talk:American twenty dollar bill. You get this invitation because your name appears in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (US vs American). Feel free to ignore if you are disinterested. - Optim 05:14, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

MediaWiki Messages for Ships
I've put a couple of new MediaWiki messages into circulation. One of them is for DANFS, and the other is an experiment with the Iowa class battleships. Please let me know what you think. David Newton 23:09, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * I've now gone way beyond the Iowa class ships with new messages. I've covered all the US battleship classes except for the abortive South Dakotas that were terminated by the Washington Treaty. I've also dealt with the Alaska class large cruisers and imported DANFS text for those that didn't have it already. BTW, did you know the the NHC now has a complete copy of DANFS online? David Newton 07:44, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * The Epopt, who I also let know about the MediaWiki messages seems to approve of things. He's created one on the Tang class submarines. He's also suggested that we leave off USS from the ships to save space. I can't see any enormous problems with that from a practical point of view. David Newton 19:57, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

How's the work on the Reagan years coming? Do you want me to list some more sources at Talk:History of the United States (1980-1988), or do you have enough for now? If you're seeking quick access to data online, my user page might also contain some relevant links. 172 06:38, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

New Table Markup for Ships
Stan, I'm not sure whether you're aware or not, but recently a new table markup system has been introduced. I have altered the two standard tables for the RN and USN on my page so that they use the new formatting. From now on, whenever I add a table to an article, I will use the new format. It is a good deal easier to use than the old one I would say. David Newton 23:41, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Stan, what exactly do you mean by the question which of the new format tables would be a good exemplar for cloning? David Newton 19:57, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * Look here Standard Tables. David Newton 01:12, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Lenin tomb
Thanks for raising the issue Mrdice 22:03, 2004 Feb 26 (UTC)

USAF Museum

 * http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/warn.htm . If you've secured permission via their process, then the image page should say so. In practice, many photos of experimental planes are also at NASA sites, you can get them from there.

I seemed to me it they said it would be okay in this context. However, I'll take the images off the article until I can get specific clarification from them. Thanx!!! serak 20:57, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Object file formats
Hi. You have this on your todo list, although there is an existing object file format which redirects to object file that contains a list of formats. RedWolf 05:18, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)

-- Good comments on Talk:Kim Jong Il. BTW, how's the Reagan stuff going? Do want any more sources on the Reagan years? Perhaps you could narrow the request down to a more specific focus this this time. 172 12:04, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

- Dear Stan, since our friend Great disappeared without further discussion, i took the liberty to reorganize the Ancient Rome directory, now in List of Ancient Rome-related topics. I included all the new topics. Criticism is (as always) welcome. Cheers, Muriel 11:45, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

USS Topeka
OK, I understand. Sorry. --Monsieur Mero 00:12, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

- Hey Stan, think you've done some great work, but please, the biography of Bill Gates is not the place to put in your obvious bias for open source software. The word changes I made were subtle. Please keep them that way.

---

Thanks for the Isenberg reference on my talk page. I took a look at the related articles, which seem to be coming along nicely. As a reader (who's very much of a novice on these topics), I've been finding your recent work pretty helpful. Btw, I guess that we can restart the work on History of the United States once we're not so busy with the other projects. 172 12:36, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

- You think that the assassination of the Sheikh Ahmed Yassin is a good idea!??? He's far more of a danger to Israelis dead than alive. This was the best thing that could've happened to him! A blind guy in a wheelchair was taken out of his misery, and his cause was greatly strengthened. For crying out loud, he was a figurehead, not someone engaged in - or even capable of being engaged in - operational matters. Unlike Osama bin Laden or Ayman al-Zawahri, he lacked any logistical know-how that made him indispensable. Instead of merely soiling himself and spewing his senile ramblings, his "martyrdom" will greatly enhance Hamas' steady stream of recruits. Sharon even managed to alienate the Bush administration, not giving them the heads up needed for the official statements immediately afterwards. The effect on relations w/ the EU, UN, Egypt, Jordan, Russia, etc. are so obvious that they don't even warrant mentioning. And how much do you want to bet that the wave of violence is going to escalate? The human toll goes without mentioning. Less noticed in the Western media, this will further cripple Israel's significant but depressed tourism industry, along with foreign investment in general. Meanwhile, unemployment's hovering around 12% and poverty's hovering around 20% - the highest levels in over two decades as the Likud is privatizes much of the country's huge state sector and slashes state-sector jobs and wages. I don't see why the Palestinian extremists won't be able to survive another 5-10 years of Intifada. But if Israel fails to take its losses as soon as possible, I cannot imagine how Israel's economy will stay clear of anything short of an Argentina-style default. Dangerous schisms among the Jewish population itself, dividing, e.g., rich and poor, secular and religious, native and foreign born, and Middle Eastern Jew and European Jew are also looming. They need to bring back Shimon Peres ( http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040322/wl_mideast_afp/mideast_unrest_yassin_040322152858 ), but Labor's sadly so impotent. Anyway, good day and sorry for the rant. 172 09:46, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

On the thorny issue of the DLG/DLGN/CG/CGN status, I was generally working to the rule that the destroyer leader nomenclature should be applied to ships up to about 1970 and cruiser nomenclature thereafter. The break point I chose was the USS Truxton, which was the last ship to spend any time with a DL designation. Pretty much everything after then either had the DLG designation for virtually no time at all as a commissioned vessel or was redesignated before being commissioned. I know that Truxton spent a lot more time as a CGN, but I feel the ship spent enough time as a DLGN to be 'known' as one. Either way, there are active redirects that will lead someone who searchs for CGN-35 to Truxton anyway. That's something I felt was particularly important.

The recent spate of anonymous IP creations of ship articles showed a fundamental misunderstanding of the Wikipedia. There were several articles that I had to merge and then create the appropriate redirects for. The DD and DDG series is another problem, furthing impinging on the DL series again The US designation system around the dawn of the missile age is quite horrendous!

On another, related note, I believe I've now got MediaWiki footers for every active ship class in the Royal Navy and also the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. However, there are substantial gaps in the USN coverage, including the OHP frigates, the amphibious assault ships and the remaining commissioned auxiliaries. David Newton 14:02, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thumbnails
Hi! No, I don't have any sense of graphic design at all :-( I'll try to keep away from the stamps in the future. But, was the "large version" link really that much better? Maybe an alternate thumbnail design would be in order? Like "...|thumb|transparent|..."? --Magnus Manske 15:42, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, most people seem to like the thumbnails; I do, too (obviously), for the simple syntax and unified look. IMHO these are Good Things (TM). I think there's a vote somewhere for the thumbnail appearance, so if you don't like the gray, just vote for something else - or better yet, make your own proposal! --Magnus Manske 20:59, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback on fishes with electric organs (as well as bicycles :-)). The comic effect was clearly a collaborative effort you shared with the creator of the redirect.  By all means convert the redirect into a disambig if you prefer the original wording. -- Alan Peakall 18:34, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Nice catch with the vandalism by 66.248.57.190 - there is more by that IP, subtle changes from WWII to WWI. Sorry - just a newbie myself, can you do the reverts? Wikiwizzy

--- Please see my response to your comments on Talk:Kim Jong-il posted here. I'm honestly sick of that feud with Adam. It must be a gross annoyance to users who want to work on an encyclopedia rather than settle scores with people they've never met. So on one hand, I want to back way from that silly blood feud. On the other, I feel that I have to defend myself from his slander and misrepresentation, and point out Adam's pattern of abuse of other users. I seem to be failing miserably when it comes to accomplishing both ends at once. I'd greatly appreciate it if you read my response and gave me some feedback. Anyway, sorry for the hassle. Hopefully, at least you got a few laughs out of this pointless episode. BTW, I know what you're thinking, and it does looks like you've been right all along about the "professionals" on WP. Since I'm asking for help, at least I ought to grudgingly admit something. 172 07:41, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Kerry Jewish->Jews
I was about to revert the anonymous first edit Jewish->Jews, but you beat me to it and I was wondering whether you saw the same thing I did--both "Jews" and "Jewish" is factually accurate but "Jew" is an objectification that has perjorative connotations in much of the world. I can't think of any other reason the poster made that change. Cecropia 06:47, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for copyediting my work on Overseas Sophie, i appriciate it --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 12:32, 2004 Apr 12 (UTC)

Stamps
Thanks for the tip about adding US to the stamp filenames. :) jengod 03:36, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)

Papua, West Papua
Hi Stan, great point that it was as "every Australian schoolboy knows". And when we (Australians) saw it happen a second time with East Timor, the national shame was repeated. We have tried but there are others who fight such publications.

Even now, Wik renames West_Papuan_Genocide to Attacks_in_West_New_Guinea yet its Wik who had just renamed West_Papau to Papua_(Indonesia) and changed Hollandia to Jayapura, so I wondered and looking at Wik's contributions I find they are all just wiki-fying articles, excepting ones against Islam like Hamas where Wik removes the fact that a speaker is the 'Top Hamas official' .. which has affect of making him sound like some un-informed John in a street somewhere.

The only other content I've found Wik edit has been every West Papua related article, all of which might not reflect well upon certain interests. I am now seriously wondering if Wiki is not employed full time to vet every Wikipedia article and tonning down undesirable ones. And by modifying every article read, Wik would have a record of work done for employer. Hopefully not, hopefully Wik is just a person who can spend week after week doing Wiki edits.

Meanwhile West_Papua article gets bounced around like a ball.

BTW about West Papua wanting Indonesia? Papuans were 90% Christian, 100% Melanesian (as in Australian Aboriginal who've lived in the Pacific for past 40,000 years. As in they are also black in complexion); so why would they EVER entertain the concept of inviting a Islamic militant Asian race from Java who believe Papuans are an inferrior race of infidels?

But that's common sense, it's politically incorrect to mention in the public. Daeron 05:37, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"Soviets" for the collective of different nationalities of the Soviet Union
I've changed your notion of the Soviets in the Great Patriotic War article. I hope you don't get offended, and that you believe my serious incentives. Of course I know that English is not my mother tongue. --Ruhrjung 19:00, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

See your stamps again
I see your contributions, first on the Zululand page, which has, with all things Zulu, blossomed :-) and now on Talk:Rhodesia. Wizzy 18:53, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Tompkinsville
Thanks for pointing out that duplicate article. The Tompkinsville, New York form is definitely improper, as it hasn't been an indepedent town for well over 100 years, but it definitely is current neighborhood of Staten Island. The last remaining towns were abolished in 1898, but I think Tompkinsville ceased to exist officially before that. Like a lot of places, the unofficial usage lingers on. It should definitely be a redirect to the current neighborhood. I'll move the naval base ref over that. I had actually always thought of the naval base as being in the Stapleton neighborhood, just to the south, but I guess I was incorrect, based on those naval history articles. Again, thanks for the heads up. -- Decumanus | Talk 05:05, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Papua, and so forth
Hey Stan, thanks for your intervention at the Papua page. If nothing else, that you seem to mostly agree with me gives me greater confidence that I'm not turning into a Wik-like insta-reverter, or something. When reading constant lengthy posts where I have little real idea what the relevance of the points being made by my opponent are, one is left with having to decide whether it is oneself, or one's opponent, who is not making sense. Your comments lead me towards feeling that it's probably not me, although perhaps neither of us is making any sense at this point. So, at any rate, I don't feel like further discussion by me with Daeron is of any use, and I've requested mediation. We'll see how that goes. john 06:12, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Check out Daeron's comments at User_talk:Jmabel. I've been accused of plagiarism for putting back in some stuff that he had added in one of his versions. We both seem to be being accused of anti-semitism, although I'm not certain of that. Ga! john 16:22, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

Vocabulary Project
Hi there, I just read an insightful comment of yours at the Vietnam page, and since now you will have a lot more time, not watching modern history any longer, I thought with your skills in foreign languages and programming you would be the perfect guy to work with in a project I describe on my user page. Would you mind taking a look and telling me at my talk page what you think about it? Get-back-world-respect 21:47, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

RfC
Sorry to bother you, but I was wondering if you could take a look at Requests for comment/VeryVerily and Requests for comment/172 (and maybe even Requests for review of administrative actions). My conflict with 172 has again become a public matter. I know that you have had experiences with 172 similar to my own, and as I'm facing possible arbitration, it would really be helpful if more voices could provide the context for my actions. (I'm not saying you necessarily would agree with those actions, but you would I hope agree with my characterization of the conflict.) Thanks, VV 23:21, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Next time, I will respond more politely if we can respectfully disagree on changes we make to articles, without passing negative character judgments. I was not impressed by your decision to bring this up on pages launched by users who, IMHO, are beneath you. 172 04:44, 24 May 2004 (UTC) 172 03:44, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

I like the sentiments of your posting, but a small but vocal minority of these users beats people with their crutches, mugs them, and mucks up articles. What do you do in situations like that? 172 05:34, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading the last posting you'd sent me. I only doubt one key assumption in particular: that everybody can be persuaded-- especially when dealing with ideologues. For example, this clearly demonstrates that resolving the dispute is impossible; instead, the two options are winning a fight or losing it. 172 07:29, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Just wanted to note of your conversation with 172 that you should not be taken in by one of his premises, that this is a case of an ignorant user being mistreated by a knowledgeable one. I think if you look at the content in the two edit wars in question, you will see there is nothing ignorant about the changes I made. Of course, you are correct he should not be abusive in either case. And thanks for the sainthood comment! I'm glad someone else noted the asymmetry between how 172 treats users and what he calls "personal attacks" on him. VV 21:34, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
 * This is a perfect example of VV's passive aggressive obsession with me that I was talking about. Perhaps most of the edits in his user history are like this one, with VeryVerily going from talk page to talk page, user talk page to user talk page, and article to article to provoke revert wars with me and then play innocent and try to discredit me. 172 22:37, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

Disneyland past attractions
Saw that you had touched the disneyland article (xlate to It! wow--): I started working on List of past Disneyland attractions from memory but it's way too late and I've spent too much time and I'm going to bed. Elf | Talk 06:41, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the latest reply. But I know that I've exhausted all the options regarding the discussion of the Pinochet intro with him. I'm just going to try to avoid him from now on. 172 09:31, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

List of Ancient Egyptians Move
I understand why you moved list of Ancient Egyptians to list of ancient Egyptians; you thought it was a violation of house style. However, it is not. In this usage Ancient is a noun as well as an adjective (see: Ancient Egypt). The same capitlization rule applies to New Yorker or Costa Rican. New and Rica (Rich) are both adjectives but they are also nouns in these particular usages, and therefore are capitlaized. The article refers to the people of Ancient Egypt, the proper noun we use to refer to Kemet or to a large extent (but not exact) Pharaonic Civilization in respect to modern or Islamic Egypt.

I will not move the page back until you have had a chance to respond.

-JCarriker 18:34, May 30, 2004 (UTC)


 * I have posted a response to your rationale here.
 * -JCarriker 06:15, May 31, 2004 (UTC)

Won't edit articles I've been working on, huh? You're still going around with a chip on your shoulders. Yet, overall, I have been more fair and reasonable to you than you have been to me over the past year and a half. When I disagree with you, I do so read such disagreements as evidence of flaws in your character and personality. In contrast, when you disagree with me on an edit to Vietnam War, you're filling out attacks on my character on RCF pages. What gives? You should be smart enough to realize that you've only had trouble dealing with me because of your own holier than thou attitude. 172 21:30, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Here's some news. If you want sources, evidence, or explanations of my edits, make a straightforward request. Belittling me isn't going to get you anywhere, though. You don't need to respond to this posting, just do it next time. 172 22:10, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

You owe me an apology
I see you get off on kicking people while there down, huh? "No, he explains it right there where it's the people's fault for having 'poor worker productivity' even though the main agricultural areas had produced surpluses for export since ancient times."

Note the following from the article:

"Stalin's campaign of forced collectivization was a major factor explaining the [agricultural] sector's poor performance. In the new state and collective farms, outside directives failed to take local growing conditions into account. Also, interference in the day-to-day affairs of peasant life often bred resentment and worker alienation across the countryside (although some landless or poor peasants benefited from the process). The human toll was catastrophic. In the collective farms, low labor productivity was a consequence for decades to come."

If you have any sense of personal honor, you will apologize to me on the mailing list. 172 17:40, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * See also 172 16:23, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * So what is wrong with this, 172??? Past signs indicate that you have a poor understanding of stalinist Russia - and this seems to be the latest sign of this. Arno 08:03, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I'm forgetful, but I don't know who you are or to what you're referring. BTW, Stalinist Russia is not my area of expertise-- I'm not a specialist on Eastern Europe. But I still stand by my edits on the subject. 172 16:23, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Other things
Hi Stan, left you a message in Augustus. Anyway, i am out of here for a week or two and i need your help to have a look in Elagabalus. There is this user (who uses the interesting name of Leah Q) that is tryng to get the boy categorized as a Roman empress and change the pronouns to female. Based on research made by sexologists tthat Elagabalus was a transgender. Have fun! Muriel G 17:29, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Tacitus
It was all very complicated. Essentially, Tacitus used to be a disambiguation page between the historian and the emperor. Then it got changed to a redirect. My opinion is that Tacitus should pretty clearly be the article where the historian is, with a disambiguation notice at the top about the Emperor. So I moved Tacitus to Tacitus (old), Then deleted Tacitus and moved Gaius Cornelius Tacitus to Tacitus. I'm not sure if anything weird happened beyond that. john '''k 05:18, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Clipper
Do you intend to fix all the "what links here" links that are actually for the disabiguation pages, or do we have to dig in? Rick Boatright 20:31, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

ToL and Categories
Please weigh in: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life

Weird edit bug?
Stan, you seem to be logged in now, I was wondering if you could help me figure out a strange editing problem. I was editing the External links section in Marshall, Texas, I viewed preview a few times and made soem tweaks to the link I added. I saved the edit at 04:47. When I did I noticed that the only section of the page that was ther was external links. At first I thought I must have pushed preview rather than save, and thus was viewing only the one section, but I realized it had deleted the rest of the article.

I have repaired the damage, but it's still strage. The history shows that I blanked the entire page at 04:44. Yet, I only was editing the External links section. Section edits aren't suppose to effect other parts of the page yet it the history "shows" that I blanked the page. I'm wondering if it may have been a bug related to the strage bold and italic text that seems to be currently proliferating in wikipedia. I've checked the edit made within the same minute and there doesn't seem to be a related incident. What do you think?

-JCarriker 05:24, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Is all text bold, and so all titles look like bad 80's computer fonts or is it just me?
 * -JCarriker 05:53, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * It is a server problem, but it is related to wiki. My Mozilla works fine, and so does my internet explorer that is until it goes to wiki and then every thing in that window is bold from then on. A more disturbing fature is that it blacks out the icons. The bolding effects both yahoo and google after visiting wiki. I'm going to log off and try to clean my computer and see if that helps. Can you look into this matter further for me? Please e-mail with anything you find out. I'll also try to find some screen shot software so you can see what's happeing.
 * -JCarriker 06:15, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * I beleive there are two seperate issues, the Marshall "bug" which is a problem with wikipedias software and the "bolded" bug which I think is a problem with my archaic machine. I'm using Mozilla as my primary browser at the moment. Thanks for the advice. Oh, have you had a chance to glance at the Cicero bio I recoommended at Talk List Ancient Egyptians? If your still interested I'm willing to provide an excerp.
 * -JCarriker 08:02, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)

Article with missing history

 * from the pump

Dunno if this is a software bug or what, but imagine my surprise on seeing my watchlist report that Ships of the Royal Netherlands Navy has been changed by an anon, then clicking on the diff only to find that it's a new article! Of course, without history, there's only my word that it's not new, but then how did it get on my watchlist? Stan 16:21, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * It is possible to add article to your watchlist which don't exist yet. Another possiblity is that you added the article to your watchlist, it was deleted and now recreated. However I cannot see any deleted revisions of that article either, so this must have happened before the last purge of the deleted articles. Or it may of course be a database glitch which made the database forget the previous edits. andy 16:26, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * However as that article didn't show up on Special:Newpages, a database problem becomes more likely. andy 20:12, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * No, the article definitely existed previously, that's why I was watching it. Presumably the history has to be restored from backups somehow? Is there any way to know if more than the one article was affected? Stan 21:52, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * According to the history of Ships of the Royal Netherlands Navy, it was created on June 3. However, thefreedictionary.com have this article, and their copy appears to be older than June 3 as they don't have a copy of HNMS Jacob van Heemskerk which was created March 29th. There have been other weird things going on with page histories on wikitech-l. I don't know if this is related. Angela. 00:55, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Etheldreda
Thanks for fixing that! I wouldn't even know how to make the AE character to begin with. ;) --Puffy jacket 10:51, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the Merchant Marines article
I hand't found the "United States Merchant Marine" article because I was looking for Merchant Marines. Thanks for the correction.

Businessmen
Hi, I put Aaron Montgomery Ward in category Category:Salespeople, this article was currently the only one in Category:Businessmen. There is nothing that stops anyone from creating Category:Businesspeople. I got a question of why I created category:businessmen from User:Tagishsimon, and I think his suggestion of creating category:businesspeople would probably be a better idea anyway if this category is to be kept. -- Fuelbottle | Talk 03:59, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I created Category:Businessmen and just after I created it I got the a message from User:Tagishsimon about the name, so I removed the article I had added and added to it shortly after, this was before you had put Aaron Montgomery Ward in that category. I have now created Category:Businesspeople, so it can be discussed there. Fuelbottle | Talk 04:11, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I'm sorry if anything I did upset you... Fuelbottle | Talk

I have put my request to Undelete *National Socialism* on the Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion page. Andy deleted it, redirected it and then put it some of the material onto the Nazism article. I feel he didn't use procedure as an administrator. I ask for your support.WHEELER 17:26, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Greek mythology
Per your thoughts on the Discussion page, look at the "Interpreters" subsection and see who's left out. Some critiques, especially of Bulfinch, edith Hamilton, Frazer etc might be in order. Any external links? A big topic, eh. Wetman 05:35, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Battle of Bosworth.
Greetings Stan: I had wondered where that bit of info. ~(Talk:Battle_of_Bosworth_Field) had gone, I blame those busy little wikifairies!!!, glad you find it of some use though, but it does need cleaning up a tad! I would prefer to merge it with the main item...

If you visit my user page you will find several other pages on battles I have contributed, I hoped at some stage to contact a Battle project editor to see if these might be included...I dont really want the Bosworth stuff on wikipedia, but their it is, so it will be changed at some stage to reflect my concerns over my own copyright, as I uploaded it as is without giving the fullest of consideration to the copyright.

Thanks again Faedra 17:54, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Vote for deletion
Simonides has placed this Early National Socialism/draft up for deletion. There is material there not covered anywhere else. I ask for your *keep* vote.WHEELER 23:11, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)