User talk:Tetris L

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -Razorflame (talk) 17:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

AfD nomination of Chicago (2006 song)
Chicago (2006 song), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Chicago (2006 song) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Chicago (2006 song) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Chicago (2006 song) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. — xDanielx  T/C\R 05:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

appareil
Thanks for your comment about this incorrectn renaming. I revoked it Pi ku (talk) 09:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Luneberg lens
Thanks for moving Rudolf Luneburg to the right place. Could you do the same for the lens named after him: It's called 'Luneburg Lens'? --DrJunge (talk) 22:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure, I can do it, but ... you know you can easily do it yourself, do you? --Tetris L (talk) 08:08, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Done. --Tetris L (talk) 11:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot. Next time a simmliar situation arises I'll try to do it myself. -- DrJunge (talk) 12:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The help page makes it look more complicated than it really is. For standard cases it's only two mouse clicks and you're done. If I can do it, anyone can. ;) --Tetris L (talk) 13:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Floating cranes
Although the article & category structure here was already poor, it's an inappropriate move to remove Category:Floating cranes, as you're now doing. Floating cranes are a WP:COMMONNAME for a large group of them, particularly between the wars. They are (mostly) neither crane ships, nor crane vessels, as they are incapable of making way independently.

Not discussing such changes beforehand is also a poor way to operate on WP. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:11, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Proper categorization requires a clear definition by corresponding articles, which is currently missing. Currently floating crane is a redirect to crane vessel, and the article crane vessel begins with the definition "A crane vessel, crane ship or floating crane is ...". This means, the articles currently pretty much treats the terms as synonyms, or at least the difference is not strictly defined. If there really is a clearly defined difference, then please write an independent article floating crane (not redirect) with an explanation, so we can use it as a basis for categorization.
 * Also, according to the relevant articles, it is not part of the definition of ship or marine vessel that it must be capable of "making way independently". For example non-self-propelled barges are still considered as ships.
 * And last but not least: Category:floating cranes had only 3 entries, which I removed. Let's have a look at them: One is a redirect. One is the article crane vessel, and since you just explained yourself that floating cranes are not crane vessels, I reckon this entry is arguable. Plus, it has already been categorized indirectly through the redirect floating crane, so it has been categorized as floating crane twice. This leaves us with only one proper entry. The benefit of a category with only one proper entry is very arguable in total. --Tetris L (talk) 11:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

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) 18:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Category:Power stations by condition
Category:Power stations by condition, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 02:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:1996_North_Indian_Ocean_cyclone_season
Hey there. I saw you posted about the November 1996 Indian storm, that you experienced it! I just wanted you to know that I wrote an article on it - 1996 Andhra Pradesh cyclone. Having researched it, I can't imagine how scary such a storm would be, and I would love to hear your stories (assuming you're still active on Wikipedia). Cheers! ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:22, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply. Yes, I'm still active on Wikipedia, but as explained on my user page, I'm mostly active on de: and check en: only every now and then.
 * Your article describes the event much more in detail than the rather brief summary in 1996 North Indian Ocean cyclone season. Even though this doesn't provide solace, in memory of all those who died, it's good to see that in Wikipedia their fate doesn't go unnoticed. Thanks for that!
 * Regarding "stories": I don't have much to share there. As explained, I was working on a powerplant construction site. We were inside the building building when the storm hit it, and we were really scared that the whole building steel structure might collapse. But outside it was even more dangerous than inside because of all the debris flying around so we stayed inside for shelter. Probably the fact that the big windows and rolling shutter gates on both sides of the machine hall were ripped out by the wind pressure saved the building, because after that the wind could blow right through the building, giving it less resistance. The pressure of the wind was so strong, that we needed three men to open a door. Surprisingly, unlike the building hull, the machinery inside took only little damage. We would have been able to resume electricity production after very few days, but since most of the power supply lines in the region were cut it took about 6 weeks or so until we could feed into the grid again. The accomodation that we lived in were strong stone wall houses, they took little damage. The fact that we had no phone and no television for 3 weeks because of electric power outage and a destroyed satellite dish was our most severe harm, so that's nothing compared to what the people around our site suffered. As I already mentioned in Talk:1996_North_Indian_Ocean_cyclone_season: The whole area was devastated. There was hardly any tree that was still standing, and most of the houses (built light) and huts were demolished. Thousands of trees were blocking the roads and railways, so there was no transportation. Fortunatly, on the power plant site there was nobody severely injured, because transport to hospital would have been possible only by helicopter, and I doubt that those would have been available. The powerplant site had a small ambulance and its own doctor, who provided first aid to injured people from the surrounding villages in the rural area.
 * I've got some photos which I could upload, giving an idea of the destruction. --Tetris L (talk) 16:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)