User talk:WhisperToMe/Archive0

This is an archive of comments from July 2003 to December 2003.

Greetings! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you have questions or doubts of any sort, do not hesitate to post them on the Village Pump, somebody will respond ASAP. Other helpful pages include: Have fun! --Jiang 23:13 15 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Welcome, newcomers
 * How does one edit a page
 * Manual of style
 * Naming conventions

Welcome! You seem to know a lot about airports and Sega games. I hope we see you more often than onece a month.

A POV violation is something political. To say a city is attractive doesn't count as biased. DINOPUP. Original writer of Newark culture.

If there's anything I can do to help, please drop me a note on my talk page. --Uncle Ed 16:49, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Hi. I'm just curious as to why you decide to change all the Sonic the Hedgehog and Genesis pages to Sega Megadrive? Since the English Wikipidia is, as far as I can tell, American based, and since the Genesis is more widely recognized, I would think you should leave it. =/ - The T

The T, the British call their Genesis the Megadrive too. I'm switching stuff to Japanese names to avoid international confusion with the English Wikipedia. Not everyone who speaks English is from the United States. Don't worry, for I have the U. S. names bolded in close proximity to the Japanese names - WhisperToMe


 * I think that moving the pages to their Japanese names is a bad idea. I fail to see how this will "avoid confusion" this will only create confusion. "Super Nintendo" returns 373,000 hits, while "Super Famicom" returns 32,700. M123 16:44, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)

WhisperToMe is chaning the names from their Americanised names to international names. This is the English wikipeida, not the American wikipedia, so I think he's doing the right thing. CGS 17:00, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC).


 * Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the Famicom/Megadrive/PC Engine names all Japan-only? If so, then it seems to me that the English Wikipedia should use the English name that the consoles were marketed under (NES/Genesis/Turbografx etc.) -- Wapcaplet 18:05, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Wapcaplet, the Megadrive was marketed under its original name in the United Kingdom and Europe. Add to the fact that several in Hong Kong, India, and other countries speak and read English. I'm going with the Japanese names to avoid confusion with people from those countries. Those in the US can identify the Megadrive as the Genesis because "Sega Genesis" is bolded just like "Sega Megadrive" is, and et al. -- WhisperToMe


 * Fair enough :-) -- Wapcaplet 18:14, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * I really have to disagree with moving Mega Man to RockMan. What is gained by moving the article to this new location? It can easily be mentioned that Rock Man is the Japanese name for Mega Man; I think it will confuse people more for the article to be at this name. (And is it "Rock Man" or "RockMan"?) It also seems especially strange to say that Rock Man appeared in a cartoon series (Captain N.) in the U.S. when he was called "Mega Man" in that series and every one after it. -- Wapcaplet 19:41, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning that Wapcaplet. Although the article is in its new location. Instances of the Megaman character being in media produced in the USA (Captain N and the US cartoon series), he will be called Megaman in those instances. When I get around to making an article about the Megaman games for game gear and the computer original games, since those were US Productions, I will call him Mega Man in those articles also. -- WhisperToMe


 * Okay, that makes sense. I have no serious objection to the page being named Rockman, but the Naming conventions page states "article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity", which to me indicates "Mega Man" (or "Megaman") is a better choice for the article title. -- Wapcaplet 23:59, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)

STOP moving all videogame pages from where they've been to new pages. First of all, they're already established there. Second you move pages away from what Google likes (see Google Test popular usage), see the discussion on at Village_pump for some statistics. Third in general wikipedia settles disputes about American/British naming by leaving an entry as it is created. Fourth, for example simply add something like this "Sega Genesis or Sega Mega Drive (as it is known outside of North America) ..." to the Sega Genesis article would suffice. Also be aware that people in North America (US/Canada etc) are completely unaware of what a "Famicom" or a "Mega Drive" is. M123 05:07, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

1. I have the US names next to the Asian ones so it work work both ways anyways. 2. This is the ENGLISH wikipedia, not the AMERICAN wikipedia. Especially in the case of the Brits, whom speak English. 3. A lot of Americans know about alternate names. I've seen websites based in the USA which USE the Japanese names. 4. Google gets hits on the redirect pages as well.

However, I will not move Resident Evil as nobody knows its Japanese name in English speaking countries.

Also, M123, as you have failed to notice, Famicom and NES have separate articles due to being totally separate consoles with the same games. WhisperToMe


 * The issue is not if you also list the US name the issue is the THE ARTICLES WERE ALREADY THERE stop moving them. In English the more common names are the North American names as indicate by Google. What are you talking about &quot;Google gets hits on redirect pages&quot; it doesn't make any sense. Here are some statics from Google searching the web:

- all the above statistics are for websites in English. M123 23:23, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)
 * Super Nintendo&quot; returns 373,000 hits, while &quot;Super Famicom&quot; returns 32,700
 * 196,000 for &quot;Sega Genesis&quot; and 47,200 for &quot;Sega Megadrive&quot;
 * and 109,000 '&quot;Mega Man&quot; Nintendo' vs. 1,660 '&quot;RockMan&quot; Famicom'

- Have you added the hits from "Megadrive" to the total for "Sega Megadrive"?

I have no qualms about moving articles to more commonly used names. Articles are moved all the time -- WhisperToMe


 * The articles were already at their more popular names. You moved them away from there. I didn't count just "Megadrive" because if I searched for "Genesis" and "Megadrive", Genesis would get false hits from the bible book. M123 23:57, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * M123: But there's only one Megadrive and, as you notice, at least two Genesises. So obviously people will disambiguate their use of Genesis but not their use of Megadrive. Seems to me, if it's called Megadrive in Europe and Australasia, and Genesis in just the US, we should put the article under Megadrive. I also got the impression that it was a far more popular platform in the former markets than the latter, but I don't know. What did Canada call it? And perhaps this discussion should be at Talk:Sega_Genesis? -Nommo


 * There is only 1 "Sega Genesis" and only 1 "Sega Megadrive", there never was any ambuguity . M123 00:19, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * I was referring to Google. You said: "The articles were already at their more popular names. You moved them away from there. I didn't count just "Megadrive" because if I searched for "Genesis" and "Megadrive", Genesis would get false hits from the bible book." Sorry for any amiguity. ;) -Nommo


 * Also if you want ambiguity, the first link returned for "Megadrive" on Google is for http://www.megadrive.com/ which has nothing to do with the Sega Genesis/Megadrive. M123 00:37, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Well, the Sega Genesis was less popular in the US and Canada than the Megadrive was in Europe, Japan, and Australia. - WhisperToMe


 * Then why is it 3 to 1 more popular under the North American names on Google? Also do you have any figures to back up your "more popular" assertion, the Sega Genesis was a hugely popular video game system in the US. M123 00:26, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Just look at the statistics, M123. http://www.epinions.com/content_1936498820 The Megadrive as a whole OUTSOLD the SNES in Europe, but vice versa in North America. If you want a link, I'll give one to you. Also, Its hard to truly tell the truth about Megadrive vs. Genesis, because of the complexity of simply typing in "Genesis". Try to make this your science fair project if you have one, M123. WhisperToMe


 * I know it's hardly scientific, but on Google "Sega Genesis" polls 186,000, while "megadrive" tallies 240,000. As I said before, the former is far more likely to be qualified than the latter. Taking that anomaly into account, I'd say that web-wise they were pretty much even. -Nommo


 * A fairer comparison might be 'Sega+Genesis' 387,000 vs. 'Sega+Megadrive' 108,000. Note that Megadrive is the name of entirely different technology product in the US. M123 00:39, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * That's true, but the other nine are the console. By contrast, it looks like none of the first ten "Genesis" sites have anything to do with the console. I think for a rough estimate, counting "Megadrive" seems fair enough... -Nommo


 * That's fine because the article was originally at "Sega Genesis" before Whisper moved it, and "Sega Genesis" gets 196,000 hits while "Sega Megadrive" gets only 47,200 M123 00:46, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * I think you'll find I was disagreeing with you. :) If we're going on Google, counting "Megadrive" results seems fine from where I'm looking. And that, like I say, puts the two about equal web-stats wise.-Nommo


 * I think that 196,000 is a larger number than 47,200, I can't see how you disagree with this. It is not statistically equal, one number is 4 times larger! The bottom line is Whisper never should have moved the page from "Sega Genesis" in the first place. M123 00:53, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * I agree he shouldn't've moved it without a debate on the matter. And I think this debate is at the wrong place. That aside, a debate now exists, so lets have it. Here if needs be. Now. I repeat:

1) I see no major reason why the Google searches shouldn't be "Megadrive" and "Sega Genesis" owing to the other uses of the words Genesis and Megadrive. A person talking about their Megadrive is unlikely to qualify it. A Genesis user is MORE likely (though not univesally likely) to qualify it. 2) This gives us: Genesis: 186,000; Megadrive: 240,000. That's more to Megadrive.

3) Given that some people in an established context WILL say Genesis and not Sega Genesis, I add a few thousand to the Genesis camp, and estimate that in Googleville the two are pretty much equal. 4) How that effects the wiki placeholder is a different matter entirely. -Nommo


 * It should be moved back to where it was created in 2001 and where it has been unchallenged until Whisper single-handedly moved it. Also I'd like to mention that of the "Megadrive" search results I've perused, a good number of them are in French not English. If I click to search under English only (this is English-language wiki) I get 90,300 for "Megadrive" while I get 190,000 for "Sega Genesis". The bottom line is the page should be restored to where it's been, and "Sega Megadrive" made into a redirect. M123 01:08, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Hi, Whisper... This conversation has been continued at Talk:Sega_Megadrive. It'd be nice to have your opinions (/agreement?) before the article gets put back at Sega Genesis. -Nommo

Hi, Whisper. I just wanted to drop you a friendly suggestion. You seem to make a lot of edits in rapid succession to the pages you're focusing on. While this is technically fine, it does begin to clutter the page history of these entries, and takes up a lot of server space with archived versions of the article. I'm hoping you can choose to make several edits in one update, rather than keeping to your current system of many edits, each of them saved to Wikipedia and generating another archived version of the page. Hope I'm not stepping on your toes too hard: always glad to see someone's contributing! Thanks, Jwrosenzweig 23:42, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Jwrosenzweig. Next time, I will try to have as little edits as needed. - WhisperToMe


 * You're welcome, Whisper. I appreciate your being so quick to respond: happy editing! Jwrosenzweig 23:50, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Please still copyedit.. a lot! But Jwrosenzweig means that you could make use of "Show preview" button. --Menchi 08:57, Aug 21, 2003 (UTC)

--- I just wanted to say that you are doing a great job with all the airport articles. :-) --mav 07:51, 23 Aug 2003 (UTC) --- Thanks for the compliment, mav. :) Whisper -

Your article, Angel Maturino Resendiz is an orphan. It is suggested that you have at least one other article link to it. --Jiang 03:58, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

- I was in the process of finding an article to link to it, Jiang. The deed is done. I will try to find more ways to link the article. Whisper

Hi - why are you changing all the links to Weimar into links to Weimar, Germany, which is just a redirect? You're not planning on making Weimar a disambiguation page are you? --Camembert

Yes, i'm planning on making "Weimar" into a disambiguation page that links to Weimar, Germany and Weimar, Texas. Both cities are "Famous". The first is a beautiful, artistic city in Germany. The other is a small town where Angel Maturino Resendiz murdered a pastor and his wife. - Whisper


 * I really don't think it's a good idea - the Weimar in Texas might be famous in the USA, but it doesn't have much fame for anything anywhere else in the world as far as I know (certainly not here in Britain). The one in Germany, however, will have been heard of by people all over the world (a look at the article on it shows why), and there are many more links referring to the German one than the Texan one. The thing is, in the long run, people are going to carry on making links to Weimar, wanting the German city, and if that page is just a disambig there's going to be a lot of effectively broken links. Please don't go through with this - if you do, I'll most likely change it back, because I do feel quite strongly about it. --Camembert

I'll go ahead and keep it where it is, Camembert. :) Believe it or not, I didn't even know how famous Weimar, Germany was until I found out about it on Wikipedia. Whisper


 * Thanks very much, I really appreciate it :) --Camembert

Hi. On Wikipedia, we strive to call people by their most common names. That's why I deleted the Lindberghs' middle names, twice now, from List of murdered people, and why I redirected Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Jr. to Charles Lindbergh, Jr.. If you can show me that they are both most commonly known by their middle names, I'd be more than happy to revert what I changed. RickK 01:46, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC) --- Thanks for confirming this with me. You can leave the article at the name you put there. WhisperToMe 02:26, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Nice work on History of Los Angeles! RickK 02:17, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yes, that text was on the old Los Angeles article, but the article got too large, so I took out the history section and moved it. WhisperToMe 02:28, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hey, go take some pictures of all the Houston places you're writing about and upload them, so people on the other side of the world can see what they look like. Although I used to live in Houston, it was before the invention of the camera :-), so I don't have any of my own to add... :-( Stan 02:46, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yep, i'm planning to do that this weekend. I also want some pictures of the city. I want to at least take a picture of downtown Houston at day and night. I could also take pictures of other places in the city. WhisperToMe 02:48, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Sounds like you got some good shots, I'm looking forward to seeing them! If you have good detail in the pics, be sure to do "larger version" for them - 300px across for the article inline version, 700px for the larger version is good. I usually fool around with cropping a bit to get something that is shaped nicely; for instance, panoramas look good if they're skinny and centered; see Gamla stan for example. In any case, Image use policy has the markup to cut-n-paste, if you haven't done images before. Stan 04:08, 29 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hello

I would prefer the list of mirror sites not to be in the article. You may mention in the article that they were several mirror sites tricking people to make them see the picture. This is the relevant information. Putting the links is not adding any information if the mirror existence is stated, and if the pict link is already provided.

Anthère 01:26, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

No biggie Whisper. I similarly apology if I was short. I am sure we will find a nice compromise :-) Anthère

Hi! I'm BL with the same handle on the Swedish Wikipedia. Nice to meet you. BL 02:46, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Hello, BL. :) See your talk page.

WhisperToMe 02:49, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Cool! Just try to use a simple language so that translation becomes esier for the Swedes. :-) BL 03:31, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

largest city
Hi Whisper,

If you add the largest city of a country, you could link to List of national capitals by country, since that also lists them as an extra.

Patrick 17:56, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)

IC --Jiang

Why are you adding these "City" designations to the Virginia cities? RickK 05:01, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Someone else put up the link, so I made the redirect to avoid double articles. WhisperToMe 05:04, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Why did you move Axis Powers to Rome-Berlin-Tokyo axis, without any discussion? -- Mattworld 02:38, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

That is the name the axis called itself. Therefore, this is all about the World War II axis. WhisperToMe 02:42, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * I moved it back to Axis Powers, start a discussion on the Talk page about why you are correct, and people will probably start to agree with you. But don't unilaterally move it. -- Mattworld 02:48, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

History of City
Why have you been moving the history of many very important cities to to "History of..." daughter articles and not leaving any decent summary in its place? The history of a city is very important and not leaving a few paragraphs in the main article about a city is very wrong IMO. Leaving nothing but a link is far worse. On top of that you have not mentioned your moves in the edit summary of the main city articles ; such a major edit needs a mention in the page history. I also have not seen any mention in the first edits creating the "History of..'' daughter aticles that the text was moved. This makes it look like you are the sole author of this text and is therefore a violation of the GNU FDL (not to mention plagiarism - I thought that History of San Francisco was a new article and thus it was listed under New articles on the Main Page for a day). ---mav 07:09, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I did it as a pattern, first because of the burgeoning size of the Los Angeles article. I moved the history to relieve the article, since it was over 32K in size. Since then, I moved other city articles to meet the pattern, and to allow space for the history article to be expanded upon. I'm not trying to attribute myself as the article, but I'm trying to make space for large articles about cities to include information on the city as it is in the current day. Next time, I'll mention that the history had been moved, and I'll make a short summary if space permits me to.

I've done stuff like this many times to help relieve morbidly large articles. Look at the Jesus Christ article. It was more than twice the max. recommonded size, so I announced on the talk page that I was splitting it up. I also did this to World War II, simply to alleviate large articles. WhisperToMe 07:14, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Always leave a decent summary of text moved. A huge article that still touches all the major points (even if they are lost in detail) is far better than an article with very important points moved along with the detail. Such an article is nowhere near comprehensive or complete since it fails to mention very important aspects of the subject! An article should start with a general summary about the entire subject. Then subtopics to the main topic (such as a "history of" section) should grow until it gets too long. Then that subtopic should be nicely summarized and then the detail should be moved to a daughter article (and so on - preferably basing further moves on specific subjects, such as events, people and places). The is called News Style. A good example of this in action is Germany. ---mav

I like what you are doing at World War II! Leaving summaries is a great benefit to the user; people who are slightly interested in the war will use the summaries, while people more interested in a particular aspect of the war will read the summary as an introduction to that aspect and then they will navigate to the article on that particular aspect (or just jump straight there). This makes the article more useful and is good News Style. --mav 07:47, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Thanks. From now on, I'm going to use this method whenever I make daughter articles. WhisperToMe 07:55, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Sweet! The Wikipedia articles you work on this way will be far more useful to far more people as a result. --mav

WhisperToMe, way to go with trying to get consensus on edits to places like al Qaeda. I see you're getting it. :-) -- Mattworld 00:39, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Yep. I've seen jehad.net myself before it was janked down. I couldn't understand the Arabic, but the pictures suggested that it was related to terrorists, so I contacted the FBI about it. WhisperToMe 22:01, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Project Bojinka
What's with all the prominent linkage to Project Bojinka? I think that at least some of the references to it could be removed (such as the one in NAIA). --seav 16:42, Nov 18, 2003 (UTC)

Since actual incidents that have have taken place regarding to the flights out of an airport are put on the airport's article (e.g., TWA Flight 800 on the New York and Paris CDG articles), I listed Project Bojinka as a "could-have-happened big incident". If it did happen, it would have been listed long ago. WhisperToMe 23:46, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)

That's excellent! Glad to see you over there. The Arabic Wikipedia needs all the help it can get. It would be really helpful if you could log in when you're over there so I know I don't have to check your edits for vandalism. At the moment, the majority of edits are vandalism, so having a few less to check would definitely be a good thing. :) I think the dates must be dodgy, it says you created the article on the 15th, not the 24th! I'll report it at ar:Wikipedia:Bug reports.  Angela 20:49, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Its my error... X_X - I misread the edit list. WhisperToMe 23:41, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll take it off Bug reports. Thanks for explaining. Angela 00:20, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

-

Arlington, Va.
Philadelphia is both a city and a county under Pennsylvania law. So is San Francisco under California law. Arlington, Va. is a totally different case. As the article itself states, there is no incorporated municipality within Arlington County. It is a county, a CDP, and a post office; however, there is absolutely no basis for calling it a city, as Virginia law does not consider it one. BRG 16:52, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I put the Virginia law phrase in the Arlington County VA page. WhisperToMe 17:18, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * OK. What you have there now looks fine. BRG 19:36, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi, I've nominated you for Administrator privileges. If you accept, please say so on Requests for adminship. --snoyes 20:25, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Id still like to know that website's source on the information; its personal information. Her favourite color? Come on. Lirath Q. Pynnor
 * Ask the question "Who wrote the website?" When I say Rachel's parents, it should become fairly obvious where the source is.... WhisperToMe 22:33, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Examining I find no reference to her parents. Lirath Q. Pynnor
 * See: http://www.racheljoyscott.com/contact.htm Beth Nimmo" is the name of Rachel's remarried mother. WhisperToMe 22:37, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * The link does not actually say that this website is created by the mother. In any case, if you put the information into the article, as text (not as a chart), and state that it is "according to rachelyjoyscott.com"; Im not going to remove it. Others might. Lirath Q. Pynnor
 * Someone else set it so that the text wouldn't show, so I've decided not to put it back. WhisperToMe 22:54, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I've withdrawn my opposition to your adminship based on the Rachel Scott rewrite. Secretlondon 23:09, Nov 27, 2003 (UTC)

Hi,

Just a word of warning about the placing of your e-mail address on your user page - you are making it vulnerable for use by spam mail senders. Arno 02:18, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Its only a web-based account, dun worry. Anyways, i'll make it so that spam bots wont take my e-mail account anyway. I'll get the info from my dad once I need to use my ISP-based account. WhisperToMe 02:21, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I know that Elephant (film) is headed by a spoiler warning, but it feels like bad form to reveal who gets killed and who doesn't. If it's not objectionable to you, I'd like to see those kinds of details removed, and in their place add more details (if desired) about what the characters are like. Mkmcconn 06:32, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)

See: Talk:Elephant (movie) WhisperToMe 00:21, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * I don't want my comment to be interpreted as a complaint against you, WhisperToMe. It's just a suggestion that the article will be better, more the sort of thing that people will be glad to have read, if we make a difference between what I'll call "cheap spoilers" - details revealed for no apparent purpose, except to let people know how the story ends - and "accidental spoilers", which are details that are used in explaining something about the film.  "Elias is somehow detached from the story, a voyeur but whose path also connects numerous stories and provides perspective; so much so that, when he calmly snaps a picture of the killers, point blank, it is left unclear whether he is killed afterward." - that's the accidental kind of spoiler.  "John is told by the killers to stay away, and is spared; Bernie gets blown away after wandering toward the danger that everyone else is running from" - the latter feels cheap and pointless, in that there is no obvious reason for providing this detail, except to let people know the end of the story for two of the characters.  It's not the sort of thing I would want to know, if I'm reading a story about a movie - where the other kind of spoiler is more incidental to the observation being made.  Does this help?  Mkmcconn 02:26, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I never interpreted it as a complaint against me. I see what you mean. Yes, this helps. I have not seen the film before. WhisperToMe 04:09, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Serious question -- what did the Lackawanna six plead guilty to? Moriori 23:48, Dec 3, 2003 (UTC)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,87264,00.html Terrorism related charges. WhisperToMe 23:50, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * Cheers. Your amendment clears it up nicely Moriori 23:59, Dec 3, 2003 (UTC)

Re the DC-10 under Americna Airlines: Just because it's not flying any more doesn't mean it shouldn't be there. It's part of the airline's history. -Sekicho.

I decided to keep it. WhisperToMe 05:51, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

You're now an administrator -- Tim Starling 00:32, Dec 6, 2003 (UTC)

Buffalo six
I see you've been doing work on the Buffalo six. I came across a new news item. maybe it will be of assistance to you. Kingturtle 00:20, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Russian transliterations are tough, eh? Took a bit of googlesniffing to decide that "matryoshka" was the most plausible, didn't think to add redirs. BTW, I liked your Houston pics! Stan 05:09, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Yea, I use redirects on as many transliterations as I can to ensure that nobody will make a double article on a diff. transliteration.

BTW, Thanks for the comment about the pictures, Stan :) WhisperToMe 05:11, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Don't worry--I don't fully agree with your approach either. (See User:The Cunctator/Agglomeration for some thoughts on the issue.) I've been mulling on ways to deal with this issue, and I have some ideas for an implementation that I'll try to mock up in the near future. --The Cunctator 03:48, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Its best to consider a page large once it gets over the limit as indicated when one tries to edit the whole page and he or she sees a reminder warning him or her that the size is too much. However, as mav stressed, its better to have a larger page than one that is fragmented to the point where it is not comprehensive. I don't believe that the Philadelphia article needs splitting up right now. Obscenely articles such as World War II and Jesus Christ, however, needed splitting up. WhisperToMe 04:19, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

2wtccrash.JPG
Did you either take this photo or did you get permission to use it without attribution? --mav 05:44, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The photo came from the Chinese Wikipedia. WhisperToMe 23:28, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi, I saw the question you posed for Formulax. The Chinese version says "911 -- French Wikipedia". The pic is at the French WP here:. --Jiang | Talk 04:33, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Comment on my talk page : http://en2.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Anthere&diff=0&oldid=1973270

cheers. PomPom

-

Bojinka = & = &. Good luck on autotranslating. --Menchi (Talk)ü|â 02:09, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The person who thought of the idea of the attack was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed; Osama used his power to modify Mohammed's plan.

Your source for this? Adam 02:24, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/south/03/02/mohammed.biog/

WhisperToMe 02:29, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Just a thought
IF THIS IS SCREAMING and this is talking, is this whispering? If it is, then I whisper to you :) Zocky 04:47, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

XD It's okay to talk normally... XD WhisperToMe 04:50, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)