User talk:Woohookitty/Archive

Edit summary
Hello. Please provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy edits. Hyacinth 02:26, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

xhosa
Can you provide a reference for your contention that the Xhosa people live in Namibia? It seems you may have confused them with the Khoisan. Ferdinand Pienaar 21:32, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"America"
I see you're fixing links to "America"! While you're doing it, you might adjust the text to read "the United States" if that's what's really meant in the context, and if Canada is definitely not meant. Or "North America" if that's the meaning. You may think this is unnecessarily sensitive ...and imagine that I'm Canadian or something! --Wetman 06:55, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi! Thanks for the note. Another tip: When you get to a Userpage, look at the lefthand column and click on Discussion. You'll get a chance to leave your note and read everybody's mail! You can even add an "I couldn't help overhearing..." remark, if you're sure you have a helpful solution to an issue, or a good link: Careful! Wikipedia is a glass house, so behave yourself! When leaving a note, select Watch this page, as answers are often left right under your note. --Wetman 01:07, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * There was no condescending tone intended in my attempt at helpfulness. Here's a quote from Dr. Johnson that James Boswell noted down: "If you would be thought agreeable in society, you must consent to be taught a great many things you already know." I have restrained a cross remark more than once with the thought of Dr. Johnson's remark. --Wetman 01:47, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I have reverted your disambiguation of America at User:Thryduulf/Geonamesongs (the proposed re-working of List of songs whose title includes geographical names. I have done this because the link to the disambiguation page is purposefully there. Thryduulf 22:07, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

United States
I apologize, but I had to revert your edits to Last edit made by Postdlf. The prior use before you vandalized the article page and your edit was lost in the revert since I can't determine clearly what you're edit was trying to do. Please be alert for vandalism, as it does occur frequently on several pages, such as United States, and George W. Bush... just to name a few. Make sure that you check the history first on articles which have high volume or appear to have a lot of reverts due to vandalism. (Edits which have "Reverted edits by..." are rollback edits, and if they show up a lot, it could mean vandalism.) Thanks for your contribution to the Wikipedia. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:04, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Er, I should clear up my sentence. What I meant was that the last edit before you was a vandalized edit, and you edited on top of the vandalized edit.  What I meant was "the prior edit before you, was a  vandalized edit"  Sorry about that. -- AllyUnion (talk) 12:39, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * No problem. No harm done. --Woohookitty 18:35, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

America is not always United States
Your work to disambiguate America is great. However, please be careful to choose the right meaning of the word. In Swedish slave trade, you redirected America in "when the Swedish colony in America, New Sweden, was taken over by the Dutch in 1655" to United States. While the colony was within the borders of present-day U.S., I think the reference is inappropriate, since the U.S. did not exist at the time. I changed it to read "North America" instead.

In the same edit, you seem to have changed African to African. Both will look the same, but the change is no improvement - quite the contrary. The first form is correct syntax, as it makes the whole word hyperlinked, but links directly to Africa. The second form links to African which is a redirect to Africa. Linking through redirects is generally considered ugly.

Please consider this in your future edits - and keep up the good wikiwork! Alarm 10:50, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

*Thank you for the help. Yes usually in that situation I changed it to North America, which I've done several times but I missed that one. --Woohookitty 20:49, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Canto General
"Canto General" consists of 15 sections, 231 poems, and more than 15,000 lines. It is an incredible ambitious work that attempts to be a history or encyclopedia of the whole continent of North America. --> Shouldn't that be South America? Neruda lived in Chili, so... georingo 20:13, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. --Woohookitty 21:14, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar
Woo-hoo, the suggested redirects are done! Good job on finishing those off! For your efforts, I award you this barnstar. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 21:49, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Arcade games
Woohookitty, I replied to your post on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Arcade games talk page. Thanks for joining. As for stepping on others toes, I don't think you will, but there is one user who currently is. See my reply to you on the Talk page for more information. Thanks again! :-)  &mdash; Frecklefoot | Talk 19:10, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

tagging articles
Please put templates like that only are useful to editors, on talk pages (the only exception I can think of would be the different stub templates). This is to Avoid self references as much as possible and make our content more useful to third party users. Thank you. :) --mav 08:50, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wayne Static
Hello, hello. Do you remember tagging this for vfd? Do you remember putting your reasoning on the Talk page instead of the VfD page? :P You must have had one too many windows/tabs open. I'll let you sort it out. —Mar·ka·ci: 2005-02-10 13:33 Z

Mr. Do
I'll give the revised version look when I have the chance later today. Both articles were pretty good, which is why I didn't do a "vote for deletion" which I have seen some people do with duplicates. I figure both had merit and anything different in one should be merged into the other. Thanks for taking it on. 23skidoo 18:45, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hey, Woohookitty. I'm glad you've changed your mind. As far as the WikiProject Arcade games, I'm not officially a member because I don't really think I have too much to add, though I am a member of WikiProject Computer and video games, which I'm much more conversant in. However, maybe sometime I'll take a shot at the arcades :) Anyway, no apology necessary, you acted in accordance with the appropriate WikiProject and that's a valid reason to want the article a certain way. Andre ( talk ) 21:02, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Cheng Kung Senior High School
HI, I'm the copyright holder of http://www.cksh.tp.edu.tw/english/english.htm. so the article is innocent. Thanks:P

i see the nominated for deletion page... and it seems that the article of high school is not suitable here. however, there are some High_school article.

therefore i dont know whether i misunderstand the rule here or not.

if the high school article is offend the rule here, I'm sorry and i will remove the page. if what i should do is expanding it ,i will do it as soon as possiable.

Excuse me to incommode. (anyway i add {school-stub} tag now)

OK,i understand:P Thanks your instruction.

Image copyright tags
I see from your contributions that you're perhaps working on the untagged images project. I tagged thousands during the first round of that project and so have some familiarity with the issues involved.

You put a tag on Image:Vancouver area map.png. That image is not in the public domain, and I don't see how you would have thought that it was. I created that image and had tagged it. A vandal had removed that tag and the information on the source of the image. I can understand you not catching that vandalism. But I do not understand how you thought to label the image as public domain.

Though I don't have particularly strong proprietary feelings about that one map, I certainly hope that you're not willy-nilly slapping tags on images without justification.  Public domain is a specific legal concept, and it doesn't mean that you just don't know where an image came from or that it's found widely on the 'net and therefore "must" be free to use. Copyright is an important issue with Wikipedia, and using unlicensed images that are not in the public domain could have serious consequences.

Thanks for your work on tagging images. It's an important project that needs lots of help. But every effort needs to be made to determine the source of the images and apply the proper tag. I looked at some of your tagging efforts. Many are right on, but many seem mis-tagged to me. If the image is described as being made by the user who uploaded it, e.g., then it is assumed to be if the user has not tagged it otherwise. I've found other cases where you could have used or  but didn't.  You might find it useful to more carefully review the definitions of the copyright tags and the Wikipedia copyright information. You also should be leaving notes on the talk pages of the users who uploaded images of undetermined origin – many, as I would have, respond with useful information and even volunteer to revisit and tag all the images they've uploaded.

Thanks for contributing. -- Kbh3rd 04:41, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't really mean to scare you off the project! (I was pretty tired last night, and in the light of morning the above looks rather stern.)  If you can educate yourself a bit more about how to go about it, your help would certainly be welcome.  But if you have other areas where you think your efforts would be better directed, I'm sure your contributions will be appreciated there, too.  I don't have a lot of time right now, which is why I'm not active on this phase of the image tagging project, but maybe I'll find time to review the images you've tagged and fix what needs it.  Thanks for helping.  Kbh3rd 14:59, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tariffing
I am about to reverse your redirect of Tariffing. There is a whole clutch of articles indexed by Teletraffic Engineering which need to be considered for deletion as a group. For example Cell handover process duplicates handoff. Redirecting one article just confuses matters.

I think they are a project by students at Witwatersrand University - some refs are to lecture notes from there and a recent anon edit was from South Africa. -- RHaworth 06:41, 2005 Mar 3 (UTC)

I have now created Deletion policy/Teletraffic Engineering. -- RHaworth 09:07, 2005 Mar 7 (UTC)

Fnarr, fnarr!
Why did you remove "fnarr, fnarr!" from the List of catchphrases? &mdash; J I P | Talk 11:27, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Germany
Nice job on that mess! &middot; Katefan0(scribble) 21:32, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ach! I can smell the sauerkraut from 1922 in Germany from here!  You truly are a glutton for punishment.  :)  &middot; Katefan0(scribble) 20:53, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce Procedure note
Please add new items to the list of open tasks at the bottom of the list. Thanks ! --Randy 20:38, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

expos/nationals debate
There is a major debate going on, and I wondered if you might want to chime in. The debate involves how to deal with franchise moves in baseball. The question is whether Montréal Expos should be its own article or if it should redirect to Washington Nationals. All other instances of franchise moves in MLB redirect the old team name to the new team name, and the history of the franchise is covered within the new team name (for MLB, NBA and NFL examples, see here. Some people are confused and think the Expos and the Nats are different teams. Some people don't want to upset Canadian readers.

Indeed, the Washington Nationals are not a new team - the Montreal Expos franchise has moved to Washington, and the old franchise name should redirect to the new franchise name, just like the 20+ instances of this occuring in Wikipedia. For example, Brooklyn Dodger history resides in the Los Angeles Dodgers article. New York Giants history, including the Shot Heard 'Round the World, resides in the San Francisco Giants article.

If you have the time, maybe you could chime in on the conversation there, Votes for deletion/Montréal Expos. Kingturtle 17:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Mexico City Metro Stations
Thanks for adding the tags and more or less cleaning the article. But as I'm getting better at wiki markup, I decided to join the Cleanup Task Force myself!

- Rune Welsh 18:25, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce
Good job cleaning up the Samuel de Champlain page, it's much better organized now. I came across it when I was cleaning up the Trent University page and flagged it for the Taskforce. Keep up the good work. Ben Babcock 00:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your help
Hi Woohoo - I just wanted to say thanks for all the work you put in on the bad stub articles. Contributors like you make me glad I spent the time to create that project and gives me even more energy to work on the next one. Thanks again and keep up the good work. Triddle 02:32, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Open issues list, Cleanup Taskforce
Please add new issues to the bottom of the open issues list of the Cleanup Taskforce. --Randy 11:34, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/First Baptist Church, Columbus, Indiana
Can you please put Cleanup Taskforce/First Baptist Church, Columbus, Indiana on someone's desk... someone else. I'm not quite sure what to do with it. Thanks --Randy 02:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan
Oh boy. I didn't envy you this job (waiting for your retaliation!!). I think it's shaping up nicely. Quite a task. There is still some unencyclopedic style and POV to edit out (People knew that Reagan had been ill, suffering from Alzheimer's Disease for a decade and that morning, there were reports indicating that his health had significantly deteriorated, and the words, "Reagan is dead," had been expected to come in weeks or months. ... sounds like a research paper or op/ed or something). I give you permission to finish your work (duck). Would you like some help? &middot; Katefan0(scribble) 14:32, May 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * You've done a nice job in cleaning up the page and editing. Have you finished with it? If yes, you can now proceed and do the same with Death and state funeral of Pierre Trudeau. I've given you permission to do so there. SNIyer12(talk) 15:41, May 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * I've already added the Pierre Trudeau article to the Cleanup Taskforce and to your desk, as well as for Operation Yellow Ribbon. --SNIyer12(talk) 18:37, 28 May 2005
 * Absolutely! My pleasure.  I'm really sorry to hear you're having continuing problems.  If I'd realized, I would've put it on my watchlist to see if I can't help out some.  I'll do that now.  More eyes and voices are always better. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) June 29, 2005 19:25 (UTC)

Letter writing
Well, I guess I didn't really know what I was stumbling into. It's just that, I maintain the transwiki log basically single-handedly. I've been going through all the old entries to resolve them, and when I come upon an old interwiki redirect, I have to tag them for speed delete, since those redirs don't work ,and discourage editing (and are explicitly mentioned in the CSD). This article was just one of the ones I came across as I was going through them. I don't think you have much to worry about from the vandal, as you had no part in it. And, I don't really think we have much to fear in general from someone who's been inactive since February. I transwiki articles every day, and it still baffles me how much people oppose moving things to our sister projects, as if they're being deleted or somethin. Anyway, thanks for the heads-up. --Dmcdevit 07:10, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The scary thing is, because of the flakiness of VfD, a lot of times articles that aren't really encyclopdia material, but strike a fancy with a bunch of editors, are kept, even against deletion policy. --Dmcdevit 07:22, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It's been recreated by an anon :( Rather than speedy it again, I've brought it up at WP:AN/I, though I'm not positive if that's the proper forum. Any input? --Dmcdevit 06:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I hope by presenting a united front we can fix this thing before it gets out of hand, like it looks like happened last time. It's ironic that this person makes such a big deal about such an insignificant issue, really. If he really cared about the spirit, the idea of Wikipedia, he would have moved on and helped out elsewhere by now. Ah, people... --Dmcdevit 08:01, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vote for deletion alert
I see from the page history for Cut Ending to Knights of the Old Republic II that you once edited it. I thought you would like to know that there is a VfD on that page now at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Cut_Ending_to_Knights_of_the_Old_Republic_II. Please stop in there and comment on this vote! --maru 15:55, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

False positives on the double redirects
Hi Woohookitty,

Can you leave just a couple of the false negatives as a message on my talk page? I'll take a quick look and see if they can be ignored but I have a strong suspicion that they have been fixed in between the snapshot I can work with and the point that Wikipedia is at right now. Thanks for the heads up and once I check it out I'll put up a note on the project page. Triddle 05:09, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

I did a quick check and verified my hypothesis. You can safely ignore any false positives. Thanks again. Triddle 05:21, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Military of Pakistan
Would you be interested in discussions on this (Talk:Military of Pakistan) particular page?--PrinceA 00:09, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lots of edits, not an admin
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) June 28, 2005 13:43 (UTC)


 * Hey, you might want to check your watchlist, :), it's kind of funny that you would ask me to vote. By the way, I think advertising is a good way to put off some regular voters. I'd just let the vote take its course. --Dmcdevit 29 June 2005 03:56 (UTC)
 * Oh, well never mind then. And good luck. --Dmcdevit 29 June 2005 04:41 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, and I had been meaning to tell you, it looks like Letter-writing Richard came back a few days ago to vandalize my user page. It went on for so long that the page was finally protecetd for a day. Look at the history. Might want to look out for that, he's switched to a dynamic IP now. --Dmcdevit 30 June 2005 01:20 (UTC)
 * Haha. I like the recent addition to your user page. That's kind of how I feel (not that anyone's asked). You will henceforth be referred to as "it" and "that", not he or she! --Dmcdevit 3 July 2005 08:14 (UTC)

reagan
Well, I was feeling masochistic this afternoon so I went over the RR death/funeral article and copyedited it pretty mercilessly. I dont' even want to know what it was like before you got out your red pen. Excellent work! Anticipating the complaints soon. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 1, 2005 18:11 (UTC)
 * As an aside, are you having trouble with your watchlist today? Mine hasn't been updated since the wee hours of this morning, it seems. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 1, 2005 18:23 (UTC)
 * Mmmhmm.... I can see what you mean. Apparently, this is one of SNIyer's pet articles (I guess we all have them -- ones we put more loving care into), and he feels pretty invested in it.  I sympathize, but not enough to just leave him to it.  I haven't even looked at the Trudeau article.  Not sure I have the strength today! There is definitely a bug with the watchlists. Annoying. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 1, 2005 19:47 (UTC)
 * I guess that's one word for it. I was thinking something more like... nevermind.  Are you American?  If so, we're both up late. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 2, 2005 05:18 (UTC)
 * BTW, if you feel like returning the favor, I'm having a particularly frustrating time dealing with an editor who just doesn't care about NPOV mandates at Price-Anderson Act. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 2, 2005 05:20 (UTC)
 * It does get tiring, doesn't it? I get discouraged with this sort of thing, sometimes.  It seems like Wikipedia is far too easy on bad actors, to the detriment of editors that really care about the project.  It's too difficult to get bad actors penalized, and in the process good editors end up burned out from being Don Quixote. My $.02...  Cookies good.  I just got in from an evening of good beer, but feel restless, so here I am.  I'm a total nerd. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 2, 2005 05:33 (UTC)

Price-Anderson Act
If you're going to got through the article (please see my comments in Discussion), I'll defer making changes until you do. Simesa 2 July 2005 20:27 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. I've requested Protection for a cooling-off period, and Pstudier and Katefan) have supported that on the RfP page.  Would you add your comments?
 * Unfortunately, I see this going to the Arb Committee. I think Ben is on a crusade, and simply won't stop making unsupported statements. Simesa 2 July 2005 21:45 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for your help. It's much less of a burden having more NPOV eyes on the thing.  I'm hopeful that ArbCom won't be necessary (if we are diligent, we can keep him honest, even if that's through reverting), but if it is, it is.  There don't seem to be too many admins patroling the RFP page lately; I may drop a message to an admin who protected a page I had requested in the past.  Don't get discouraged; keep up the good work. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 3, 2005 03:24 (UTC)
 * laugh* Could be!  Actually though, I think there is a policy against admins protecting a page they've been editing. I could be wrong though. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 3, 2005 03:34 (UTC)
 * Well, at least he sourced the USPIRG stuff properly this time. The problem with that addition is that that same criticism is already stated in the article... he could pick one or the other, but piling on like that isn't needed.  If you get a minute, could you read my comments on the talk page and see what you think?  I won't be offended if you disagree, but I feel like if we start establishing consensus on certain items on the talk page and be very clear about it, then we can more assuredly revert some of Benjamin's POV changes. &middot; Katefan0(scribble) July 3, 2005 03:50 (UTC)

Thanks for all your hard work on this, I appreciate that it hasn't been fun. I restored the section on Chernobyl-vs-Western plants, with 4 citations (which I admit I should have had there originally). Unfortunately, I view this text as very significant for PAA, even though Ben may go through the roof. I hope I have your and Katefan0's support on keeping this. Simesa 3 July 2005 12:52 (UTC)


 * I wrote to Katefan0 - I'll go along with Mediation covering the whole article, but I'm looking for mutual solutions - not just caving in to Ben. His attitude is that as long as he's talking, he's winning - my attitude is that the article shouldn't get any more slanted. Simesa 4 July 2005 15:21 (UTC)