User talk:Mel Etitis/Archive 30

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A warning

[1]

Sam Spade 16:27, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Taken from User:Extraordinary Machine's talk page:

I may be wrong, but judging by the inability to write without violent language (as with the last part of this) and edit summaries like this, Hollow Wilerding seems to me to be Winnermario (who, though claiming to be a University-age female was clearly an adolescent male; he explained his e-mail address by saying that he shared it with a younger cousin...). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:34, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gossip is not appreciated. For one, you accusing me of being User:Winnermario with two individual edits that don't live up to the standards of Mariah are vile — she did tell me to avoid you, and that I've been attempting to accomplish. And two, your comment about Mariah pretending to be in University is interestingly amusing. Do you honestly believe that she's an adolescent male because she happens to share her PC with her younger cousin? It's preposterous. And those edits are not violent; they are merely my questioning evolving into minor fury. --Hollow Wilerding 02:05, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please prove your maturity by not reformatting the charts until a consensus has actually been met with at the WikiMusic Discussion. The fact that you do makes you look desperate and demanding. --Hollow Wilerding 02:20, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also like to make a personal comment: the fact that you believe me to be an adolescent male (oh dear) veers me to believe whether you are really an Oxford professor. I was wondering if that's your tactic to receiving honourship and praise here on Wikipedia. But that's fine with me, one way or another. You don't believe me to be a University-student—although I am not Mariah, but a woman named Courtni teaching high school science and English—so I fail to believe that you are an Oxford professor. Besides, what would a busy professor with so much time on his hands be doing on an internet encyclopedia? It boggles me. --Hollow Wilerding 02:27, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You mean "busy professor with little time on his hands", right? --Maru (talk) Contribs 02:40, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No I do not. --Hollow Wilerding 21:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Then what you said made no sense. "Busy professor with so much time on his hands" is contradictory. If you are busy, you do not have time on your hands. --Maru (talk) Contribs 22:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, Winnernario is supposed to be a University student studying English who thinks that "numberous" is a word, whose English is often so grammatically peculiar as to be genuinely obscure, whose first name just happens to be that of one of the main pop stars whose articles he edits, and who acts and writes like an adolescent boy. You're supposed to be an English teacher who uses words like "honourship", whose English is grammatically peculiar ("veers me to believe", "if that's your tactic to receiving...", etc.), and whose behaviour involves the aggression and petulance of an adolescent boy. No, obviously not the same people, obviously two mature women after all... --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:16, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My grammar is only incorrect when I am typing, let me make that clear now — this is because I always assume I will get my point across in an easier fashion, but this has always failed me. Verbally, I am much better.
Anyway, "...and whose behaviour involves the aggression and petulance of an adolescent boy". You are in no position to assume this because you cannot prove it. But I would like to know why you do assume that I am Mariah, who you assume to be an adolescent boy. I will also express something Mariah said somewhere on a talk page on Wikipedia (although I cannot remember where it is posted): "No one has perfect English". This includes you, Mel Etitis. I will never have perfect English, and you will never have perfect English. Another point I would like to bring up is Mariah's name: ...So what? She having the same name as Mariah Carey is completely irrelevant to this discussion. --Hollow Wilerding 21:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well it seems as though you did not reply to my above message for obvious reasons. I am not surprsied. Also, Mariah thought "numberous" was a word? I will give you that one, because you're right, it's not. But anyway, once you find evidence for your comments, that's when I will take them seriously. --Hollow Wilerding 21:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Waterboys moved to The Waterboys (band) by a new user

Sorry to bother you with this. Without discussion, a new user just page-moved The Waterboys to The Waterboys (band) and created a disambig page in order to mention a Japanese movie of the same name. This was done without discussion, and I feel fairly strongly that a simple disambiguation header would be reasonable, whereas this was, um, overly bold. I cannot, of course, fix this myself while preserving the edit history of the article. I'd appreciate some advising. Jkelly 05:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whether out of laziness or ignorance, that user hasn't yet bothered to fix a lot of links. If the move was warranted, he or she should have fixed these links, or should fix them. Was it warranted? I think so: see my comment on your talk page. -- Hoary 07:22, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think that, in this case, a disambig header is reasonable. Note the lack of the definite article in the Japanese film title. The film should probably get a redirect from Water boys, as it doesn't have one. If the matter is really contentious, we can discuss it at Talk:The Waterboys. Jkelly 08:16, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and, thanks, Mel Etitis. Jkelly 08:16, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Double degree

I left a note on his talk page asking why. I can't see anything objectionable about those links. SlimVirgin (talk) 02:11, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Beach Boys and the infobox dispute

I've been trying to get at the root of this dispute regarding album infobox 2 and I think I'm almost there, but there is one unanswered question in my mind. You have repeatedly removed a different template, Template:The Beach Boys, from a number of Beach Boys articles in addition to reverting BCG's change of album infobox templates. Perhaps he's got a legitimate complaint about the former, but I don't know, since you haven't responded to my first question about why you removed it and I can't find any discussion or edit summaries about why you removed it. This may seem like an insignificant, perhipheral issue, but I think it should be an easily resolved one, and it is frustrating that both parties will not even discuss it with one another. Gamaliel 18:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted at WP:AN/I, I have insisted that BCG refrain from this edit war for the period of one week or else I will block him. While you and those who disagree with him are free to revert him or otherwise go on about your normal editing, I ask that you and others who disagree with him be a little more conscious about what you are reverting and try to avoid "collateral damage" like the Beach Boys infobox. Gamaliel 01:43, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi - Just wanted to say thanks for your support on my RfA, which passed after a lot of controversy. I greatly appreciate your support! Ramallite (talk) 03:57, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU!

Thank you so much for voting in my RfA, and especially thank you for supporting me. I really appreciate it, and will wield the mop and bucket the best way I know how. I, like RoboCop, promise four things:

  1. Serve the public trust
  2. Protect the innocent
  3. Uphold the law
  4. Classified

I hope to do all those things and, even if I can't keep my fourth classified, will do all I can to be a great admin. It is an honor to be serving with such a great admin as yourself. Stop by my talk page, or on article pages; I look forward to working with you. A belated thanks again, [[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] [[additions | e-mail]] 04:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Curiosity was framed - ignorance killed the cat

I'm slightly curious and I hope you don't find me impudent for asking - did any of my contributions here do anything to persuade you that I have reasonable opinions on the matter? - Haukur Þorgeirsson 12:55, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps not. And perhaps the wording of my question was conceited. Thanks for the discussion, in any case. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:24, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Polite Request!

Hello! I've recently - for the first time - submitted an article I've written for peer review. One of the steps suggested was to politely request another user - who'd written on similar subjects - to give feedback... so here it is: my polite request! If you are not too busy, the article in question is here. The reason I'm asking you is because I noticed that you had contributed to articles about Johnny Dankworth and Ted Heath, which are about similar subjects/people... plus from your member page, it's obvious you know what you're talking about! If you don't have the time, don't worry about it - I still wanted to just say hello anyway! HowardBerry 17:14, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for all the edits you made on the article - it's really appreciated. I took a look at the changes so I could see the things I've been doing wrong, and shall bear them in mind when editing articles in the future. Oh, yes, he is a relation - I'm his grandson. Thanks once again HowardBerry 21:13, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy in love

Thanks for the tips and for correcting the tone of the article. "Smash hit" is used so frequently to describe successful number ones, I had no I idea it delved into the "fanzine" territory. lol. And yes, its "Bonnie and Clyde". Thanks again. Oran e (t) (c) (@) 22:22, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions

Standard naming conventions (including Wikiepdia's) are to leave article and prepositions uncapitalised, even if the book or record publishers present them otherwise. After all, the CD of "Time Out" also capitalises "to" (though the LP cover didn't). It's true that most internet sources follow the CD cover, though some (e.g., [2] & [3]) don't. I've seen both versions in printed sources, depending on the style manual used by the publishers involved.

I don't have any other recording of "Pick up Sticks"*; do you know if anyone else has covered it? (I'm afraid that I have to admit that I catalogue my jazz recordings in terms of leaders, musicians, sides, etc., so that I have a listing of different versions. The most is "Body and Soul", predictably enough (21) with "A Night in Tunisia" a close second (19). And I don't own an anorak...) --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:14, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not following you. It's a song name; "Pick Up Sticks", period. I see nothing in the manual of style that suggests the "U" should be lowercase. Could you link to what you're talking about? ¦ Reisio 22:59, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure where it is in the MoS (I'll look), but the convention is pretty standard (Chicago, Hart's Rules, etc.) that in titles, articles and prepositions aren't capitalised (some manuals specify prepositions under four letters). This isn't a matter of its original usage, or preference of the original publisher, but of the style of the publication in which it's cited. thus some publishers ignore any such convention, and capitalise everything (they'd print "Three To Get Ready" and "Pick Up Sticks") while others follow the convention, and capitalise neither "to" not "up". Wikipedia, as has been discussed in many places (and if I can remember or find where, I'll link to them) follows the latter. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles) is the obvious place, but it doesn't mention the convention (though all its examples follow it). I've requested help on its Talk page. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:11, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago MoS changed their rule: if a preposition is used adverbially, then it is capitalized. "Pick Up Sticks" should be that way, as should "Pump Up the Volume". But, for example, "Stand on the Shore" would not be capitalized. An explanation from the Chicago MoS Q&A: "An opposite problem was encountered with our own publication of the novel A River Runs Through It by Norman Maclean (yes, the lowercase “l” is how he spelled his name). According to our rules at the time, “through,” a preposition, would not get a capital “t” in titles. Somebody here wisely objected to this, so we capitalized it. We've since added an exception for prepositions that are stressed or used adjectivally or adverbially." -- ChrisB 20:57, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation pages

The Manual of Style guidelines involve (among other things) no secondary Wikilinking. --Mel Etitis 09:47, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, but you leave me with no idea what page you might be referring to. Hu 16:17, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adi Shankara

Thank you for your kind words. Please see my response at Talk:Adi_Shankara#Proposal_to_resolve_this_dispute. Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:49, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:User:Hollow Wilerding

I personally do not think that the User:Hollow Wilerding account is being operated by the same person who edited under the name User:Winnermario, as their opinions on chart table separation and bolding of 1's are quite different. I understand your concern, though, as it did seem odd that Hollow Wilerding start editing Wikipedia on the same day that Winnermario was blocked. I read somewhere that a developer could check the IP addresses of separate usernames and see if they match, though, so maybe you could ask one to compare the IP's for those two users just to be sure. Extraordinary Machine 23:43, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Homo erectus

Mel - I reverted an edit on this page that was clearly a copyvio. As the editor even left an external link to the site, I suspect that he/she is are new enough not to understand the copyright policy. He/she just left me a questioning note on the talk page and I briefly responded. I will be away from my computer for most, if not all, the weekend. If you would like to "welcome" them, perhaps give some instruction, and watch Homo erectus, I would appreciate it. Best.............WBardwin 04:41, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

He caught me before I logged off -- so I gave him a modest welcome. Seems well intentioned enough - User:Quena@sympatico.ca. Thanks. WBardwin 04:51, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOS and consensus

I was wondering, given my suspicion that you have done some thinking about the issue, if you would take a look at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums#Several_inappropriate_Coldplay_article_reverts. I'd especially appreciate feedback on whether my argument reflects popular opinion or not. Jkelly 01:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bayreuth Festspielhaus

Hi Mel I noticed you reverted edits made by User:Dtaw2001 on the above page. We are trying to keep information about the festival and the Speilhaus distinct (which explains an edit I made earlier with regards to certain aspects of the buildings special design, viz. the proscenium, inter alia). I believe that the content you recently restored was correctly moved to the Bayreuth Festival page since, properly speaking, it is about the festival and not the Festspielhaus. Before I revert, however, I thought I would solicit your motivation for restoring the material. Do you feel it is a serious elision not to provide such information on the Festspielhaus page? In which case, we could perhaps provide a better introduction about where to look for what?

Also, the Bayreuth article is being considered for a featured article and feedback is being requested. Please consider offering your thoughts. Cheers! Dottore So 19:30, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks fro the quick response. I'll add a better introduction to the Festspielhaus article, indicating that such information can be located on the festival page (to be honest, I suspect most people who end up on either page are looking for how to get tickets, as I was!). As it stands, the info is duplicated, and not very well at that since my initial numbers for tickets and wait-times (for example) have now been made much more specific at the festival page thanks to recent contributions. My initial edits on this and the Festival page were designed to keep the festival and architectural material discrete, and I still believe that is a good approach. Dottore So 19:50, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalities

Replied in my talk page --Vizcarra 18:17, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of life

Yikes, where to begin? Deletion would be a start. I had to write an essay about this in my first year, and it ended up marginally better than this article; perhaps I should fish it out and insert it. I remember it involved a lot of Camus. Have you noticed that all over Wikipedia, people's sigs are bleeding and turning pages red and green? Or have I been at the Bailey's again? SlimVirgin (talk) 23:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re: Billboard charts.

I finally got word back from the owners of Billboard magazine as far asusing chart information; they want a licsensing agreement. I emailed Jimbo, and he said to delete the "lists of Billboard hits" articles, and that the information in the articles can be retained. But, before we do anything, we should probably inform the editors at the WikiProject Music talk page or something. --FuriousFreddy 16:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not delete anything just yet; we should organize the efforts and make sure that we are doing the right thing. As far as your sig, I don't know...keepsleeping had the same problem with his (his started leaking, and turned all the talk pages Technicolor green). Maybe it has something to do with the Infinite Crisis...lol. --FuriousFreddy 00:10, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Encyclopedic...

...and "Raquel Welch" do not compute. You're too young to remember what a big deal was made of her big ones. Who appointed you the Encyclopedic Nazi? And don't go flashing your "Admin" badge at me. I don't care if you're the Sultan of Oom Papa Mow Mow. If Raquel belongs in this pretentious weblog that you call an encyclopedia, then so do her big boobs. Otherwise, this article should be a big fat VFD candidate. >:( Wahkeenah 00:16, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I expected a patronizing and puritanical response from you, and I was not disappointed. I doubt very much, though, that you are in your 70s, even if your attitude is. Be that as it may, why don't you turn your self-righteous eye toward other articles, such as the Jennifer Lopez writeup where you could weed out the half-page section about her famous "assets"? Or is that somehow more acceptable just because it's a more recent phenomenon and because she's an inferior actress to Raquel Welch? Wahkeenah 10:56, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to an actual legitimate and fair question you raised... I stumbled across this site some months ago and thought it would be a good outlet for my occasional desire to write. Over time I have come to the conclusion that this site is little more than a pretentious weblog. Anonymous users on PC's at their local libraries are allowed to post any adolescent vulgarities they want to, wasting everyone's time reverting them, while registered users are hassled by the likes of self-important characters like yourself who, unilaterally and without discussion, strike the entries of others on the grounds of being "unworthy". The more time passes, the less impressed I am with this site, but it still serves my original purpose to a degree. That's why I still come here, albeit with much less enthusiasm than originally. Wahkeenah 11:48, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Mel Etitis, I noticed that the talk portion of your signature is broken. See User talk:67.177.115.115. A similar thing happened to me and User:JoanneB. I don't know if this problem, that appears to be widespread, has been reported. See the bottom of my talk page for more information. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 13:01, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also on the message to me, which I just assumed was purposeful, what with the Greek and all:

--Mel Etitis ([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<font color="green">Μελ Ετητης</font>)]] 09:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wahkeenah 13:37, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I reported at Wikipedia:Bug_report#Signature_not_showing_up_properly_2. Walter Siegmund (talk) 18:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Need advice: Page on "Kumdo" is an embarassment to Wikipedia

I am rather new, and only know of you (and your status as an admin) because Ann Heneghan was the first person to welcome me to Wikipedia, and I saw your entry near the top of her talk page (the one that was active at the time) and saw your interesting signature and visited your userpage. I'm writing to ask your advice.

I have spent a great deal of time on Wikipedia in the last week, and have looked at topics in which I have some expertise, one very narrow area being the Romanization of Korean. The first page I ran across which was spelled wrong (there are legtimate differences of opinion on spelling conventions, but this was outside such bounds) was the page "Kumdo." I read the talk page and added my opinion that the page had to be moved to the correct spelling (my advice would be "Komdo"), but didn't read the article. Today I read the article and looked carefully through the history.

The best version was near the beginning Revision as of 17:13, 11 May 2005, and after that a Japanese contributor has been angrily insisting that Komdo is simply Japanese Kendo and its claims to be descendant from ancient Korean swordsmanship are illegitimate.

Unfortunately, the best version of the page consists almost entirely of text that was simply copied from another page on the web What is Kumdo? that I happened to see when I Googled the topic, as I was considering re-writing the article myself.

I'm not sure what to do. I'm not sure the page can be saved. And I don't want to get into a fight with the apparently unstable Japanese guy.

Would you care to intervene in some way, or at least advise me? Thanks. -DoctorW 22:56, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The sig problems and your "talk" portion

Please excuse the unsolicited advice (which may also be too late), but since the HTML tidy extension was turned off a couple days ago, all sigs that didn't conform to strict xhtml or xml format were displayed literally, with their "flaws," rather than being cleaned up. There was definitely another problem also (and sigs with html have to be saved as "Raw" from now on), but in you sig I noticed the brackets and parentheses were not nested:

([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<font color="green">Μελ Ετητης</font>)]]

So if you were to change it to:

([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<font color="green">Μελ Ετητης</font>]])

or

[[(User talk:Mel Etitis|<font color="green">Μελ Ετητης</font>)]]

it should be dispayed correctly (one would hope). -DoctorW 23:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kumdo and your sig (response)

Thanks for your message. As you'll realise, I've no expertise in this area, but I'll certainly look at the page and see what I can do to help. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. Kumdo — I see what you mean; what a horrible mess (and much of the English was too obscure for me to be able to work out what was meant). I dived in, being bold, and did a rewrite based on the version you said was the best, supplemented by what I could salvage from the most recent version. I hope that that helps.

I am no expert in komdo either, but I can easily correct the atrocious spelling errors and may be able to add or tweak some things based on my familiarity with Korean (and Japanese) culture. I would like to move the page to a name using corrected spelling (same with Haidong Gumdo). Is there any reason that I should not do so right away, or anything you would suggest I do first? (I have already addressed the issue yesterday on the Kumdo talk page (and just now on Talk:Haidong Gumdo).

Quicker way to do a revert?

I've been waiting for some other reason to write to mention that I neglected to tell you I was impressed by your skillful rewrite of unfamiliar material on the Kumdo page. Kumdo is not an interest of mine; I noticed it only because of incorrect spelling. I'm still thinking to move it and correct spelling, though I'm starting to wonder if it's worth it. It's on my watch list, so I saw that it had been completely rewritten tonight by 218.123.46.40, the style and content being quite similar to that of User:Yappakoredesho. I reverted it by copying and pasting a block from the history and deleting the additions. Is there a quicker way to do a revert? -DoctorW 08:37, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Intervention of admin needed?

Please have a look at Kumdo. It seems that 193.164.126.19 (who apparently has the same extreme POV as 218.123.46.40 and User:Yappakoredesho - same person?) has taken upon himself to revert my restoration of your rewrite, citing "POV." I mentioned in my edit summary that you were an admin, but this did not moderate his actions or POV. It's possible that one factor here is the deep racial prejudice that many Koreans and Japanese hold toward each other, based not only on the nearly 40 years of brutal oppression by the Japanese in the early 20th century, but based also on conflict going back many centuries; one big difference between the position of the Japanese and that of U.S. southern whites (in their attitudes toward blacks) is that in the U.S. such attitudes have been almost completely marginalized in all but the most narrow and secretive circles. If there is prejudice there it may very well be received and unconscious, but it still represents an ugly underside to this. Even if not, the actions do not seem at all appropriate for an encyclopedia that would like to uphold and improve its credibility. BTW, I put my comment here because I thought I'd group it with other Kumdo comments, but does that make it harder to find? (I imagine you get a lot of messages.) -DoctorW 19:01, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


2. My sig. Thanks for your advice, but after I'd turned on "raw" (and edited accordingly) it seemed to work; do you not see it correctly above? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the broken section of your sig in the entry above mine on your talk page. I don't know whether there is a current problem with it, or whether the HTML tidy extension has been turned back on, but my thought was that it probably couldn't hurt to change your nickname to conform to strict xhtml / xml to avoid possible problems in the future. Again, I don't know how you feel about such unsolicited suggestions from relative newbies! Looking at your sig now, it seems to be nested properly. -DoctorW 01:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image undelete question

this image is in PD - it has been painted over a century ago. Is this not enough for it to remain on Wiki? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 06:24, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see. The problem here is that User:Emax has uploaded many images without a source, labelling them pd/fu, and dissapreared suddenly from Wiki about a year ago before I could force him to source them. While I understand the rationale for deletion of unused fu, shouldn't in the case of pd (age) images assume good faith and leave them until we can prove they were 'stolen'? Btw - my guess about images like Matejko's uploaded by him would be that he has copied them from some online gallery. Would this be a copyvio? If you can find the gallery, I'd be happy to send them a permission request letter (I have already cleared up one huge mess left by Emax this way). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islamofascism

I know you were involved with this article, so can you please take a look at it now? It has been reinstated after months of being a redirect. Yuber(talk) 15:51, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect edits

I would like to point out as per this edit that removing capital letters from bracket-song titles is incorrect due to songwriting limits. Please refer to Billboard.com or another source for accurate writing. (I suppose this applies to Wikipedian users more so, this being an encyclopedia and all that jazz.) Thanks for understanding. --Hollow Wilerding 16:52, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately for you, as this—"Hollow Wilerding (Mel Etitis Remix)"—is the standard form of CD single labelling for song titles in non-studio recording, they will be displayed around Wikipedia with their accompanying track listings and formats. --Hollow Wilerding 17:31, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As do I. The proper way. (My husband has Madonna remixes galore.) --Hollow Wilerding 17:57, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islamofascism

Hi Mel,

Where was consensus achieved to make Islamofascism a redirect? The AfD was closed as "Keep". Thanks. If you could address this on the Islamofascism talkpage, that would be great. Babajobu 18:09, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You were responding to a comment that wasn't mine. User:Kade responded to Yuber on my talk page, whereas I responded to Yuber's comment on Yuber's talk page. My comment to Yuber had nothing to do with subjectivity, but rather that I thought Islamofascism should have its own article, and also that the AfD closed as a Keep, rather than as a merge/redirect. Babajobu 18:31, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mel, where was the consensus for redirect? At the AfD? It closed as Keep, and there were 26 Keep votes and 23 merge/redirect votes. How is this "a clear consensus to redirect"? Please do explain. Thanks. Babajobu 19:49, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Okay...well, even with those modified statistics, the closing admin still closed it as a keep, and "a clear consensus to redirect" seems like rather a stretch. Babajobu 12:12, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been lovely if you had taken a moment on the talkpage to actually discuss your protection of the page. Asserting the extistence of a "clear consensus for redirect" after the AfD went against you is petty, but not deigning to respond to any of the concerns expressed on the talkpage is wildly inconsiderate to those who took part in that process in good faith. Babajobu 05:45, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Sorry, I was working on 50+album/single articles the other day, and I didn't realize that they I had didn't difefrentiate between the album and song stubs. Thanks for picking that out. :-) --Madchester 19:45, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder.

I usually fill in the box explaining why I make an edit. I'll try to change "usually" to "always". Rick Norwood 23:06, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

contingent work

Contingent work

I'm afraid that this article was deleted after an AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Contingent work); if you think that it should be created, you need to go to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:59, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I realise that someone else has created an article called contingent work, and that there has been a consensus to delete it - but there has been no consensus to delete the article that I created. Therefore, I believe that your deletion of this article without discussion and without notice is in contravention of Wikipedia policy.
Course - the other reason I'm annoyed about it is because my work has vanished into thin air without me having a chance to keep a copy of it first! If at the very least you can post the most recent version of the article in my user pages somewhere, I'd be very grateful. Thanks. Squashy 11:23, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re: contingent work pt2

I see that you started discussing this at Wikipedia:Deletion review, but then recreated the page without waiting for a response. That won't help your cause. While you're waiting for discussion and a result, it's perfectly OK for you to continue working on the copy in your own User space, and to ask for comments and help on it (my own comment is that it seems to contain rather a lot of original research, and that more citations are needed). If consensus is that the AfD vote can be set aside, then you can copy the article to the main namespace. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:54, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your comments about the content - but - unfortunately, since you have deleted the most recent version of the article, and I don't have my own backup of it, I can't refer to the article in order to counter your arguments. Therefore, if you want me to be able to take your comments on board, then you need to show me the article! That's why I have now posted a content review request as well as an undelete request.
I was a bit angry about it being deleted without notice and without discussion at first but I've calmed down a bit now, thanks to the fact that there's many votes for undeleting. Squashy 18:17, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I should stress that I have no particular objection to your article. The problem is that there have been many cases in which an article, objectionable for political, religious, or other reasons (often racist, etc.), has been voted for deletion, only to be recreated (with new text); the usual claim is that, because it's new text, it's not covered by the AfD. The response to that sort of thing is the one I've given above: that an AfD isn't about the specific content (though that might also be awful), but about the article itself. In this case, I realise of course that the situation is very different — but if we're going to enforce the rules in one case, we must do so in all. Assuming that the article's undeleted, good luck with it. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that. Thanks. As an objection, I might mention the time delay - but then again, I realise it's difficult to make hard and fast rules about that sort of thing. I'm no psychology expert, but I reckon that a person who has got an axe to grind is likely to recreate articles within hours or days of their deletion - and yes, I appreciate, this causes major problems for admin. But after a few weeks, they'll probably be bored with it and give up. The article I created was four months after the original - which, incidentally I never saw - but you're not to know that. But you do know about the time delay, and that's my main point.
But then - like I say, it's difficult to make a one-rule-fits-all about time delay. Perhaps it would be better if the Wikipedia software blocked the creation of VfD articles in the first place, thereby forcing people to vote for undeletion, and preventing people getting their fingers burnt in the process. Do you have any idea why the software doesn't do this? That would kill two birds with one stone - it would stop racist articles getting continually recreated and deleted, but it would also stop newbies getting upset and being alienated by seeing their articles vanish without warning. What do you think? Perhaps we could suggest it. Thanks. Squashy 23:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Watching a user

Is it possible to place a user, rather than a page, on my watchlist? I have discovered a user 66.92.188.212 who has a history of nothing but vandalism. I would like to be notified of his edits so I can revert them whenever they occur. Thanks. •DanMS 02:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islamofascism

I don't agree with your decision to protect a redirected page. I realise this is a hotbed issue, and to be honest the term seems to me to be a particularly stupid one, but I don't think the AfD mandated a redirect. I have raised the issue on WP:AN/I. Please comment there if you disagree.

Incidently, this is nothing personal. I jsut don't agree with this admin action. I would hope you do the same for myself if you disagreed with something I did. - Ta bu shi da yu 09:10, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded on WP:AN/I. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:33, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mel (figure I should ask directly) why are you calling Babajou "intellectually dishonest"? I feel this is quite unfair. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:54, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Herald Sun

"The" is not part of the name. see [4]. It should be moved back. Xtra 12:19, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Humble request

On Islamofascism, exactly what do I have to do at this stage to get it deleted or merged, and when can I do that? BrandonYusufToropov 21:26, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Emperor Dowager Longyu

Mel, this article is incorrectly named and so is a duplicate. I think it should be deleted. Please see Empress Dowager Longyu. Thanks. WBardwin 06:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New DinkSock

The user formerly known as User:DickWitham has returned again as User:RSPW Poster, once again defacing my talk page with unwanted & harassing comments, while starting another needless "neutrality dispute" over the entry for Rec.sport.pro-wrestling, much like the one he started under another identity on the StarrCade article. He has reverted the RSPW article well over three times today, and shows no signs of ceasing that or his harassment. - Chadbryant 19:52, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. Wow. That's pretty funny. Last I checked, you in no way had access to log IPs on Wikipedia websites, and thus had no way of telling who is or is not who. It seems as if your paranoia has run afoul of Wikipedia once again. The reason I stated the "neutrality dispute" was because you were told earlier this year not to put that information into the article, and now you have done so not once but three seperate times in a clear violation of both protocol and direct order from Wikipedia officials. Perhaps you believe this to be some sort of joke, but I can assure you that there are those of us such as myself, who continue to suffer your harassment despite repeated attempts to avoid it, who will work with Wikipedia to resolve this situation. I asked you to place nice, and with this message here it's obvious that you cannot. Why did I rever the article over three times? Because three times you put the information in that you knew wasn't there. Next time, tell the whole story rather than just parts of it. It makes for a more interesting ending. --RSPW Poster

This latest DinkSock continues to deface my talk and user pages, and has directed his anger towards other pages I've contributed - he has ignorantly started a revert war on Category:Von Erich wrestling family, over my removal of a redundant link (Jack Adkisson no longer exists as an article; it redirects to Fritz Von Erich). Obviously, he has no interest in actually contributing anything of substance or relevance.

Hee, hee! You just get funnier and funnier with your manipulative lies and half-truths. First of all, I have no "anger" towards you. I don't know where that came from, except for possibly a mental illness on your part, but specuation into that area would eventually sway towards the creation of a personal attack, so I simply won't go there. Second , the only reason the link is redundant is because YOU moved the location of the entry in the first place -- an action that you were told to stop by Mel Etitis I believe? Correct me if I'm wrong here. Third, what the hell is it with you and "contributing [ . . . ] substance and relevance?" This is the umpteenth time I've seen you make such remarks. What do YOU think YOU do when you make accusations of sockpuppetry based on nothing but your own paranoid personal beliefs? Or do you have some detective skills that you've been holding out on? I suggest that the best thing you could possibly do for yourself right now would be to stop trying to edit the articles based on your own biased behavior and leave it all alone for awhile. But, as usual, you will follow your own path by ignoring good advice and engaging in self-destructive & immature behavior when given the opportunity. In which case the Wikipedia administrators are more than happy to remind you that you are making a fool of yourself. -- RSPW Poster

entry for rec.sport.pro-wrestling AGAIN

Hi Mel! I hate to beat an old horse, but Chad Bryant is AGAIN posting personal opinions on the entry for rec.sport.pro-wrestling, basically the same information that you and Theresea told him NOT too a few months back. A neutrality dispute flag was put up, which he removed. Can you please have a look or talk to him? I dont want another flame situation on the entry.

Thanks and I hope all is well with you! See you in the World Curp!

TruthCrusader

Once again, Mr. Signorelli & Mr. Cain (the infamous award-winning Usenet kook responsible for the multiple "DinkSocks") are attempting to cause trouble by inserting "neutrality disputes" into articles, while pretending to be innocent contributors. They do not contribute anything of relevance to Wikipedia, and are only here to cause trouble. - Chadbryant 21:30, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oh will you just STOP IT already? First of all, you have NO proof that TruthCrusader = "Mr. Signorelli" or that RSPW Poster = Mr. Cain." Let's just set aside the fact that "infamous award-winning Usenet kook" could constitute a personal attack (which is against the rules on Wikipedia - you should know by now that Mel especially hates them) and look at the FACTS in this issue. The FACTS are that YOU were told NOT to put the information in. Regardless on whether you are or are not "StephenSignorelli" who inserted them so many days ago (though you should really read the talk page on RSPW regarding that...you may be surprised!) the FACT is that you were told back in MARCH not to put the information into the site by not one but TWO Wikipedi administrators. Now you are putting them BACK IN with the evidence in the talk page CLEARLY THERE stating you shouldn't. Are you really this freakin' stupid? Sorry...that's a personal attack. My bad. What I mean is, can't you read?? Is there a problem with your memory, perhaps? At any rate, the facts and the entries speak for themselves, and they are talking to anyone willing to listen about how you are up to your old tricks in trolling Wikipedia due to your own personal bias and how you are also inserting the very information you were told months ago to leave off of the entry. Perhaps you should take a break from Wikipedia before your spin of the truth causes you to fall down once again. -- RSPW Poster. Oh, and p.s.: You want to talk about being here to cause trouble? Why the hell do you keep intentionally replacing information you know very well you shouldn't, then falsely claiming "vandalism" as the reason?

remove block

Hello Mel Etitis, could you please do me a favour. I am a member of WP:AMA and Nixer (talk · contribs) contacted me about something. He has been blocked for 48 hours for violating the 3RR (Block log), and the block is due to expire at 10:02, 25 November 2005 (UTC) (tomorrow) (Blocked usernames). According to WP:3RR: after your fourth revert in 24 hours, sysops may block you for up to 24 hours. Nixer has been blocked for 48 hours - the sysop who blocked him wasn't authorised to block him for that long. He has already been blocked for roughly 24 hours (he was blocked 24 hours ago), so could you please remove the block. Thanks. Izehar 10:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

I'd like to thank you for your support of my RfA, and the compliment. I'm glad that you were inspired to express your opinion. Thanks again. Jkelly 08:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And an RfA thank you from me as well

Hi, Mel. I just want to thank you very much for supporting my RfA, and also for your kind words. I hope I'll make a good job of being and administrator. I'm supposed to be working on an assignment at the moment, and had delayed thanking people, but I'm finding the new rollback button so easy to use that I'm just keeping Wikipedia open on my browser while working on other things, and I thought I'd like to thank at least a few of my those who supported me while I'm here. (I've changed my user name, as I want a little more anonymity, but I'm sure you can work out who I am!) Cheers. AnnH (talk) 21:12, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What about an RFA for yourself?

Come across Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2005/Candidate statements? Why not add your own?

Em dashes, en dashes

Mel Etitis: Do you remember which Talk:Atheism archive we discuss the usage of em dashes and en dashes? Thanks for any help. Adraeus 16:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. I found it. Wikipedia was surprisingly fast today. :) Adraeus 17:05, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

FYI Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#References.2Fexternal_links_name-change_proposal. SlimVirgin (talk) 04:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cheesy explorers

I would think this category should be deleted; how do I proceed to make that happen? Yours sincerely, Shinobu 06:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just got rid of it. --Nlu 07:00, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article for December 25th

I noticed you have listed yourself in Category:Atheist Wikipedians. That said, you will probably be interested in my suggested featured article for December 25th: Omnipotence paradox. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-28 08:26

Sock check

Can an admin look at a logged-in user’s contribution history and find out what was the IP of the user at the time of a contribution? If so, could you look at the articles Muhammad Kulmakhanov and Kazakh Societist Party? I am quite certain that users Pinkspikes and 24.1.75.37 are one and the same. I think if you could check the record, you would find that 24.1.75.37 was the IP of Pinkspikes when he was logged in. •DanMS 18:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your garden

Thank you for putting your garden image on your user page; I confess to much jealousy but also sincere appreciation for your generosity in sharing the beauty of your garden with others. KillerChihuahua 01:46, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Baia

I'll revert to my version. I cannot see why you objected to it, because:

1. there was no Romania back then (I should know, I'm Romanian).

2. You do nobody any favor by linking the countries to modern-day equivalents, such as you did for Hungary. If someone hasn't heard of Matthias Corvinus, it will not do him any good to click on post-Treaty of Trianon, republican Hungary.

Dahn 04:58, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:How You Remind Me

Thanks for the correction. I was thinking that since lyrics can be written down by anyone by listening to the song, I could place them in Wikipedia also. Please clarify. Also I was flattered to see that YOU reviewed my changes (I saw the awards you got on your page and am impressed.) Thanks. --Crazczar 06:39, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FAC/Marilyn Manson

Thanks for your input last month at Wikipedia:Peer review/Marilyn Manson/archive1. The article benefited greatly from all of those comments, and it's now a Featured Article candidate. I would definitely appreciate your vote! --keepsleeping say what 22:37, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Links from "simple" words

Hi Mel, I have been having a discussion with Super Mario on his talk page. He linked from the word father on Simon Bradstreet in the sentance "His father was the rector of the parish church". I suggested that this was a rather trivial link. He admits, like me, to being a relative newbie, so while he can see some merit in the link, he invites me to do as I like (i.e. revert it if I like), which seems a very reasonable position. What do you recommend? SMeeds 22:40, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User BGC resumes edit warrring on music articles

About 75 articles, wiping out virtually everything other editors had done in the last month or so, without regard to accuracy, MOS style, Wikipedia policies, or even simple spelling. No explanation in edit summaries. Given that he's inflicting the sort of "collateral damage," on a much larger scale, that he complained about with regard to you and me, his bad faith should be evident. What sort of intervention should be asked for? Monicasdude 02:38, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

rita quintero

A few issues for User:Jfi2121:

1. Wikipedia style for headings is to capitalise the first word and proper nounds only. 2. She's either an American, or a Cuban American; I can't work out why you first insisted on calling here an American Cuban, and then (when I'd discovered the correct link to Cuban American) you reverted to my earlier choice. 3. Please use edit summaried; it used to be preferred, but it's now Wikipedia policy. 4. The list of affiliations is surely a bit OTT; aren't they just the sorts of 'affiliations that any person in her position would have?

Good Morning Mel,

First I'd like the thank you for your assistance in editing the page for Rita.

1)I will note and correct any capitalizations on the page 2) She was born in the USA to Cuban American parents, which in America makes her an American Cuban. If you are familiar with geographical ethnicity, the land you are born in comes first, then related heritage second. Sounds a bit odd, but that's how she wants it. 3) noted 4)Not at all OTT, no such thing in the music industry as a "sort" of affiliations, but I will review them again.

Thanks again for all your input.

JFI2121

User Chadbryant

Could you please assist in putting a stop to Chadbryant's childish nonsense on Wikipedia? From glancing over his history and his edits, it appears that he simply reverts an article for no particular reason other than to vandalise the page or break the rules on here. I and others I am sure would appreciate someone doing something about this vandal. Doctor Strangelove

Help!

Can you help me add info to the criticism and support section of USA PATRIOT Act, Title II? I've managed to summarise the Act, and write about each of the sections, but now we have to note criticisms. I think EPIC has a heap of stuff! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:03, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Your RfC

Hi. This message concerns your request for comment for the Adi Shankara talk page. If your request still stands, could you please summarise the issues behind the request on the request page? Thanks. // Pathoschild 22:22, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Conversational Neckwear accreditation to Ralph Marlin

reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Necktie&oldid=28109381

Ralph Marlin is easily credited with this new segment of Necties and more specifically the Fish Tie. I do not feel the removal of the material was appropriate. Frankly Conversational neckwear is about the last vestage of Neckties worn other than by bankers and accounts for a large number of current neckwear manufactuers and Necktie sales. Ralph Marlin is even credited by competitors.

http://www.triviaqueen.com/Files/Two%20Bits%20Neckties.pdf#search='fish%20tie%20history'

Ralph Marlin and Co., which carved a niche in '80s fashion with the colorful "fish tie," is still in the vanguard of themed ties.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3092/is_n17_v33/ai_15804978

“Ralph Marlin and Co., which carved a niche in '80s fashion with the colorful "fish tie," is still in the vanguard of themed ties.”

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nba/mavs/2001-02-20-nelson.htm Nelson, a master prankster and former advocate of the fish tie,

http://www.showmenews.com/2003/Dec/20031217Spor016.asp Nelson’s numbers ;Innovator, risk-taker and a one-time wearer of the fish tie, Nelson is all that.

http://www.wildties.com/ties/RM132210.html?source=cat Fifteen Years Ago, Ralph Marlin & Co. manufactured a fish tie that spawned the conversational neckwear industry.

http://lantech.geekvenue.net/gifts/sharon/SFE/Holidays/StPatricks/Ties Fifteen Years Ago, Ralph Marlin & Co. manufactured a fish tie that spawned the conversational neckwear industry.

Just to keep you updated...

In case you were interested, I thought I'd let you know- I will be going to Balliol on Sunday (11th) until the 14th for an interview :) Thanks for all your help earlier in the year. -sars 22:18, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

it's pointless to protest that i am innocent? they sent it to me for no rhyme or reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.21.154.11 (talk • contribs) 04:30, 6 December 2005

User Bill of Rights

You may be interested in Wikipedia:User Bill of Rights. (SEWilco 04:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Mel_Etitis/Archive_30"