| Revision as of 01:51, 21 October 2007 editAlansohn (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers504,495 edits Reversions at Ghosttown, Oakland, California← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:42, 20 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (254 intermediate revisions by 84 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''My policy on discussions:''' | '''My policy on discussions:''' | ||
| :If you leave a comment here, I'll reply here. That way both sides of the conversation are in one place, which should theoretically be easier. | |||
| '''Arkivs of old stuff:''' | '''Arkivs of old stuff:''' | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | |||
| == hey baby == | |||
| == String in pegbox, your edit comment to ] == | |||
| i'm baaa-ack, did ya miss me? chugsa-wugsa here! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 19:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| Hey, there: no biggie, but strictly speaking, "The little bit of string inside the pegbox isn't going to affect the sound to any detectable degree." is incorrect. There is a difference sometimes audible that even depends on how many wraps around the peg the string takes. It's not so much about the steady state tone or the vibration of the short section of tight string in the box, but more about the way the speaking length responds as the player goes more or less deeply "into the string" with the bow. Easier to hear on a cello with the bigger dimensions involved, particularly on the lower strings. I heard this from Ken Meyer, a top-tier cello fixer in the Boston area, as he was remedying just exactly the number of wraps on my C and G pegs. | |||
| == A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies == | |||
| The part you trimmed out at that time probably deserved to go, since it was fuzzy and unsupported. Just wanted to pick the one little nit... __] 13:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described ]). If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me ] (]) 16:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Wait; just to be sure, are you saying that the little piece of string ''behind the nut'' can affect the sound of the instrument? The little piece betwixt nut and peg? If so, sorry, but that sounds like the worst sort of mythology and pseudo-science to me. I'm sure you can get any number of otherwise respectable players to testify to all sorts of nonsense. If I'm misunderstanding or misconstruing this, please let me know. +] 17:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yup. The string behind the nut, and all the way around and around the peg to that little hole that it threads through. Not mythology, but a bit of practical optimization. Pretty much all the other things about the instrument have to be set right before you get much gain out of it, though. Consider that "the sound of the instrument" includes the way it responds to the things the player does. That much string has a little bit of stretch to it, and the more there is, the more it can stretch, and, in gross terms, the more the note bends when played vigorously. Difference between walking a steel rail and a slack wire is one image to explain it with. Talking about something you could hear with your own ears here, but it would be an extreme stretch to put it into any part of the pedia I can think of just now. Later, __] 20:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] nomination of ] == | |||
| :::Sorry, still not impressed; this is pseudo-science as far as I'm concerned. I'll concede that there may be a minute but discernable difference in how a string feels and responds depending on how much is left free inside the pegbox, but that still falls into the realm of lore, not any kind of measurable phenomonon. I'm sure, for instance, that there are plenty of guitar players who will swear that it makes a huge difference to coil the free end of the string past the post of the tuning machine; we've all seen their guitars bristling with their coiled-up strings. (I wonder if this is the same set of players who are likely to use the projecting end of a string to park their lit cigarette?) +] 19:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ]] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 17:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Talking about bowed viola (& cello) here, not some plucked fretted thing with steel strings and a headstock instead of a pegbox. You a scientist or an artist? I ask because measurement and perception are pretty well studied and refined these days... never mind, if you haven't experienced it, there's no need for further concern. Next time I've got a gut C on, if I think of it, I'll give the length in the pegbox a poke and see how many cents it goes sharp and how long it stays that way under what conditions of bowing. Meantime, be well, __] 00:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Welcome back== | |||
| :::Sorry, didn't mean to ensnare you in my little joke there about git-box players and their strange proclivities. (I take you ''have'' seen what I'm talking about, coiled-up strings boinging around like little Slinkies.) Just trying to be funny by using an absurd example of musical mythology. | |||
| Good to see you pop up on my watchlist. Welcome back. ] ] 20:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :::It sounds like you're talking about the thing where you can actually tune a violin (or viola) string up a few cents by pressing on that little piece inside the pegbox; I've used that trick a time or two. | |||
| :::Regarding your experiments, no matter how crazy they may sound, I'm always interesting in hearing the results if you care to post them, peer-reviewed or not. +] 02:47, 3 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I always figured they coiled the strings up that way because they didn't have somebody else's fingernail clippers handy to nick the extra part off with. __] 13:16, 3 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Ditto. Nice to see your no-nonsense approach again after more than a year away. ] (]) 14:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| ==Hyphens and Key Names== | |||
| At present every editor is rearranging the deck chairs on this sinking ship. I'm not going to get at all involved with the article itself, but I do think that substantive edits need to be made. This is like a peace conference deciding on the shape of the table, not talking about peace. | |||
| What literature? In the context of a list, it would be "Clarinet in B-flat" ] (]) 02:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :Actually, it could be either with or without a hyphen. I just did a quick check of my record collection, which seems as good a sample as any; turns out it's pretty evenly divided between hyphenators ("A-flat major") and non-hyphenators. | |||
| I encourage you to '''be bold'' and make the great swathes of edits the article needs. That list, for example, needs pruning to a common sense and short paragraph. References to web resources could do with {{tl|cite web}} and the whole article salvaged. ] 18:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| : |
:Therefore, the hyphen isn't '''required'''. For simplicity's sake, then, my preference would be to not use it. It seems, well, fussier with the hyphen in there. --] (]) 05:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::But that's not what has been used on Misplaced Pages for a while. Hyphens have become standard for Misplaced Pages when talking about Keys and instruments. I have seen it both ways too, but I find the hyphenation more clearly attaching the "B" to the "flat". ] (]) 05:43, 22 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ::You care enough to rearrange the deckchairs. Your tinkering with the references is a perfect example. It is possible that an uncharitable editor might suspend an assumption of good faith. I suggest you either edit wisely and well or leave the article alone. ] 18:50, 2 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::: |
:::Except that it's not "what's been used" here for a while. Haven't done a formal count, but my sense is that it's evenly divided here as well between hyphenated and not. And I really don't see why any extra little lines are needed to "attach" the letter to the "flat" or "sharp". That's done by the reader's brain. --] (]) 05:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::::I'm not part of the editing of those pages, but I thought that the hyphen was used when the hyphenated words were describing a following word, as in A-flat major, but not used when the would-be hyphenated words stand alone: A flat. This is the case for non-musical terms like African American versus African-American president. ] (]) 17:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| == TfD nomination of ]== | |||
| :::::That's the logic. The hyphen attaches the "B" to the "flat" but the space implies they are separate. The hyphen removes all ambiguity. ] (]) 21:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> — ] 20:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Cigar fillers == | ||
| I'm curious as to why the jr cigars link is not considered commercial then since they have links on that page to actual product pages and the famous smoke blog has incredible authority in the cigar world and is none commercial, though the site is. | |||
| I am slightly confused. -]] | |||
| Oh, I get those numbers on Google Map and Yahoo! Map. You know there are bunch of numbers on the map link in the browser. Those numbers actually represent the coordinates of the center point of the map screen. ] <sub>]</sub> 01:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == What do you think of these? == | |||
| == Mondegreen == | |||
| *] | |||
| The lines I added were legitimate misheard lyrics, no more '''''absurd''''' than the misheard lyrics in the rest of the article. --''']''' ] ] ]] <small>]</small> 02:24, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| == ] an article to audio dramas == | |||
| :It was not only absurd ("one ton tomato" for "Guantanamara"? that's straight outta the old Billy Crystal schtick from "Saturday Night Live"), but unreferenced to boot. Sorry, but that article is pretty well full up with good, cited examples. +] 03:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Here is a citation , but I'll leave it out of the article, since I see can see that this is too important for you to admit you might be wrong. --''']''' ] ] ]] <small>]</small> 04:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| '''Please if you have time and you know anything to it (I have seen that you have made edits in the article area which owns relations on it) , please look on the article ], somebody placed a erase discussion on it.''' after we have had a merge discussion. It would be interesting what you would say to the merge and the delete discussion. And possibly it could help to contact other people that they should help also. )-: Merry Xmas --] (]) 15:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yeah, that's it; it has nothing whatever to do with the quality of the article, and everything to do with my ego. +] 04:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Well, the link's there for you to look at, as well as the rest of the results from google (or yahoo, or your choice of search engine) for "one ton tomato". BTW, my dad sang that to me as "one ton tomato" a good 7 to 9 years before Billy Crystal was on SNL. --''']''' ] ] ]] <small>]</small> 04:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| :::::Well, OK, but seriously, it's not a mondegreen. It's something, all right, and moderately funny, I'll grant you that; but it's an '''intentional mangling''', not an accidental mishearing, somewhat akin to a ], but not quite that either. | |||
| :::::Besides, shouldn't that be "One ton of fan mail"? | |||
| :::::By the way, you get points for editing Unicyclopedia. (Even more if you were involved with Encyclopedia Dramatica or some of the badder parodies.) +] 04:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I ''believed'' it ''was'' "one ton tomato" when I was 3 years old, meaning it ''is'' a mondegreen as defined in the aritcle. And no it shouldn't be "One ton of fan mail", since my misintreptation proceeded that sketch with Dana Carvey and Patrick Swayze ('''''NOT''''' Billy Crystal) by several years. Finally, if you look at my user page you can see that my main wiki ''IS'' Uncyclopedia, though I was being serious here. I don't know why you need to insult me by comparing my work to Encyclopedia Dramatica, but if you do you could at least use a modicum of correct grammar (it's '''''WORSE''''' pariodies '''''NOT''''' "badder" ones!)--''']''' ] ] ]] <small>]</small> 04:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Nope, meant "badder", not "worse"; ironic and edgy, dontcha know. And I think you meant to type "preceded" instead of "proceeded", no? By the way, do you realize your "sig" takes up more space than most of your comments? +] 05:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692007949 --> | |||
| ==Phoenix, Arizona Reassessment == | |||
| == I'll tell you the purpose of another bus picture. == | |||
| ], an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --] (]) 10:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC) | |||
| == ] of ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| The article ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
| You see some other transit pages have some pictures of their fleet. The images I put on pages, ] kind of demonstrate the history of the San Francisco Municipal Railway, as some of the buses are being phased for retirement, so it's important to preserve some of that history. Not only that, I have a lot more images coming up. | |||
| <blockquote>'''Non notable musician who fails the notability guidelines.'''</blockquote> | |||
| While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
| ] 04:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
| == A question about == | |||
| Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> ] (]) 21:18, 19 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
| Wouldn't that imply that the last movement is in A minor, F major, and A major all at once? — ] 04:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] of ] == | |||
| ] | |||
| The article ] has been ]. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why. | |||
| :I don't think so (although that would be a perfectly legitimate point of confusion in, say, a piece of Charles Ives's). I just thought more conventional punctuation ought to be used, while still conveying that the movement shifts keys a couple of times. Don't you think most readers will work out for themselves that these are successive keys? +] 05:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
| ::Hmm, perhaps, although I didn't think that →s were unconventional. Is there maybe another clearer way to show that it moves from A minor, through F major, to A major (you probably know about the short A minor section between the last two, but the key listing bordered on too long as it was)? — ] 15:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
| :::Well, tell you what: if you change them back to the arrows, I won't undo that, even though I think it's kind of "unencyclopedic" (even though it does illustrate the modulations graphically, I'll grant you that). +] 19:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> <span style="color:green">'''Ten Pound Hammer'''</span> • <sup>(])</sup> 03:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Sorry I didn't see this; I don't have your page on my watchlist. OK, I'm going to change them back, and I know they are unencyclopedic, but I can't think of a much better way to (accurately) get the information across. — ] 03:40, 24 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Well, I still don't like it and consider it unencyclopedic, but as I said, I won't challenge it. +] 04:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Wikiquette == | |||
| A user recently opened a ] in reference to your comments at ]. I have to agree with the user who opened the alert, in that your comments crossed the ] line. Please try to ] and maintain yourself with civility at all times when discussing matters with your fellow editors, especially as I see some of your comments here on your own talk page could be seen by some as contentious at the least. --] (]) 22:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Picture was "generated"???? == | |||
| Hey, you're a very funny person (no, really). The reason why I wrote (picture was "generated"????) was (OK. Fine. I admit it. It was intended so that way railfoamers can "Not WORRY" about those stuff). But, it was also intended so that way a "Muni Version" of the Boeing Vertol can be shown on ] It may be converted into a wrecker, but there's no way to justify that because you know MTA won't tell it on their website. But, Nathaniel Ford, last year, has approved a measure that would rehab torpedoes currently stored at Pier 72, and that includes current wrecker 1008. When that's rebuilt and stuff, the ] will be converted into one of them. Thanks! | |||
| ] 02:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == spiccato/staccato == | |||
| Hello! | |||
| I think we may be referring to two different things on ]. When I saw the sentence about "up-bow and down-bow versions" I figured it was referring to the type of up-bow staccato in which many fast, accented notes are played with one sweep of the bow (the most famous example being Dinicu's "Hora Staccato.") Spiccato is similar to sautillé and is played with fast, separate strokes. Is that separation what was referred to by "up and down bow versions"? Best, ] 20:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :No, I was referring to spiccato, which has up- and down-bow varieties. Of course, you're correct; there's up- and down-bow staccato as well. But we're talking about spiccato where a string of notes is played rapidly in one direction or the other. +] 01:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Foamers? == | |||
| I actually agree with you for the most part on your attempts to contain out-of-control image proliferation on many of the transit pages; however, I'm not sure if you realize that "foamers" has a rather perjorative connotation, and I've noted a couple of times that it's your very first comment on a page. It comes across as pretty condescending, and it just strikes me as the sort of thing that would cause the exact sort of people who might be editing these articles to get their backs up, and not particularly conducive to productive conversation on the topic. --] (]) 03:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I do understand the connotation, and it's intentional; that sort of ] really has no place in articles such as these. +] 04:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::I guess my point is that you can remove cruft without launching personal attacks against those who add it. --] (]) 19:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == "better" image == | |||
| do you really want me to give you a link to the discussion where you were '''the only person''' who thought that the current image is better? Really? —]–] – 18:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Rift zone == | |||
| Is rift zone the same as a fault? Because ] says something different. I don't know. Perhaps you can show me. ] <sub>]</sub> 23:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :No, not the same thing, which is part of my beef w/Cholga on this. It turns out that the article here you linked to isn't entirely correct either (surprise, surprise). For a quick look, type <code>define:rift zone</code> into Google and look at the 3 links that come up. | |||
| :What I told her is that the map calls it a rift zone because an earthquake fault (the San Andreas) runs through it. The fault is still called that, a fault. +] 23:48, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| OK. Then is the article I linked to has the wrong definition? Cholga can be difficult sometime to accept something new. But she is not a bad editor, so please be more patience when you explain something to her. Thanks ] <sub>]</sub> 23:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I and Cholga just come up with a compromise in the article. So take a look and comment on it. Thanks. ] <sub>]</sub> 00:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Now, are you saying that the map is wrong. ] <sub>]</sub> 00:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ANI == | |||
| Hey, Just wanted to drop you a line, I noticed that your conduct is being discussed at ].... Anyhow, thread is ].... Thought you'd want to know about it. ]<sup><small>(])</small></sup> 05:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your revert at ]== | |||
| I disagree with the "unrolled" references on aesthetic purposes, but please be aware of what you are reverting in the future; I did in fact fix reference fifteen, which was not closed properly and therefore disrupted the citations that followed. If you had read the page history correctly, you would have known this before blindly reverting me. I fixed the ref again, but kept the formatting as was. I also suggest you attempt being a little more civil in your edit summaries; a little decorum is always received better in such circumstances. <span style="font-family:verdana">] </span><small>(])</small> 17:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I didn't realize you had indeed fixed something in that edit, so that was, as they say, my bad. | |||
| :I do disagree about unrolled references: it shouldn't be, as you say, and "aesthetic" issue, but one of readability (of the edited text, not the displayed text, which of course is the same in either case). It's just damned hard to make out where all those parameters are when they're all squished together. But you're right, I should be more careful about not undoing valid edits. +] 17:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::I realize now I should have used a more detailed edit summary, so I'm at fault as well, and I apologize for that. I understand what you're saying about the references and how readability should be of utmost importance; I think my preference of "white space = bad!" comes from my early days on Misplaced Pages when people would "clean-up" my citations, so I've just fallen into the condensed references as a habit. When I edited the one section in the Miller article, I automatically began eliminating the white space after I fixed the typo, and even considered going back later to sweep through the rest of the article, which is why I put it on my watchlist. Next time I'll discuss such changes on the talk page first. Take care, <span style="font-family:verdana">] </span><small>(])</small> 18:06, 19 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] Logos == | |||
| If you want to discuss, then by all means discuss. Summary deletion ''isn't'' discussion. Until then, I'll keep restoring the Logos section. --] 02:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == West Marin == | |||
| Well, I look at the West Marin article. It seems to me that there are some references in the article. (I don't have time to read thru those refs) But if those refs show that West Marin is in fact a region, then it is quite difficult to have the article deleted since this procedure requires Admin attention. If those refs only refer to West Marin as a simple term to describe western Marin County, then it is likely that the article would be deleted. Also the deletion process takes more than 5 days, Cholga in the mean time can research for more refs or improve the article. So it is hard to say, it is up to the Admin. Cholga sometimes doesn't understand Misplaced Pages policies and might insist on her position, but as I said, she still a good editors. | |||
| By the way, the Oakland articles I tagged haven't been deleted yet, because again the process takes more than 5 days. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 02:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :One more thing, Cholga can remove the template any time, if she thinks she has addressed the issue. So if that happened, don't revert or readd the same template as that is not standard procedure. But if the article is clearly a problem, then we would have to do it through ]. Opps! forget to sign, this is the first time that happened. ] <sub>]</sub> 02:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I also nominate ] at citing concerns over whether the template violates ]. ] <sub>]</sub> 02:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| Hey there IL2BA i think you were a little overzealous in trying to get the article deleted, i didnt create it just to have it mentioned in dogtown, i did create it because i had allready mentioned it in dogtown and it doesnt yet exist at that point, having said that heres a buttload of references if you truly don't believe me, but if you were just being spiteful im sorry for you dude. as for it being mentioned in dogtown that is a whole differant story, and it should definatly be mentioned your arguement is that it does not exist but it does, two of the existing dogtown references "helen" and "hhs" allready mentioned west marin and dogtown, the county health report even defines dogtown as part of west marin, check em out and google it and lets put this behind us.'''Cholga'''<sup>'']''</sup> | |||
| [http://www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/HH/main/ems/documents/Annual%20Reports/Annual_Report_2000.pdf 9 West Marin is defined as Bolinas, Dillon Beach, Dogtown, Inverness, Marshall, | |||
| Muir Beach, Nicasio, Olema, Point Reyes, Point Reyes Seashore, Stinson Beach, | |||
| Tomales and Lagunitas], this is directly from the county of marin'''Cholga'''<sup>'']''</sup> 02:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, okay let's see community groups, a school (West Marin School), newspaper articles, a bus service called West Marin Stagecoach, and newspaper which mentions their West Marin news section, mentioned in San Francisco Chronicle, its mentioned in reports from the county, business websites, realty listings, a soccer leage West Marin Youth Soccer, a community radio station which says its a station for West Marin, i hope this is convincing'''Cholga'''<sup>'']''</sup> 03:00, 23 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Carnatic tuning == | |||
| Dude, I'd like to think we're both on the side of Truth and Justice (tm) here, but I confess I bristled at your edit summary (and, regrettably, sniped back) regarding Carnatic tuning and violin playing position. I've added an external link to ] for your enjoyment. Unsourced statements are one thing, but provocation ("likely untrue") seems useless and superfluous in this context. Be well, __] 23:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Marin Independant Journal == | |||
| Hi, I am wondering if you can comment (positive or negative) on the ] of ]. Thanks ] <sub>]</sub> 23:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == References and citations == | |||
| Hi. I believe you are mistaken . You're confusing references and citations. A ''citation'' is something that is specifically cited in the article. A ''reference'' is anything that was referred to in the course of writing the article: the sources of information, whether or not they are specifically cited. In particular, I referred to both of the books listed as references in the course of editing that article. A ''bibliography'' is a list of relevant reading materials, which are not necessarily sources of the information in the article but which may be useful to the reader interested in more information.--] 03:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Deletion of others' comments in AFDs== | |||
| In the AFD ] you apparently deleted my comment when you added your own !vote . This should never be done unless in enforcement of some Misplaced Pages policy such as ] or to remove completely off topic material or spam I have restored the deleted comment. ] 05:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I have no frigging idea how that happened. I ''thought'' I was just adding my vote/comment; I edited the section and saved it. How did that happen? +] 06:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Since the removed material basically agreed with your !vote, it appears to have been inadvertent. happens to everyone from time to time. A cut and paste from earlier complete versions would fix it, but I'm not sure if that is in accord with attribution rules. I don't want to just rollback or revert, because that would similarly lose later additions by others. ] 15:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::. ] ] 16:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Read prod tags before instructing others== | |||
| Anonymous, | |||
| If you would bother to read the prod tag prompting deletion you would find that it says tag can be removed upon article improvement or objection by anyone to the deletion. If you want to delete an article this badly just place it on AfD to hear from others. By the way the tag was further inaccurate in that it said the article is unreferenced; it has three sources. sincerely ] 14:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == pt. isabel == | |||
| would you read the comments on the laci peterson section on the talk page before edit warring, you must agree its not really some insignificant factoid, mind letting it stay until we reach agreement on the talk page, feel free to rewrite it if you think its too detailed, but please comment on the actual talk page since there is a discussion going on. thanks.'''Cholga'''<sup>'']''</sup> 19:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Flagstaff == | |||
| Sorry for reverting your improvements; I was trying to restore the standard demographics wording and didn't mean to remove the capitalisation. ] 20:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :No harm, no foul; I've done it, it happens. +] 20:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == hwy 1 == | |||
| Dude, according to the MOS it only has to use the official name in a link, but if we don't link we don't have to use it, and the parenthases is a way around it. I mean c'mon who would say CA SR 1 for San Pablo Avenue or CA SR 1 for 19th Avenue or whatever # El Camino Real is.'''Cholga'''<sup>'']''</sup> 08:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == genre == | |||
| you don't consider ] a ]? --] 18:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Alpha list of panflutists == | |||
| I notice that people are just adding names. I alphabetized it, but I don't want to have to do it over and over. It seems that a note should be made. Some people think it is in order of status perhaps.. in the music world that would be normal. As long you keep it in order I don't mind if it is there or not. If you don't have time for that, then add the note about proper order of the list. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 20:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :It shouldn't be in the article, as lists like that are implicitly assumed to be kept in alphabetical order, and advisory notes like that would only quicly clutter up articles. However, feel free to add a note (using <code><nowiki><!-- comment --></nowiki></code>) in the edited text if you like; that ought to keep some folks from adding names willy-nilly. +] 00:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Ghosttown, Oakland, California == | |||
| I already warn ] about ]. So one more revert from him, I will report him. Just letting you know. ] <sub>]]</sub> 01:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == RE:Ghosttown == | |||
| I completely agree; the source is completely unreliable, and the article looks hoax-y. But that does not justify your continued removal of the source without consensus being reached. I don't care of you don't like the word; '''it's the way this wiki works'''. Please try to calm down and discuss things in the future before reverting blindly. Happy editing! --''']''' 22:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==wp:points== | |||
| this one is all you: "'Borderlining' (habitually treading the edge of policy breach or engaging in low-grade policy breach, in order to make it hard to actually prove misconduct)" | |||
| which one is me?'''Cholga'''<sup>'']''</sup> 03:59, 19 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Link in Criticism article == | |||
| Are you suggesting by inserting it that there's consensus to include that link? -]<sup>(])</sup> 08:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Seriously, what does ''ex post facto'' mean, in that context? What has the concept of something being retroactively enforced got to do with consensus? -]<sup>(])</sup> 16:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Paper recycling== | |||
| The article on ] needs a lot of work, IMHO. I moved the "History" section from ] to Recycling only because it did not belong where it was, not because it was a particularly well-written piece. I have busy working on a number of articles within the Pulp and Paper category, but haven't had time to seriously tackle the Paper recycling one. Are you able to assist? ] 14:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: Flagstaff == | |||
| Hi there. I understand your point about copyedit vs. proofread; the reason it is labeled that way is that I performed the "proof" (or second review) of the work that another member of the ] had already performed. See the "copyedit" box on the talk page to see what I mean. Thanks! ] 21:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Reversions at ]== | |||
| Your pattern of reversions at ] is placing you on the cusp of violating the ] rule, if it has not been violated already. Any further reversions of material may subject you to being blocked. ] 01:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 12:42, 20 February 2023
My policy on discussions:
- If you leave a comment here, I'll reply here. That way both sides of the conversation are in one place, which should theoretically be easier.
Arkivs of old stuff:
hey baby
i'm baaa-ack, did ya miss me? chugsa-wugsa here! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.67.171 (talk) 19:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies
Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 16:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Templates for deletion nomination of Template:Obscure
Template:Obscure has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Mike Serfas (talk) 17:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Welcome back
Good to see you pop up on my watchlist. Welcome back. Antandrus (talk) 20:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- Ditto. Nice to see your no-nonsense approach again after more than a year away. Binksternet (talk) 14:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Hyphens and Key Names
What literature? In the context of a list, it would be "Clarinet in B-flat" Justin Tokke (talk) 02:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, it could be either with or without a hyphen. I just did a quick check of my record collection, which seems as good a sample as any; turns out it's pretty evenly divided between hyphenators ("A-flat major") and non-hyphenators.
- Therefore, the hyphen isn't required. For simplicity's sake, then, my preference would be to not use it. It seems, well, fussier with the hyphen in there. --ILike2BeAnonymous (talk) 05:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- But that's not what has been used on Misplaced Pages for a while. Hyphens have become standard for Misplaced Pages when talking about Keys and instruments. I have seen it both ways too, but I find the hyphenation more clearly attaching the "B" to the "flat". Justin Tokke (talk) 05:43, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- Except that it's not "what's been used" here for a while. Haven't done a formal count, but my sense is that it's evenly divided here as well between hyphenated and not. And I really don't see why any extra little lines are needed to "attach" the letter to the "flat" or "sharp". That's done by the reader's brain. --ILike2BeAnonymous (talk) 05:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not part of the editing of those pages, but I thought that the hyphen was used when the hyphenated words were describing a following word, as in A-flat major, but not used when the would-be hyphenated words stand alone: A flat. This is the case for non-musical terms like African American versus African-American president. Binksternet (talk) 17:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- That's the logic. The hyphen attaches the "B" to the "flat" but the space implies they are separate. The hyphen removes all ambiguity. Justin Tokke (talk) 21:39, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Cigar fillers
I'm curious as to why the jr cigars link is not considered commercial then since they have links on that page to actual product pages and the famous smoke blog has incredible authority in the cigar world and is none commercial, though the site is.
I am slightly confused. -Cayden ツ ;̡̡ ̴̡ı̴̴̡ ̡̡͡|̲̲̲͡͡͡ ̲▫̲͡ ̲̲̲͡͡π̲̲͡͡ ̲̲͡▫̲̲͡͡ ̲|̡̡̡ ̡ ̴̡ı̴̡̡
What do you think of these?
- Potrero Hills
- Chevron Richmond Refinery
- Weather pains
- Committee for Green Foothills
- Correos de Chile
- Villa Las Estrellas
Audio theatre an article to audio dramas
Please if you have time and you know anything to it (I have seen that you have made edits in the article area which owns relations on it) , please look on the article Audio theatre, somebody placed a erase discussion on it. after we have had a merge discussion. It would be interesting what you would say to the merge and the delete discussion. And possibly it could help to contact other people that they should help also. )-: Merry Xmas --Soenke Rahn (talk) 15:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Phoenix, Arizona Reassessment
Phoenix, Arizona, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 10:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Jeff Newman (musician)
The article Jeff Newman (musician) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non notable musician who fails the notability guidelines.
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sahaib (talk) 21:18, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Jeff Newman (musician)
The article Jeff Newman (musician) has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • 03:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)