Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:58, 23 December 2005

This is Bunchofgrapes' talk page. Click the little tab up there to leave me a new message.

Archive 1 (Creation – 21 November 2005)
Archive 2 (21 November 2005–12 December 2005)

Whoops

Sorry: You do not have new messages. I left one for soeone else her by mistak, and have just come back to retrieve it. Sorry about that seem to be half asleep this morning. Giano | talk 13:01, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Self-defense

Thanks for your note, it is greatly appreciated. Although I am confident that was vandalism, I just want to be careful in case there are any doubts. --Hurricane111 03:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Your block of Benapgar

Thanks for taking a principled stand and doing the right thing. I'd like to point out that Ben launched a fresh round of attacks on Guettarda on his talk page during his block. I removed the personal attacks. Ben reverted and left me a nice little edit summary: I think his block should be extended 24 hours. FeloniousMonk 08:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. If you want to know the history of Benapgar's problems, I suggest taking a look at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Benapgar and Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment/Benapgar.

Considering his vulgar edit summary and the recent comments at User_talk:Benapgar#On_Guettarda:_For_the_record, which I encourage you to read, the message contained in the block has clearly not sunk in. Extending the block is certainly a better and less disruptive option for the project than allowing him to continue as he is even while blocked or an RFAr, which at the rate he's going is the next stop. FeloniousMonk 16:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Protected page

Hi there, A small task I ask. Could you add {{current}} to the Stanley Williams page. Thanks--Jay (Reply) 21:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I haven't brought it up on the articles talk page. However, I don't think it would be much of an issue to tag it {{current}}. --Jay (Reply) 21:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I understand.--Jay (Reply) 23:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Kumanovo

You might want to take a look at User talk:Bitola. Then you can stop making arguments based on what is clearly a lie. If you still dont understand, you'll notice Bitola was warned about adding a copyvio and then continuing to do so. If you look at the history of Kumanovo you'll see Akamad has previously reverted Bitola's bad faith edits. Cut the BS. freestylefrappe 22:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding blueberry

Regarding the message you left at Talk:Blueberry, if you don't suppose that the article can be upgraded to become a featured article, perhaps we could collaborate on something less... specific and something more general on a worldwide basis? What do you think? —Hollow Wilerding 00:06, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

As a matter of coincidental fact, I had been looking at that article earlier this evening (or morning, wherever you are located in the world). Since I do enjoy cooking with various garlics, perhaps we could collaborate on the article. Its quality is... questionable. A very broad topic shouldn't be sitting in the peanut gallery. Let us make garlic! —Hollow Wilerding 00:13, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Oregon. Very cool. Are there any specific topics you want me to research? —Hollow Wilerding 00:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Fixes (Hopefully) Made to Delrina FAC

Hello there. I've mentioned this on the respective FAC page for Delrina, but I believe I have addressed the issues that you pointed out earlier, and would invite you to inspect what I have done. Cheers! Captmondo 03:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

WP:AN/I

Thanks, i've updated what you said at the AN/I entry there. I'm writing a user rfc right now on him just to let you know, the tone of his voice is concerning to me. karmafist 04:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

There we go. Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Freestylefrappe. karmafist 04:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

WP:V citations

You may be interested in Misplaced Pages talk:Verifiability#Citation format poll: Format of citations and WP:V examples, and WP:FN. (SEWilco 16:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC))

StephenJ

His only contributions were vandalism and your question is harassment. Stop following me. freestylefrappe 18:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I have made some remarks on this issue, and on this response, at User_talk:Freestylefrappe#Your handling of Stephenj. -- SCZenz 18:52, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

RfC addition

Hi Bunchofgrapes, Freestylefrappe is disputing my right to add evidence to the RfC page after it was certified/endorsed . Just to make sure everything's on the up-and-up, I am letting everyone who certified/endorsed the dispute summary before I made edits of the changes I made. I added more detailed evidence of my conversation with him, and the concerns it raises, as well as a summary of same, so you should take a look. Obviously you're free to suggest I change what I wrote and/or withdraw your endorsement if you see fit. -- SCZenz 22:32, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey, I had something I wanted to add as well, but I've never done anything with RfC before, and I'm not sure if it should go or not (it doesen't have to do with the article, but establishes a pattern of behavior). Could you pretty please take a look at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Freestylefrappe and lemme know if I should add it, and where, if so? Thanks! ;] --негіднийлють 03:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I asked karma too, he said the same ;] I'll remove it ;] Thanks for getting back to me so quickly! --негіднийлють 03:40, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Freestylefrappe blocking threat

Hi Bunchofgrapes,

Freestylefrappe has now threatened to block me for adding information to the RFC on him . (The information I added, incidentally, was about him deleting an entry from the "relevant policies" section of the RFC page.) I am wondering if this may soon be a job for ArbCom. For the moment, can you keep an eye on my talk page in case he actually blocks me? Thanks.

SCZenz 22:15, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

My point is that I'm not trying to cause trouble here. Kumanovo is one of many Macedonian city pages I have created. I have seen repeated references to this "edit war" being a "content dispute." This is not the case. The original reverts were because Bitola was adding copyvios. The last few reverts were because his edits were sloppy- and this is type of reversion is not unprecedented. The very last revert I did, once the RFC had started, was because he insisted on having information that was already covered. I deleted his reference to "about 100,000 residents" because there was already a more exact number farther down the page. It seems to me that the general case that I was uncivil is warranted, but that users can hardly take this RFC seriously with SCZenz and Bitola on the warpath. It also seems to me that checking whether Bitola and Macedon5 are the same person would make sense. freestylefrappe 23:18, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Seeing Phobos and Deimos from Mars

I'm making an artical to show and explain what phobos & deimos liik like in the martian sky. Does this sound like a good idea? — Hurricane Devon ( Talk ) 19:22, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Good point. Delete it. — Hurricane Devon ( Talk ) 19:28, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Copyedit work

You made some comments on the talk page suggesting that you were ashamed of editing this article significantly. You shouldn't feel that way. I love it when others copyedit articles that I contribute to — it gives Misplaced Pages a much better article than when one person controls everything. Indeed I frequently request others to do major copyedits of my work (I especially like User:Silence's work). I like and agree with your edits, and you should continue. I am not offended at all by them. Keep up the good work. Saravask 19:57, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Streetlight Manifesto Peer Review

During Streetlight Manifesto's first peer review you provided some very helpful advice. I have since further improved the article, in particular including your section suggestions (Critical reception, musical style), and have now put it up for a second peer review. I would greatly appreaciate any comments you could provide on my implementations of those sections you recommended as well as any new Peer Review comments. Thanks again for your help. — Ian Moody 14:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

From User:Powd3ry

Sorry that my article was misunderstood, I will spend more time revising it and research the topic more next time I post an article.

Posting Pictures

Hello. I was wondering how one goes about posting a picture onto the article they have written. Thank you very much for your time. (Unsigned from User:Jdelpagg)

Hmmm..

Please notice the user (you know who) changed the headline name of the message you posted - and this is not the only kind of trouble the user keeps spreading... --BorgQueen 02:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

The user deleted off your post this time. --BorgQueen 03:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

User:William Pan

Hi Bunchofgrapes,

Can you take a look at this user's page? The content seems to be an attack on someone. Thanks. Regards, --Hurricane111 23:09, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, I blanked the page; the user's only other contribution was vandalism along the same lines. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Grapes, you ruined us

I've been going through the code and I'm quite disappointed how you never code anything Unicode friendly in Process Central. Every other string you've used is missing _T.

Thanks!

I could have told you that. It's good, it gives you something to do. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:33, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Ken Kutaragi

I'm requesting your opnion about this dispute. Lot of POV-Pushing, the article is currently blocked. --GroundZero 00:06, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Favor

Could you erase 51 Pegasi b. — Hurricane Devon ( Talk ) 00:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Done. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Passing on a message

Hi, Bunchofgrapes! Thanks for the notification. I've sent Theodore7 a reply through e-mail. Regards, Sango123 (talk) 15:54, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Opinion please

Hi, Grapes. I wonder if you could look at today's history on Twelve Days of Christmas and tell me if you think I'm in danger of breaking the 3RR rule. I just kind of landed in this article today and gave it a much needed tidying-up, but I'm dealing (IMO, admittedly) with someone with an agenda and may get into a revert war. There are other editors on this article who might be of assistance, but I want to avoid stepping over the line myself. The problem is that several of the edits might be seen as reverts even though different material was added each time. (Yes, its one of those.) TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:34, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Looking... —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:35, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I seem to have lucked out, as the user in question has said on the talk page that he's giving up. Thank you very much for taking the time. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Nyaaargh. Well, that's for the best :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

We crossed talk pages. I'm not really sure that it was ever thought to be the 12 days leading up to Christmas except by some people in places where the 12 days were no longer observed and who were unaware of the history. The switch to the pre-Christmas season in the article seems to have been a bit of anon vandalism that no one caught at the time Some previous editors cited Frazier to support 12/26 to 1/6, but Frazier himself seems to have confused Twelfth Night (holiday), the eve of Epiphany, with the night following sunset on Epiphany itself, unless he's was just incredibly sloppy in his phrasing. That would naturally throw the reckoning off. (Perhaps, not coming from a liturgical tradition himself, he was confused in that the eve of the feast is counted as part of the feast itself.)

You're quite right about not getting into these things in the first place, but considering some of the articles I've been involved with my tolerance for flakey, left-field POVs that don't deserve serious consideration is considerably attenuated. I think I'm developing an allergy. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

P.S. After writing the above, I took another look at Twelfth Night (holiday) only to find that a familiar name has been at it. I think I'm going to start breaking out in hives now. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:22, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I saw the same confusion you did Google-wise. Some of it comes from Frazier who, as I said, was confused himself. (And not just here. In his eagerness to syncretize all the world's religious traditions he often played a bit fast and loose. But he's one of the standard reference for syncretists.) The confusion is that the liturgical day begins at sunset as in Judaism, and it always has. When Twelfth Night is called the "night of Epiphany", what is therefore meant is that it's the evening before. But when that's read by someone who reckons the day from midnight to midnight, particularly when this person is a Protestant with no liturgical tradition, it's assumed that it means the evening after, but this is incorrect. ("Eve" = "night", but we now reserve the first for holidays where we know very well that it means the evening before. See also Hallowe'en, "All Hallows Evening", which is also the evening before All Saints Day.) There's no particular significance to the evening after, but the eve of Epiphany is celebrated like Christmas Eve in cultures where it's still observed. (And in the course of doing living history and so forth I've actually been to Twelfth Night parties thrown by enthusiasts. They're always on the night of the 5th, not the 6th.) But I'll be strong and not touch Twelfth Night (holiday) at this time. ;) TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

RfAr against Freestylefrappe

I've filed at RfAr regarding Freestylefrappe here: Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Freestylefrappe. -- SCZenz 17:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

I just wanted to post a quick 'thank you'. I think that that is good advice. I appreciate it. --Chris Brennan 21:58, 23 December 2005 (UTC)