Revision as of 12:14, 15 August 2006 editCJ (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,411 edits →History Portal← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:05, 15 August 2006 edit undoAherunar (talk | contribs)3,963 edits →History PortalNext edit → | ||
Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
:I just saw your discussion with MAURY in his talk page. I could not agree with you on this one, because both ] and ] are actually British English (if I am not mistaken). However, civilization had a far larger use than civilisation, perhaps proved by the fact that the number of hits for 'civilization' had 5 times the number of hits for 'civilisation'. That alone is not really important, as we cannot ask everyone which they prefer, but the article ] itself uses "civilization", which will make it quite confusing if we use a variant, especially because the Portal can be reached by a simple click from the main page, and is certain to be read by a lot of people, some that are not familiar with Misplaced Pages. Lastly, it appears that most of our contributors are supporting the word "civilization". It's very likely that many more will find this article and change the word into "civilization" again. I understand Misplaced Pages policies that changing a form of an English word into another form is not necessary, but reverting them (lots of times) is just as unnecessary. We might as well make some random contributions rather than wasting our time on the difference between 's' and 'z', which I believe doesn't really matter because most people would have the sense to realize, or realise, that they're the same. ]]] 11:18, 15 August 2006 (UTC) | :I just saw your discussion with MAURY in his talk page. I could not agree with you on this one, because both ] and ] are actually British English (if I am not mistaken). However, civilization had a far larger use than civilisation, perhaps proved by the fact that the number of hits for 'civilization' had 5 times the number of hits for 'civilisation'. That alone is not really important, as we cannot ask everyone which they prefer, but the article ] itself uses "civilization", which will make it quite confusing if we use a variant, especially because the Portal can be reached by a simple click from the main page, and is certain to be read by a lot of people, some that are not familiar with Misplaced Pages. Lastly, it appears that most of our contributors are supporting the word "civilization". It's very likely that many more will find this article and change the word into "civilization" again. I understand Misplaced Pages policies that changing a form of an English word into another form is not necessary, but reverting them (lots of times) is just as unnecessary. We might as well make some random contributions rather than wasting our time on the difference between 's' and 'z', which I believe doesn't really matter because most people would have the sense to realize, or realise, that they're the same. ]]] 11:18, 15 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
::What nonsense. Misplaced Pages does ''not'' prefer any form of English over another. It simply defers to the spelling employed by the original author. This is long standing convention and is explained under our ]. Thanks, --] | ] 12:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC) | ::What nonsense. Misplaced Pages does ''not'' prefer any form of English over another. It simply defers to the spelling employed by the original author. This is long standing convention and is explained under our ]. Thanks, --] | ] 12:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
:::Exactly because it does not prefer any form of English over another, I would suggest you to stop reverting the same edit for about ten times. If everyone else wants to use the spelling "civilization", why bother? They do not have the necessity to change it, but neither do you have the necessity to revert it. They are not probably correct when they are changing it from "civilisation" to "civilization", but reverting it for ten times is useless, and pathetic. | |||
:::I'm afraid you have totally got me wrong, and please ] when I am pretty certain I'm alive and sensitive. They are not two different "forms" of English as you understood. In fact, they are both British English, as I mentioned above. "Civilisation" is a less popular variant of "Civilization", and is very scarcely used (again, explained above). I would not mind if you like reading in somewhat strange English (and I mean no offence to those who prefer "Civilisation"), but quite a large number of editors (in fact, all except you) have found the need to change it from "Civilisation" to "Civilization". I do not find these users, some very established contributors, to be "nonsense". When we print the works of Shakespeare now, do we print "''To be or not to be, I there's the point''", or "''To be or not to be, that is the question''"? The latter, because that's what makes sense to us, of course. I, speaking for myself, do not find a certain 'dislike' in the word "civilisation", but keep changing it to this form, in my opinion, is really not very contributive, especially when there is a direct link to the article "civilization". | |||
:::In fact, when the policy says "the original author", it refers to the current version (Not the "first" version. It is impossible to "follow" the first version because most of the times the article starts with a stubs. The more complex words come later on and it is impossible to keep track of them and use their "form" of English). By changing the current version, from "civilization" to "civilisation", you are not following the policy as well. The policy simply means that there is no need to change from one to another, because it will simply become an edit war - which is what I see in the history portal now. The policy therefore does not justify your edit, and I suggest you to refrain from such edits from this moment (nor am I going to make that edit again). If another user comes to change it again, simply leave a note in his talk page about the policy '''AND DO NOT CHANGE IT BACK''', because it's utterly meaningless edit war. Hope it's all clear to you now.]]] 15:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:05, 15 August 2006
|
Home | Users | Gallery | Sandpit | To-do | Talk |
---|
replies | |||
---|---|---|---|
| |||
archives | |||
|
Jackp?Check out the Sydney history page. Do you think the editor that you and i have both reverted today is Jackp?? ie, 203.208.120.247 Actually, his one week ban should have expired now. --Merbabu 10:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC) OpinionHi, if you've got time could you tell me if you think this article I have on FAC is clear about why the guy was important- I think it is, but them I wrote it. :) --Peta 04:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Portal:BiologyI fixed the things you criticised as much as possible, so if you want to have another look... Misplaced Pages:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Biology Cheers. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 13:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC) Light's VisionHi Cyberjunkie. Obviously "generally accepted" was too strong. I read Chris Bowe's well-referenced article from the Adelaide Review, and the day-by-day account of events (from the research of Langmead and Johnson) appears hard to refute - always assuming the sources are accurate. The view of Kingston's competence or otherwise is of course an opinion. It is tempered by the apparent fact that he based his plan on that of Pietro Cataneo, as already implemented in the founding of several other cities (by other people) - i.e., he did nothing original, but kept with a plan that had worked before. All he actually had to do was draw up a plan based on pre-existing work (which he apparently did in London), and then travel with Light to help him find the best site to build it. Anyway, there seems to be a good story here, and it seems a shame to lose it in favour of a cearly simplistic legend. Pingku 07:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC) Tassie PrehistoryI think I'll regret inserting the prehistory into that art! Anyway, thanks. As for place names issue, I suppose we wtch that spce? :) SatuSuro 06:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC) HelpmannWho is generating these enormous Talk page boxes? They are very ugly, intimidating and not very useful. Adam 07:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
SorryWhat are you refering to?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thefourdotelipsis (talk • contribs) 17:03, 31 July 2006.
Don DunstanThanks for that intensive copy-edit. michael 06:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC) Moderate LibertarianismCjunkie - you locked my article (Moderate Libertarianism) and redirected it to Libertarianism a while back. I did not have the text of the latest version saved anywhere but wikipedia and now cannot get to it. Would there be someway to access it? Jhaven 21:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC) BrowsebarHi there. What's up with removing philosophy from the browsebar? That's a pretty bold maneuver without concensus. Philosophy has been on there for nearly a year, and you want to remove it on an impulse without discussion. And after all the lectures you've given me about building consensus, being too bold, etc. You didn't even contact those who have an interest in the matter, like the guys over at the philosophy project. Not cool. Let's get those guys in on the discussion. Do we have to dredge up the discussions concerning why philosophy has been there all this time, and the discussion from the last removal attempt? Philosophy is as big in scope as Science if not bigger, as it encompasses all major academic fields (Philosophy of History, Philosophy of Science, Philosophy of Mathematics, etc.) Philosophy preceded Science, and philosophy covers most everything that science does not, and it provides the foundation of scientific inquiry itself (which is a philosophical issue). Philosophy's coverage on Misplaced Pages is probably the most comprehensive treatment of philosophy on the internet, and its lists and indices rival if not exceed the size and complexity of the other topics on the bar. Philosophy is also one of the highest quality collections of articles on Misplaced Pages. Please leave the philosophy portal on the bar. Thanks, I appreciate it. --Go for it 03:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC) On a related matter, where's the discussion concerning the removal of the reference page links from the browsebar? There's nothing about that in the Misplaced Pages:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 April 11#Template:Browsebar discussion. You seem to have done that all on your own. The concensus was to keep the browsebar, not chop it in half. I've restored it. We should contact the people involved in the AfD discussion concerning the content of the browsebar before deviating from the consensus of that discussion again. --Go for it 04:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC) You've got a Thank you card!Dear Cj, thank you so much for your beautiful words, your kidness and your trust in me! My Request for Adminship is finally over, and the support and appreciation that the community has gifted me will stick in my mind as long as I live. I have no way to properly express how grateful I am to you for all you've done for me, and all I can tell you is, I'll try not to disappoint you nor anyone else with my use of the buttons... and if I mess up, make sure to come here and give me a good yell! :) Seriously, tho, if you ever need my help, either for admin-related stuff or in any other way, you'll always be welcome to message me, and I promise I'll try my very best. Australian military history taskforceHi, i noticed you are a member of WikiProject ADF. I was wondering if you would be interested in joining the Australian military history task force. Regards Hossen27 11:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
GHe's RfA
Meetup on 24th August 2006Apologies if you're already aware of this, but the Inaugural Adelaide Meetup will take place on Thursday 24th of August at Brougham Place Uniting Church, thanks to Alex Sims. Please indicate if you will attend or not. This message left by May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) on behalf of , 09:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Mawson PlateauHi Cyberjunkie Re: Your edits of the Mawson Plateau article, I don't think the protected areas category should be on the Mawson Plateau page. The plateau is not a national park, conservation park, etc, it is just a small part of a pastoral lease. It doesn't have any legislated protection other than that given to all pastoral leases. Regards, Steve Reynolds CR | talk Monday, 2006-08-14 00:51 UTC
AussieguyCJ, User:Aussieguy = User:Pnatt. He's been creating socks all day (that's why the Australia and Macquarie Dictionary articles have been sprotected). Sarah Ewart (Talk) 06:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion#Portal:OrkneyA Portal created recently by Mallimak (talk · contribs) - the Orkney Portal - has been nominated for deletion. If you wish to take part in the discussion please contribute at: Thanks. --Mais oui! 08:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC) MedPortalHello cj! I noticed you removed the links from the intro box on the portal which you think are unnecessary. I inserted them earlier after this discussion with NCurse. You'll find some of the reasons why I created these links there. If you'd like to argument why you think it's not a good idea, please do so on that page, maybe it is better without them, then we will certainly remove them. Your input is very much apreciated! grtz, --Steven Fruitsmaak | Talk 09:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC) Thanks!Hi cj, thanks so much for the review. It meant a lot, especially since you were the first user to welcome me :) I have taken part in one or two FAC discussions, and an FPC discussion; that aspect of Misplaced Pages does interest me more than deletion debates, so I like your suggestion. I feel I already have a fairly good handle on policy – and AfDs bring me down ;) Anyway, thank you very much for taking the time out to write down your thoughts. Oh, and by the way... when I first registered, we had a discussion on the Flinders talkpage, and I promised to take some photographs... didn't realise it was this bloody cold in Adelaide during July, so that plan kinda went bust! I'll see if I can do something about it in the coming months. Hope you have a productive time at the Adelaide Wikimeetup, too, if you're going. Cheers! — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 12:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)History PortalI noticed you have continually changed "civilizations" back into "civilisations" in the history portal (in fact, about 10 times). I want to ask if you have any specific reason to do this, because Misplaced Pages generally prefers the word "civilizations", e.g. see article Civilization (while Civilisation redirects there). I have changed it to Civilization again. Hope you don't mind. Aranherunar 11:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
|