This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.106.191.188 (talk) at 00:21, 6 July 2007 (→vandalism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Thanks

thanks for the vote for my RfA, didn't work out — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munkee madness (talk • contribs) 20:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Family

You are welcome for the revert. We are all a kind of Wiki Family, we have to stick together.

Fighting crime, one vandal at a time...--Witchzilla 16:15, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Email

I've replied. Walton 17:22, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

RE:Image:Map of the United States highlighting the Inland Empire.gif

How do you fix it? - Presidentman 15:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, the writing, that's from the original picture, which was in the public domain as a work of the U.S. government. See Image:U.S. Counties.gif - Presidentman 21:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Source for the base image fixed. - Presidentman 11:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

re:Wikibreak

Thanks. I'll have time to make a few edits here and there, but definitely not enough time to debate a controversial rewrite of WP:FICT. Hopefully, this will only be a brief break. — Deckiller 19:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject James Bond, Collaboration of the Fortnight

RFA thanks

Hi Dorftrottel. Thank you for your support and kind words in my RfA, which passed with 95 support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral !votes. Your Q7 really made me think about Misplaced Pages in a way I never had. I especially appreciate your willingness to forgive my past actions and put your trust in me. It does means a lot to me to have your individual support and the collective support of so many others. I truly will strive to carry myself at a level representing the trust bestowed in me as I use the mop to address the never-ending drips of discontent in need of caretaker assistance. Jreferee 07:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: (User talk:ais523) adminrights

Thanks for pointing this out! I've whitelisted : in the script as a character safe to output directly into URLs (MediaWiki seems to put colons directly into the URLs, rather than URL-encoding them like it does with most other punctuation marks; I hadn't realised this before your comment). I've now corrected the script appropriately; the fix may not appear for you until you bypass your cache. --ais523 08:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Nominator

Hello, i am the user known as onopearls. although i feel that you have every right to criticize a nominator, to call their intentions questionabe is, in my opinion, uncouth. How long a user has been editing wikipedia or how long an account has been active shouldn't play such a significant role in your judgement of a nominator, and saying that the noms intentions are "fishy" is unjust without background knowledge. i have been editing wikipedia for close to three years, but never felt that a account was nessecary. i have also edited much more than 167 times. my short sentence can be attributed to the fact that i have never nominated a user before. i will write a longer one the next time nominate a user, should i ever do that again. please dont consider this a personal attack, but i felt that your accusations were misguided, and that i needed to set the record straight. Best Wishes, Onopearls 20:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC) "". Onopearls 17:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure you're not mistaking me from someone else? I don't recall ever typing the word "fishy" in any context. —AldeBaer (c) 20:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I know. i shouldnt have put fishy in quotation marks. i was referring to your agreeing with Sarah. sorry for the mix-up. best wishes, Onopearls 20:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

What RfA are you talking about anyway? —AldeBaer (c) 20:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

User: Milton Stanley

Edits

Actually it wasn't a test - I used the information in the article as a starting point for this fictional article: http://serv01.siteground133.com/~europea1/index.php?title=Dagger_STS/STG —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.9.89.137 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Well being lazy I CTRL+X'ed the contents rather than CTRL+C'ed them, and then without thinking saved the page >.<

Well - I noticed when I was presented with a blank page afterwards with the word 'whooooops' reverberating around my head. Being as I'd just cut the lot I had it in my clipboard easily available and just pasted it back in. I was a little worried I'd be banned for it >.<

Oh - just FYI - I've finished the article that I used this one as a base for: http://serv01.siteground133.com/~europea1/index.php?title=Dagger_STS/STG

will that be ok?

will that be ok? i added something else.

even though they are my own words? Onopearls 17:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, simply because an exchange has taken place. I replied to your post, and my comments are unintelligible without your initial message. It takes away the context and meaning of my comments. —AldeBaer (c) 17:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Amway

Thanks for going to all of the trouble. Cheers, ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

vandalism

i am conducting no vandalism; i've been working very hard to improve articles by making sure both German and Italian is used. I've upgraded a lot of the village homepages to new templates, etc. please, assume good faith. :(

sorry if it was misconstrued as vandalism; it was not. I have tried to make sure and use Alto Adige and Sud Tirol in the historical context, and the Province of Bolzano-Bozen when referring to the actual modern day province.

That part is a bit difficult to be exact, because during that time there was only the County of Tirol under the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. Both Alto Adige and Sud Tirol are terms that have become more used in modern times. Alto Adige (technically) came out of the early 1800s, and Sud Tirol was used more after WWI. But to answer your question, at that time there was no Sud Tirol proper. I guess to be more precise, it could be written that he was in the city of Bolzano-Bozen in what was the County of Tirol (in present day Alto Adige/Sud Tirol). I was mainly trying to make sure at least both German and Italian terms were referenced.

Ok, let's go through this together. I'm (slowly) beginning to understand the difficulties here. Why are there three different articles (South Tyrol, Autonomous Province of Bolzano-Bozen and Alto Adige/Südtirol) for the same region anyway? Maybe we should link to each of those from the "See also" section in the articles you edited. —AldeBaer (c) 22:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the page, I believe they are trying to work that out a compromise as they did on Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol. I do not care so much, as long as they hopefully choose something that respects both speakers. There is some difficulty though because the area names of these provinces correspond also with the actual province names. I.e., Trentino == Autonomous Province of Trento. Alto Adige/Südtirol == Autonomous Province of Bolzano-Bozen. So it does get confusing I guess.

Good idea; though I've spent more time than I should today on Misplaced Pages. :-) I wish my Greek friend would relax a bit too, and assume good faith; I mean, he could of simply asked. If you look at my edits I try to be very consistent, on the city pages I go out of my way to make sure I have both German and Italian, etc.

(outdent) Hmm. Maybe there lies the problem. I'm not currently able to discern all involved aspects, but my guess is that it's really confusing to have three different articles: Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol, South Tyrol, and Province of Trento which comprises the former both. In your own opinion, is it possible that those articles are POV forks?

On an unrelated note: It's common to sign your posts on Misplaced Pages talk pages. You can do that by putting four tilde characters in the end of your comment, like this: ~~~~

Also, Misplaced Pages doesn't "walk away". If you don't have the time right now, check back tomorrow and we can continue the discussion, just let me know. —AldeBaer (c) 23:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think I now need a break. Hopefully the work I did on the province towns wasn't reverted too. I don't think these links are POV forks in this case; they express the reality. There is the overall region Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol. That region is made up of two subregions Trentino and Alto Adige/Südtirol. Those subregions happen to overlay the actual provinces: Autonomous Province of Trento and Autonomous Province of Bolzano-Bozen, respectively. That is the hierarchy really. There is some POV involved because of two different language groups, that is for sure. Some would only want Trentino-Südtirol or even incorrect translations like Upper Adige; and I guess these you would call POV forks. I'm trying to think of an example in the US. Maybe it would be similar to the name Old Dominion and State of Virginia (when comparing Trentino to Province of Trento). As far as the Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol, it is just a region like Tuscany. In this case it is only made up of two provinces, where Tuscany is multiple. Either way, it makes sense to have a regional page and then provincial pages. The part that makes things really confusing, in my opinion, is when people use just South Tyrol, because you get the impression it is a province or even a republic, which it is not. It is the English translation of a German name of the area. 71.106.191.188 23:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

If you want a quick overview of your edits, go here. I reverted many of them, as I suspected them to be vandalism, but they appear not to be intentional vandalism. I would however go with the name of the article. If there is consensus to use the name South Tyrol, it should be used in other articles as well, unless there is a compelling reason to use one of the alternative names. —AldeBaer (c) 23:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the problem is that sometimes it makes sense to use Trentino and sometimes Province of Trento (or Autonomous Province of Trento). Most often articles refer to the provinces (like a list of provinces, a governor of the province, etc.). So saying that so and so is governor of the province of Alto Adige, or province of South Tyrol, is wrong (for example I changed to for that very same reason). You don't say Arnold is the governor of Cali. or Tim Kaine governor of Old Dominion. That is why I thought there were redirects actually, to deal with situations like this. The simplest thing would be for South Tyrol to be Province of Bolzano-Bozen with redirects (as Trentino redirects to Province of Trento, but there are some German POVs at stake, I guess. Anyway, thanks for having a discussion on this at least. :-) Actually, just noticed you are an Admin, and recent one at that. Congrats (I think :) Actually, if you read through the discussions sometime on South Tyrol you will see just how much bias there is. Unfortunately, decisions have been made by a majority rule (i.e., bring as many of your friends speaking a certain language :). What has been most saddening is some Admins pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable as far as taking sides Gryffindor comes to mind. For this mixed province, using only Seudtirol/South Tyrol or Alto Adige becomes inflammatory to the other group. It is also the case that both Alto Adige and South Tyrol are used often in an English context. Personally I see Alto Adige more often in North America, but that is just one data point. When I'm editing I've simply tried to use the Province of Bolzano-Bozen (multilingual) when addressing the modern province and Alto Adige/Sudtirol (again multilingual) when in a more historical context. Once day perhaps they will rename the South Tyrol page to the proper modern name of Province of Bolzano-Bozen, but I believe there is a lot of politics involved. There are far-right politicians who like to think of the bit of land as an independent state named Seudtirol.. hence you see some individuals very stringently pushing that South Tyrol is the one true name (even though it is a new term if you look at the history). Childish if you ask me, but what is new. :-) 71.106.191.188 00:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)