Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 165.189.91.148 (talk) at 16:21, 28 March 2006 (Scheme pages). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please Note

1. Please add new items at the bottom of this page.
2. Whenever I write anything on another User Talk page, I will Watch that page. Replying there instead of here will make the exchange much easier to follow. (I got this idea from User:Plugwash.)

Welcome!

Hello, Chris Chittleborough, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  - DS 22:44, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Brian Leiter

Hi Chris. I agree with your revision. As it stands, the links section looks fine. Sir Paul 08:07, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

(Responding to this comment, before I added the "Please Note" section above.)

US vs. U.S.

Hi, Chris. Check out Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style#Acronyms and abbreviations. It specifically endorses the "U.S." usage over "US". —Cleared as filed. 00:07, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh. So it does. I should have looked there. -Chris Chittleborough 03:51, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi! Thanks for your support in my request for adminship (did you know that "adminiship" is not an English word? Unbelievable!). It ended with a tally of (51/0/0). As an administrator, I hope to better help this project and its participants: if you have any question or request, please let me know. - Liberatore(T) 12:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

VDH

On Victor Davis Hanson talk page, I wrote a bit about why his response to Gary Brecher's article wasn't particularly noteworthy. Since you re-added the link, I wondered if there should be a better explanation on that talk page of why to include it? Ojw 14:14, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. I should have responded to you, but I never got around to it. I apologise. My view is that VDH was not trying to rebut Belcher, nor even to reply to Belcher's essay, just responding to Belcher.

Incidentally, the main reason that 26-Aug-2005 essay stuck in my mind was the second footnote.

While writing this reply, I realised what I did wrong a month ago, and fixed it: the 26Aug2005 NRO essay is now only mentioned once, with a parenthetical note tying it to Gary Brecher's essay. I hope you approve. (Of course, this now means that anyone who deletes that link to Brecher's essay, like User:71.103.214.70 did, will "break" the article.)

—Chris Chittleborough 16:07, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I probably don't know enough about Hanson to comment, I just noticed that the article was all extremely complimentary, and that an essay with a whole string of very good critisisms was hidden away in the final paragraph, complete with a note that VDH had "responded" in a way which might make people think the link led to a compelling well-reasoned piece-by-piece rebuttal of Brecher's claims, which it didn't.

So I don't want to be editing the page too much in my ignorance, just pointing out some parts that might need further investigation by the experts.

Incidentally, if half the stuff in Brecher's essay is credible, then VDH would appear to be a much more contraversial character than the Misplaced Pages article indicates.

Of course, when the critisism comes from a pseudononymous rant, it's hard to separate facts from opinions but I tried to list a few in that talk page. Ojw 17:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, Brecher's essay struck me as aiming for controversy rather than accuracy, but YMMV. I'm happy with the way we mention Brecher now; it's certainly better than my Feb 19 edit, which was a stuff-up. —Chris Chittleborough 03:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The Game

Thanks for the heads up about the vandals. I'll try to keep on the ball about it. Bkkbrad 22:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Scheme pages

Hi. There's still improvements that could be made to Matthias Felleisen—what I did was almost entirely cosmetic. Still, I think that Misplaced Pages is nicer to use when pages look good. I don't really have much to say about the PLT Scheme family, but I can certainly take a look at the articles. I see you've already improved the DrScheme page. Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. 165.189.91.148 16:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)