This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AWilliamson (talk | contribs) at 16:36, 14 October 2004 (→Request for Help). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 16:36, 14 October 2004 by AWilliamson (talk | contribs) (→Request for Help)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
New messages
Thanks much for your kind welcome and comments! -- Jim (User:Jes37226)
Runes
Dear Firestar, you wrote: The Etruscans, who spoke a language with unknown language family affiliations, had brought their writing system (based on the well known Semitic alphabet) with them when they had migrated from the Near East in approximately the 12th century BC. The script had subsequently been adopted and used to represent neighbouring Lepontic, Rhaetic and Venetic, which were Celtic languages. I removed this because 1) the Etruscans had not migrated from the Near East. They may have migrated from Lemnos, though, which was in the Greek area. 2) the mainstream theory is that they learnt the script from the Greeks. 3) Rhaetic was not a Celtic language, it was related to Etruscan. 4) Venetic was an italic language.--Wiglaf 20:07, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Hi Firestar. When I come to think about it I am not sure about the position about the Veneti. Last time I read about them they were Italics, but on the other hand both Italics and Celts belonged to an Italo-Celtic group so their classification may have changed. Frankly, if I had seen that it was your information, I would probably not have removed it. I only found it out afterwards and felt I owed you an explanation. I do not, however, believe that there is direct connection between the semitic script and the Etruscan as the Etruscan script was heavily indebted to the Greek script. Regards,--Wiglaf 21:50, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Nomination for adminship
Hello. You don't appear to be an administrator, but I think you should be. If you would like for me to nominate you, I will do so. You may reply here or on my talk page. Regards, Wile E. Heresiarch 17:36, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- I have posted your nomination at WP:RFA. Please reply there to accept. Good luck! Wile E. Heresiarch 04:09, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Hi Fire Star, about the admin nomination, I think it would be a good idea for you to reply immediately below the nomination statement at WP:RFA to say that you accept the nomination. I know that you've already responded to the questionnaire, and that's great. I just think explicitly saying "I accept" is probably a good step. Looks like votes are in your favor, that's terrific! Wile E. Heresiarch 21:46, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Romanization
Fire Star, can you please stop making "double versions" of articles. It's too hard to maintain both versions. You can always feature both romanizations on one page. WhisperToMe 03:23, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Literature
New editions of English literature are going pinyin. The only reason the WG stuff still sticks around is because it was there. While WP is not paper allows a lot more liberty, duplicate articles (save for the romanization style) aren't one of the things. The main reason why double articles aren't good is because the edits won't affect the same content.
On Misplaced Pages, when in doubt, use pinyin. See: Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style for China-related articles WhisperToMe 22:08, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
You're a sysop!
I'm pleased to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. Congratulations!. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 04:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for your note and congratulations on your sysopship. I was glad to offer my support. ffirehorse 14:26, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Congrats, Fire Star, and thanks for your note. I trust you'll enjoy adminship, but <moralising>don't forget to keep on contributing to articles, especially when the troll wars start getting to you</moralising>. JFW | T@lk 16:30, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Congratulations, Fire Star. Glad that I could help in a small way. Btw I agree 100% with JFW. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:05, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Image
Thanks Firestar, the image was really interesting. It is funny how mixed the types are all over Europe. Congratulations on the Sysopship!--Wiglaf 20:57, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
My nomination for adminship
Thank you for supporting my nomination for adminship. I will do my best to serve Misplaced Pages. --Slowking Man 00:06, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)
Request for Help
Congratulations on your admin status.
While I hate to bring you into the following mess, I could use some help with a problem which you're already somewhat familiar with, via the "Joan of Arc (cross-dressing)" discussion. While this side-article is probably no longer necessary, the debate over the main article has unfortunately continued, and I'm hoping that you can help bring it to an end by reviewing and posting the final change which might finally clear things up. I would like a neutral and veteran editor to review it, rather than merely engaging in another round of bickering with the lone holdout (AlexR) who has been the only editor who has ever opposed any of the previous changes.
Here's the entire entry for Joan, with the final sentence revised to reflect the historical evidence.
-----------
"*Joan of Arc was a 15th century French military commander who led the French armies against England in the Hundred Years' War. She is a French national heroine and a Catholic saint, having been martyred by the English. Her pro-English judges convicted her on charges of cross-dressing, although eyewitnesses quoted her as saying that she was only wearing male clothing because it allowed the pants and tunic to be fastened together, thereby serving as a defense against rape."
------------
Only the final sentence in the above has been modified; the rest was left as it had been. If you think it's acceptable, please make the edit for me (I've said I would refrain from making edits of my own in the interest of stopping this "edit war"), and I'm hoping you'll then additionally protect the article from further tampering until any discussion about the change has been allowed to take place - during the last attempted compromise, AlexR simply went in and entirely rewrote it on his own initiative without allowing discussion to take place first.
Many thanks for any help you can provide.
Regards,
AWilliamson 16:32, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC) (Allen Williamson )