User talk:Thryduulf/archive1

This archive contains messages from 3 January 2005 to 20 April 2005.

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

• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 00:05, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I see that you have twice restored the title "New Orleans Instrumental No. 1" by R.E.M. to the List of songs whose title includes geographical names. While it is not an explicit policy of that article, it has been generally been accepted by the various Wikipedia song lists that instrumental tunes are not "songs", as they do not involve singing. I don't necessarily agree with this idea, but as long as it's accepted practice, I try to enforce it in the song lists I carefully monitor.

In fact, I mentioned this specific issue in that article's Major article reorganization section (in my rather lengthy December 18, 2004 posting that begins with "I've restructured the list as promised"). I also listed each song that I removed for the various reasons cited and asked people to start new topics if they disagreed with any of the removals. I see that you have already done this on some other topics. If you feel this song should be included, please bring this issue up there. Thank you for your cooperation. — Jeff Q 01:17, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sure if that's the way you feel. Ollieplatt 00:44, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
(for context, the above is in response to my comment on Ollieplatt's talk page Thryduulf 00:47, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)) With your encouragement, I responded on the RfC itself. Ollieplatt 00:56, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It is going to require constant vigilance. RickK 00:04, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)

this may interest you: Iasson has continued to alter other peoples comments on the RfC. Xtra 08:07, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

hi, just reading your other user page, wonder what does "worksafe account" mean? Xtra 02:10, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) as several people might ask me this, I've answered on my userpages Thryduulf 02:17, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

hi again. i believe user:146.124.141.250 is Iasson. the prior user has been around for years. i think it is worth looking into if no one has yet. Xtra 10:47, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• merge all of the VFD votes into one — That would have been my preference. Unfortunately, within a few minutes of the articles' creations we had three separate and divergent votes going on for three of articles. And the author in response to the VFD discussion created a further batch of articles. Now we have a real mess, with some people copying and pasting the same vote across all articles, some people explicitly voting "the lot", some people only voting on some articles, some people voting with different rationales on each article, and some people only voting upon one. I've attempted to keep the whole discussion linked together with a "See also" section on all of the articles (I've just picked up one that I missed) so that anyone voting upon one article would at least know of the other votes. I could attempt to merge all of the VFD discussions. The best that we could probably do is a single VFD article with separate sub-headings for votes that address "the lot" and votes that only address the various different individual subsets of the articles. That will take a lot of sorting out, though. I suspect, moreover, that it probably will not be worth the effort. The result seems to be pretty clear without refactoring. Uncle G 19:24, 2005 Jan 30 (UTC)

I noticed your comments on the talk page of Cantus's new Wikipedia:Images unsuitable for inline display. I'd also appreciate if you could look at my Template deletion proposal for his template:offensiveimage which he's been trying out lately on one or two articles.

The discussion is here.

--Tony Sidaway|Talk 19:05, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Many thanks for the answer to that -- I'm building my own idiot's guide to markup, and have added that. I know I could have found it, but in my time zone it was late! HowardB 05:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Nice job setting up User talk:Thryduulf/Geonamesongs! I'll be adding more comments as soon as the Wikipedia servers start responding reliably again (or within a day or so, if I get too impatient). — Jeff Q 22:05, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thryduulf, I want to apologize for my lack of participation on this project. I've been completely preoccupied with urgent personal matters, and my Wiki work has been reduced to a mere trickle. (I haven't even addressed the other changes I've discussed for the personal- and geo-name song lists that were due by now.) I'll jump back in as soon as I can, but it'll probably be another week or so. Meanwhile, I hope you, Grutness, and others are finding this work illuminating. — Jeff Q 18:01, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the addition to the RFC page; apparently that wasn't the correct place to do it though. Discussion will now be at Wikipedia talk:Template messages#Moving templates to talk pages, which is apparently a better place. --SPUI (talk) 22:06, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've just had an idea regarding an additional sentence on the VfD template. Following "However, you are welcome to continue editing this article and improve it, especially if you can address the concerns of those who believe the article should be deleted." I propose that we add: "If you make significant changes to the article, it is courteous to mention this on the [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/{{pagename}}|deletion discussion page]]." I am not set on that particular wording, indeed I would prefer a phrasing that didn't involve a third link to the same page (see [[User:Benc|Benc's]] comments in the Bolding section above). ~~~~

How about:

Should you improve the article and address the concerns of those who believe the article should be deleted, please remark on this page's entry regarding its improvement.

-- AllyUnion (talk) 03:48, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Dear Thryduulf,

The sociology of clothing article is there because pedant17 (I think that's the editor) is fond of his own prose. I completely rewrote the clothing article some time ago; after playing revert war for a while, he moved HIS clothing article to sociology of clothing. It's not sociology of clothing, it's a catalog of his fetishes. But since it just seemed to be me versus him, with no one else being interested, I didn't want to fight.

There's nothing much in that article that isn't already covered in clothing. IMHO, it could profitably be deleted ... but that would probably mean a battle. Unless he's lost interest in Wikipedia. Zora 10:52, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Darling, Rienzo. CheeseDreams

I just wanted to say hello, and let you know that I am aware that you have been accused of being a sockpuppet. Please, have fortitude: I can definitely sympathise as I've also been accused of being Rienzo. It appears that CheeseDreams is accussing everyone she dislikes of sock-puppetry at the moment. Hopefully this will come to an end soon. - Ta bu shi da yu 01:47, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hey! *waving* Thanks for taking the time to respond to my suggestion/inquiry on the FYAD candidate for deletion page. I suspected there might already be something similar! (There really is nothing new under the sun.) :-p Peace 2 u. deeceevoice 13:49, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Good suggestion. I have moved your text to the main article. Be bold in updating pages --Theo (Talk) 10:39, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That page is a black hole, you have to submit a bug report at http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/ I did one for http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1546 but it was left unresolved. -- AllyUnion (talk) 12:35, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm aware the system can display dates in my preferred format (although it doesn't actually *do* it for me, for some odd reason). I am in the habit of 'correcting' dates in South African articles (actually all articles using British English, since I believe they have the same custom) to conform to the local standard, as per the Wikipedia style guide relating to dates in Europe/Oceania/South Africa. Dewet 07:14, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I notice you moved Bristol Cathedral and approve. You might wish to consider moving Manchester Cathedral back as well. I would do so myself, but have already engaged in a few rounds of renaming with User:Irate and it would be helpful if others did the rename.

Perhaps also Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral.

For more background, see also:

• Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Irate
• User_talk:Irate#Cathedral_names, or this preserved version: [1] (Cathedral names section).

-- Curps 22:59, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

really really sorry for that; I was checking that and missed that change, instead I thought it hadn't done anything, so I was reverting as I thought it's buggy; again I apologize--iris lorain 16:41, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Heh heh heh. That was a find and replace when experimenting with box colours (green -> lime 'cause green was too dark). Forgot to change that back.... --BesigedB ^(talk) 22:12, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Bravo for taking the time to gather all that. I was worried that I was going to be the only person giving evidence...humblefool® 01:06, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi Thryduulf, I read your post about train prices from Ipswich to London. Are you traveling from somewhere in East Anglia for the WikiMeet? I live in Lowestoft (on the coast about the middle of ipswich and norwich) and really want to make the meet but am unsure about the finanical practicality of transport at the moment. Would you be interested in a car pool or something if one can be arranged? nsh 01:36, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, that makes more sense, my precussary grok of your user page didn't seem coherent with being East Anglian. I used to live in Trowbridge, btw, and Somerset is a lovely area of the country. I miss all the hills, now I live on tbe broads. Well, I hope to see you on saturday anyway. Take care nsh 01:50, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, you were right, I meant RfC. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 15:20, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wikifun Round 6 has started if you'd like to play again! Gkhan 23:52, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for posting the pictures from the meet-up - I'm sure I took that one of you! I hope you don't mind, but I've placed the (scary) close-up of me on my user page. Warofdreams 00:31, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No, our form of English isn't that corrupted, it's purely sloppiness on the part of the writer. Thanks for taking the pictures, by the way. --Michael Snow 22:43, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Just thought I'd let you know I've edited the gallery page plus the image captions to identify Nile Hef plus my two (non-Wikipedian) friends, John and Kris Dow. And it was undoubtedly David Gerard that Morwen was listening to, as I'm afraid I was pretty much silent and didn't contribute much to the conversation at all! Arkady Rose 02:40, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure what you want me look at specifically concerning the above article. It seems fine to me.--Centauri 21:54, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. I've split #2 into 2a and 2b because of the reasoning behind your votes. That means I've had to move your votes around a bit, please check if you agree with that. Yours, Radiant_* 13:47, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

My edit was not a revert by any commonly applied definition. Neutrality removed the Template:Move to Wikibooks with no explanation, or edit summary. I placed a signed comment on the top of the page pointing out a discussion on the talk page about the requested move -- I did not undo Neutrality's edit. Noone would ever reasonably use my edit to justify a 3RR block, and such blocks would be quickly undone by people with a more practical standard of what a revert is.

This injunction is not a ban. Do not suddenly pretend that normal standards can be made more flexibly interpreted. Use common sense judgement. I now fear that people are going to block me for reverting vandalism, reverting myself, rephrasing a section of a page, etc. by using looser standards than normal. -- Netoholic @ 10:28, 2005 Apr 8 (UTC)

See my comment at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#8_April_2005 --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:52, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry — seeing an anon removing material with no edit summary, I tend to assume funny busines (on the assumption that if I'm wrong it can always be remedied, as in this case). I'll watch out for the article in future, and make sure that I don't do the same thing again. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:01, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Brookie here - thanks for the tidy up on the RP Keigwin page - and the Wikistory! --Brookie 13:43, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Excellent job contacting the previous voters. -- Netoholic @ 14:53, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)

• Thanks for that, but I'm afraid this is not going to help. The point I was trying to make is that people shouldn't vote by subst-ing, both because of WP:WIN a democracy, and for server load issues. Thanks to Netaholic, this will now turn into the usual polarized factionalist battle since the template happens to involve high schools. However, I've created Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Proposal for this, please give me your opinion on that. Radiant_* 15:03, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • I would like to withdraw this nomination, as I can already estimate that on VfD it would lead to a lot of pointless bickering, and end up kept for no consensus. Yours, Radiant_* 16:16, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

"Thanks to Netaholic"? Whoa whoa whoa. I agree with the real concern is bad - voting via templates - just not this nomination or the TFD proposal. Check out Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Voting via templates. -- Netoholic @ 16:24, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)

• I agree that we should not vote by template, as it happens. It should not be necessary because articles of a particular type should not continually be fought over. It's absolutely poisonous and does not help make an encyclopaedia. Sorry for the interruption. Grace Note 01:17, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks! [2] Radiant_* 10:12, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

[comment deleted, as it (strangely) requested]

Sorry, I'm a Wikipedian newbie, and don't yet know the social protocols. I just appreciated your oversight of my oversight, and didn't want to take up space on your talk page, that's all. Feel free to put the rest back, if you like. TimeriderTech 04:01, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please revisit this and vote on #2C and #6 (variations on earlier proposals). Yours, Radiant_* 15:32, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

Who do you think you are? I laugh at your arrogant threats. You are nobody to threaten me. You are just another editor. What makes you think you have any authority to order me or anyone else around? I suggest you read Wikipedia policies and adhere to them. Your edits are abusive and your accusations against me amount to personal attacks. I have not called any editors bigots, although it may be true that they are. I have referred to some edits as bigoted, which they are. Referring to a bigoted edit is not a personal attack. It is a description of an edit, not an editor. I welcome entering into dispute resolution process with you to help you stop your abusive personal attacks and threats on my Talk page. --Islamist 15:26, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support on my RfA, and the kind words: I shall attempt to continue doing whatever it is has given you cause for such glowing praise, and to put the shiny new buttons to good use. Aside: I'm fond of your username, as well. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:38, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have moved the two competing proposals into Talk:Public_Broadcasting_Service please adjust you vote by removing the unnecessary Oppose Public Broadcasting Service → PBS. Philip Baird Shearer 21:14, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

could be. Cheers. Thryduulf 00:23, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)