User talk:ὁ οἶστρος

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback}} on my talk.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback}} on your talk.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives

Archive 001
2010-04-28–2010-09-30

If I'm found wanting when my case is heard
It'll be by the author, not some interpreter of his word

Charlie Reid & Craig Reid
The Light
1994

Template:Cite gold platin

Hi there. I was wondering about this. The issue is not critical - the template is a redundant template waiting to be removed when I find the time to replace it with the new one. But regarding the change you made, the endash was added following a request by another editor. I must admit I do not really know the rules of dashes on foreign languages, so I just fulfilled the request. Was that editor wrong? Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Muhandes. The expression "Gold/Platin-Datenbank" is what is called a Kompositum in German (see also the English-language entry "Compound", although German is only briefly mentioned there). Such constructions are often written as one word, and if not, a hyphen is used (it's kinda ironic: normally, people use hyphens when there should be used an en or em dash, here it's the other way round). Regards – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 11:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. --Muhandes (talk) 13:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No prob, glad I could be of some [tiny] use. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 13:46, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave an informative edit summary next time

Hi Oestrus.

Please take note of this edit of mine: [1], to WP:MOS. I request that you leave an edit summary next time you edit core guidelines or policy. Don't leave the job of maintaining a record of changes to others. It's part of the work of making an edit that you signal what you're up to. Thanks.

Noetica^Tea? 12:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, duly noted. I thought it didn't matter for such minor edits, but I was obviously wrong. My apologies, and thanks for adding an edit summary. Regards – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 12:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hyphens and dashes

Hi, when changing hyphens to dashes, please be careful not to break links, as you did here - the second parameter of {{BS-header}} is the name of the template which will be viewed or edited when you click the v-d-e links, and so it must match the template name. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:22, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Redrose64

Sorry about that, and thanks for letting me know – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your invitation to participate in a Wikimedia-approved survey in online behavior.

Hello, my name is Michael Tsikerdekis [2][3], currently involved as a student in full time academic research at Masaryk University. I am writing to you to kindly invite you to participate in an online survey about interface and online collaboration on Wikipedia. The survey has been reviewed and approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Research Committee.

I am contacting you because you were randomly selected from a list of active editors. The survey should take about 7 to 10 minutes to complete, and it is very straightforward.

Wikipedia is an open project by nature. Let’s create new knowledge for everyone! :-)

To take part in the survey please follow the link: tsikerdekis.wuwcorp.com/pr/survey/?user=19836018 (HTTPS).

Best Regards, Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 09:07, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The results from the research will become available online for everyone and will be published in an open access journal.

UPDATE: This is the second and final notification for participating in this study. Your help is essential for having concrete results and knowledge that we all can share. I would like to thank you for your time and as always for any questions, comments or ideas do not hesitate to contact me. PS: As a thank you for your efforts and participation in Wikipedia Research you will receive a Research Participation Barnstar after the end of the study. --Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 08:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		Research Participation Barnstar
		For your participation in the survey for Anonymity and conformity on the internet. Michael Tsikerdekis (talk) 13:35, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	For doing a great job making MoS fixes that make Wikipedia more professional (at least in my opinion). I make those fixes too, but not in the heroic quantities you do! David1217 ^{What I've done} 16:09, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, David1217, thanks!

Silly as it may seem, but you made my day, as I wouldn't have thought anyone to actually notice, let alone appreciate those corrections – actually, at first I thought you were being sarcastic (well, some sarcasm is there, but in a good way, if that makes sense). – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 21:12, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No sarcasm was intended. I really do appreciate the minor fixes—it's always nice to know that someone else is improving Wikipedia in the same way. By the way, did you know that there is a script to fix hyphens and dashes? David1217 ^{What I've done} 21:23, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the tip – I gotta say, though, I don't yet know the first thing about scripts and am therefore hesitant to [try to install] and use them. But I guess someday, I will have to take the plunge, anyway, so I might or might not look into it in a bit.

By the way, what do you do in cases such as this? It's got both spaced hyphens and NYT-style spaced em dashes. Should I convert the spaced hyphens to spaced em dashes to harmonize what's already there (even though using spaced em dashes is against guidelines), or should I replace everything with spaced en dashes? Or employ unspaced em dashes when divisions or stops / interruptions are marked within a sentence and spaced en dashes for titles and item separations? But then again, the spaced em dashes are within a quote – a quote from the deliberately spaced em dashes-using New York Times... – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 12:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About the script—it's very easy to install: just create User:Ὁ οἶστρος/common.js with importScript('User:GregU/dashes.js');. Once that's done, a "–" button will appear in the drop down menu next to the watch/unwatch button. It's quite easy to use, too.

About the dashes in quotations problem: per MOS:QUOTE (what a Byzantine guideline the MoS is!):

"Although the requirement of minimal change is strict, a few purely typographical elements of quoted text should be adapted to English Wikipedia's conventions without comment. This practice of conforming typographical styling to a publication's own "house style" is universal. Allowable typographical alterations include these: Styling of dashes and hyphens: see Dashes, below. Use the style chosen for the article: unspaced em dash or spaced en dash." (It continues, but I didn't add the rest.)

So I guess you should use spaced en dashes for everything, as that's what you (presumably) correct spaced hyphens to. You're the only Wikipedian I've met (besides myself) who has such an interest in dashes!

David1217 ^{What I've done} 19:26, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Much obliged for your help in both topics – and, yeah, rather weird fascination that, ain't it? But if you don't tell anyone, I won't, either... No, seriously, I concur with what you wrote above about it making Wikipedia look more professional: as a reader (which I primarily am), it just irks me when my eyes hit upon countless such errors, as I think proper typography behooves what wants to be an encyclopædia. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 21:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't really think about dashes until I read the MoS and realized, There are tons of articles with hyphens instead of dashes. I guess I decided to fix it because it irks me to see them wrong, and because not many other editors do it. Well, happy editing! David1217 ^{What I've done} 23:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To you, too, as well as a very merry unbirthday – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 08:38, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Negative coordinate values

Please don't change hyphens to dashes in {{coord}} templates, as you did here and here. Doing so breaks the template syntax, so that the coordinates don't display or link correctly the articles. (No negative sign actually appears in an article in any event; what is displayed is "S" for negative latitudes and "W" for negative longitudes.) Deor (talk) 12:35, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sorry. But shouldn't the template be changed or expanded, then, so it can handle real minus signs (which are different from en dashes)? – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 12:48, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's just the way the template is set up; presumably, someone thought it would be irksome to use an unusual character when a familiar one would do. As I said, no hyphens or dashes or negative signs display in the actual coordinates anyway. Deor (talk) 15:10, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Fixing dashes"

<humor>I couldn't help but notice your recent changes of Airy disk in your "fixing dashes" mode. Of course you're correct according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Dashes and Dash. But I thought to take a moment to ask you have you considered the massive amount of memory, computer time and resources (see Global warming) which fritters away by reason of this pursuit? If you ever have thought about it, would you consider changing your mind if you were given an alternative meme i.e. that a dash is a dash is a hyphen? (Repeat after me: A dash is a dash is a hyphen.) And so, would you ever consider throwing yourself into the dis-organized opposition and becoming a Wikipedian Hypen Luddite? If so, see Category:Wikipedian Hyphen Luddites Sorry for the nowiki markers, but if I post the category with a wikilink it will mess up your user categories. </humor>

Trilobitealive (talk) 00:48, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, sorry, ain't gonna join you rabble-rousers.

While I like the self-deprecating tone of your movement ("Dash proudly!"), its cause is misguided: a rose is a rose is a rose, but a hyphen is not a dash, just as a question mark is not an exclamation mark, and a comma is not a colon.

(By the way, are you sure your message was meant all in good fun? Ya know, people who try to clobber you with global warming whenever they possibly [and impossibly] can usually aren't blessed with humor in spades – there probably should be proposed a new law, something akin to Mr. Godwin's...) – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 02:45, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well said. I'll ask my next QWERTY keyboard maker to incorporate the full spectrum of dashes. ;^)

(Yes, its all by way of a humorous introduction. Actually I just used the reference for its poetic effect. Sadly the world has been warming ever since the Younger Dryas fizzled out 11.5K years ago and there's nothing we can do one way or another until the next big freeze. Trust me I would never clobber anyone with it, firmly believing the clobberers are much like the sunspot alarmists in Venus on the Half Shell.)

Good to meet you. :^D. If you want a subtle global warming userbox, I've got one at User:Trilobitealive/Userboxes/Next Dryas? Trilobitealive (talk) 04:25, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good meeting you, too. And curse you for making me add yet another item to my already far too long reading list... – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 16:13, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know how it turns out. Got to dash - Trilobitealive (talk) 00:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:5544 Meier1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:5544 Meier1.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

till / Till

Χαίρε. Okay, ὁ οἶστρος has stung me into action. See my latest message on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:27, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am now going offline, but I have posted one last comment on this to my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:54, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, see ya. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 16:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prepositions

(To contextualize this section, I copied the message that I originally posted on Kww's talk page and inserted it here. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 21:32, 10 December 2012 (UTC)) [reply]

My Bonnie Lies over the Ocean vs. My Bonnie Lies Over the Ocean

Hello Kww. With regards to this (by the way, you also changed "IMDb" back to "IMDB" – it would be nice to be a bit more diligent when reverting others), please take a look at the edit summary here. Do you really want to change One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, although it doesn't seem to be spelled with a lowercased "o" in over, like, anywhere? Looking forward to your reply. Regards – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 19:01, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:CT is pretty clear that it's "over", not "Over". The goal is to capitalize consistently within Wikipedia, not consistently with the source. That's a little strange, but it is well-established policy. I'll agree that the "preposition of under five characters" rule is a strange one, and winds up looking funny to my eyes as well. I've considered starting an RFC to see if there's really consensus for that part of the MOS.—Kww(talk) 19:31, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for your reply. I don't know much about the "procedural side" of Wikipedia, so I started this. Should I have put that elsewhere? (By the way, I certainly am ready to have it either way – and what choice do we really have here, after all...? –, but need some certainty first, as currently, some titles are spelled according to that rule and some are not) – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 19:54, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, would it be OK if I cut&pasted my first message to you from your talk page to here? As otherwise, this conversation doesn't make much sense to the "uninitiated" (including me, if I re-read it in a few months' time). – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 20:00, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can cut and paste talk page comments as long as you cut and paste complete messages and don't change the order to make it look like people are replying to different things.—Kww(talk) 20:28, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stupid me just realized that I can simply copy it, so there's no need to cut anything. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 21:32, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This Little Light of Mine

Hello, I don't see any references that state the information on the "This little light of mine" is actually true regarding who is the composer of "This little light of mine". The only reference on the page actually uses wikipedia as it's reference. I am totally new here, so I don't know how to proceed. Can you help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srsinger (talk • contribs) 15:44, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Srsinger. I'm afraid I only did some copy editing there ((+4) means a change in four characters via-à-vis the previous version). But it generally is a good idea to contact people who edited the article (you might go for the entry's creator and / or people who made some further substantial edits)‎. You can also check if there's a portal or project page for a topic and approach the Wikipedians hanging around there. Like, at the bottom of "This Little Light of Mine", there are categories listed; if you click on "American folk songs" and go to the talk page there, you'll find these links:

Wikipedia is a constant work in progress, and while some articles are excellent, some are seriously lacking. For example, before this, the arguably most influential English-language version of "Lili Marleen" wasn't even properly listed. It's still a confusing and still a badly structured, written and sourced article, but – at least in my opinion – it's slightly better now (if you wanna see an even bigger mess [as of today], try this) – but hey, the good thing about this place is that if you come across something that's inadæquate, you can go about tackling and improving it yourself.

Sorry I couldn't be of more help. Regards – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 16:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: MoS and Caps

(To contextualize this section, I copied the message that I originally posted on al-Shimoni's talk page and inserted it here. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 16:21, 16 February 2013 (UTC)) [reply]

notification of current state of work title capitalization rules discussion over at WT:MoS

Hi. As you're one of those folks who contributed to the work title capitalization rules discussion over at WT:MoS but then seemed to tune out (and therefore – as opposed to the "MoS regulars" – probably didn't follow it any further), I just briefly wanted to point you towards my latest post there (beginning with "As there has been little progress"), which might well be the last overall: I'm phasing out, and since there hasn't been much input by other users lately, it's likely that over the next few days, the thread'll die (i.e., disappear into the archives) without there having been made any changes to the MoS. So I'd be much obliged if you took the time to stake your support for or opposition to my proposal (should I also have put an RfC tag there?) and – unless it's accepted (I'm not holding my breath...) – maybe even considered keeping the debate going. Thanks. (I'm aware of the unsolicited nature of this message, so if you feel molested by it, I apologize.) – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 14:26, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't participated further in the discussion partly due to frustration with people who insist that the MoS must conform to a house MOS from some other established entity. This, despite the fact these other entities more-or-less came up with their consistency rules on their own, not based on some other established MOS. To these people, Wikipedia can not establish its own rules, and debating any adjustments with them is futile.
Combine that with the "consensus nazis" who define consensus as "If it is not my opinion, then consensus means every person in the world must agree; therefore, even though I alone do not agree, it is not consensus." This is another group which it is futile to debate with. I do not know how any of us can deal with such extremist interpretations of WP policies, and so I have taken a break from the debate for a while.
Feel free to quote any of this anywhere you think appropriate. If you have any thoughts on how to deal with such interpretations, I would be interested. — al-Shimoni (talk) 03:59, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I share some of your frustrations (and it seems that not everywhere the same standards are applied / not everyone is alway practicing what they preach), which is partly why I'm also on my way out of the debate, hoping to hand it over to someone else. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 08:52, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Policy proposal

I believe you may be interested to know that I’ve proposed a change to policy at WT:AT#Proposal: WP:COMMONNAME should use common orthography. If you have an opinion on this change, please do give it. —Frungi (talk) 20:09, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Frungi, thanks for the notification. However, I'm sorry to say that the [quiet disregarding and] petering out of this attempt at change, as well as the sometimes duplicitous talk and the amount of tedious and tiresome postings, betraying their drafters as not having read or choosing to ignore what was already written, to be witnessed there in the process has turned me off any further participation in such matters (also, to me, it doesn't make sense to, as I consider it, put any further layers on a core that's unsound to begin with, but which to reform no one could be bothered with). – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 13:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Community Help

There are a number of people, one of whom has vandalized the Stalking page, as of th 24th, -removing perfectly referenced, material, which was in use on another page word-for word

This material was maliciously vandalized, removed - on the 24th of August, please check the log

- We need some help ~please Dynomitedetails (talk) 23:04, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm not sure you will even read this, since you have posted the same or similar messages in what seems an indiscriminate manner on numerous talk pages. It even appears that you have created an SPA for the, well, "single purpose" of canvassing people for "your cause". Such practice is – to put it mildly – discouraged here. Ignorance of Wikipedia's policies does not excuse you, as it's your own responsibility to read up on them, and it is not my job to inform you of anything.

Be that as it may, perfunctorily perusing the mentioned article's talk page, I get the [maybe wrong] impression that you, under many different identities (which, again, would be unacceptable), have unsuccessfully been pushing for the inclusion of certain material for many months now. Frankly, I currently do neither have the time nor inclination to acquaint myself with the matter and then get involved (which might result in me voicing something you don't want to hear, anyway).

I wish you the best, and in hoping you will be able to resolve the issues, I leave you with a piece of advice: An intellectually honest person will always weigh the opposition's arguments with great care and be very tough in challenging one's own positions, as, ya know, after all, everyone's capable of getting it wrong sometimes... – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 12:55, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lord's of Flatbush

Hey there, was wondering if you'd like to weigh in on whether we should move The Lords of Flatbush to The Lord's of Flatbush. Cheers! JesseRafe (talk) 03:10, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for the heads-up. Just gave my two cents. However, don't expect me to get more involved, as a) I'm rather short of time at the moment, b) I don't feel that strongly about this specific case and c) I'm still angry, angry, angry about this... (I corrected two more instances of "Brooklyn" in your post above, I hope that's OK with you. If not, please change it back, as I'm very particular about the notion of messing with other people's words and wouldn't want to give the false impression it's something to be taken lightly.) – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 13:12, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Saw it. Completely understandable. I had, by what was literally complete coincidence, been on the page for Lordz of Brooklyn that same day, and my fingers often do different things than my brain. Re the MOS link, wow. That's why I try to stay as surface-level as I can on all things wiki, because once you start peeling back layers (or have them foisted upon you) shit gets bizarre and passionate -- two of the worst possible qualities of a bureaucracy. JesseRafe (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of interest

A discussion you may be interested in is this RFC, a proposal to make the second comma in a date/place optional. United States Man (talk) 04:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:COMMA

I have opened a new RFC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style § RFC: Proposed amendment to MOS:COMMA regarding geographical references and dates, following on from another recent RFC you commented on. —sroc 💬 08:28, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Without wanting to clog the RFC with more comments, I just wanted to thank you for your civil and thoughtful discussion on the issue. —sroc 💬 00:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#En dash vs. "and" for multi-state metro areas

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#En dash vs. "and" for multi-state metro areas. Herostratus (talk) 18:16, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some bubble tea for you!

Cheers for 'harmonizing' the dashes on the Holodomor article. I was in need of a shot of levity... Definitely the first bit of harmony it's seen in years! Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:01, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:COMMA change

It is a little premature to crawl through pages with changes citing "MOS:COMMA" broadly when the change was (1) recently added, and (2) has no apparent consensus. I reverted the edit per BRD and put it up for discussion here: WT:MOS#MOS:COMMA_change_discussion. I recommend that you revert your edits until the discussion is resolved—otherwise, it's going to leave a huge mess. czar ♔ 19:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but just what are you talking about? Did you actually read the MoS? This practice has been ongoing for years. This is not about the somewhat controversial issue of dates being used in an adjectival sense ("a January 25, 2014 article" vs. "a January 25, 2014, article" – I consider the latter, with the second comma, wrong here, by the way). Also, I'm not "crawling through pages", I'm just a reader that corrects stuff that catches his eye. Please stop making such baseless claims. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 20:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No need for hostilities. Yes, I've read the MOS. The example puts the dates/locations as asides, so it makes sense to have following commas. In the diff I linked above, you added a comma after "2014":

It was released on January 13, 2014, for Microsoft Windows via Steam.

I considered that change closer to the "January 25, 2014, article" example you just mentioned. If the change wasn't related to the recent MOS change along those lines, I apologize for conflating the coincidence. Also, I didn't mean "crawling" as derogatory—I saw you had made a bunch of similar changes recently, so it seemed natural that you were implementing the new (boldly added) MOS rule.

czar ♔ 20:54, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whether "crawling through pages" is derogatory or not (and I have a rather hard time not conceiving it as such), it's wrongly interpreting my editing approach here. The examples in the MoS and the two instances in the Nidhogg article are analogous (as opposed to "a January 13, 2014 release for Microsoft Windows" – no comma there in my book, though I'm not sure what the current consensus is over at MoS). If you've realized your error, please revert yourself. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 21:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't mind, I didn't fully understand what you just said. You agree with the no comma after 2014 in what you just said? Because your edit added a comma there, which is what I reverted, so I'm not sure what you want me to revert. I'm looking into when the MOS added its current language of always following dates with commas. Wasn't there in 2012. I'll keep digging. Thanks for your help czar ♔ 21:27, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"You agree with the no comma after 2014 in what you just said? Because your edit added a comma there, [...]" (Czar) – That's because they're two different kinds of construction, the second treating the date as an adjective: in "a January 13, 2014 release", you could replace "January 13, 2014" with "new" or "limited" or whatever. "I'll keep digging." (Czar) – Please do. Have a nice day. – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 21:49, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had written out a summary of my findings but I see you responded and are kind of done with this, so I'll take it elsewhere. Thanks for the explanation. czar ♔ 22:26, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your latest contrib over at WT:MoS: no worries, as far as I'm concerned, we're cool. However, I'd advise against trying to rewrite history: if you sober-mindedly, unemotionally re-read your postings in this matter, you will find it was you who from the very beginning took on a very condescending tone in your attempt at "correcting" me – not only on my Talk page, but in front of others (by the way, I'm certainly grateful when someone points out my mistakes to me, and even if they mistakenly point out "mistakes" that really are no mistakes, that ain't no biggie – but, as they say in German, "der Ton macht die Musik", roughly translatable as "it's not just what you say, but how you say it").

Regards – and マザー FTW! – ὁ οἶστρος (talk) 16:52, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Bierce Ambrose, sig, clean and moderately crisp.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bierce Ambrose, sig, clean and moderately crisp.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:Bierce Ambrose, sig, clean and moderately crisp.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 04:45, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An RfC that you may be interested in...

As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!

This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 18:27, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposed edits to Mass killing under Communist regimes

If you want to have the edits you proposed implemented, you can get an admin to do them by writing out exactly what they are in the talk page section you started along with the template {{editprotected}}. AmateurEditor (talk) 00:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tone of edit summary

I came across this edit you made. The tone of that edit's summary is inappropriate. Please remember to assume good faith and maintain civility at all times, even if you think an editor is wrong. Jason Quinn (talk) 18:40, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Policy discussion in progress

There is a policy discussion in progress at the Manual of Style which affects the capitalization of Sounds Like Teen Spirit, a question in which you previously participated. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — $Llywelyn II$ 11:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who like Black Mirror

Hey! I saw that you edited the article Black Mirror and thought maybe you would be interested in this new user category I created?-🐦Do☭torWho42 (⭐) 20:06, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:ABBR listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:ABBR. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:ABBR redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:31, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:ACRO listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:ACRO. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:ACRO redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:31, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:CAPS listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:CAPS. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:CAPS redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:COMMA listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:COMMA. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:COMMA redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:CT listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:CT. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:CT redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:CURRENCY listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:CURRENCY. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:CURRENCY redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:DASH listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:DASH. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:DASH redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:33, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:HYPHEN listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:HYPHEN. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:HYPHEN redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:45, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:PUNCT listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:PUNCT. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:PUNCT redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:53, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:WORDSASWORDS listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MoS:WORDSASWORDS. Since you had some involvement with the MoS:WORDSASWORDS redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 18:54, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What's the connection between Polytechnic Magazine and Polytechnic Boxing Club?

So just sought to address that question on Talk:Polytechnic. SuchAndSuchWork (talk) 04:23, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]