User talk:Aesopos

Welcome!

Hello, Aesopos, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 Wikipedia:Questions, 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! Tellyaddict^Talk 14:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject European Union!

Hello, Aesopos, and welcome to WikiProject European Union! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a European Union Project Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your edits. Again, welcome, and happy editing!

- J Logan ^t: 09:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Architect

I agree with the person below, thanks for your effort to keep Architect clean from advertisements, but I urge you to be more careful with removing references: you removed the source for Finnish architects salaries (The profession database of Finnish Ministry of Employment and the Economy) which hardly could be identified as an advertisement ;-) --piksi (talk) 09:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Using 'Undo' to revert vandalism

Hi! Thanks for all your good work on reverting vandalism. Undo, though, works best when used on edits that are farther back in the edit history. If the most recent edits on the page are the vandal's, the simplest way is to open the revision immediately before the vandalism took place, click 'edit' and then 'save.' The reason for this is that if the vandal makes more than one edit to the page, as the anon you reverted on Tobacco smoking did, it's easy to miss the other vandalism. If you check the diff of your and the anon's edits combined, you'll see that you missed a few things. Please do be careful when reverting, and always check the edit history to make sure you didn't miss anything, because vandalism that's overlooked in this way often stays in the article for some time before it's caught. Thanks! -- Vary | Talk 18:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thnks. I guess I'll leave the vandalism reverting up to the specialists... Lars 06:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all! I'm just letting you know how to avoid these problems in the future: please, don't think that I'm telling you you shouldn't revert vandalism if you feel like it! Nobody starts off as an 'expert', remember; everyone's got to learn somewhere.

As for my user page, of course you can, just cite it the same way you would cite anything you didn't write yourself. (Since it's GFDL licensed, I'm not sure I could stop you even if I wanted to, so long as you comply with the terms, hehe.) But thank you for asking! -- Vary | Talk 13:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thnks! When it's done, I'll send you an invitation!

Lars has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Signature

Would this do:

L _ar s

? ~ Dreamy ^§ 03:35, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quite interesting I´d say, but maybe a bit difficult to read if one has some kind of colorblindness. BTW, good luck with your editor review if I may say so. Lars 17:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth

Which? [1] His daughter or his mistress?--Patrick (talk) 10:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His daughter I am convinced. Lars 10:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then I wonder why you say the opposite in your edit. I corrected and clarified this.--Patrick (talk) 11:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Must have done something very wrong here, don't know what but thnks for fixing it and informing me. Lars 11:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok.--Patrick (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

301-400, etc

I've noticed you're making a lot of list articles like 301-400, without explaining what they are. At present they look like indiscriminate info. Please address if you can, thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 12:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 1-100, 101-200, 201-300, 301-400, 401-500, and 501-600

Hi, what is the meaning of creating these articles? This list does not seem like it is in any kind of particular category. Please apply the proper categorization in addition of what the objective of these articles are before continuing. Thanks. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 12:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After EC, I see you already did what I was trying to tell you and ask for: Only wanted to split the page in different sections. Is there a way to undo this apparantly wrong editing in one step ? Thnks and sorry for the hassle Lars 12:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not sure what exactly you are trying to do, but if you want to self delete articles you edited, you may apply <db-self> to the articles. Until you settle down with what exactly you would like to do, may I suggest using the WP:SANDBOX in your userspace until you are ready? Have a great day! - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 12:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thnks and once again, sorry for the hassle. Lars 12:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1-100

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 1-100, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of 1-100. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 12:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

101-200

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 101-200, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of 101-200. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 12:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

201-300

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 201-300, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of 201-300. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 12:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

301-400

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 301-400, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of 301-400. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 12:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

401-500

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 401-500, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of 401-500. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 12:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

501-600

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 501-600, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of 501-600. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 12:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of 1-100

A tag has been placed on 1-100 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Naerii · plz create stuff 18:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of 201-300

A tag has been placed on 201-300 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Naerii · plz create stuff 18:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored it for you. Please keep in mind that if you don't give a good enough reason to keep the page, it could be deleted again. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thnks. This is all too difficult editing for me. I'll think I'll wait and see from the sideline what happens next. (smile) Lars 07:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of 301-400

A tag has been placed on 301-400 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Naerii · plz create stuff 19:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of 101-200

A tag has been placed on 101-200 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Naerii · plz create stuff 21:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of 501-600

A tag has been placed on 501-600 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Naerii · plz create stuff 21:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jasper Vinall

Could you please explain your thinking around the citations that were given? I do not see how the three that you have removed are irrelevant since they are the verifiable sources of the statements written. Without the citations, the statements themselves could be removed. Thank you. --Jim Hardie (talk) 07:38, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was checking on the source of this citation (jl.sl.btinternet.co.uk) without success. So I deleted it because I thought it to be a a dead link. Maybe I was too quick on that one. I'll try to find a better source. If you like to undo my edit, please feel free to do so.

Lars 07:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the site may have down for a time but has been restored during the last few days according to its modification dates, so it might have presented itself as a dead link during that time. I had linked to its contents page previously so I'll improve that by linking to the pages that contain the actual references. Thank you very much.

--Jim Hardie (talk) 06:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you for your assistance.

Lars 07:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense of Thomas Jefferson and wine

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Thomas Jefferson and wine, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Thomas Jefferson and wine provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Thomas Jefferson and wine, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 09:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC) [reply]

List of atheists

Thanks for your edits to this list. I noticed that you changed a word in a Mitch Clem quote from all caps. I restored the all caps, because misspellings and other errors in written quotes need to be preserved as written. Thank you. Nick Graves (talk) 15:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thnks for informing me. Lars 15:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Man from U.N.C.L.E., and wikifying years

I responded on my talk page Colfer2 (talk · contribs). I also noticed you have wikified solo years, like 1911, etc., on many articles. I think WP:DATE advises against that, unless it is specifically relevant. That is, if the 1911 article would reasonably link back to the article in question. That's how I recall it. Or, here's another way to look at it: MOS:UNLINKYEARS. Note MOS:UNLINKYEARS#Dates of birth and death has specific examples where those dates are only wikified if the full month, day and year are known. -Colfer2 (talk) 14:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit on Alpha Kappa Alpha

Those links weren't outdated. Please be more careful. miranda 04:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm so sorry. Please apologise. Lars 04:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Woodsy Owl

I did NOT vandalize that talk page as you asserted in your revert. I merely took out an extra space that was making the first few words of somebody else's statement appear as boxed text. Go back and look and don't be so quick to call an editor a vandal. That article and especially the talk page is subject to actual vandalism so its best not to throw that accusation at folks who have been trying to preserve the sense of the article and the talk page.LiPollis (talk) 13:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Systems

Hi, next time you wikify an article in the field of systems and systems science you better take a better look at what you are doing. You made several mistakes in the system article, which I corrected. I know, some of those things are arbitrary. But I wikified about 500 to 1000 articles in this field an I keep one system here.

But, anyway it was a good thing that you took a look at the systems article because I made some mistakes myself to. Good luck with your work. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 13:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thnks for your support. Lars 13:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just checked your last edit of Transcendental Meditation, and I always put the "external links" at the end and the "further reading" section just behind the "reference" section. What ever..!? Good luck. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 13:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiglaf

I noticed that you changed some accessmonthday parameters in Wiglaf of Mercia from "26 October" to "October 26". I don't mind which way it goes, but I was wondering if you were working from a style guide or some part of MOS. Can you tell me why you changed it? Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 12:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is how I have been told to do some time ago. Are there different opinions to this subject? Lars 13:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "26 October 2007" is (I believe) the British standard. I think "October 26, 2008" is U.S. style. In parameters such as this accessmonthdate, I don't really think it matters very much, but as a general rule I think it is best to understand whether an article is written in British English or US English before making a change like this. If an article is in one variety of English, it should be kept consistent, so changing the dates is not a good idea in that case. I'll leave Wiglaf as is, but I'd suggest you don't bother changing dates any more -- it would give you quite a bit of trouble to check out which variety of English each article is using. (There usually isn't any kind of tag you can look for.) Mike Christie (talk) 16:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds perfect. Correct me if I am wrong, an article should have or British or English dates, consisteny throughout the entire article. I'll follow your advise. Thnks! Lars 17:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lars has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Edit window formatting

I noticed you did an edit on ISO8601, just modifying the edit format, removing blanks adjacent to markup codes like bullets and section headers. Why are you doing that? It reduces readability. −Woodstone (talk) 14:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC).[reply]

If you think it reduces readability, please feel free to undo my edit. Lars 14:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lars has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Reflex (linguistics)

Concerning the edit of [2] , a "reflex" in the linguistic sense is not the same as a reflex in general sense. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 22:10, 21 August 2008 (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) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Aesopos. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]