User talk:MelanieN/Archive 61

This is an archive of past discussions about User:MelanieN. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 55

←

Archive 59

→

~ welcome back ~

~mitch~ (talk) 22:04, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Woohoo

Hey, MelanieN. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Mjs1991 (talk) 00:09, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Enjoy your vacation! (And, then...)

When you have time, would you please weigh in on this? Talk:Kirkland & Ellis#Should clients be mentioned in lede. After a couple of reversals from me of (initially unsourced and inappropriate) content added by user:Snooganssnoogans, another editor, user:GergisBaki, then appeared to take over, adding back the same questionable information as the first (...a pair of edit warriors, or one and the same... either seems equally possible... and I am, quite possibly, in over my head, once again). Thank you for your time, if you can find some for this, and enjoy your well-deserved respite, including from these whines of mine! PS I was also concerned to see so many sources, deemed "surplus", removed here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Presidency_of_Donald_Trump&diff=prev&oldid=906420423 by user:Snooganssnoogans. Lindenfall (talk) 21:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Further to that, when I saw this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/PlainLawSam08) for the last editor who had come along to join the fray referenced above, I saw shades of Histnewbie in their massive law page deletions, and see all three to be of a kind, if not of the exact same cloth; and I have been WP:BOLD in removing what seems sensationalist. (All of their sweeping law school deletions were already reversed.) Lindenfall (talk) 23:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Eilat

Why my request was declined? You must be kidding, how could I discuss an IP??? And I will tell you this shortly, Eilat was a Jordanian territory before Israel occupied it, and as a result, there are thousands of Arabs living there! I don't think that we need to discuss such a thing! This is mere vandalism and WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT!

And for your records, Template:Infobox Israel municipality contain a parameter "arname" which is used to write the Arabic term for the Israeli cities, therefore I don't have to discuss my edit because I'm not doing anything wrong and it is completely legit and not controversial! Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 18:42, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Super Ninja. You need to make your case on the article's talk page, not here. You will find that "I don't think we need to discuss it" does not go very far at Wikipedia. In fact, if you just keep reverting them without providing any explanation or evidence, it makes you look like the one who is in the wrong. Here's what you should do: First, calm down. Then explain at the article talk page, calmly and without insulting anyone, why you believe it is valid to provide the Arabic name. If you 1) put a convincing argument for your case on the talk page, and 2) then make a new request for page protection, pointing out that you have proven your case at the talk page and that changing IPs are removing it, I suspect your request for protection will be granted. In fact if you come back here and show me that you have made a reasonable case on the talk page, I may restore it myself. But you need to establish on the talk page why it is justified. -- MelanieN (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Puns

I noted on your page a list of them. One in particular arrested my attention, re half a large intestine. Sometime in the mid-70s, the Australian poet, James McAuley, when told by his physician that if he didn't have an operation on a rectal cancer he would die, gave the go-ahead for a colostomy bag quipping, 'better a semi-colon, than a full stop.' Regards Nishidani (talk) 19:21, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I love it when people come out with these things spontaneously. Got any more? -- MelanieN (talk) 19:23, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

It'd require most of the lifetime left to me to start on puns, mankind's best artifice against violence.* Rather than personal anecdote, could I suggest, if you haven't yet come across it, a reading of the late lamented Walter Redfern's wonderfully written, exquisitely erudite yet vernacularly affable, if slightly francophilial Puns, Basil Blackwell 1984?

vous savez que j'ai fait venir un cuisinier français, et qui fait des calembours; or, le calembour est incompatible avec l'assassinat. Stendhal, La Chartreuse de Parme, in Oeuvres completes de Stendhal, Michel Lévy Frères 1864 p.390/'I have, as you know, imported a French chef, who is the merriest of men and given to making puns; well, punning is incompatible with murder' (Stendhal, The Chartreuse of Parma, tr. Margaret R.B.Shaw, Penguin 1958 p.426 (chapter 24)).Nishidani (talk) 21:21, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Oinkment, I like it! My mother was an accomplished ad-lib punster. One I recall fondly was when the storage tanks at a nearby refinery were repainted from gray to various pastel colors. My mother exclaimed, "Is that paint, or is that a pigment of my imagination?" -- MelanieN (talk) 21:56, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Brilliant, or, as a very old punster friend of my father's used to quip with a gentle conservative's wry wit whenever, with youth's passion, I'd harangued him with a Marxist interpretation of Vietnamese history, 'I'll take that as read/red!'. Nishidani (talk) 06:53, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Veracity of statements by Donald Trump

Hi. I'd thought that needed to be more clear, too, and thought that I had made it so on the second edit. Not clear enough for the eagle eye of Mrs. T., though, I see. PS Mind having a look at Kirkland & Ellis mess that I can't seem to straighten out on my own? Starts in editing notes, goes to TALK, then back to editing history notes. I already complained to the wrong place — I'm not good at this. (While it pains me to even appear to be supporting an Epstein in any way, sensationalizing WP does, too.) Thanks, if you can find time. Lindenfall (talk) 20:06, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

OK, a few comments. But you may not like them.

First, "lede" is very commonly used at Wikipedia; I used to use it all the time myself until I read where WP says it has a little different meaning, but I still use it sometimes. Probably at least 50% of Wikipedians refer to "the lede", meaning either the opening sentence or the opening section, and it implies nothing about the presence or lack of a journalism background. Certainly not worth getting into an extended argument over.

Second, if K&E really is the largest law firm in the world, they are bound to have some especially notable clients and attorneys, which can be mentioned in the article. However, in our list of biggest law firms, even highly notable ones like Skadden don't list clients or attorneys in the lead.

Third and most important, a Wikipedia axiom: Discuss the content, not the other editors. In particular don't throw around accusations; that can get you in big trouble if you make a practice of it. It is considered blockable to persistently accuse someone of COI or sockpuppetry without evidence. You haven't gotten to that point but don't start.

If I were you I would start over at that talk page. Drop the irrelevant argument about "lede". Stop making personal comments about the other editors. Focus on whether to include clients and attorneys in the lead, pointing out that none of the other nine largest firms do so. I think you can win that argument. -- Mrs. T (talk) 22:31, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the time that must have robbed you of, most sincerely. (And, you're more thorough than I was, having only looked at about six or so firms myself.) I had already discussed the content, in editing notes, the content of which was ignored. When they finally took it to TALK, as I had urged over re-adding content, it was along with restoring the questionable content, which still remains. A lot of bad faith actions, and no consensus reached, yet no one seems to notice these obvious factors, and the content remains. Your second point was exactly my position, all along, coupled with a lack of a WP:NPOV, being an obvious misuse of the WP:LEAD. The way it was done just looked like coatracking and sensationalism to me. The suspicion is not a habit, and there's no persistence on my part, only on Grayfell's (wherever they came from when no one else ever appeared until yourself), to harp on the matter. It has, in fact, only ever come out of me before around the editor that you are well aware of prior to this, which brought me there. (The "lede argument" was actually Grayfell and my rebuttals to them. The editor in question just said "ridiculous", asked me likewise, was answered, and moved on... hardly an argument. Grayfell's diatribe over it was neither necessary nor useful, being already addressed between the two parties.) I'd already had more than one long, hard look back in edits before I'd asked them, as well, seeing shades of the past; it wasn't casual, it was causal, but that's another story, that never did get told. "Lede" was just a simple start, but was pre-empted by Grayfall. (Simple — ha! Personally, I have only very rarely seen it here, never noticed it anywhere else, and saw it as a typo, or I'd have picked something else.) Nonetheless, your sage advice on that is appreciated and noted. Also akin to that other time-wasting situation: again, it's far easier to wreck content, than to try and fix it... not my favorite status quo. Lindenfall (talk) 01:31, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Recent semiprotections

See this result at WP:AN3. Since you semiprotected three articles, I'm unsure whether a block of the IP is also needed. Though if they expand their interests beyond the first three, it should probably be done. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Ed. That one issue, affecting those three articles, seems to be their single focus at the moment so IMO no action needed right now. Since the IP is an IPv6 it will probably have changed by the time the protection expires. If they or a new IP renew the attack, they could be blocked quickly this time, without jumping through hoops. But renewed protection may be the only solution. I will tell the OP to let me know if it resumes. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:44, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

talk page

Very nice post - well done. Thank you. — Ched : ? — 22:51, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Ched: And thanks for your thoughtful essay a little earlier. I'm sorry to see you so pessimistic about our future, but your comments may be the most realistic of anyone's. -- MelanieN (talk) 02:50, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Check RfC please?

Unfortunately, your comment regarding at Talk:Kirkland & Ellis#Should clients be mentioned in lede was ignored. Would you mind please taking a look at this RfC? Talk:Kirkland & Ellis#RfC: keep or remove lists and specific details from lead. I'm not sure I did it right, since I can't find an RfC number for it, and others seem to have that. Thanks for your comments. Lindenfall (talk) 18:58, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

You did it right, and it does have an RfC number. You have to be in the edit window to see it. -- MelanieN (talk) 20:06, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

I did it right? I'm dumbfounded with shock! Thanks for checking, Mrs. T. (A bot added the RfC number right after I posted here, so I guess that's automated.) Lindenfall (talk) 21:49, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

@Lindenfall: One other thing: when you launch an RfC, it is considered a courtesy to ping all the people who commented at the previous discussion (except IPs, because pings don't work for IPs). Be sure you include everyone - both those who agreed with you and those who disagreed with you. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:18, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Seems a very good point, thanks. Will do. Punnily, Lindenfall (talk) 23:05, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Hope you're doing well! :-D

Hi MelanieN! I just wanted to leave you a message and wish you a great day and happy editing! I figured I'd message you to know that I was thinking about you... :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:08, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Oshwah, how sweet! Yes, I am doing fine. Hope you are the same. -- MelanieN (talk) 14:19, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

A glass of Sharbat for you

		A glass of Sharbat for you
		Here is a glass of Sharbat for you. Sharbat is a popular Indian and West and South Asian drink that is prepared from fruits or flower petals. It is sweet and served chilled. It can be served in concentrate form and eaten with a spoon or diluted with water to create the drink. Thank you. Titodutta (talk) 18:54, 28 July 2019 (UTC) For more Indian dishes, visit the Kitchen of WikiProject India.

Thank you, Tito! I was unfamiliar with this drink and it sounds great. I wonder if I can get it at local Indian restaurants here in San Diego? I'll ask next time. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:24, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

RFPP

I see you might be currently active, could you consider actioning this report Thanx, - FlightTime (open channel) 23:01, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you :) - FlightTime (open channel) 23:14, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome. Why do people do that??? -- MelanieN (talk) 23:15, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

We are a magnet for such things, I think (know) that will never change. Have a great day/eve - FlightTime (open channel) 23:17, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Laura Yeager

On 31 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Laura Yeager, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that on June 29, Major General Laura Yeager became the first woman to command an infantry division in the United States Army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Laura Yeager. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Laura Yeager), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 31 July 2019 (UTC)