User talk:Nestorius

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

Juno Film edit

I edited the budget from $7.5m to $6m because this is the figure (with cited source) used in another location of the article. Given that it appears to be the only source for the Budget given on the article, don't see why it got changed back.

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.190.225 (talk) 01:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it should be $6.5m. That was my mistake, I'm very sorry. If, in the future, you want to prevent this sort of thing from happening again: i) register & edit with a username ii) ensure that you write an edit summary. I acted too quickly because quite a few unregistered edits with no edit summary (that change numbers in articles) are malicious. I'm very happy that you are not :D. Feel free to take my advice and change it back. Nestorius (talk) 04:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bruichladdich article edit

Hello Nestorius:

I saw your edit to Bruichladdich article. It seems to me that the article ought to be about the whisky itself more so than about the distillery, so your edit to talk about the distillery in the first sentence seems odd to me.

Since you seem to be taking the same approach with other Scotches, it might be a good idea to explain the rationale involved. Maybe you already have, in which case please advise where.

Thank you. Wanderer57 (talk) 01:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. You didn't do anything wrong that I'm aware of.

I expect you will find other editors wondering about the same point I wondered about. Providing some explanation in edit summaries of the approach you are taking might create a more positive reaction to your edits. Cheers, Wanderer57 (talk) 04:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS You don't live near Islay by any chance, do you?

Hi. I have moved our discussion to User talk:TinyMark/Scotch Whisky TINY MARK 21:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

new message

I noticed your discussion with Wanderer57. Would have been easier to follow if it all took place on the same page! TINY MARK 16:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll Bite

Hello Nestorius:

Re your edit summary: "removed 16-year-old, as it is not a core expression."

What does the term "core expression" mean? I don't believe I have ever heard it.

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 00:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me neither! TINY MARK 00:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zapped with edit conflict. Ouch. Expression - industry term that is interchangeable with product. Basically what it is alluding to is that any whisky is merely an expression of the distillery's character... core meaning one the non-special bottlings. I.e. if you go on their website, you will see their range of bottlings. If you go into a store, you might see limited editions, duty-free, etc. ones. These are not core expressions (you could say they are expressions, but not core). Make sense? I think you're going to say this term is too technical, but it is a common term in whisky circles. E.g. here it is used [[1]]. Found another page defining it but twas blacklisted, google 'whisky expression'. Nestorius (talk) 01:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On that note, the Infobox Scottish Distillery template that I have slightly adjusted should change 'Age(s)' to 'Core Expression(s)', as there are some distilleries that release core NAS (no age statement) expressions like Bowmore's Legend. Nestorius (talk) 01:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a very nice bottle of Glenfarclas "1987" bottled in 2001 (14-year-old) matured only in Oloroso sherry casks-delicious! Is then "1987" a core expression? Then there is your typical Glen Rothes. They are always the same age, but dated by year, with a very different taste. Is this a core expression or a vintage,which, in wine, usually has something to do with the weather that year? TINY MARK 05:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't tell if you're challenging my view here or if we're just talking whisky :). I think that speaking of whiskies in terms of expressions makes more sense than in terms of age alone- especially these days, when distilleries are moving towards NASs (e.g. Abunadh, Glenmorangie finishes, Laphroaig Q/C, Diageo's Distiller' s Editions) so that they can get more creative with ages and include younger whiskies without the corresponding psychological negativity of younger whisky.

More to your point, certainly vintages can be a core expression, but, as the exception to the rule, I would propose that they be listed under 'vintage release', if they are a main product. Right now the Glenfarclas page doesn't include vintage bottlings; correspondingly I don't think the infobox would include it. As an aside, I don't think different vintages have such a radically different taste as you are suggesting... Glen Rothes consistently produces highly sherried malts, they don't have say vintage 1990 as a cask strength peated port finish and a 1991 as a sauternes/bourbon unpeated vatting. Happy dramming Nestorius (talk) 05:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See this article for a more practical explanation of where age is limited in describing products. Nestorius (talk) 05:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, do you ever sleep? It's 8 a.m. here (&6 a.m. GMT/UTC-0) ;-) No, I was just talking whisky! TINY MARK 05:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful, you had me worried there :). The only thing I love more than a nice sherried malt is a peat monster (haven't tried Compass Box's peat monster though). I'm not sure what to say about the vintages. Scotch whisky is still very mystical, who knows what delinates one year from another if they are in the same cask mix with same spec of malt.. I suppose that is part of what is so enticing about single malts. And re: sleep (I'm GMT -4, probably could use a userbox for that), well, for simplicity's sake let's just say I work a lot at night and no, I don't get a lot of sleep. :D Nestorius (talk) 06:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect most readers will have no more idea of what a 'Core Expression' is than I did. If it is helpful to use the term, it will need to be explained. Wanderer57 (talk) 07:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is probably true. I'll do a bit of research; I'm not sure that expression is the simplest term to use (perhaps product might be sufficient). Nestorius (talk) 08:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gun deaths by homicide

Added source for statement -- please stop using Twinkle! It reverts statements without notification or the ability to check the page. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.170.186 (talk) 04:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for commenting. Can you elaborate on your source? I couldn't find this information when I looked. Nestorius (talk) 04:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, it turns out that's because it was crap.--128.2.170.186 (talk) 05:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iran

How was that vandalism? I was just fixing a typo.

Doesn't look like a typo to me .... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iran&diff=prev&oldid=203385575 Nestorius (talk) 21:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha come on now you know its true. Those sick bastards are blowing there selfs up just to kill Americans.

I'll stop

Sorry. I WILL stop doing it. Thanks for the friendly warning Tech43 (talk) 05:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

 Thanks for the advice, I did mistakenly edit that part of the page. I was actually trying to remove a dead link. Anyway, thanks again for the advice.

Take care, Steve —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.97.151.184 (talk) 00:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tasting Notes

Hi Nestorius:

Why do you think there cannot be some notes about the taste of whiskies in Wikipedia?

There is lots of stuff just as odd or odder. For example

The article on truffles has notes about the smell of different types of truffles.

The tequila article has different ways of drinking tequila.

The gin article includes helpful links to various mixed drinks that include gin.

Wanderer57 (talk) 20:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Wanderer. For the same reason that there are no tasting notes on wine (not verifiable, not encylopedic). I think a general character is okay (see Caol Ila), but some of them were getting into detail e.g. The Balvenie 21yo Portwood = cooked pears, clean linens, etc. Nestorius (talk) 21:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iran

my mistake. Check the page history, u'll see. BS@homosexuals.Slicky (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean to write 'and' that would make more sense, I guess. Nestorius (talk) 21:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yep, I was.Slicky (talk) 09:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dallas Dhu

Was it acceptable? I found a picture of the distillery/museum[[2]], but I don't know how to go about getting it approved...? Kansas Bear (talk) 08:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Och, I'm sorry about that snide comment, I was very confused with a little April Fools' joke on a major whisky website. Check my timestamp, I think it was in the wee hours of the night :D. The wikification is fine (that's what I saw), the images are all copyright though. Slainte Nestorius (talk) 19:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caol Ila

It took me a while to find this function, but I have registered a user now.

The translation of Caol Ila was unsourced as it is, but I've added some information now pertaining to the name. From what I gather "Sound of Islay" is actually a mistranslation from Gaelic to, and this is strange, Swedish. Islays Sund and Sound of Islay, it's an easy mistake to make and whisky articles are pretty crude around here. The name is in reference to the location, overlooking the strait between Islay and Jura. The article I got what I perceive as the correct information from was a long swedish article from the distillery, with sampling, history and so forth and the reason for 'strait' is more fitting than 'sound'. Using a Swedish source might seem thin in the world of whisky, but Sweden is a huge market for single malts, to the extent that they got a special(even though it's now spreading) brand of The Famous Grouse, The Black Grouse, made to try and capture part of that market.

So, what you think? I don't want this to turn into an edit war and you seem to be the only other people that cares about this so let's try to find a solution we both like.

edit: aah, found the culprit! Main Entry: sound Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Old English sund swimming, sea & Old Norse sund swimming, strait; akin to Old English swimman to swim Date: 14th century 1 a: a long broad inlet of the ocean generally parallel to the coast b: a long passage of water connecting two larger bodies (as a sea with the ocean) or separating a mainland and an island

Appears that 'sound' is just ye olde english adapted from Old Norse 'sund' but perceived as 'sound', something to be heard, and not sound, a strait. That would explain why it's wrong everywhere.

Andromedar (talk) 14:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! I'm glad to see another user interested in cleaning up whisky articles - as you can see I am on a 'wikibreak' (well, sort of) or else I would be putting in much more work on them. I have heard of both Sweden's penchant for whisky as well as the Black Grouse, I try and stay on top of internet whisky news and I have seen references to Sweden remarkably frequently.

Now, regarding Caol Ila - Diageo seems to use 'Sound of Islay' in all their marketing materials. It seems that 'strait' is probably the preferable term, but in deference to their own usage, I think the most amenable solution would be to put both (perhaps with lit. (erally) on the 'strait of islay/islay strait' translation). What do you think? Slainte Nestorius (talk) 17:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caol Ila

Ok I don't think I've figured out how to properly reply but this might just work, I'll keep it brief just in case it gets launched into some place it shouldn't be.

Anyways, perhaps a bit/section on the name as you said? I can see how Sound of Islay is more marketable than Islay Strait, a bit deceptive in a way but that's marketing, so separating it into two parts about what it means and what it's marketed as(and why) seems reasonable and informative. There's more stuff to add in the article from what I can see so that might be fillable and tied together in a satisfactory way, so perhaps I'll do a push and see what comes out of it.

Andromedar (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It worked, no worries. I reworked the paragraph to integrate the changes about the name we discussed. I think that is enough content on the name- we have to keep the article encyclopedic and while I agree with you on the marketing bit, it definitely breaks WP:NPOV. If there is more stuff in that article it would be fine to include it, just make sure to cite it according to the WP:CITE guidelines. Slainte Nestorius (talk) 16:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the article looks good, I'll probably add something later about the dock that was built nearby later on, plus some other things I kinda miss. --Andromedar (talk) 18:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April/May or whatever month this is...

You're right! It's a human error. I've got no idea how I got them mixed up. I guess I warned too many vandals in April :) Happy hobbying, editing, working, or whatever. Basketball110 ^{My story}/_{Tell me yours} 05:20, 4 May 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) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BMOCM logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BMOCM logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:19, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]