User talk:The Man in Question/MiQ's archives IV

archive index

I · II · III · IV · V · VI · VII

Vanguard Editor Ribbon

Hi, MIQ... so I take it this is WP's highest awarded ribbon currently. How many edits does it take to get this? Best, --Discographer (talk) 14:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1,000,000. But it's not yet available. See the awards page for details. You have made 3,737 edits since August 6, 2009. If you don't feel like working out which award that means you are eligible for, just use this template: {{service awards|year=2009|month=8|day=6|edits=3737|format=medal}}. — the Man in Question (in question) 17:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 01:08, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Service awards / new messages

I have no intention, or desire, to be any of "rude, sarcastic, temperamental, or generally hostile", and I hope you don't find my reply to be any of those.

However, I really don't appreciate you wasting my time and diverting my attention with something you, and ONLY you, find amusing, when I'm trying to politely reply to, and to thank you for, something "nice" that you did.

Now that you have already occupied at least three times the amount of time I had originally intended, and completely wiped from my face the smile that you put there, I'm dis-inclined to make my reply. Nevertheless, I will anyway.

Thank you for your "nice" posting on my talk page; as I said, it made me smile. User:Pdfpdf

Ha! I'm not sure if you really are pissed or if you're just being ridiculous, but never have I had the honor of an editor hiding their post on my talk page. Cheers, Pdfpdf. Maybe I'll make things a little less misleading. (P.S. It is not only I who have found this amusing.) Anyway, I did it as an experiment to see how much the pageviews would spike. — the Man in Question (in question) 10:43, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm not sure if you really are pissed or if you're just being ridiculous" - Neither actually. i.e. Not the first, and from my POV, most certainly NOT the second. Perhaps "slightly irritated" that I came here to do something "nice", in response to something "nice" that you had done, and had my time wasted and attention diverted by a puerile "joke".

"but never have I had the honor of an editor hiding their post on my talk page" - 1) There's a first time for everthing, and I like to think I'm a little unusual. 2) The main point of putting it in a hidden comment was to attach it to the disabling, without removal, of your "diversion".

"It is not only I who have found this amusing" - No doubt. Perhaps I'm just a boring old fart?

"Anyway, I did it as an experiment" - What was the result?

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was the result. — the Man in Question (in question) 19:26, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

So, you've had it up since Feb 2008, and I'm the first to complain?

If so: Hmmm. Is seems that I am a boring old fart!

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Am I the first to complain? Pdfpdf (talk)

Yes. — the Man in Question (in question) 11:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! In fact, ROTFLMAO!!! Pdfpdf (talk) 11:50, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But Pdfpdf, I have retargeted it to something more interesting now! — the Man in Question (in question) 15:45, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those redirects in quotes

Hello, those redirects surropunded by quotes often get created by mistake. If you search for something with quotes like "Foo bar baz" and click the redlink in You may create the page ""Foo bar baz"", one might not notice the quotes before clicking save. That is how I accidentally made a couple of those redirects at least. I didn't bother having them deleted myself, but I don't mind if you clean them up of course. --Apoc2400 (talk) 12:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The new service badges

Aside from the actual discussion at WT:SA, I wanted to ask you: How did you made those barnstars? I mean, if you altered the existing ones or if you created them, with which program?
You also made some changes for the books, and I just wanted to know how to do that. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 22:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I made new ones on Photoshop, based on the old ones, using File:Large Barnstar.png. Same with the books. I used scanned textures for the leather and some of the backgrounds. The rest I just made using a paint bucket, a burning tool, drop shadows, and of course several separate layers. Pretty basic for Photoshop (I'm not any sort of graphic artist). — the Man in Question (in question) 22:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I still don´t like the fact that some of the precious metals are repeated (rhodium and platinum). What do you think about it?
And 1000000 edits are.... well, you know my opinion about that. I just want to discuss that. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 03:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any respectable way around the metal issue. Only rhodium and platinum are worth more than gold. And since they are allied with a certain type of medal (Senior, Master), it kind of makes sense they're the same, so I'm not bothered. You already know that I think 1,000,000 is the right edit ceiling. As I have said, User:Rich Farmbrough is well on his way to a million. If you're trying to get a compromise, I don't have one to offer. If it really bothers you that much, start a new thread on the talk page. I would ask that you do not start a thread specifically geared at negating the recent changes, however, since a consensus has already been reached. — the Man in Question (in question) 03:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I woudn´t negate the recent change, because I think it was great and original, but since gold and silver and bronze and the others do not repeat, I don´t think these two should. From where I see it, it reduced prestige to them (being repeated and not unique). - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 03:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Babirusas

Please comment at Talk:Bola Batu babirusa. And please be advised that your moves to change capitalization are opening a huge can of worms as there has been much debate on this issue. The MOS does not unambiguously support your change, as the second exception ("For particular groups of organisms, there are particular rules of capitalization based on current and historic usage among those who study the organisms") may apply. Ucucha 17:41, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know that wicked can of worms well. — the Man in Question (in question) 03:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Thanks for the invitation, MiQ, but I don't really come this way anymore. :-) Clio the Muse (talk) 02:42, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Signatures

I'll get to them as soon as I can. Connormah (talk) 02:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editor ribbon

Please explain why you reverted [[File:Editor - bronze ribbon - 1 pip.jpg]]. I created a new version and I don't know why you reverted it. Place a {{talkback}} notice on my page when you reply here.-- iBen^talk/_contribsIf you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 22:44, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WT:Service awards#New image uploaded. I might ask you to please explain why you made the change in the first place. — the Man in Question (in question) 23:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Pussy Cats": Starring the Walkmen

Please could you explain why you made the move from "Pussy Cats" Starring the Walkmen to "Pussy Cats": Starring the Walkmen without discussion. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:The Man in Question/MiQ's archives#"Pussy Cats": Starring the Walkmen move. — the Man in Question (in question) 17:31, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm - I'd disagree with your rationale without examples of precedent or policy - especially given that the use of quotation marks would imply that the title is one sentence, thus negating any necessity for the colon - so for the time being have had it moved back. Maybe you could discuss it and give the necessary examples on the article's talk page if you were wanting to have the page moved again. Earlier consensus seems to favour "Pussy Cats" Starring the Walkmen. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiBirthday

I saw from here that it's been exactly four years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Awww, thanks…if seven minutes late. Ha! — the Man in Question (in question) 00:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day

HAPPY FIRST EDIT DAY!

from the BIRTHDAYCOMMITTEE

Wishing The Man in Question/MiQ's archives IV a very Happy First Edit Day!

Have a fantastic day!

From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee

Vatsan34 (talk) 16:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maya Angelou bibliography

MiQ, you totally got me with your top banner. Good one! Anyway, the real reason I'm here is to ask about the article move you made with this one. Another editor made the same attempt, but after talking about it, he moved it back because we agreed that its original title, "Works of Maya Angelou", was more accurate. See, this list includes more than Angelou's books and poetry; it also includes her film and television appearances, directing experience, etc. So would you mind moving it back? Thanks. --Christine (talk) 20:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. The issue is that it should not be categorized under Category:Bibliographies by author. Perhaps Maya Angelou bibliography and filmography, like Stephen Fry bibliography and filmography? — the Man in Question (in question) 00:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that is that the list includes more than just her filmography, too. I don't care much for categorization; this list, like many of Angelou's works, defies categorization. Like the editor above asks, has there been some kind of consensus about changing the titles of these kinds of lists? If not, I still think that the original title should be retained. Thanks. --Christine (talk) 01:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliographies

Hi -- I just reversed three moves you did today; List of works by Bede, List of works by Mary Martha Sherwood, and List of works by Joseph Priestley. If you look in the edit history of these articles you'll see that two other editors have recently made the same move you did. Is there some standardization drive going on at the moment? I would like to find a way to flag or somehow indicate to editors doing this move that consensus is against it for these pages. Is there a way to do that? I thought perhaps making a non-trivial edit at the redirect page would prevent a move-over-redirect, which might force the mover to read the redirect page and see a note asking them not to do the move. Anyway, if you have any ideas I'd be grateful. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 02:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the reason I and undoubtedly those other editors moved the page is this: Category:Bibliographies by author (as its name implies) holds bibliographies. I personally think the wide variety of bibliographies on Wikipedia merits a bibliography wikiproject, in which case members would police it. Of course, under these conditions, a normalized format would be created for bibliography names where possible. Many famous modern authors, such as J. R. R. Tolkien (J. R. R. Tolkien bibliography) and Leo Tolstoy (Leo Tolstoy bibliography) adhere to this format. Those that do not employ (or employed) a variety of formats, viz. [List of] works/books by/of [Author's name] or [List of] [Author's name] works/books. The use of [Author name] bibliography removes all ambiguity arising from variant forms, and in the case of the "books" examples, allows for the inclusion of plays and essays. It also narrows the definition broadcast by "works"—which can, of course, include just about anything—to literary works. The only other format I could support for these pages is List of [Author's name] literary works, which is a bit clunky. — the Man in Question (in question) 02:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There was a debate on this earlier. It never really came to a conclusion. Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Archive_110#Bibliography_title_format_standardization I am not a huge fan of the new change, but I am willing to discuss it. Oldag07 (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain the reason for moving "Chaos;Head" to "Chaos; Head"

The logo of the game is stylized as "Chäos;HEAd". Per WP:MOS-JA, the article's name is left in follows conventional capitalization rules. In any case, this has nothing to do with spaces. Both C;H's official website and C;HN's official website does not have an extra space. --Remy Suen (talk) 00:36, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is common practice on Wikipedia to normalize titles by conforming to conventional rules of capitalization and punctuation. Where the name of the work significantly differs, a styled, stylized, or rendered comment can be added to the lede. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Untitled Lemony Snicket series

On February 3, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Untitled Lemony Snicket series, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Route 40 Alternate (Keysers Ridge – Cumberland, Maryland)]

The article title properly needs to be spaced, per MOS:DASH. Keysers Ridge has a space in it, which is which the en dash in the title was space. The example you gave though, shouldn't be spaced because neither Ishpeming nor Negaunee contain a space. I know it's a confusing guideline, but it's what we have to deal with. Can you please move it back? Imzadi1979 (talk) 04:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To my displeasure, policy is in your favor. Have at it. — the Man in Question (in question) 19:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Thanks for finding such a good image of the Mutunus Tutunus coin and for your other edits. I've tried to clarify a few small points. When it was nominated for a DYK (much to my surprise!), I felt obliged to dig up Palmer's article at the library, as it seemed to be the major piece of scholarship — but it's quite densely argued, and hard to summarize. By the time I tried, I no longer had patience for figuring out the much-needed sections you added. The only thing I deleted was the explanation that "Mutunus Tutunus" could also be called "Mutunus," which seemed to me to clutter the first sentence unnecessarily (we don't say "John Brown", who is also called "Brown"). Again, it was a pleasure to see your intelligent edits and helpful contributions. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! I love any article that delves into the obscurer elements of historical Western mythology and religion. — the Man in Question (in question) 19:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop moving units!!!

Units is the standard disambiguation, not (measurement)! Please stop moving those, it'll take forever to undo! Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 04:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All of these disambiguations are used widely:

(measure)
(measurement)
(unit)
(unit of measure)
(unit of measurement)
(length), (mass), etc.

I was just picking the most neutral term (since a unit can refer to a wide variety of things). Is there a specific place where "unit" is specified as the standard? — the Man in Question (in question) 04:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well (unit) is the one used for all mainstream units such as Newton (unit), Tesla (unit), Pascal (unit), Barn (unit), etc, and it's also the one that makes most sense (unit of measure/measurement is redundant/too verbose), (measure/measurement) is just wrong, and (length/mass/etc.) is too specific. I would bet that the (length) (mass) (unit of measurement) are only used on the most obscure units (with maybe a few exceptions). Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 05:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a few mainstream exceptions until recently. How do you figure "measurement" is wrong? — the Man in Question (in question) 05:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because a newton/meter/kilogram isn't a measurement, it's a unit [of measurement]. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 05:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How so? The American Heritage Dictionary has "The dimension, quantity, or capacity determined by measuring" for measurement; and "A precisely specified quantity in terms of which the magnitudes of other quantities of the same kind can be stated" for unit. Both are apt descriptions of what all these articles discuss, and I don't deny for an instant that "unit" is quite accurate—it's just that it's also misleading, given that "unit" has a very wide variety of meanings (11 are listed by the AHD), whereas "measurement" meanings are limited (AHD lists 3) and all in the same vein. "Unit of measurement" might be best, but as you say, it's too verbose. — the Man in Question (in question) 05:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get me wrong—I'd prefer "unit" to the hodgepodge that's going on now. It's just "unit" seems in bad taste to me. — the Man in Question (in question) 05:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Measurements are expressed in units. If I want to know how I weight I measure it. For example, I weigh 80 kilograms, aka 80 kg is a measurement of my weight. Kilogram is the unit in which I choose to express the measurement. I could have chosen a different unit (pounds, slugs, stones, grams, ...), but it would still be the same measurement. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 05:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Truly. But an inch (for example) expresses a measurement; similarly, a book holds a novel or a television set holds a television. In the end, the the unit (not specifically of measurement) vs. the abstraction defined by that unit are both, as I said, apt descriptions of something. And since "unit" has so many meanings, "measurement" seems better…to me. I'm not trying to be belligerent, though. From a technical perspective, "unit" might seem more appropriate, but from a layman's perspective (and it is laymen who put Wikipedia in the top 10), "measurement" comes more naturally. An example of a confusing use of "unit" would be Gauge (bore diameter) vs. Gauge (instrument). If the former were changed to Gauge (unit), this would be quite misleading, since the latter is a unit as well ("An entire apparatus or the equipment that performs a specific function"). Just as "chi", "em", and "en" are units of measurement (Chi (measurement)), so too they are units of the alphabet (Chi (letter); "An individual, group, structure, or other entity regarded as an elementary structural or functional constituent of a whole"). Likewise, a finger is a unit of the hand and a unit of measurement; and a quarter is both a unit of mass (28 pounds) and a unit of the school year ("A fixed amount of scholastic study used as a basis for calculating academic credits, usually measured in hours of classroom instruction or laboratory work."). — the Man in Question (in question) 05:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, an example of how "mass"/"length", etc. are used in the mainstream: Foot (length). (I only bring this up because I failed to provide an example earlier.)

This uniformisation problem should be discussed widely, a clear consensus found, and then executed. I am starting a thread at WT:MEASURE. Hans Adler 10:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Measurement § A standard for the disambiguation of units of measurement

Rising moves

Your move of The Rising (song) to The Rising (Springsteen song) caused two problems:

If you look at Category:Bruce Springsteen songs, you'll see that for commonality, the disambig phrase should be "Bruce Springsteen song", not "Springsteen song"
It's not enough just to do a move like this. There are many links to old The Rising (song) page; you now have to edit all of these pages to fix them to link to the new name.

Your move of The Rising (novel) to The Rising (Keene novel) also left many links to the old page that have to be resolved.

If you don't feel like doing all this grunt work, then don't do the move in the first place ... nothing was broken by the way it was. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Farundel

Thanks for your addition to virgate. Any chance of adding a citation of your source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkingiron (talk • contribs) 22:01, 7 February 2010

Done. — the Man in Question (in question) 22:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Issue

I was unaware of the discussion at the time of the move. Sorry about all of that. At least there are a few of us out there who are able to achieve 180 edits a day. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite all right. Thanks for being understanding. — the Man in Question (in question) 05:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Agnes Blannbekin

On February 11, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Agnes Blannbekin, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Incomplete RFD Nominations

In December, you tagged a number of pages with {{rfd}}, but you did not complete the nominations by listing them at WP:RFD. These pages are:

Can you please complete the second step of these nominations per the instructions at the WP:RFD page? If you do not list them within a reasonable amount of time, I'll assume you no longer wish to see them deleted and will remove the templates. Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:50, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wow. Sorry. Some of those I delisted, then forgot to untag. But three of them should have gone through. I'll get on it when I have a chance. — the Man in Question (in question) 21:57, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Successful featured picture nomination

File:Martha Washington.png

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Martha Washington.png, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Maedin\^talk 13:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of names in English with counterintuitive pronunciations

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of names in English with counterintuitive pronunciations. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of names in English with counterintuitive pronunciations (3rd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Welcome to the Lemony Snicket task force!

Hi there. Thanks for the welcome! I really do wish to help improve some of these articles, starting with the book pages and their summaries and such. Please, let me know if there's anything else important that's not on the to-do lists or will be added soon! --Tonnatwajes (talk) 15:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage...

Your userpage just cracks me up! Funny stories and a secret language; that takes some serious talent. And a sense of humour, I suppose. I especially like the "tabbed browsing"-ish feature at the top of your page. How do you code that? cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 15:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That's pretty cool; I think I might try it out sometime. cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 22:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

African-American firsts

Hi. Just wanted to point out that as was discussed at length at List of African-American firsts, "African American" is hyphenated when it's a compound modifier. The infobox, for example, is titled "African-American topics" and contains "African-American history", etc. So the title "List of African-American U.S. state firsts" was actually correct the way it was. It might have been good to discuss your change on the "U.S. state firsts" talk page before moving the article, but no worries. So, for reasons of both standard grammar and consistency with the consensus-derived title "List of African-American firsts" and the infobox headers, I've changed it back. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:21, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lemony Snicket's task force

hello, I'm Rident, and i am now helping you with the Lemony Snickets task Force. Please excuse me if bug into you again from time to time. Thanks! — User:Rident (talk) Member of the VFD 15:23, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to it. — the Man in Question (in question) 14:44, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 20:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

V.F.D. members images

The use of non-free images should be kept to an absolute minimum. If an illustration is genuinely needed for an article, so be it, but the article contains at least one image that is completely unwarranted, and at least one other that does not have a rationale for that article. I'm gonna review the image individually as you seem unwilling to do so. J Milburn (talk) 11:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_August_1#Template:Kipzock

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_August_1#Template:Kipzock. Mootros (talk) 19:31, 2 August 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})[reply]

The following discussion is preserved as an example of why I try to avoid responding to rude, sarcastic, temperamental, abusive, or generally hostile posts. It is hard to believe that the polished userpage of Ling.Nut was crafted by the same lunatic who stained my wall.

don't wanna be rude, but reading WP:OWN might help...

Thanks for making the image of the wiki-ogre's arm kinda coming out of the cave. However, it just doesn't look like an ogre. The topicon in particular just doesn't look like anything, really. I think you are experiencing some WP:OWN issues here with respect to your image. The image i replaced it with is much much more clear and vivid... Please think of the best of others.. • Ling.Nut 07:15, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I undid your edit because it was an undiscussed significant change (and one which did not clearly enhance the page) and because it removed material. I am unconcerned with how the particular image I created fares. I applaud you for your enthusiasm for adverbs, though. — the Man in Question (in question) 07:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An image... in a.. non-article... is...a significant change? And the image (much better than yours) does not clearly enhance the page? Are you an admin? Only admins spout policy/guidelines/etc. to support positions that are patently incorrect.. let me check... no, I don't see your name. Admin wannabe, then. Good luck with your RfA. • Ling.Nut 07:30, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hesitate to respond, but no, I do not want to be an administrator, Ling.Nut. — the Man in Question (in question) 19:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Novels

Hey did you see the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels#Category:American_novels, the discussion is kindof stalling and we could use some new thoughts. Sadads (talk) 16:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

		Keeper of the Roll Award
		The Keeper of the Roll Award is awarded to User:MiQ for substantial contributions to the Service Awards Scheme. Mootros (talk) 17:39, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Humour tag at the Service awards page

Hi,

I have reinstated the humour tag, after today's discussions that continue to miss the point that the Service awards are is nothing than just a bit of light-heated fun. Please rest assured that this is by no means an attempt to ridicule the award or to belittle to good effort contributors have made toward the scheme. Yours, Mootros (talk) 15:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Vinokur

Twinkle crapped out and didn't finish the AFD. I fixed this for you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 17:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Vinokur

You might want to look at this AFD, the author dug up some sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Generations

At first I didn't think the photo you added was very good because it's hard to tell the ages of the women in that black and white photo. However, the description adequately identifies each woman. If you can find another in color, preferably a modern one, that would be great. But, I like it now. I'll leave it up there. I don't think anyone will change it back, but if they do, you can always bring a discussion on the article's talk page. Good job on the photo selection. CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 00:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Series + apostrophe

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos#Apostrophe fix contested. John of Reading (talk) 13:53, 5 September 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})[reply]

Salish is not a language, it is a group

I noticed on Ogopogo that you have a {{Lang-sal}}language template naming "Salish" as the language the native name of the creature is in; no, it's in Syilx'tsn or Okanagan; there is no such language as Salish, other than that of the Selisch/Montana Salish/Bittteroot Salish. An Okanagan person would cringe at seeing that, given that it means the language of another people than his own but is also a clumsy "white" misapprehension of the nature of the Salish language group vs an actual language. I won't go on except to suggest you come up with templates for each of the Salish languages, rather than treating them as if there were all one, which they're not. It's the same as when I see "the Coast Salish people" or "the name in Coast Salish is...". There is too great diversity within word-forms and grammar in both Interior and Coast for such sloppiness to be acceptable in an encyclopedia.Skookum1 (talk) 21:02, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Grim Grotto

I've removed your plot summary from this article and started a discussion on the talk page. Let's try to work this out there. TN X Man 11:45, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move from Apollo Lykeios to Lyceus

Hi! I wonder about this move: the article doesn't concern Apollo's epiclesis, but a particular statuary type. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:15, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Gelert

I have made some changes to the article you wrote on Saint Gelert because I think the facts you stated in the first paragraph were wrong. The fact that Llandysul forms part of the address of Llangeler does not mean there are multiple places of worship associated with him in the area. I live in and am expanding the article about Llangeler. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Callidice

Hey,

Fixing up the IPA, and wondering why this was stressed on the pre-antepenult. I "corrected" it; please revert if needed. — kwami (talk) 19:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IPA-grc

Hi,

I deleted this as a fork of {{IPA-el}}; having undocumented IPA redirects makes them difficult to maintain. (Say you want to ensure that all Greek transcriptions match our treatment on the IPA key or the Greek phonology article; if you don't know that someone has been linking them to a different template, you won't find them all.) — kwami (talk) 04:36, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Audio theatre an article to audio dramas

Please if you have time and you know anything to it (I have seen that you have made edits in the article area which owns relations on it) , please look on the article Audio theatre, somebody placed a erase discussion on it. after we have had a merge discussion. It would be interesting what you would say to the merge and the delete discussion. And possibly it could help to contact other people that they should help also. )-: Merry Xmas --Soenke Rahn (talk) 04:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

Happy Birthday, The Man in Question, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a nice day! Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 00:10, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New WikiProject Novels initiative

We have begun a new initiative at the WikiProject Novels: an improvement drive. As a member listed here, you are being notified. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels#5-5-5 Improvement Drive and Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Collaboration for more details. Also I would like to remind you to keep an eye on the project talk page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. Thanks, Sadads (talk) 01:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day, The Man in Question, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 22:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]