User talk:Musical Linguist/Archive05
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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 One Archive Two Archive Three Archive Four Archive Five Archive Six Archive Seven Archive Eight Archive Nine Archive Ten
Elser
Dear Ann, I saw your edit to Elser while I was working on my reply to Dan. Of course, you are completely right and the error was probably an oversight or a typo.
I hope you don't mind that I stole your "Welcome" text to post it on Dan's talk page.
You don't have to feel ashamed about not knowing Elser - for some years he had sunk into obscurity (probably because he's not such a clear cut figure, though the German Wiki article tried to turn him into one by leaving out non-Communist things) and only since the late eighties has he become prominent again. Also, I guess there are many persons from Irish history I have never heard of.
Good night, sleep tight (if your assignment allows you to). Str1977 01:35, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for your kind greetings. I am delighted to stand corrected on the neither, nor question. This proves you can teach an old dog new tricks. Self improvement and acquiring knowledge drew me to Wikipedia in the first place. I look forward to hearing from you, and contacting you whenever it's appropriate. Best wishes, Dr. Dan
User Avoidance of Issue re: Scandal
either you have time for WP, or you don't . you claim you have no time to do your required duty as editor of facts at the page [[1]] but yet you have time to follow me and comment re:The Great Scandal. Will you please at last justify your clear removal of fact from that article? EffK 09:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)In fact looking at yr user contrib stuff-I see you have lots of time, so why no answer for your removal of facts? Do you deny the facts, do I have to state them here to receive a good faith response and not an excuse?EffK 09:33, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
A question for you
Apparently a user has begun moving quite a large number of articles on Anglican bishops to some titles that seem rather questionable. My own knowledge in this area is woefully inadequate to consider the page moves, and another administrator has put the question up on AN/I. I thought you'd be a fine person to ask for input on the issue, if you have a minute [[2]]. Best · Katefan0(scribble) 21:23, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
On the Catholic Church of Wikipedia
As you have described yourself as a Catholic, I thought I would alert you as a co-religionist to your opportunity to delete the particularly offensive article, Wikipedia:Catholic Church of Wikipedia.--Thomas Aquinas 21:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Catholic Church of Wikipedia
Hello, You once asked my opinion I believe on this page: Wikipedia:Catholic Church of Wikipedia. It is now being voted on and thought you might like to know that. Dwain 04:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Congrats
This must be soooo late, and for that Im sorry. I was actually away, thinking of taking a break from Wikipedia for a couple of months (or more...maybe even for good). However, my break lasted only 2 days; I couldnt tear myself away! Anyway, I wanted to congratulate you on your promotion. Well deserved. Oran e (t) (c) (e-mail) 17:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Changes
I desisted from pressuring you for the reasons you stated, I find your blessings a sweet refreshment after most interactions, I think you leapt to some kind of conclusions , and I don't know why. I simply refer to factual edits that I enumerated. It is not for me that I pull you up on them, but a question of pure fact. I was and am shocked, but no more than anyone else would have been, I only say that I refer to that which you chose to do . As to Str, well, again , I did what you obliged me to do. You appear to be incorrect in believing he accepted the meagre apology for the meagre insult-let me say the 'reference', which was taken worse than it was meant and which I regret using. I go by actions, by reference to what I know, and the only thing I know about you, is that you chose to do what you did where you did and refused to justify , interact or even label your edit as I should have thought required. Maybe you know things which I don't about interaction here, by which I mean that I claim very patchy understanding of WP. I object very very strongly to Str amd McC and anothers behaviour , and for that it is not a question of apology . Your own sweet but misplaced sympathy with me based on an assumption for which you have no proof I take as a misunderstanding but with the others it would be used to justify the extreme ad hominem they exhibit continuously. I think you should seriously follow what I remarked to another user about the magisterium yesterday , and take it as some kind of positive in these matters that cause distress and dispute. Lastly , I do not intend to fight you on the page you oddly wiped the facts from , but to say that you probably should/will account to yourself for it, or perhaps to others . I'm sure your efforts outside WP will see success and you will be relieved when it's done. Good luck EffK 19:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
A Message to Pro-Life Wikipedians
The section "Foetal Pain" (Fetal Pain) has been deleted from the Abortion article. Could you help restore it? If you would like to see what was deleted, go to my talk page, scroll to "Fetal Pain," and click the provided link.--Thomas Aquinas 22:26, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Pro-life Categories being listed for deletion!
I thought you might be intereted to know that the Category:Pro-life celebrities and Category:Pro-life politicians are being voted on for deletion since 11-24-2005. Here is the page they are being decided on: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion.
I will see what I might be able to do about fetal pain in the abortion article. Dwain 00:06, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Congrats
Hey Cordelia, congratulations on a decisive result, which you thoroughly deserve, and I hope the buttons are making life easier for you, and that you'll use them always for the good (which I know you will). Cheers from me, SlimVirgin (talk) 06:36, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Comhghairdeachas
My pleasure, compatriot. Best wishes for your adminship! Palmiro | Talk 12:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Ann, thanks for the heads-up. I do, actually, feel somewhat passionately about whether or not that category should be kept, because there's no other way in Wikipedia to get a list of people in Hollywood (notoriously and overwhelmingly pro-abortion) who buck the trend. And even more so because I just can't see a reason for people to oppose the category other than the idea that the anti-abortion viewpoint is minor, marginalized, and uninteresting. I've weighed in over there.
Renaming might be in order. Some people of course feel that "pro-life" is biased. I dunno; I prefer "anti-abortion" for myself but there are slight shades of difference in meaning, and use of "pro-choice" instead of "pro-abortion" is at least as biased or more so. It never ceases to amaze me how many folks think it's consistent to accept the pro-choice group's reasoning for their name but not the pro-life's. More importantly to me, it might be appropriate to change "celebrities," which is definitely vague, to "entertainers." And some geographical context might be in order: "Hollywood celebrities" or "American celebrities." But I don't much like the implication from some that abortion is only an issue in America because the rest of the world is more enlightened...
On another note, do you have any idea how tired I am of seeing the "X calls himself pro-life but appears inconsistent because he supports the death penalty. Here are some reasons why X's supporters do not believe him to be inconsistent. (Most American pro-life people hold the view that pro-life means protecting innocent life, not guilty.)" passages in article after article after article. Some day maybe I'll go write up an article on this and hunt down every place it occurs and replace it with a link. :) There is definitely a double standard if we think that a category for pro-life celebrities is uninteresting but that the alleged contradiction between being pro-life and supporting the death penalty is interesting enough to put in every article, even for people who've never actually been questioned on the subject. (For the record, I am not pro-death penalty, although I see it as a thing to leave to everybody else to figure out and for me not to participate in.) Jdavidb (talk • contribs) 13:49, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Very very belated congrats
You are very welcome. I am certain you will be a fine admin. All the best Banes 15:43, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Terri Schiavo
Could you help me deal with some objections I'm facing in the latest Schiavo FAC? Apparently the referencing system is out of whack. It's at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Terri_Schiavo Thanks! Borisblue 00:57, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Me, as an ingrate, thanking you very belatedly
I just realized, while perusing my user page history that I never thanked you for reverting the vandalism to my page here. So thank you!
I see that your RfA was successful, so let me add a belated congratulations to that. --Elliskev 21:46, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
NOT VANDALISM, but rather a response to somthing he left on my page
OK!--70.182.219.158 18:57, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
barnstars
How's that? Guettarda 00:27, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks very much. It looks delicious. Actually I figure things out the same way - steal things, fiddle, trial and error. Guettarda 01:55, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Delicious
Ann, thank you for your kind words, which mean a lot to me, particularly coming from you, because you're one of the editors I wish I could be more like. It's people like yourself that make this project worthwhile. The apple turnover was delicious and arrived just as I was needing some serious sustenance. ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 13:04, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Anti-Culture-wars warrior around
Yes, it looks very yummy. But I am posting, dear Ann, because over at Terri Schiavo there is an anon IP (always starting 71.143...) strolling around bent on removing the "Issue in the Culture Wars". Could you and other admins have a look at this, in case he comes back. Cheers and Mmmmmmmmmh! Str1977 23:19, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks again for the turnover and I am even more delighted since you didn't put icing on the top of it, as most bakeries in the town I currently live in do. I am a bit of a "sweet thooth", but that's too much. It's the same with strawberrries - I like them best with nothing but strawberry (in fact I should include them into my "likes" section too). That's my purist side - the Apfelstrudel is my Moravian side.
You don't have to be ashamed since if it hadn't been for you I wouldn't have come up with these sections. And, to be honest, I couldn't think of quotes before I put up the biblical ones. Now I will add one after another. (I mean, they have to be English - or translated, which makes it a bit difficult). Do you think the two biblical ones are too long (I was wondering myself) - should I keep them as they are or reduced them to the bold parts (the core for me).
I hope your nutritionist will soon give you a "All clear!" sound. I imagine it to be terrible - no dairy products. I would have to change my breakfast completely.
As for the "obsolete" question: Is obsolete actually the right word or would archaic be better? I don't know whether "beasterly" is in the OED (though it should be) - I have come across it only once, during my stay in England. I was reading the play "Tis pity she's a whore". In that play, which you might know anyway, a young man falls in love with his sister, and tries to convince her to ..., you know. He succeeds in the end, but her first reaction is to shout out: "Thou art a beasterly man!" As I was reading this, an English female friend (and one of the really greatest people I have ever met) asked me about my book and I gave it to her and she by chance read exactly that line, which resulted in ROFL. Soon after, I had read Milton (political stuff) and I termed him a "beasterly man" as well.
Au relire! Str1977 17:51, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Hiya 'ML'! You might not have noticed but the St. John Lateran is located at the Italian version of its name, thanks to a four person vote in April! I've proposed a vote to move the page. It is at Talk:Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano. Please drop in and vote FearÉIREANN
\(caint) 05:19, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Pope John Paul II visit to Jordan River
You removed the bit about the Pope having been baptized in the Jordan River here, with the explanation that Catholics can only be baptized once. You're Catholic, I'm not - that's fine, and I learned something new. However, I know for a fact that he did visit a baptismal site at the Jordan River in May 2000. If he did not get baptized there, do you know what he did do there? Thanks. - Sandwiched 08:51, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
According to this article, the Pope offered up a prayer at the baptismal site. Sandwiched 17:36, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Spum
He was already blocked a few days ago for some lovely activities on Healthy diet. I was nice and gave him another chance. Since he used to have a drawing of a man masterbating on his user page, I didn't think it'd help much. :) But anyway. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 12:11, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Maybe you could take a look and see if you think WP:NPA is violated. It is getting hot now that we have another contributor voting on consensus. Dominick (TALK) 15:47, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Death
Dear Ann, no I'm still as adamant as I can be in favour of the wording "death". The way I see it you are either in favour of the wording or in favour of the fact. I just was not vigilant enough this morning - I normally check the first line everytime I visit this page (that's my main involvement with that article), but I was fooled by teh fact that "Dona Nobis" was the last editor, thinking any POV intrusion would have been fixed by her/him. Au relire (sounds a bit like Aurelie, doesn't it), Str1977 15:53, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Now I saw what you meant, Ann. I guess it was some kind of computing error or cross-posting. Aurelie! Str1977 18:08, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
The FuelWagon/Ed Poor arbitration
Now that FuelWagon is banned from a all pages other than the arbitration pages there is no reason to move it up in priority. There are about 10 pages ahead of him. So you probably have a month or so. Fred Bauder 16:02, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Terri Schiavo
The article appears to continue to need scrutiny. Terri Schiavo was a human being with a mother, father, brother, and sister, and a life before her collapse. Can you imagine any other Wikipedia article that is "improved" by deleting the "Early life" section of the subject? patsw 04:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
Your comment means a lot to me. I llok forward to working with you in the future. -JCarriker 13:10, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Pudding
Yes, yes and yes. Send it please. I have decided to make one this year and collected most of what *seems* to be necessary (hopefully...) and plan to do it before this week end. I wanted to make it sooner, but well, life... better than nothing to do it now. I indeed found the Delia recipee on the net, as well as a french speaking translation of it... looked at the wp one, and was wondering what to exactly do. Please, do not hesitate to send it at anthere AT wikimedia.org
Cheers
Anthere 15:07, 7 December 2005
Would you please compare Dunc's contribs to mine, and indicate whether I have a right to better treatment than I've been getting? Uncle Ed 16:32, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Catholic Wikiproject
I would like to direct you attention, in a nice way, to: Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism I like the Benedict and the HV templates. I would love to coordinate loyal Catholics to write better articles and help teach what the Chruch teaches, in charity. Dominick (TALK) 02:48, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Help?
I'm not sure if you are an admin or not...but I need help. Fred Bauder, has blocked me for edit warring. That means that I've been reverting pages that started with BC/AD and were later changed to BCE/CE. He did not - from what I can tell - obey wiki policy because on the Block page it says that you have to inform the user; He did not. Also I didn't violate the 3rvt rule to the best of my knowledge. What I'd like you to do if possible would be to unblock me. Thank you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.239.63.136 (talk • contribs) 03:41, December 08, 2005
Embassador versus Ambassador
Hey, this is Anittas. It's been a while. You've changed your name. I had to check for old edits. :p
I may need your expertise. Can you check this message? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ambassador#Ambassador_versus_Embassador
Thanks! --Anittas 17:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Bonne nuit!
Dear Ann, Thanks for your kind message and your constructive criticism regarding my user page. I have cut down the bible verses, though it was hard with the Isaiah one and it is still pretty longish. But I didn't want to leave gaps in between, and the dark-light part, the Midian part )(which always brings tears to my eyes) and the child I wanted to include.
Anway, yes, I plead guilty to haven stolen the B16-Babel-template from you. But Francis Ford Coppola was taught by his father: "Steal from the best!" And were are two of a kind when it comes to formatting and stuff - we go by trial and error. It took some to create the coats-of-arms table (a little for thinking and a lot for experimenting). I hope you like it, though now everyone who knows me can tell who "Str1977" is. But the likes/dislikes already gave many pieces for the mosaic. As for stealing formats - you can steal from me anytime.
I like your new poems, especially the "Burning Babe". It contains another phenomenon I like. At the end you have two lines ending good and blood, respectively. When reading such lines I always try rhyme them (that in pronunciation not just in the spelling) - so I read gud and blud (I haven't figured out the phonetic diacritics on WP yet, so bear with these substitutes). This sound refreshingly archaic. I know, the English usually don't do that, singing church hymns without rhymes (word and Lord etc). In Germany, we do it differently. Old church hymns sometimes even change words to make them rhyme (e.g. in this advent song [3] - the change is from "spät" to "spat".)
I think I will go to bed. The mice can come out to play.
Aurelie! Str1977 00:26, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
My failed RFA :)
Dear Musical Linguist,
I would like to thank you for supporting me on my RfA. Even though it failed with a with the final tally of 55/22/6, I want to thank you anyways. I don't want to be one a admin anymore until I reach 10,000 edits now that it's over with. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 03:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)Your note
Hi,
Thank you for the belated thanks, which were entirely unnecessary. I sleep a bit easier at night each a fair-minded user is promoted, so my reasons were partly selfish. :)
Our philosophical perspectives on many matters are likely very different, but I do wish to note, in passing, that your heartfelt vote at the recent deletion discussion of the so-called "catholic Church of Wikipedia" was quite touching, and emboldened me to admit my nomination of the page. By nature, I'm an iconoclast, and I'm happy to offend in many instances, where the proud, the powerful, or the wealthy bear the sting of the offense. Your comments reminded me of a corollary personal lesson I probably forget too often: I have no wish to offend, or see offended, kind, talented, and beautiful people who are gentle in their dealings with others. Thank you for your example. Best wishes, Xoloz 04:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Your message about abortion
I'm sorry you take such an intolerant view of my opinions. The language and semantics of this debate are huge, as you no doubt know, and by your characterization of my comments as you have done, you've shown your true colors!
Have a nice day! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.168.12 (talk • contribs) 15:05, December 09, 2005
Dear Ann,
You wrote:
"We can't say it's the murder of a baby, and we can't say that it's the removal of a piece of tissue. The pro-life Wikipedians who follow the rules while working patiently to ensure that the articles don't end up siding with the abortionists do a lot of good here. Those who come in and insert stuff about murdering babies do not, in my opinion, achieve anything. If you want to achieve some good here, there's a way to do it while staying within Wikipedia policy. If not, you'll just find your edits get reverted and you get blocked. Regards."
I find it ironic that referring to induced abortion as not being the "murder of a baby" is a "point of view", or something of the sort. I'm sorry you're so constrained by Wikipedia's rules and value your contribution to the pro-life cause, both here and elsewhere. I suppose that if it's politically incorrect to refer to abortion as murder then the abortionists and their culture of death have achieved quite a coup. Why not make mention in the Wikipedia article on abortion to simply state that millions upon millions of Americans, at least, consider it murder? Is that not newsworthy, or worthy of mention, instead of just ignoring that reality? Imagine if someone were to start praising some of Nazi Germany's policies as forward looking or helpful to society, or that the Nuremburg trials should not have taken place? I'm sure there are those who might defend such ideas, but imagine if Wikipedia were to take those ideas seriously and allow them to stand in an article on Nazism. Obviously, some censorship needs to exist, because some ideas are simply beyond the pale.
I take abortion very seriously, as you can well imagine, along with many other issues, and will consider your helpful comments should I decide to post further on this issue.
Thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.168.12 (talk • contribs) 15:43, December 09, 2005
You're welcome
In both respects. You're certainly one of the most deserving people as far as adminship goes, and I'm glad to see that it went so well. And don't worry about taking so long...I certainly understand that college comes first. Ral315 (talk) 20:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- Sure, congrats from me too. I know you'll do a good job. By the way, I know how it feels to be drenched with end-of-semester college work, I'm swamped with it myself, so don't worry about it. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 21:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Hello
- Congratulations on your adminship. I am sure you will do a great job. I see on your user page that you are a Lecturer. I am an Associate professor and I instruct summer evening HAP courses at the local community college. Thank you for the nice message, I had forgot that stressmeter on my page, too busy reverting and warning. I hope you like the virtual Christmas card. Again congratulations and thank you.--Dakota t e 21:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- And congratulations from me too; since we have obvious ovelap of interests, I hope I get to collaborate with you some day! Best wishes, Antandrus (talk) 22:29, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Yellow
I saw your note about wanting yellow, so I fiddled around with your page using code from mine but a previous color of Jimbo's. To be honest, I'm not sure which parts of my code are necessary and which not, so there may be extra stuff there, but if there is, it doesn't seem to be doing anything. I reverted my change in case you're not keen, but the pale yellow is there if you want it. ;-D SlimVirgin (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- My pleasure. I felt my yellow was a little garish for you, so I chose Jimbo's more sophisticated one, because it suits you. ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 23:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)