Jump to content

User talk:Prosfilaes: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Nonidiomatic: google shows up mostly english universities for "within English Literature"
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Save your [[soul]]. [[User:DavidStarner|DavidStarner]] 04:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
[[User_talk:Prosfilaes/Archive|Selective archive]] (use the history button for the rest)

== Link Spammer Warning ==

I note that you have [[User_talk:69.157.90.19|warned]] anonymous user 69.157.90.19 to refrain from link spamming the [[female ejaculation]] article. This IP address is just one of a series of similar addresses, all but one belonging to one provider, that are constantly used to spam a number of articles with links to commercial porn sites. I'm still a bit new and have preferred to focus my time on actually editing articles rather than figuring out the process to go through to attempt to have link spammers' IP addresses banned, but since I see you've issued a final warning for this particular IP address I'd like to take the opportunity to bring the others that are probably being used by the same person to your attention:

*65.57.106.46: [[Special:Contributions/65.57.106.46|Contributions]] / [[User_talk:65.57.106.46|Talk]]
*65.95.72.245: [[Special:Contributions/65.95.72.245|Contributions]] / [[User_talk:65.95.72.245|Talk]]
*69.157.88.199: [[Special:Contributions/69.157.88.199|Contributions]] / [[User_talk:69.157.88.199|Talk]]
*69.157.90.19: [[Special:Contributions/69.157.90.19|Contributions]] / [[User_talk:69.157.90.19|Talk]]
*69.157.91.250: [[Special:Contributions/69.157.91.250|Contributions]] / [[User_talk:69.157.91.250|Talk]]

Hope you can help. Thanks.

--[[User:Lapsus Linguae|Craig]] ([[User talk:Lapsus Linguae|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Lapsus Linguae|c]]) 06:04, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

== Comments ==

I saw your comments about vandalism on your user page and I'm inclined to agree. I'm convinced that Wikipedia could eliminate at least half of the vandalism on the english site by running a bot which reverted based on three combined factors: a)IP address (anon account); b)Empty edit summary; c)Removal of either a section header and at least 50 words, or removal of at least 50 words without a section header. I'm sure I'm not the first one to come up with this idea, but if you're interested in doing something about it, let me know. There is no reason someone should be removing 50 words without an edit summary (and we could also add that the edit summary box should be emphasized; currently it is merely wikilinked without any encouragement to use it). --[[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] 12:07, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

== My essay on Esperanto ==

I don't quite understand why you accuse me of not mentioning threatened languages in my little piece on Esperanto. I mention Mari, and at the end give MAFUN as an example of a good cause. Due to some of my studies I am especially sympathetic to the plight of the Uralic languages. That said, I should mention that I don't really care whether Wikipedia keeps my article linked (some anonymous person first put up a link in the German Wikipedia and then it spread elsewhere). [[User:Crculver|CRCulver]] 16:09, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

== Severus Snape ==

Hi, I think troubled is much better than tense, although I am beginning to think the whole sentence is beginning to sound like they need marriage guidance. I would agree that the first time I read the word fraught I laughed at seeing it there, but it has grown on me. I think people should be exposed to new words. Make it a link to a definition? (not really a serious suggestion.) I didn't think tense had the right meaning, and actually now that we are arguing about it, fraught is exactly what their relationship is. The meaning of troubled seems to be somewhere between the two, on a scale of escalating trauma. [[User:Sandpiper|Sandpiper]] 17:12, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

== AD pre-/post-pend in Common Era article ==

Hi:

I came across the dispute between you and [[User:Jeff3000|Jeff3000]] in the [[Common Era]] article. As it happens, Jeff3000 is backed up by [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Era]], and a variant of this directive was added into that part of the manual of style as early as [[July 5]], [[2004]] by [[User:Gdr|Gdr]].

I hope this helps. I will keep your talk page watchlisted for the next three days, in case you wish to respond here.

— [[User:DLJessup|DLJessup]] ([[User talk:DLJessup|talk]]) 15:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

== ;) ==

ok; thank you for your comment

== ;) ==

ok; than you for your comment



== A question about your edit on the USS Liberty Incident ==

I noticed that you made the following comment when deleting my addition to the [[USS Liberty Incident]]:

"new sentence uncited, especially as used by Israel; it's not NPOV and the incident wasn't that similar"

Perhaps I was adding it to the wrong section, but I do think it is important to mention the USS Stark incident. I did not mean that it was mechanically similar incident. However, it was an unprovoked attack on an American vessel by a MidEast nation during a time of war. Much of the anti-Israel rhetoric in the Liberty controversy uses an exceptionalism argument: that this attack is a special case, when indeed an almost identical incident occurred years later. What would be the proper way to mention this in the article?


==Suntzu==
It came from http://www.hernandofla.com/greats4.htm, it seemed legitimate to me. But i agree with your caution. Trying to help, --[[User:Larsinio|Larsinio]] 21:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

==Politeness - reply==
Dear Prosfilaes - if I say your argument lacks logic that is not rude. I fully understand that your perception of logic and reality differ severely from mine. I am not making a value jugdement about this fact. I am just not the right person for you to discuss this with. I took on the job of defending the Babel-concept because I accidently stumbled upon the deletion-discussion of en-5 and nobody else seemed to be around who could have given a reasonable judgement. That is annoying enough as it is. I am not going to discuss this further because it makes no sense to me, sorry. Not because I do not want to talk to you but because the template is unsalvageable, so there is no more reason for me to dedicate time to discussing it. I hope you are not mad at me but my Wikipedia-time budget does not allow me to have discussions that lead nowhere (that is cannot possibly lead to the saving of template en-5). The Babel project will have to find other solutions to make up for the lack of scale xx-5 in the English language.<br>
Also, the research-issue with another user, where you found my comment impolite: there are ways to research the basics (in this case looking at the babel-page, the info this person should have read is right on top, no need even for scrolling). If a user does not have basic information and refuses to get them, he or she should in my opinion not be voting. While some people just find it fun to troll around on deletion pages, this is not a place I regularly go to. Their actions (deleting a needed template just for fun) just shock me and of course make my work here harder. We have the right to free speech, I am allowed to say that I am annoyed by that. --[[User:Fenice|Fenice]] 11:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

== Theodore7 ==

A number of editors started an RfC against [[User:Theodore7]] [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Theodore7|here]]. I though you might wanted to know. Cheers, [[User:R.Koot|R.Koot]] 16:25, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

== Polygamy ==

Please see my comments on [[Talk:Polygamy]]. Thanks! [[User:deeptrivia|deeptrivia]] ([[User talk:deeptrivia|talk]]) 13:42, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

== Re Nevsky Prospekt ==

Hi Prosfilaes! I don't want an editing war with you. Nevsky Prospekt is most commonly written with a "k", not a "c". I've just been changing those fairly few spelled with "c", so they line up with the majority, which were spelled with "k". Just so you understand my motive. Currently the article about the street itself is spelled with "c", but I'm planning to switch that one to the "k" spelling redirect, and then make the "c" space a redirect instead. And I'll leave "Nevsky Avenue" alone avs a redirect. Best regards. [[User:Thomas Blomberg|Thomas Blomberg]] 05:07, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
:Okay, I see that you've done it again, and I guess I can see the point when referring to the English title of the book. However, otherwise the spelling should be Prospekt. See discussion on the page about the street, also see the official English website for the street: [http://nevsky-prospekt.com/ Nevsky Prospekt official website]. Regards [[User:Thomas Blomberg|Thomas Blomberg]] 05:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
::Thanks for the reply. According to the recognised transliteration tables for Cyrillic to English or to the Latin alphabet in general (all except BGN/PCGN can be found under [[Romanization of Russian]]), Невский проспект should be written:
::* "Nevskiǐ Prospekt" - ALA-LC, i.e. the standard established by America Library Association & Library of Congress 1997.
::* "Nevskij Prospekt" - GOST 16876-71 (Russian standard from 1983), ISO 9 (1995), and the United Nations romanization system from 1987. NOTE: These three standards are not Cyrillic to English, but Cyrillic to the Latin alphabet, no matter which language.
::* "Nevskiy Prospekt" - BGN/PCGN, i.e. the standard developed by the US and the UK 1947 for geographical names.
::At the end of the Wikipedia article there is an additional table for "Conventional transcription of Russian names" (not fully accepted by everyone on the discussion side), which says that the ий combination should normally be "iy", but whenever they are the commonly/historically accepted convention "y" or "i" can be used (a typical example is that "Trotsky" is the accepted English spelling of Троцкий.
::In addition to all this, Wikipedia has established its own naming convention: [[Wikipedia:Transliteration of Russian into English]]. According to that table, which is a modification of BGN/PCGN, Невский проспект should be written "Nevskiy Prospekt" or "Nevsky Prospekt", i.e. they also accept the older "y" for ий when that has become the established convention.
::As you can see, the only possible debate regarding this street name is if it should be "Nevskiǐ", "Nevskij", "Nevskiy" or "Nevsky". All agree that проспект (meaning "avenue") should be "Prospekt". The English word "prospect" (outlook) has nothing to do with it, except being the reason why people think "Prospekt" is a misspelling. Best regards [[User:Thomas Blomberg|Thomas Blomberg]] 03:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


==Pseudo-science Pejorative==
Why did you remove this sentence:
::''Terms such as "alternative" and "non-orthodox" express the same concept without being [[pejorative]].''
It seems a fair, and probably widely held, criticism. Although personally I think that those terms don't do most pseudo-sciences justice (pseudo-science is a kind description, "bs" and "delusional" are probably more accurate for most), but it is a valid criticism and I don't see no reason not to include it.
(Personally I think the whole article has become one big POV edit, and because of the nature of the article, the skeptical POV is winning out (also because there are fewer non-skeptical people who understand the subject very well--otherwise they'd be skeptics! :) ) but nonetheless, it is a bit of a ugly article by NPOV standards, even coming from the POV that the article mostly represents (i.e. I am a unabashed skeptic). --[[User:Brentt|Brentt]] 21:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

== New project ==

Do you know about this new project: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiproject_Rational_Skepticism], you might be interested. [[User:Bubba73|Bubba73]] [[User talk:Bubba73|(talk)]], 06:25, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

:Yes, please join us there, if you feel it's right for you. There you will find people who know the difference between [[chiropractic|pseudoscience]] and science, in contrast to some you are now [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pseudoscience&diff=next&oldid=38156376] dealing with.....;-) -- [[User:Fyslee|Fyslee]] 20:04, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

== William Beeman. ==

Good day,

It seems you are the only one with a link to the article on '''William Beeman'''; I just thought you should know that I plan to make the target a disambiguation page in the near future.

Cheers --[[User:Folajimi|Folajimi]] 02:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

== Vandalism ==

Please check the recent history for {{article|orangutan}}. - [[User:UtherSRG|UtherSRG]] [[User_talk:UtherSRG|(talk)]] 15:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

== Project Gutenberg ==

I put the two projects back that you keep removing from the [[Project Gutenberg]] article, and explained why on the [[Talk:Project_Gutenberg#Prosfilaes.27_ongoing_vandalism|talk page]]. In short: 1) almost none of the projects listed as affiliated are Official Afilliates, 2) if you delete a '''fact''' you should always explain your action on the talk page, 3) if you want to keep the fact, but not on a certain page, you should move, rather than delete it.

A solution that I would be OK with is if only official affiliates are mentioned, and if the rest are moved to another heading or even their own article. Don't assume you know all about PG, just because you have been a contributor for five years. Look things up.--[[User:82.92.181.129|82.92.181.129]] 00:06, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

== Botchan ==

Did a quick rewrite of this - I haven't read the novel in question, so I hope it's OK! --[[User:Sir Ophiuchus|Sir Ophiuchus]] 00:44, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

== [[Lolicon]] ==

There is another stawpoll on the disputed offensive image currently underway at [[Talk:Lolicon]]. [[User:Hipocrite|Hipocrite]] - [[User talk:Hipocrite|&laquo;<small>Talk</small>&raquo;]] 20:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

== Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot ==

[[User:SuggestBot|SuggestBot]] predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
{|cellspacing=10
|-
|valign=top|
;Stubs:<!--'''[[Wikipedia:Stub|Stubs]]:'''-->
:[[Chitimacha]]
:[[KUVS-TV]]
:[[BangaBhasha]]
:[[Skeptic's Dictionary]]
:[[Debunker]]
:[[Voiced alveolo-palatal affricate]]
:[[Bucharest Daily News]]
:[[Tignish, Prince Edward Island]]
:[[List of newspapers in Sri Lanka]]
:[[Crackhead]]
:[[Marcello Truzzi]]
:[[Genetic sexual attraction]]
:[[Applied kinesiology]]
:[[Vaginoplasty]]
:[[Optative mood]]
:[[Exberliner]]
:[[Wintu]]
:[[Red noise]]
:[[ConScript Unicode Registry]]
|align=top|
;Cleanup
:[[Duration of sexual intercourse]]
:[[Sexual acronyms]]
:[[Ethnic stereotypes in popular culture]]
;Merge
:[[Dawn (newspaper)]]
:[[Vorarephilia]]
:[[Combining character]]
;Add Sources
:[[Vaginal flatulence]]
:[[Dry orgasm]]
:[[Script kiddie]]
;Wikify
:[[Grim Natwick]]
:[[Giambattista Vico]]
:[[Parag]]
;Expand
:[[Karyotype]]
:[[Maggie Gallagher]]
:[[Elision]]
|}

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on [[User_talk:SuggestBot|SuggestBot's talk page]]. Thanks from [[User:ForteTuba|ForteTuba]], SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on [[User:SuggestBot/Requests|the SuggestBot request page]]. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- [[User:SuggestBot|SuggestBot]] 06:40, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

== Pedophilia ==

Could you please dicsuss your edits to [[Rind et al. (1998)]] at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch]]? Thanks, -[[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] 01:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

==Project Gutenberg==
I just translated "Project Gutenberg" to Chinese which is much more than the old one. The two zh links are the same article. --[[User:Farm|Farm]] 13:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

== User notice: temporary 3RR block on [[Klingon language]] ==

:[[Image:Octagon-warning.png|left|30px| ]]You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. <!-- Template:3RR3 --> The duration of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User:Prosfilaes&action=edit&section=new block] is 3 hours. [[User:William M. Connolley|William M. Connolley]] 13:56, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

==[[:Image:Wanted_for_treason.jpg]]==
I would ask that you create that copyright template and properly cite it then, because the current template you are using is for pre-1923, which this obviously was not, and your statement that published before that date and without a notice = PD is uncited. Until such a template exists I'm going to return the image to fair use, since the template currently applied to it is patently false. If you create the template that correlates to the correct law, go right ahead. [[User:Staxringold|Staxringold]] 07:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:You are absolutely right, and I apologize. [[User:Staxringold|Staxringold]] 16:44, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== Excessive vandalism ==

Please do not vandalize Wikipedia articles. Thanks. ([[User:Ibaranoff24|Ibaranoff24]] 23:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC))

Stop accusing other people of vandalism when it's really a content dispute.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 00:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

* What do you call removing an entire section because you feel that it is "mere trivia"? ([[User:Ibaranoff24|Ibaranoff24]] 00:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC))

* You're removing an entire section because you don't like what it says. How is that fundamentally different? The petition is mere trivia; there's no need to record the exact wording of a petition.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 00:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

* I removed a POV comment made by some two-bit author whom nobody has even heard of. The petition text is in there because Wikipedia won't allow links to the Petition Online website. YOU vandalize articles by inserting POV statements and removing entire sections. That is a huge difference. ([[User:Ibaranoff24|Ibaranoff24]] 00:24, 3 April 2006 (UTC))

* Once again, non-Wikipedians are free to make POV comments and we are free to quote them. Your bias is showing through when you call him a two-bit author; winning major awards in his field proves otherwise.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 00:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

== Thanks: reference desk ==

Thanks for your answer to my question on the reference desk. I think I've gotten too used to standardizing my spellings for Wikipedia articles. Writing too different verisions of a word seems weird now.--[[User:Bkwillwm|Bkwillwm]] 07:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

== Nonidiomatic ==

What does the word "nonidiomatic" mean, in the context of your reversion of my change to [[Nineteen Eighty-Four]]? [[User:Ansell|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Ans</span>]][[User:Ansell/Esperanza|<span style="color:#009000;">e</span>]][[User talk:Ansell|<span style="color:#0000FF;">ll</span>]] 00:21, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

: I've never heard "within English literature" used before. A brief search on [[Project Gutenberg]] reveals that (a) the Gutenberg full-text sucks, but (b) I'm finding many examples of "in English literature" and none of "within English litature". Nonidiomatic in this case meaning that I have a hard time arguing that it's formally wrong, but it's not something I think an English speaker would say.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] 01:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

::Okay, it might just be how I say things. Not a big deal. It was a new word to me though. I thought I knew what idiomatic meant, but didn't quite know what the negation would be. [[User:Ansell|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Ans</span>]][[User:Ansell/Esperanza|<span style="color:#009000;">e</span>]][[User talk:Ansell|<span style="color:#0000FF;">ll</span>]] 11:56, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Most of the 400 odd references [http://www.google.com.au/search?q=%22within+English+Literature%22&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official here] were from english universities, which may say something about the places which use this particular grammar structure. :) [[User:Ansell|<span style="color:#0000FF;">Ans</span>]][[User:Ansell/Esperanza|<span style="color:#009000;">e</span>]][[User talk:Ansell|<span style="color:#0000FF;">ll</span>]] 11:59, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:47, 3 May 2006

Save your soul. DavidStarner 04:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Prosfilaes&oldid=51317511"