User talk:Qutezuce/Archive001

WikiLove

Here's a pizza for you!

Pizzas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better.

Thanks for your eagle-eye attention to the Manitoba/Caribou vandalism!

Feel free to remove this pizza once you've had enough :) Hu Gadarn 17:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 02:27, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Test

I appologize for leaving that "test has been removed" message before. I meant to warn User:24.41.48.25 for vandalism of the List of characters from Family Guy article. Sorry again! =/ -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 01:15, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Computer and video game terminology category change

Hi! I noticed you added back the "terminology" category to the game engines page. Please see discussion here about why we are removing the "terminology" category. Please don't add it back. Thanks! -- Sitearm | Talk 19:59, 2005 August 20 (UTC)

No problem! Will do :) -- Sitearm | Talk 20:11, 2005 August 20 (UTC)

Peanuts / Schulz

Glad to see someone with interest in Peanuts! Saw your attention to detail in the editing, and since I had just been revising the page, I thought I'd say hi. Hope you like the new pictures there; I hope to get permissions for more photos -- both the Peanuts page and the Schulz page would benefit greatly from photos. Would love to follow your picture selections at the animation pages -- that's a really great goal. Paul Klenk 00:32, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

The Peanuts page has a lot of potential. The Time magazine cover is a real find -- a work of art in itself. It's really lovely with the green background. You may appreciate another page --- John Keston -- which I wrote from scratch last weekend. He's my former voice teacher. The pictures really tell a story on that page. Also check out Microchip (animal identification). Paul Klenk 14:41, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

What's up doc

Hi Brookie here - thnaks for that. The curate's egg 19:08, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Oops Indeed

Thanks for the Joint_stereo correction on Advanced_Audio_Coding.

I'm always screwing up. Frogtumor 07:13, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Album Listings for The Vestibules

Saw your welcome additions to The Vestibules page from last night. I just wanted to point out that in Wikipedia track listings for albums are more typically rendered on a seperate page for that album, usually with a small pic of its cover. For example, see this Air Farce album listing for "The Air Farce Comedy Album", which links from their page. Not a big deal, and I'll probably do it if you do not. ;-) Thanks also for adding the info about the Winnipeg Comedy Festival info to The Frantics page (which I have added to in the past) which I did not know about. Will look for it.

Cheers from a fellow Vestibules' fan! Captmondo 08:59, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Fair use exception does not apply to user pages

Hi. I notice that there are a number of images inlined on your user page that are screenshots tagged as being used under the fair use exception. I'm afraid that the fair use exception applies to the specific use, not to the image itself. As you can see from Wikipedia:Fair use#Policy, such images cannot be used on user pages as this exception cannot apply. Sorry. Bovlb 07:17, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks for responding so amicably. You asked how I came across the problem. I happened to notice your creation of AFI's 100 Years of Film Scores. I have a suspicion that there may be a copyright problem inherent in the reproduction of the list itself, even though the exact form of the list is different, but I have not been able to form a firm opinion one way or the other. When I see a potential problem, it's my practice to poke around a bit; sometimes that clarifies things for me, or leads me to something that is more clear cut. Bovlb 07:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

DTS dab

Re: rv of DTS dab link on Digital Theatre System Problem is, when you type 'DTS' in the wikipedia search/go box, you're taken directly to Digital Theatre System, regardless of whether you wanted Data Transformation Services etc. What to do? Stevage 14:07, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Bob Irsay article

I attempted to NPOV the Robert Irsay article. Take a look, and if you agree, remove your NPOV tag. --rogerd 00:02, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Manitoba Articles

Hi, I'll go back and look at the communities that don't have intros in them and get something started. Thanks. jdobbin 06:19, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for saving the articles about regions in Manitoba from speedy deletion. Punkmorten 13:49, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

It appears there are pages in regards to CanWest stations. I found them later on CanWest page itself. The redirects should probably go to those pages rather than the CanWest page. I ran out of time to correct the errors for that and regards to the jazz radio station. I'll look at it again tomorrow to see where the links go. jdobbin

I have linked a few of the digital TV stations to their correct locations. I am having problems with Mystery TV though and Extreme Sports. I've also found that the Winnipeg TV station list does not include two digital TV stations. I will include those today. If you could look over those areas to make sure I haven't screwed them over too bad, I'd appreciate it. jdobbin

Sorry, I was trying to change the City of Winnipeg page to redirect to Winnipeg but pasted over the wrong instruction for it. jdobbin 00:49, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at the Manitoba articles. The reason I deleted Cartier and Coldwell is because they are not cummunities in Manitoba. They are municipalities. I looked it up. jdobbin 02:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Didn't realize I had deleted the French thing in the communities listing. As far as the Rural Muncipalities thing: Shouldn't they read "Muncipality of" or "Rural Muncipality of" rather than "Alonsa, Manitoba" which is a place name rather than a regional name? What is the format the U.S. uses for things like "Grand Forks County" and "Grand Forks, North Dakota"?

At the moment, many of the muncipality names in Manitoba point to towns and villages. jdobbin 03:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm still not convinced of the People from Manitoba versus Manitobans. I know some people have made the same argument for Winnipeggers saying it should be People from Winnipeg. I know that when I look for Manitobans that I don't look for People of Manitoba. I'm prepared to go with what is acceptable but what I was intending on doing is to get the Manitobans section to be as comprehensive as I can. If it needs to be moved later on, at least it can be done so lock, stock and barrell along with redirects. jdobbin 00:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Why did you delete the bulk of the West St.Paul and East St.Paul articles for likely copywright violation? Are you able to prove that the articles were in violation of a copywright? I didn't write the article but the original articles were actually quite good, and are now just a shell of their former selves. If you were certain the articles contained copywright vio why didn't you re-write them instead of just deleting everything? Also, much of what you have written on the Winnipeg articles is incorrect, ie. Old Kildonan once being a part of East Kildonan (never was) and West Kildonan lying north of Inkster Blvd. (that was not the boundary), that Winnipeg's Mennonite population is 33,000 (not supported by statistics). Be sure that you are absolutely certain of the veracity of a fact and have done your research thoroughly before you write, add to, or edit an article. Otherwise readers will will receive misinformation and that is not what an encyclopaedia is intended for. The Winnipeg and city area articles are coming along quite nicely. Please don't delete any part of them for unsupportable reasons.--207.161.47.89 02:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

See User talk:207.161.47.89 for response. Qutezuce 21:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Please stop deleting good information from the Winnipeg page. Most crosstown routes (ie. 11 Kildonan-Portage, 18 North Main-Corydon) operate through the downtown area. There are only three crosstown routes that do not operate downtown (75,77,79). Also the changes to the religious affiliation and demographics sections are based on 2001 census information. Your information is wrong and you don't include other religions. Not everybody is Christian. I have worked very hard on the Winnipeg and its related articles and my information can be verified with official statistics. Please don't ruin the articles for everyone else by inserting non-verifiable information. Maybe stick to Looney Tunes?--142.161.191.76 20:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

See User talk:142.161.191.76 for response. Qutezuce 21:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Morden Airport

Thanks for catching that. There is an error in the article for sure, but at the moment other than the fact there should be two runways, I am not sure what else is wrong. I use the Canada Flight Supplement (CFS) to get the information. The one I have here at home shows runway 10/28 - 3937 ft, asphalt and 17/35 - 2300, turf. However, it's not the newest version and the data may have changed. The information I put in was from the newest version and that's at work where I will be 5 hours from now. When I get there I will check it and change the article. The spreadsheet I have with the data from the newest CFS shows 10/28 with gravel but that could just be a typing error. The other thing is that the conversions on the web site for the runways are way out. The other conversions from km to miles are not too bad (they seem a little off) but 1,341.72 m should be 4401.96 ft and 783.84m should be 2571.65 ft. The strange thing is that if you convert the m in fathoms it's almost correct. I'll also go back and check the others with multiple runways to make sure they all got put in correctly. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 15:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

It was 10/28 - 3937 ft, asphalt and 17/35 - 2300, turf. Thanks, I've corrected it now. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:05, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Beverley Turner

Thanks for your contribution to this article ... Great picture! dvc214 11:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Solomon and Dan Brown

Howdy. Appreciate your concern about spamming, but did you know The Key Of Solomon (Brown calls it the Solomon Key) was a historical--or at least, legendary--document? Also, with the controversy surrounding Dan Brown's use of religious figures in his books, an alternative viewpoint re: the Key Of Solomon should be allowed on these pages, I think. Makes for more informative reading. Thanks, bro. (or sis, as the case may be).

I don't doubt the fact that it's a DVD cover, but you managed to clean it up so well that I (and probably others) intepret it as being a logo. There's nothing in the image to suggest that it is from a DVD cover. Most DVD covers on Wiki depict the whole cover, not just a small portion. I would suggest asking for opinions on this from other users. Alr 01:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Don't have time to play re-edit with you anymore, so... one last note on subject: how is "The Solomon Key" an "encyclopedic" entry as it stands, if it only refers to a nonpublished novel, albeit from Dan Brown? Note that this particular entry--The Solomon Key--was debated on that very point by other reviewers.

Chinese Socialist Democracy

Qutezuce, I hate to mess up your page here, but I modified "Chinese Socialist Democracy" and took the liberty of removing the POV tag pending further review. I think I may have not understood how to leave a note for another contributor. --brainhell

The Crusher (Looney Tunes)

Hi, Is cleanup supposed to put in categories and stuff as well as fixing typos and formats? Defunkier 13:01, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Great - thanks Defunkier 13:11, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Tripods

Hi. Really I don't find a panoramic tripod necessary. My tripod has an adjustable bubble level centre column and the head allows horizontal panning without unlocking the ball. If after that, the image is still not straight, that is usually fixed during the stitching process on my PC. A panoramic tripod may have been more useful prior to the digital age but I don't miss it now, really. :) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 06:03, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I see what you are saying, sorry for the misunderstanding. No, parallax error isn't really a problem in most of my panoramas, both due to the small distance between the focal point in the lens and the pivot point in the tripod and the fact that they're usually of distant objects where parallax isn't such a factor. It would probably play a part if I were to take a panorama with an ultra-wide angle lens within the confines of a small room, or something along those lines. Usually, I use a normal or telephoto lens to gain detail on small areas of the frame and stitch them. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 06:22, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Nova

Thank you. :-) Pattersonc 23:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the lat/long coords for Oakbank, Manitoba. --Wtshymanski 02:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Ted L. Nancy

You wrote in regards to the Ted L. Nancy wiki article:

rv, the sex of the person making the suggestion is irrelevant, you've got a name, a url, an a piece explaining his reasoning, what more do you want for verifiability?)

I never suggested sex was of relevance. You're not reading critically. In the wiki article, the "commentator" is NOT named.

Who is this commentator?

How does the reader know this "commentator" wasn't made up?

Can we contact this "commentator" and ask him to verify what he/she said? Nope. We can't contact him/her because we don't know his/her name. Perhaps the "commentator" is an anonymous source? The way the article is written, it's subject to the readers' guesses.

It's misleading to just plop down a phrase like "we know what we're talking about because a commentator said so." We're taking advantage of the fact that most people don't read very carefully. They don't stop and say, "So, who's this commentator, and what credibility does he have?" It's something that's typical of Fox "News" reporting. It's writing in the style of Ann Coulter or that other guy, O'Reily. It's horrible.

The referenced article, by Roger Friedman (from Fox -- Grrr) says Barry Marder is "putative author of the Letters from a Nut series of books." Friedman doesn't cite any sources either, which means it's his own assertion. In case you didn't know, putative means "commonly accepted or supposed," according to Merriam-Webster's dictionary (See? I cited my source!).

I want to SINGLE you OUT and COMMEND you for your exemplary critical reading skills. HeWhoE 07:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your response on my "talk page." You took the words right out of my mouth! We must have been writing at about the same time, because I wrote on your "talk page" essentially the same thing you said! Thank you, Qutezuce. Thank you for understanding me finally. I take back the sarcastic "SINGLE OUT/COMMEND" bit above. I'd like now to give you a sincere singling out and commending. You're an awesome wikipedian! You are a wonderful neighbor! I like you. I think it's fitting to sing one of Mister Rogers' songs to you. I wish I could sing it through the LAN cables for you right now.

It's you I like,
It's not the things you write,
It's not the way you pick a fight,
But it's you I like.

The way you are right now,
The way down deep inside you,
Not the things that hide you.
Not the number of wiki articles you've written,
That's just beside you.

But it's you I like,
The way you critically read,
The way you like to "wikipede"
You forgive bad rhymes.

I hope that you'll remember,
Even when you're feeling blue
That it's you I like,
It's you yourself.
It's you.
It's you I like.

HeWhoE 07:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I left out one of the lines in the above song. It's corrected now. It goes to the tune of Mister Rogers' "It's You I Like." You can hear it on Mister Rogers' PBS website, http://pbskids.org/rogers/songlist/song5_ra.html

HeWhoE 08:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The Vestibules

Pipetext doesn't work that way. It only changes what letter the title sorts under; the title still appears as "The Vestibules" no matter what the pipetext is. So all you end up with is "The Vestibules" listed under the letter R — it doesn't make the title appear as "Radio Free Vestibule". Bearcat 00:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Then I'd suggest moving the actual article title back to Radio Free Vestibule, because we can't just file the title "The Vestibules" under R. It isn't like the pipetext in an article link: you just end up with a list that looks like this:

R

* The Vestibules

* The Roundup

* Royal Canadian Air Farce

It doesn't make the title appear as "Radio Free Vestibule"; the title appears the same way no matter what — it just gets listed under R instead of V. I know that the radio program should be listed on the category page as Radio Free Vestibule; there's just no way to make it list that way short of moving the article title itself. Bearcat 00:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure of the best solution either — maybe there should be two separate articles, one at Radio Free Vestibule for the show and another at The Vestibules for the troupe itself. That's how we currently handle the distinction between The Frantics and Four on the Floor, for example. Frankly, I wish the category links actually changed how the title appears, or that we could apply category links directly to redirect pages...because I've seen quite a few cases where a single article should technically have a different title in one category than in others. Bearcat 00:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if it's a policy issue, as such. It's just that as far as I know, putting categories on redirect pages doesn't work. I suppose I could be wrong about this, but as far as I'm aware it prevents the redirect page from functioning properly as a redirect. Maybe we could ask for clarification at one of the tech discussion boards. Bearcat 05:44, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

You applied the cleanup tag to "The Good Shepherd (novel)" -- why?

When you apply the cleanup tag, the article tells other editors to look to the talk page for your explanation of what you think needs to be cleaned up. I tried cleaning up after an inexperienced user, who put the edit history at risk. I am trying to figure out if the talk page got lost, or if you neglected to explain yourself. If you didn't put an explanation on December 14, would you like to put one now? Otherwise I will delete that cleanup tag. -- Geo Swan 04:21, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Futurama

I'm going to tape the bump (black & white message card on Adult Swim) tonight so I can get screencaps. I don't think it just repeated Billy West's post, but I could be wrong. I'll change it tonight if it turns out that I was. Mistamagic28 01:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Ahhh im glad you are interested in such a good seris as am i, seen ever episode >40 time + many with commentarys anyway enough about me, here is the desired sources. Movies Direct to dvd interveiw with matt "We're going to do four of them, straight to DVD. And as we speak, I'm exchanging e-mails and ideas with David X. Cohen and Ken Keeler, both of whom worked on the show from the very beginning. Right now we're trying to figure out whether to do a giant epic, or separate crazy movies, or what. But I wager that Bender will be featured prominently." Cheers mate, Kingpomba 10:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Avro Arrow

Hello I appologize for the way I have enetered information but I don't have a clue how wickpeia works. I only stumbled on your comments just now and may not find them again. That is also why I am replying to you by editing your page. I did not realize that when we submit comments we are becoming the new authors. In any event, I did note several factual errors and I tried to site the references. By writing 'no' I was only trying to warn anyone reading the page to be aware. I am glad to see the disclaimer now indicating there are problems with the information in certain areas. I will be more careful should I enter comments and I will site references where I can.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.106.111.151 (talk • contribs)

I have posted a reply to your talk page. Qutezuce 02:39, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

El Kabong

Thanks for your concern. I don't think the paragraph on El Kabong's pro wrestling reference got too out of hand, as I only clarified things by adding a single sentence about who first used the move and who coined it. Sorry about that bro. --Cjmarsicano 06:28, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Thanks for deleting those revisions from my user page. Could I ask you to do the same for my talk page too? Qutezuce 20:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Done. Sorry for not remembering that a page move often will move also the associated talk page. --cesarb 21:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Milt Stegall

Is it alright if I just use the sites a reference or do I have to imbed the references into the text for the article?

Thanks

NPOV doublecheck

Hiya, could you please take a look at Stanley Dunin, an article I created about one of my relatives? I did my best to keep it as neutral as possible, but I'd still like someone else to look it over and doublecheck how it sounds. Thanks! Elonka 09:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

(followup) Thanks! I'd been thinking about the article for awhile, which is why I was able to write it so quickly. Like I churned out this one today too: Peter Zika (my first cousin). And I've got a couple more like that... I take my time, find references, and then when I'm ready I'll churn out an article really fast. But it's absolutely true that it's hard to write about someone you know well... So thanks again for helping to doublecheck! :) Elonka 06:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Hiya, the Stanley Dunin article is currently going through deletion review. Could you please pop in to the discussion to verify that you reviewed it? Thanks.  :) --Elonka 23:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Kwapis Formatting

I see you removed the <br clear="all"> I'd used to format Ken Kwapis. Seems to me that this results in the Sisterhood image cutting into the Career History section. Is that a good look? Is there any Wikipedia policy/guideline on this? I suppose it's just matter of taste... Regards --Jeremy Butler 12:44, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Commas.

I never would have guessed. I was totally unaware of that Anglo-English convention. Although a large number of my corrections still stand, I think, due to lack of context and initial incorrectness all the same. Tom Lillis 23:22, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Grease dab

Sorry, those were what I interpretted from the content of the article to be the correct dab. Looking at them again, some of them are simply linking to it as a definition of what it is, i think. --Spook ^{(my talk | my contribs)} 07:03, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

do you 'ave a lissence for your minkey?

Done. Bearcat 23:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

"Portia de Rossi" image

I really doubt you're unaware, but the image you've twice added to Portia de Rossi is the photo of Portia Simpson-Miller, the president-elect of Jamaica. If you were unaware, then please check image histories before restoring them. If not, consider this a first warning for vandalism. Thank you. -Kasreyn 06:29, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

sorry about that, then  :)

I see it was a mistake, then. Sorry for thinking you a vandal. Is there any way we can rescue the original photo of Portia de Rossi, or is it overwritten? -Kasreyn 07:05, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Heh, one step ahead of me. I see it's back. Thanks, and sorry for bothering you. -Kasreyn 07:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing all my clumsy mistakes. Chaoticbob 04:44, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Cut and paste

The best thing to do would be to raise the issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Administrators, for example, have extra avenues to check whether the usernames you mentioned are in fact the same person or not — we can have developers check the IPs against each other. And, of course, we have the authority to ban users if they repeatedly fail to comply with Wikipedia rules. I'll post the issue there. Bearcat 18:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Announcements

Please do not revert the article again. It is a perfectly justifiable news story, one which I feel many Wikipedians would be interested in. - Shaft121 22:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

"as of (date)" statements

I'm not sure that I agree with your recent reversion in the Gimli Glider article. On Wikipedia, we have to trust that users will update articles as necessary — otherwise, nearly every statement in Wikipedia would need to be qualified with an "as of (date)", because anything can change. For example, Stephen Harper is Prime Minister of Canada as of 2006-03-04, but he might not be tomorrow if he dies in a plane crash or resigns because of a scandal; Jon Stewart is host of The Daily Show as of 2006-03-04, but he might well announce on Monday that he's been hired away by NBC. Quebec is a province in Canada as of 2006-03-04, but next year, who knows?

As of 2006-03-04, Boeing 767 C-GAUN is still part of Air Canada's fleet, and there is still a company called Air Canada. I don't pledge to keep either of these pieces of information up to date forever, but at the same time, I trust that if I don't, other Wikipedians will — if they didn't, we'd be no better than a paper copy of the Enclopedia Britannica, with its 30-year-out-of-date stories. I think that we should reserve as of (date) statements only for the most extreme cases, where there's a high probability of change in the very near future (e.g. mainly in articles tagged as current). David 03:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Charles Ogden

Because of the name ambiguity with Charles Kay Ogden, I actually moved the article to Charles Ogden (children's writer) instead, and turned the undisambiguated Charles Ogden into a dab page. Bearcat 00:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Bunker Hill Bunny

Thanks for the correction. I added an external link to the BCDB. --Dystopos 14:39, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Smackbot alphabetizing categories

On pages for sports players, for examples Barrin Simpson, I think it would be a good idea if you did not alphabetize the categories. The categories were listed in a specific order for clarity, first the ones dealing with birth year and living people category, followed by the teams they have played for, sometimes in chronilogical order, sometimes not. By alphabetizing them it makes the categories look like a random mismash. Qutezuce 06:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I can't scope it by article type, so for the rest of the capitalisation run, I've turned it off. Rich Farmbrough 10:55 11 March 2006 (UTC).

On the other hand, compare the list you had before, to what you think is good now. I don't think I broke anything there. Have you any other examples?Rich Farmbrough 11:39 11 March 2006 (UTC).

Cut and paste guy

By the time I saw your message the username User:Riverflow had already not edited in almost 24 hours, so it might already have been abandoned again. I'll certainly try a 24-hour block on it, but I can't guarantee it'll have an effect. (You did read the anon IP User:66.75.14.189's user page, I'm assuming?) Bearcat 07:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Mascot Guy

I haven't figured out any way to get Mascot Guy's attention. Blocking doesn't do anything but stop him for a while; either he gets a new IP or waits out the block. tregoweth 17:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

rv means revert

Thanks for letting me know what "rv" means. If you had taken a look at my contributions you would notice that I have a pretty good handle on what "rv" means. I will go by the notion that you were attempting sarcasm. If you are trying to call me out on an edit I made on the Dwight Schrute article earlier today, why not just say so? Is communication not a goal of the entire Wikipedia project? As far as that edit, I did go back to a previous version, in order to "revert" or "rv" an anonymous editor's useless edit, but then decided to make an additional change while there. By the time I hit save and checked the history, your edit appeared there. I by no means want to start any kind of feud with you, but the tone of your message indicates your elitist attitude. BabuBhatt 22:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, good point. BabuBhatt 22:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Edits

I noticed one of your edits on an article I did yesterday but no comments. If you think of it, a short comment would assist someone like myself to pick up my mistakes, etc. easier. Thanks a lot! (Stormbay 17:19, 25 March 2006 (UTC))

"Centers around"

You can't "center" "around" something. It's like saying you ascended to the bottom. If you're "around" something, then that means you're on the perimeter, and thus can't be in the center.

There are worse phrasing errors, but this is just a pet peeve of mine. —Chowbok 22:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Heh... I've made this change to a couple hundred articles so far, so forgive me if I'm not sure which one you're talking about. Let me know to what you're referring to and I'll take a look. —Chowbok 22:52, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah. Well, look at your phrasing: "the thing it centers around is in the center". It's centering around the center? How many centers do we have here?

I think the verb you're looking for in your example is "revolve". —Chowbok 23:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Sure, there's nothing wrong with that sentence. The flaw in your argument is that "centers" is not synonymous with "arranges". —Chowbok 00:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

How about the Chicago Manual of Style: "center around. Although this illogical phrasing does have apologists, stylists tend to use either center on or revolve around." (p. 205, Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition)

You wouldn't want to be an apologist for illogic, now would you? —Chowbok 01:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Geez, lighten up. I wasn't attacking you, I'm just having some fun with the Chicago Guide's phrasing. You'll need thicker skin than that if you're going to chat with people on the internet... —Chowbok 01:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

You're right, it doesn't. —Chowbok 01:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't care for your tone. I've been polite and prompt in my responses, there's no call to talk to me like that. Besides, aren't you telling me how to act as well?

That said, I agree with your criticism about that article. I am trying to be judicious with this project but of course there is always room for improvement. Do feel free to make the change you suggested. —Chowbok 01:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The Office (US) to The Office (US TV series)

You linked to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television) as justification for your move. However that page only deals with naming when disambiguation needs to occur. From that page: "Remember the disambiguator should only be added if multiple articles would normally have the same name." In the case of The Office (US) no disambiguation was needed, The Office (US) is not the name of anything else. Qutezuce 00:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for writing, but if you read to the bottom of the convention you see that "Use the following when there are two or more television productions of the same name." The disambiguator you are referring to is "TV series" which should only be added when disambiguating from other articles. When disambiguating shows from other shows "TV series" is retained. This applies to year, country of origin, producing network and animated series. If you would like to discuss it further please leave a comment at the convention talk page. Thanks! --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 00:12, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I am by no means ignoring your comment. I missed it when someone else had written after you, my apologies. But as far as the convention I don't think that it "happens" to include TV series. It was there deliberately to clarify TV shows from other TV shows just as the "TV series" is retained with year, country of origin and network. If you look at the film naming convention, when there are multiple films from the same year, even if they do not need to be disambiguated from anything else "film" is still retained, so should "TV series" or "game show". The same is true for albums, see Down to Earth. If you have a larger question with the convention, please leave a comment there. Thanks!

Percent

The words came out of Novak's mouth. It is up to any publication's individual style how those words are translated into written form. Your adherence to some kind of misguided ethical standard goes against the spirit of a style guide. BabuBhatt 03:43, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I should say, by the way, that I impute no malign motive or intellectual infirmity to your disagreeing with me on this point; your contributions to the article talk page vis-à-vis this issue are quite strong and are leading me to consider whether perhaps we oughtn't to consider the current work as quoting the article (not having looked at the link, I thought the TwP piece to be an article; I see now that it's only an interview, which changes things a bit), whereupon we'd likely stick with your formulation. I think it's best to let the issue sit on the talk page for a few days in order that other editors may consider the issue. In any case, I didn't want you to think me exorbitantly argumentative or gauche. Joe 05:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I've just now noted your MoS comment; as I say on the talk page, I mistakenly assumed (gosh, I really must start fact-checking) that our MoS followed Chicago and AP, which suggest avoiding "%" in humanistic articles. Should Babu not wish to continue the discussion further, I think we can safely return the % and can consider me better educated about our MoS, for which education I thank you (I enjoyed our now moot discussion about changing the quote in any case...) :) Joe 06:05, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Rod Bruinooge

• Ah, thanks for that, it was like 2am and I tried briefly to find the names of those categories, but must have missed them. Sorry about that! - pm_shef 14:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Merger

I hope someone just moves the movie list over. I don't know if there is any movies I've missed that is on that particular list but I add when I can to the TV and movie list. jdobbin 21:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

The Pink Panther (disambiguation)

Hi, thanks for your query. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) prescribes not using excess wikilinks. The reason is that disambiguation pages are solely for navigation, and that unneeded links distract readers (for example a "clean" disambiguation page can have 5 links to choose from, but excess links could make that >30 links/choices).--Commander Keane 22:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs List of Manitoba regions Elie, Manitoba CKSB (AM) Joe Swanson Animator John Dobbin Tweety and the Beanstalk Taz-Mania Pewterschmidt family CBWFT-TV Peter Graves (actor) Northern Region, Manitoba Gunton, Manitoba The Bugs Bunny Show Mr. Spacely Dog Pounded Canary Row Pixie & Dixie and Mr. Jinks Space Jam

Cleanup Monsters, Inc. Motion blur The Tracey Ullman Show shorts Merge Shadow Warrior VC-1 Chicken Little (2005 film) Add Sources Vicky (The Fairly OddParents) A Troll in Central Park Linda Asper Wikify Karen Horney Porch climbers PBS idents Expand Donkey Kong Jr. (arcade game) Fred Penner Frank Syms

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 SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba 19:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

DeMarco-Becket Memorial Trophy

Yes, I know. I had already put an apology on his/her talk page. I got stuck in a refresh-loop with a revert and it automatically reverted it several more times. Ted 21:43, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Rodrigue

I've reverted the move. Thanks for bringing it to my attention — because of the way he did the edit (moving it and then erasing the resulting redirect), moving it back required admin privileges to delete the existing page. I've briefly reviewed his edit history to see if there were any other inappropriate edits to revert; please do let me know if you come across any more. Bearcat 00:58, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

RMs / communities in Manitoba

Hi again! I'm not going to beat a dead horse here but, as the reverts of some of my edits show, we may not be attaining the accuracy we are looking for using the standardized method on the lists of communities. One of the reverts to Clanwilliam, Manitoba from the RM for example, now has the article on the RM titled by a community from the RM of Minto..(that being Clanwilliam). The Rural Municipality of Cartier does not have an individual community named Cartier, Manitoba. See my concern? I can spot any number of problems such as this in the list of communities. I'm going to move on to other things but didn't want folks to think I was being perverse; only trying to hit a higher level of accuracy. Cheers! Stormbay 02:11, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

• I'm certainly appreciative of the problem you are trying to resolve. In the example of Clanwilliam, I just felt it was wrong and reverted it with an explanation. It stayed that way for a while and then was reverted. With the RMs, I agree with User:Earl Andrew that the RM handle just repeats itself. However, the relevancy to someone searching for that item is undeniable. As you well know, in the case of a RM with a town of the same name in it; if the town is incorporated, it will have a mayor and council while the RM will have a separate Reeve and council. One of the reverted titles from yesterday changes the title to a non-existant community to preserve the system in place. It is, however, not a hill I choose to die on. I recognize the problem and will think about solutions. In the meantime, I don't believe that one can reliably call all RMs by (Name, Manitoba) since no one would look for it that way. I am always willing to discuss and do have a longstanding knowledge of the Manitoba situation. I am a "hunt & peck"" typist, so will end for now with a promise to contribute, if I can, to a solution. :-) Stormbay 17:16, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Springfield, Manitoba

Could you check the article Springfield, Manitoba and the talk on the above, Talk:Springfield, Manitoba. It seems you have a handle on what will be done with the RM naming to standardize it. I'm not sure the best way to correct some of this. Thanks! Stormbay 04:13, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

• I'll stick a few comments on the Talk:Springfield, Manitoba page. I'm not hung up on any particular approach to this as long as it gives accuracy and searchability.Stormbay 21:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

• • I changed my mind and will put the few comments here. Firstly, apologies for not replying sooner. I was thinking about it but don't have a strong opinion other than as stated above. In cases such as Cartier, Manitoba and Springfield, Manitoba, there are no such places so I see no reason not to call them what they are; ie: RM's or Rural Municipalities (or even Municipalities). In other cases, (Hamiota, Manitoba and the Rural Municipality of Hamiota) some disambiguation must occur. Most RMs do not share a name with a town, village, city within their boundaries so that RM of "X", Manitoba, Saskatchewan or whatever would be my choice. I drove across Manitoba and most of Saskachewan this past week and took particular notice of what is in use. RM of "X" is the most popular (fits on signage quite neatly). Municipality of "X" was also in use (mostly where there is an urban element near places like Winnipeg, Regina and Saskatoon). Spelling out the whole thing was rare...again I think signage considerations. Who will be looking for this type of information? Largely people who make this type of distinction in their daily lives. These people are grounded to a community but recognize the political, economic and jurisdictional realities of the RMs. On a final note, maybe the majority of them are not worth the time/effort to create an article whith such a narrow appeal. If they are; call them what they are, disambiguate where necessary and carry on. That's my tirade. I think that whatever is done, should reflect what is the reality. I will watch with interest what is decided since there are edits that I will leave alone until this is resolved. Thanks for showing an interest in my opinion. I maybe can avoid some "reverts" in the future.  :-) Stormbay 22:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Canadadrainagebasinsmap.jpg

Yes, it looks like you found it. Just add that link to the Image Description page and remove the Template:Nsd message. The image should really have some sort of Fair use rationale, too. Even better would be to create a free map with the same information. Jkelly 23:16, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Four-minute mile

Thanks for the advice. Zepheus 16:58, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

QWERTY

Sorry 'bout that. I thought I had gone back to the right one, but obviously I didn't. I hate it when there are five or six unreverted vandalism's in a row (or intersperced with a partial revert) - seems like I'm not grabbing the right one. I am pretty sure I did this manually because it didn't say using Vandalproof or using Popups. Those would have filled in the summary automatically. I have to watch how late I edit. A tired editor isn't always an accurate editor. Thanks for catching and correcting my mistake. --Geneb1955^Talk/_CVU 22:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Bestghuran

Thank you very much for informing me about this, as I would not have known otherwise (he was autoblocked, you see... usually admins get e-mailed about this stuff, but he seems like he'd rather just post on his talk page, which I wouldn't've seen otherwise). Cheers, Snoutwood (talk) 05:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Doug Berry Article

Hey, thanks for editing the Doug Berry article..you did amazing!

One thing though, Doug Berry didn't move to Montreal to coach the Als, nor has he moved permanently to Winnipeg to coach the Blue Bombers, I'm gonna leave my last paragraph out unless you see fit to put some like it back in though.

Berry currently resides in Amherst, Massachusetts, with his wife Carol, and daughters Jessica and Kasey.{{fact}}

CaptHowdy 23:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, cool. Thanks for the info. CaptHowdy

Okay. I was going to setup all the photos first, good thing to know. Thanx, I'll stop. CaptHowdy 00:29, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Katie Finneran

That's a good question. I did a quick search and I keep seeing 1972, in every place but Imdb. I guess for now I'll change it back to 1972. I did post a question on Imdb, though, since most of the users are very helpful in matters like this. Kris 20:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)Kc12286

Re: Street Fighter

Yeah, probably the best idea. I saw that there were lots of articles with similiar titles, so making a disambiguation page at Street Fight was probably the best idea. Thanks!--Sean Black 04:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Clue (film)

Please see my rationale on the talk page about the redlinks, redlinks to people who will almost definitely not have an article about themselves are absolutely pointless and are ugly, on top of that I'm pretty sure they're against the MOS but I can't quote the specific section off the top of my head. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 18:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Chelsea Handler

I am an educated, articulate man; have used Wiki for 4 years. You are a bureaucratic bundle of vapid wasted space- worrying about the unfunny, (and 40 year old) Chelsea Handler. She is 40, i know someone who went to high school with her. I am no vandal. Stay out of this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.83.244.225 (talk • contribs)

User:70.81.117.175

I did my best. I was thinking of creating a set template for visible minorities/ethnic diversity in canada. Maybe that would avoid this kind of twisted stats. -- TheMightyQuill 08:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

My problem isn't lists, it's the word "trivia". --The_stuart 14:22, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

46th Grey Cup

Yes it was an oversight on my part. I have moved it to the appropriate section (from 47th to 46th).

I also changed the appropriate links from the Blue Bombers page.

CaptHowdy 18:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Skookum1 re Norwegian Canadian cat

Hey; just to note I'm not the one who put that there; another user who I'd commented on the lack of a category went and created it, adding myself and himself to the cat...my grandfather Endre Johannes Cleven will have a legitimate article at some point (I just haven't written it yet).Skookum1 20:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)