User talk:The Literate Engineer/archive1

Welomings

Welcome!

Hello, The Literate Engineer/archive1, 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!, SqueakBox 04:14, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome, fellow engineer. Tom Haws 20:30, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

A Wilhelm Scream (band)

The article is a cut and paste from [1], possible copyvio candidate. JamesBurns 10:32, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Rape culture

Hi LitEng, that's an interesting question. I think it depends on the use and meaning of the term "rape culture", how well referenced it is, and whether you can sustain an argument to have it included in rape, or whether it merits its own article. If you mean that our society has a culture of rape then that might be better covered in the various sections in the main article. However, if its a specific/technical term, then I would say create its own article. Whatever you do, cite your sources, be bold and create brilliant prose! I would say make its own article, and it will be merged or VfD'd if others don't agree. As rape is a controversial topic, additions are wont to be savagely critiqued. Cheers, An An 07:54, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for Spamming

I apologize to everyone whose talk pages I spammed about the Comunleng VFD-2. Basically some complaints were issued that it was abuse of the process to nominate it again only 4 weeks after it was closed as "no consensus". One user suggested that all "keep" voters from the first debate should be notified. I notified yall. Another pointed out it was unfair to only notify "keep" voters. So I notified the "delete" voters. I feel like a meatpuppeting spammer, and I'm sorry. I'll never do something like this again. And now hopefully Comunleng will finally become the redlink it needs to be. And I really apologize for them being signed as an IP address; I'd thought I'd been logged in, and I don't know what happened. The Literate Engineer 23:56, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting emotionally

Oh come on. That was funnier, and I laughed when I saw it. It's nice to punctuate the dreary drudgery of VfD with humor. So thank you back. Although it did bring back all those bad memories of The Scarlet Letter (NOOOO!!!) Well, good night now (2:30, how did that happen?!) --Dmcdevit·t 09:32, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

My thanks for adding some clarity and astute comments to the discussion concerning constructed languages. I, for one appreciated it. Just a shout-out to let you know. Good luck in all your future endevour. Hamster Sandwich 11:23, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

MacKinnon Snopes thing

I conceed that, in form, the Snopes article is neutral, but it includes a bit of commentary that makes MacKinnon seem like a b-word. If I get in contact with Prof. MacKinnon (which I plan to do), I will ask her to make the call. Anyway, the "anti" heading will probably disappear once a good collection of links is gathered. Ideally, someone who is more familiar with her would organize them better. Amorrow 17:20, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hero-worship: Yes, MacKinnon has a lot of respectable accomplishments, but she has a current email address. It is really just matter of sending a thoughful, relevant email. When I initiate contact, I try to keep the matter to their Wikipedia article and ask for feedback. I am sure that people like MacKinnon recognize that Wikipedia will have some say about their legacy and then they respond and participate. It is just a matter of communication technology as door-opener. If MacKinnon does not respond to the email, then I might take it upon myself to phone her. I gotta get VOIP to get my long-distance charges under control...

Lists Lists Lists Redux

Problem I see with entries like a List of Romantic Comedies, or List of Twilight Zone Episodes, or List of Shortstops, or List of Speakers of the U.S. House of Representatives, is that they're all examples without a context. It's a case of data without information, and I see that as a big problem.

There are many, many lists on Wiki. I disagree that they're "data without information." I believe there is an informative value in lists as they provide examples of a type of thing. It's "informational data." Apparently a lot of other people do, as there are many entries of lists here. I don't know if a group decision was ever made about whether or not to include lists on Wiki. That may be a very valid decision to make. However, I don't think removing one list randomly is the way to remedy that issue. It's being subjective to decide to remove one list randomly but not all lists. Additionally, it's a nearly impossible matter to police. Best regards, David Hoag 16:11, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A vandal has copied your name.

Literate, thank you for the heads up! I placed a notice onto WP:AN/I. Thanks, and thank you for your vote on my RfA, too. :) Func( t, c ) 15:23, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see. That was subtle for a vandal. I scrutinised the user name, but not the URL. Thanks for letting me know; I shall be more scrutinorious in future! -Splash 15:27, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Func's RfA :)

The Literate Engineer, indeed! Thank you for supporting my adminship, your vote was very much appreciated. :)

Incidentally, I had meant to tell you that rape culture is a very well written article, in the very finest tradition of Wikipedia. I had meant to nominate it for DYK, but I was distracted at the time, and it became too late later on, (there is a 5 day limit for newness, I believe). I'm sorry I dropped the ball there.

Thank you again for letting me know about the vandal. It actually freaked me out...for a moment, I thought my account had somehow been hijacked or something.

Please never hesitate to let me know if you have concerns with any administrative action I may make.

Func( t, c, e, ) 03:52, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: adminship

Hey, thanks for the kind comments on my talk page. To be compared to those two admins is quite something! As I said to Dbraceyrules, my first edit was on 2nd June. This means I didn't cross the semi-magical 3 month threshold yet, despite my 7100ish edit count. Given the magic of 3 months on RfA, perhaps any nomination should wait a few weeks? -Splash 13:01, 22 August 2005 (UTC) (PS. you've a very good policy on lists!)[reply]

Re:Stalking

Thanks. I just found that part of the article a little confusing and I thought of a way to fix it. elvenscout742 10:38, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Voting on wikipedia:conlangs has started

Since you've been part of the discussion I thought I'd let you know. Do spread the word to others who would like to vote on it too. --Kaleissin 14:36:57, 2005-08-29 (UTC)

Conlang voting

I'll start by saying that the essence of a good compromise is that everyone leaves the table equally unhappy. I propose weighing all votes in favor of giving minor weight to a proposed notability factor. Let "major" and "oppose" votes simply cancel each other out, then do an instant runoff with what's left. Most of the factors will end up going with "minor", which is itself a compromise position. And remember, people will vote in VfD the way they are going to vote, based on their own internal notability factors. In other words, don't fret too much over the outcome of the vote. -- BD2412 ^talk 21:42, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Literate. Er, I'm trying to get a handle on the situation. It does look like someone started a vote rather prematurely, though I see that some people have been very bold in trying to deal with it, such as renaming it "straw poll" and, indeed, Kim Bruning appearently deleting it out of hand.... funny place we have around here. :) I'll try to get myself up to speed and see if I can contribute to the disscussion. :) Func( t, c, @, ) 01:31, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity discussions?

Was browsing through some nashville user pages... I'm curious if you've been involved in any religious debates online (combating extremists, for example). I noticed that you're in Category:Atheist Wikipedians. Additionally, as a fellow feminist, I'd love to hear some of your thoughts about the world! Always a pleasure finding new people and ideas on Wikipedia. Thanks for all the interesting links and info on your user page. --J. J. 07:15, 2005 September 1 (UTC)

I'm agnostic, not atheistic. Here's a challenge for you, Mr. Literate: Prove there is no God. (Fear not... I ask the opposite question of my religious acquaintances, and they can't do it, either). Wahkeenah 02:30, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow!

Wow! That came as a surprise! Thank you very much, especially for such a generous nomination statement. I just accepted and answered The Questions of Doom, with longer answers than I had anticipated. So, with all my available extremities crossed, let's hope things go well! And thanks again. -Splash 12:41, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that went rather well!! Thank you so much for the nomination — I really hadn't expected to draw quite so much support. We made it into the top of the most successful RFAs list (or will do)! Anyway, so as I start to learn how not to cause carnage with my new buttons, please do keep an eye on me and my log...and let me know if I can help you out. Thanks again. -Splash 13:10, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting comments on template alteration

Hello. I see you are using one or more of the User instruments templates in your Babel box. Inspired by some recent developments, I want to rework all the templates in there (including ones used on user pages), to make them more like the regular Babel templates. However, I thought I should hear from the people this would affect before actually doing it. Please weigh in at User:Ddawson/User instruments. Ddawson 11:31, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for supporting my RfA. Your support means a lot to me; I've always found you to be levelheaded, thoughtful, and (yes) literate. I'll do my best to live up to the confidence you're showing in me. Nandesuka 01:00, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thanks for your support in my RfA. Just to help put your mind at ease, I'm not exactly proud of my work at List of songs by name either. I was a bit surprised BD2412 mentioned it; I certainly wouldn't have. That work was done in my earlier days, when my thinking was that if we're going to have such articles, they should make an attempt to be a bit more complete. Had I been a more experienced and bold user, I probably would have thought that maybe we shouldn't have such articles, at least, not in that form. (Although I still believe that such a list is preferable to nanostubs on each song; an idea which seems to pop its head up every now and then.) Anyway, I appreciate the things you said in your vote. A sincere, unsought compliment is one of life's little pleasures. -R. fiend 15:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of songs

I am writing because you contributed to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Centralized discussion/Lists of songs. I have made a policy proposal at User:Wahoofive/Lists of songs and would welcome your comments. —Wahoofive (talk) 03:38, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New Engineering Wiki

Engineering Wiki is a wiki entirely dedicated to collecting information about Engineering. I invite you to join this wiki.

Lists

Hmm, I'm not sure why you thought my nomination might open the door to blanket deletions. For one thing, in an important sense it was a proposed conversion, not a deletion; for another, opposition to the process was enough that it will surely be a precedent not to go down that road even when it makes sense - nomination for a class of articles for which the same arguments apply. Rd232 ^talk 20:06, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"He is a feminist, with his attitudes shaped most heavily by radical feminism, though he also finds parts of postcolonial feminism to be compelling."

This is impossible. Feminism, by and large, asserts that men cannot *be* feminists, as they don't share the experiences of women. And everyone knows that feminism is about women, not "equality" (whatever that means).

And why would a man *want* to be a radical feminist? Did he have a feminist mother who taught him that men are evil? Does he hate himself and all men?

Feminism is not the friend of men, never has been and unless something weird happens, never will be.

And masculism is not the friend of women, either. Wahkeenah 02:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT 1.5.2

I still say the baseball jargon article in particular is a structured list. There are lots of jargon articles and it organizes them. But that's just semantics, the bottom line is that the article is encyclopedic, it's useful, it organizes other articles. Just because it happens to be a list doesn't mean it's not a good article. It can be read beginning to end and provides a great deal of information about baseball and baseball culture.

But honestly I feel like this was done out of spite and am not really happy about being indirectly forced into argueing over it. --W.marsh 00:33, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation, it helps. I feel like the baseball article says a lot about baseball culture, the terms it discusses are notable and the list plays a central role in that little corner of WP, and it would be a real shame if that somehow gets deleted just because it's in the form of a list. People come to Wikipedia for information, that list provides information about a notable subject, that's what it comes down to for me. But I'd respect the decision obviously, if it did come to a delete. I suppose we could back-and-forth forever, and I hate to cop out this but I'm not ~~in the mood to argue endlessly right now~~ yeah that is a copout. I just meant that I wasn't expecting to spend 2 hours tonight arguing on the internets... sorry. We'll see how the AfDs go. --W.marsh 01:05, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly turn your myopic attention to lists of Penthouse Pets, conspiracy theories, and categories like "People from Pittsburgh", before you go attacking the Great American Game. >:( Wahkeenah 02:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Kudos. Now, when you get through the other 100,000 or so junk articles, then come back and assault the National Pastime. Wahkeenah 05:16, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just trying to figure out why you singled out baseball for this "special treatment". I assume you are going to weed out all other lists of slang and such? If not, then shame on you. I'll tell ya what, though... go post a VfD on that ridiculous "Apollo moon landing hoax accusations" article, and I'll change my vote on this one and not stand in your way otherwise. Wahkeenah 05:33, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of sexual slang

I hear from Uncle G that you were looking for my help. I would love to be of assistance. Unfortunately, I am going to be away from an Internet connection for a couple of days, starting quite soon. Not sure what kind of help you needed — if it's regarding what should stay, I'm not sure I can help in a timely fashion. But if you leave me any tasks on my talk page, I will be sure to do them. :) Jacqui ^★ 14:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A little note on quotation marks

In the section About "people" who use quotation marks to emphasize things of your userpage, you nitpick on the use of quotation marks for purposes other than quotation or derision. I'd like to point out in so doing you have committed one of my own pet peeves about quotation marks: you nested double-quotes within double-quotes. You are supposed to nest single-quotes within double-quotes. ;) - furrykef (Talk at me) 14:47, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the proper usage is alternating, as in "quotes and 'quotes and "quotes"'". As Groucho said, "Add another quote and make it a gallon!" Wahkeenah 15:20, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Need to add some Literate discussion to user page

Hi, interesting user page, though one would think given your moniker, more discussion on literature, as opposed to massage, feminism, and hugs. How about a list of favorite authors? p.s. was considering vandalizing your page just so you could have the fun of bumping the count, but too lazy, sorry. p.p.s hope you dont become another one of those anal admins with no sense of humor bent on excising every possible superfluity from wikipedia, quirkiness is what keeps it interesting. We need some quirkiness to complement the barrage of raw data and boring drivel.

Sex Position Misogynists to Wiki-Hell

I don't consider them to be neologists. "Angry dragon" and "Superman (sex move)" are not newly made up words, but existing words used to describe newly made up ideas (probably better framed as either original research, or just a flat-out hoax). There seemed to be quite a crop of them coming up in the period before I added that section! BD2412 T 13:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Programme lists

A better idea would be to leave The List of Channel 4 programames as a test case. If such a low quality specimen is kept, then it is unlikely that any of the others will get deleted. If it is deleted then it might be a good idea to list the others. - SimonP 05:38, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Slang

This is tricky, really. It's plainly an indiscriminate collection of information in long form, and would plainly be kept by AfD because we should have an article on the topic. Bend over appears to have misunderstood the meaning of and AfD, and of WP:NOT (and of Urban Dictionary, where it would be welcomed). You're at two reverts already and when he reverts once more, he's at the electric fence of 3. I suppose if you want the route of least conflict, don't revert anymore. Perhaps someone else will revert it for you (that's part of the utility of 3RR: it can be avoided by having a consensus of editors on your side). On the other hand, you could revert out to 3 and then he'd probably be burned by 3RR, although he needs warning as a newbie. The possible outcome there is that his 4th revert is left in place, since you'd not violate 3RR and there's the possibility that no-one would revert to your revision. The 'better' behaviour route is no more reverts; whether that trumps the encyclopedic quality requirements in favour of 3 reverts is tricky. You probably have some moral defence in favour of a strong belief that the encyclopedia is better your way to take you out to 3.. Product over process, and all that. -Splash^talk 17:54, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I may or may not get properly involved...depends on how it goes. (Friday should not be using rollback on it, though.) -Splash^talk 18:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Channel 4 meaning

Have you misinterpreted the meaning of "Channel 4" in the article you put on Afd?? Georgia guy 02:14, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Born Again Christians

You didn't stop by to vote! So far the consensus is keep, but I feel it's only getting votes from people with an existing interest in the category. If others do come across the CfD, they probably don't want to get involved in something sticky, or maybe they just don't know much about it. --Foofy 21:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sex Slang

Redirect Resostored, article protected. I'll leave the sock alone if I can. Thanks.Voice of All^T|@|ESP 05:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You may care to help out with the newly created List of sexual slang terms, too. Uncle G 06:58, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article for December 25th

I noticed that you have listed yourself as an atheist Wikipedian. You will probably be interested to know that Brian0918 has nominated Omnipotence paradox as the front page article for December 25th. You can vote on this matter here. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. AngryParsley ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:17, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about this?

Hi, you might remember me from the squabble over the sexual slang list. For what it's worth I like how Sexual Slang looks now... I haven't followed everything but I understand you had a lot to do with it. Anyway, if you have a moment, I discovered an article called Archive of sex related lists today, basically just a list of links to Sexual slang and similar articles, and didn't quite know what to do with it. It seems completely pointless, but I thought I'd see what you thought about it since I'm not totally familiar with the situation. I'd be happy to nominate this for an AfD. --W.marsh 03:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply, I have gone ahead and nominated it for AfD here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archive of sex related lists --W.marsh 16:14, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilove

I tell you, when it first started I had no idea how gratifying that "guestbook" or whatever it is now (read: cabal) would be. Thanks for your note. I had no idea I was there. Since September, too! My what did I do, though? Now, if I could make you smile as well, let's see... gotta see this. Awww. Okay, but I'll have to work on your list philosophy sometime (when I'm not so sleepy). I sure hope list of national libraries wasn't in vain! Hope you have a wonderful day, and keep up your good work. But I'll never let you forget that you stole Splash's nomination away from me... :-) Dmcdevit·t 10:26, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The one thing that made me cringe when I saw your userpage, though, was the name just before mine. I'm still hoping Essjay's not really gone...

Cleanup

I would encourage you to plonk a "cleanup" tag on the article, and, if possible, help to clean it up! :) Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 17:32, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

welcoming new users

Please remember to post the welcome message in the users talk page, not their user page as you did with Silverwolf85, I fixed it though! Cheers! Themindset 03:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

On the above note, thank you for the kind welcome! Your tips are greatly appreciated, and have helped me to make some order out of this chaos! :) Silverwolf85 06:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

neurologic vs. neurological

I couldn't find any difference between the disorders in the "neurologic" category and those in the "neurological" category, so I merged them all into "neurological," and put the neurologic on CfD (Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_December_13#Category:Neurologic_disorders. Neurological seems to be used more than neurologic. --CDN99 18:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re: adminship.

I was nominated back in June, but turned it down (b/c I wanted/needed to leave). I don't know if I would make it throug hthe nomination process, because I've had problems with being dragged into back-and-forths with other users. --FuriousFreddy 04:47, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hello

i read your comment on the GH avisualagency AfD page and saw that you have extensive experience on here. i am trying to contribute to the GH article but everyone on the discussion page keeps giving me the wrong advice. most insisted that i have to prove notability, then they said that it was wrong to list articles about the collective. i don't know who to believe as they all keep leading me astray. if you could please offer me any advice on how to make it better or make any adjustments to the article yourself i would sincerely appreciate it. even if it does get deleted, at least i will have known that i tried my best to make it a better article. thanks so much. Inspectorpanther 15:59, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

for editing reference, these lead to some other wikipedia articles i feel are similar: List of graphic designers, artist collective, art collective

Inspectorpanther 16:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Quayle and phlebitis-I forgot to log in-

Hi!I was writing a comment on the Dan Quayle article about he having phlebitis and I forgot to log in.I quickly corrected the mistake.I hope this will create no problems.My apologies.Thanks-RFD 19:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

Yes, I did protect sexual slang after the repeated insertion of material against 2 AfDs and a Deletion Review that several other admins removed.

If you want me to unprotect, then I will do so. Thank you.Voice of All^T|@|ESP 21:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]