en User talk:LindsayH Archive 6

"Democracy and totalitarianism"(a book of Raymond Aron )” listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect "Democracy and totalitarianism"(a book of Raymond Aron )”. Since you had some involvement with the "Democracy and totalitarianism"(a book of Raymond Aron )” redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — PinkAmpers &^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 21:27, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Super Mario Bros

You wrote: Hello, I'm LindsayH. An edit that you recently made to Super Mario Bros. (disambiguation) seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Happy days, LindsayHello 18:23, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Well, no, it wasn't a test. I get sick of hearing people pronounce the games "Mario Bros" (like "hose"), and thought Wikipedia and in particular this disambiguation/landing page might be a good place to remind everyone to pronounce "brothers" in full. Definitely not a test though! Would there be a better place? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.242.174 (talk) 18:40, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, mine apologies, User:129.22.242.174; i assumed that it was a test, because Bros is the standard abbreviation for Brothers, and its standard pronunciation is the full word. I still believe that the clarification you put in is unnecessary, and should not be there, primarily because, as i say, it is standard pronunciation, any mispronunciation is fairly rare, and we aren't a guide to how to say words, anyway. I do apologise, though, as it was not mine intention to offend or make an accusation. I hope you will stay, and continue to help, learning more about WP and our ways. Please ask, if i can help in any way. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 18:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, although it is the standard pronunciation, if you spend enough time around kids, teenagers, and 20somethings, or watch enough YouTube videos about the games, you will definitely hear them pronounce it "bros" quite a lot. I think it would be useful to put it somewhere; I know many Wikipedia articles have pronunciation guides for proper names, so why not this? What do you think would be the best way to do it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.242.174 (talk) 19:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I'll be honest, i have never watched a video of it ~ i always enjoyed playing the the games myself, can't imagine that watching someone else is at all interesting; perhaps that shows more about me.... Anyway, i'm not ignoring you, i am just thinking about how best to incorporate the pronunciation. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 19:43, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have made an adjustment; no guarantees that it will stay, however; there may be people who dislike it. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 10:44, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, that looks nice and I hope it will be helpful to people! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.242.174 (talk) 16:04, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seal of Athens

Hello, thank you for contacting me. The seal/emblem/coat of arms of Athens has two versions. Because Athens is visited by a lot of tourists it has an English and a Greek version. They have the exact same colours and design, the only change being the lettering. The old version had wrong colours and some design problems. The version I added is the most accurate one as the document is official. TakisA1 (talk) 19:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Torch/Flashlight

Wikpedia currently carries a US English Title and for this Topic and appears to be aggressively defending it. The Oxford Dictionary sides with Torch- a portable means of illumination, acknowledging the US word of "FLASHLIGHT" as an alternative despite this being used initially as a product description by manufacturer. Changing this would seem to be the correct thing to do. The word Torch, is, it seems , being adopted in US English to describe a Stick with with combustible material at one end, which is up to the US. However, if Wikpedia is genuinely to become a world resource, the world -wide name in use should take preference. Until this is the case, Wikpedia should carry a Language disclaimer at the forefront of any definition that the dominant content in Wikpedia will be US English and that the Definitions contained are only appropriate to The US. WIKPEDIA should also stop asking for donations from outside the US if they wish only to serve the one Language and region.

The same would be said in the Petrol vs Gasoline argument. More countries around the world say Petrol Rather than Gasoline but guess which one Wikpedia uses.

Often busy with Work.....? not when someone edits Flashlight though ???

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/torch https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/torch

torch (plural torches)

A stick with a flame on one end, used chiefly as a light source; a similarly shaped implement with a replaceable supply of flammable material. The mob of angry villagers carried torches and pitchforks to the vampire's castle. THE US

(Britain, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa) A portable light source powered by electricity; a flashlight. - The Majority of English speaking Countries........

Ernst slipped and dropped his torch on the flagstones, shattering the bulb and plunging us into darkness. (slang, US) An arsonist. Short form for blowtorch or oxy-gas torch Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.97.181 (talk) 15:37, 29 April 2018 (UTC) (reply)

About Gnosticism

Hello LindsayH. I am trying to change the article for Gosticism. I am from Albania and I am bringing true evidences about that article. As for your answer for reverting my changes on that article I want to yes I am thinking you are making a mistake and you are illiterate also and you are censoring the truth. Word "gnoh" is of albanian origin. It has nothing to do with greek language. Please revise and correct the article of Gnosticism and let the exact term to show the truth. Stop censoring the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.106.161.173 (talk) 17:31, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about the deletion. The above comment is of course uncalled for and per WP:PA I did not think it could be worth keeping. This reply is also for 79.106.161.173 who I hope will realize that this is not productive to collaboration (if they ever read replies)... Future mistakes are still possible, but I'll try to remember to let you handle any future message, no matter how inappropriate. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) —Paleo Neonate – 12:54, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Overlink

overlooking? On David pecker page why do you find "catch and kill" to be overlinking? Mcfnord (talk) 17:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mcfnord. Because it was linked four times in the article, which is too many (best practice, i think, is once); it is still linked at least once, even after my action. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 23:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to operation goldfish movie

Why have you reverted valid edits made to the wiki page of Operation Goldfish movie?? There's so much spam, grammatical mistakes and unrelevant information right now. Which I corrected and edited.

Hi 2405:204:2021:806e:7542:be08:44ec:2d51. I reverted your edits because the one i saw changed "lead" to "the core character", which is not the best use of English. I have gone back and noticed that in reverting that edit i also changed two others, because the software assumed that all edits by the same person (you) were of the same quality and needed undoing. I apologise if you were making good edits; feel free to make more or, better yet, make an account and become a great editor. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 16:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ProveIt

Although I have never used it and was not aware it even existed until today, I think it is probably a mistake in ProveIt, as you will see from the others I have highlighted (in my edit history), it seems that ProveIt does not handle multiple templates within one ref...tag pair.

I came across the edit you made, because some years ago I went through all the Lundy citations at the time adding templates stating that his website was unreliable unless WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT was used. It happens that another editor saw that and added the reliable sources to the citations. This was given as an example on WP:RSN and in time archived. I have just revived it for another RSN discussion taking place at the moment, as it is a good example of Wikipedia being a work in progress by a number of different editors. Hence my surprise when the Lundy citations had been changed back to just the link.

I am scanning through your list of edits at around the time of the Lundy edit to see if ProveIt has caused any similar miskes when I came across this Revision as of 18:09, 21 February 2016. I think it is a mistake to remove such partial citations, and I think a better way to go is to leave the citation in place and add the template {{full}}} with a reason= parameter. -- PBS (talk)

I have used ProveIt for some years, but at some point, after the edits you have pointed out, i discovered that it was occasionally making errors/edits i did not ask it to do. Obviously, i am responsible for what i do, even when that is unintentional, so, while i'm glad you have found and corrected these errors of mine, i'm also embarrassed to have made them. In fact, i stopped with the tool for a while and now mostly use AWB because i find it easier to check; since i started using it again i am generally careful that only what is intended actually happens. I take your point on using {{full}} and shall add that to my repertoire. Thank you. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 08:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected, my apologies

I have undone my mistake. Actually I wanted to revert it to the last edit by Begoon because DrKava is removing sources again and again. Regret inconvenience Saminhil (talk) 10:14, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

"what the reference actually says"

Thank you for welcoming new users, for reverting vandalism, puffery and peacock-language, with clear messages, for service from 2006, for disambiguations and page moves, for restoring to "what the reference actually says", - Boss Linda Lesley, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:50, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious again

"slight rewrite for clarity & flow"

Thank you for welcoming new users, for "slight rewrite for clarity & flow", for service from 2006, for reverting with precise messages, for gnomish repair work, for expressing opinion and feeling on user talk pages only, for welcoming a dictator of the right approach, - Linda, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

Dear, I have an awfully bad memory, but you deserve two ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; i was amused. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 06:18, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

.... Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 62#OpenStreetMap..--Moxy 🍁 14:11, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear what you refer to

You mention "large-scale potentially-disruptive actions without first inviting discussion". Did anyone present an example of that, with a link for evidence? Or do you have an example or two in mind that you could share? Please don't just repeat hearsay about me. Dicklyon (talk) 22:53, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Thanks for your support for my unsuccessful RfA. Same as last time. Same result unfortunately. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:07, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Justmor1

Hi. With regards to the above user, it might be worth taking it to one of the incident boards (but I'm not sure which one).

It appears to me that this is a slightly unusual case where just reverting the user might not get the best result. It looks like they are an advocate account, and that some of the material they previously added and are now trying to remove was sourced from websites they own and/or from campaigns their non-profit was involved in. It might be for the best if some of that material is removed, but of course by non-zealous editors who will look at the bigger picture.

I'm not at all confident in the above assessment - if you have any extra insight please do let me know. I prefer to be pinged so that I can reply in the same place. --kingboyk (talk) 21:13, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PS They're not editing at the moment so I won't intervene. However, there is scope to block for edit warring with or without a 3RR violation. If they start up again and I am around, feel free to ping me with evidence or ask for a block at WP:AN/EW. It might be wise to not make further reversions yourself before posting there! --kingboyk (talk) 21:26, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the message. I agree that he seems to be an advocate account, odd that he inserted "bad" material and now wants to keep it out. His claim that Tesco has changed policy (possibly partially true, from one of the references he's put in), leads me to believe that he's not really here for the encyclopaedia, but curiously not for the usual purpose of making someone/thing look good, either; it's more as though he's attempting to use WP to put pressure on the outside world. I don't know. Anyway, after work, i'll take a look at the articles he's been playing with and see what sort of state they're in.

I hope it's very clear that, whatever i do, i won't be edit warring! Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 05:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Time to archive?

Your talk page is pretty big - might it be time to consider archiving some of the old threads? :) --kingboyk (talk) 21:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thus far in my career i have archived every two years. I'm due this December, but i'll take a look and see if it needs it ~ honestly, i don't pay a whole lot of attention to it, so i've not really noticed! Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 05:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your page, your rules, but you're up to 88 in the TOC, and 90Kb of data ;) Anyway: Thanks for the replies. Feel free to ping me or start a new thread on my talk page if I can help with anything. --kingboyk (talk) 05:15, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm embarrassed to say it, but i had absolutely no idea the TOC was up to 88 ~ if asked, without looking i probably would have guessed it had about two dozen entries. Your point was a real surprise to me. Whoops! I guess i'll take out some of the unneeded RfC notices. Thanks for your message. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 17:03, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to "12-hour clock"

In this edit to 12-hour clock, in a citation to a chapter of the 2008 US Government Publishing Office Style Manual you set the website parameter to gpo.gov. I disagree and have changed it to "govinfo" which I believe is the title the Government Publicaiotns Office intends for the [ website] that hosts the manual. Would you please explain your reasoning for your edit? Jc3s5h (talk) 15:38, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, Jc3s5h. When i make those edits all i am doing is removing the unneeded "www." which the website parameter doesn't want. The website was already gpo.gov, as the diff you gave shows, so i didn't "set" the parameter at all. Your change is fine, though actually literally inaccurate, as "govinfo" isn't the website the cite uses (and in fact isn't a website at all, is it? with no .gov or .com). I certainly won't revert you, though; all Kahtar is doing it correcting the CS1 errors. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 17:00, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are assigning the website parameter contrary to the template documentaion. See the Template:Cite web#Example which contains the example "website=Encyclopedia of Things".

The description of the website parameter states

website (required): Title of website; may be wikilinked. Displays in italics. Aliases: work

We could imagine an extreme example where a website was titled The John Doe Foundation Newsletter and the publisher had decided not to obtain a domain name, so the URL looked something like http://192.168.1.1. That wouldn't make a very good website title, would it. Jc3s5h (talk) 17:30, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, i take your point, though i'm not entirely sure i agree (or disagree; just not sure at all, at the moment). I think the community is in the process of redefining what we mean by and how we use the term "website" at the moment; there's been and may still be a big discussion about it on-going. Anyway, as far as i have understood, however we define it, the CS1 and CS2 templates don't want an actual external link in the parameter "website=", and all i have been doing as Kahtar is ensuring that's the case; i think that some of the documentation for them has been changed recently, and may not, at this point, be entirely stable; that being so, in the absence of contrary evidence, i shall continue removing the external links. If then you or i or some other member of the community then changes entirely what is there, no worries. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 07:51, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Almond

Hi, i reverted your recent edit on Almond. Are you really serious when you say "Encyclopedia Iranica is potentially biased" ? This source is a reliable source and written by prominent specialists, as an experienced editor, you should know this. Also, the other sources also support that the origin of Almond is geographically located in the area of Iran and its surrounding countries. Just take a look at the map provided by Kew, another reliable source when it comes to this kind of topics. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:11, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course i wasn't joking; i will do what i try always to and presume you didn't intend to insult me, but such a question is nonetheless insulting. I don't know how you edit, but i take what i do here very seriously indeed and try always to be positive in every contribution. I think, if you thought about it, you could have seen why i did what i did: It seems that almost everything in that area of the world has the potential for POV edits on WP and, seeing a phrase which might be taken as glorifying a particular country, sourced only to a reference with that country's name in the title...well, surely it's a reasonable conclusion to draw. Especially when, despite your statement about maps, the other two references do not support the statement. I won't argue it or revert, but i still question the bald statement that almonds originate in Iran. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 08:37, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also take what i do here seriously and there was absolutely no insult in my question, your claim about Encyclopedia Iranica is baseless and i'm quite speechless on how you keep saying that just because the word Iranica contains "Iran", therefore this source might be biased ... So, with such a rationale, one could say that "encyclopedia of Islam" is biased about Islam-related topics just because its title contains "Islam" ! Also, other sources, such as that one also support the claim. Regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i am sorry. I had thought we were having a conversation and that if i explained why i made the edit you objected to you'd understand. I'm glad you didn't intend to insult me, thank you. I think we'll just have to agree to differ on whether or not the original edit was worthy, though i'm sure you'll notice that i haven't rereverted you; i also notice that you have changed the referencing and phrasing of the paragraph we disagreed about ~ as i pointed out above, the Kew map didn't show what you implied it did. Nicely done! Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 09:01, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Kew source was supporting a Caucasian origin for Almond, therefore, since Caucasus is a surrounding area of Iran, i don't see what was wrong with the lead's claim. However, since you disagreed with that, i removed the source and reworded the sentence. Best regards.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for taking the time to consider my candidacy, including the answers I gave, during my recent RfA. I appreciate that time and the thoughts that you expressed. Know that it will be happy days for me the next time our wiki paths cross. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:17, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

City of London School

You deleted what I said about the City Of London School headmaster, I attend the school and a changeover has just been made. Joseph 10284 (talk) 17:35, 13 October 2019 (UTC) joseph[reply]

Did i? I also deleted/reverted a whole lot of vandalism which you had done. All the non-helpful information you'd added overwhelmed anything correct you put in; if you are going to edit, i'd like to suggest you do so productively. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 18:46, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ok fine i will edit only the correct bit which is the head master and chairmans name since they got replaced Joseph 10284 (talk) 20:52, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Anarchist" v "Opposer of war"

Hi Lindsay. Elser's own testimony given to the Gestapo in Nov'39 clearly says that is why he attempted to kill Hitler - to stop the war - I thought that was more constructive than giving him the name of anarchist. He wasn't that and would not have not what it was!

Hope that is okay to write here Simon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:D816:B500:A01E:CEB2:FB56:CC43 (talk) 17:36, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries (i've moved your reply down, as putting a new message at the bottom is standard practice around here). I agree that "anarchist" may not be the ideal term; i'll take a second look and see if i can help out any. Thank you for your reply, Simon. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 18:51, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, i have now changed "anarchist" to "idealist"; perhaps not the best term, but certainly better. Hope you see this, and approve. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 19:03, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Transylvanian Saxons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Andrew II (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:09, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]