User talk:Mongreilf

Ming Mang Mong

I wouldn't delete an article for non-notabilty of its subject — but non-existence is another matter, especially when the band's existence is attributed to made-up people, etc. (the tone of the article didn't help, it's true). If there's any information that could be genuinely useful, can it be added to the Prolapse (band) article? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:56, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Name similarity

That is funny! Moncrief 20:22, May 10, 2005 (UTC)

Leicester bit in English English

I don't doubt that some Leicester accents have [ɒ] (the vowel of Received Pronunciation cot) at the end of the name of the city (and in other similar words); indeed I've heard it myself. But I've never found a source for this information, and to comply with WP:NOR and WP:V we need one if it's to be included. Do you have a reference for this, and if so could you add details to the article?

Also, we should use IPA for pronunciation. Things like "Leicestoh" may be misunderstood, for various reasons; for one "oh" is likely to suggest the vowel of coat). The IPA in this case would, I think, be [ˈlɛstɒ].

--JHJ 14:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a bit of a look, but without much luck. Hughes and Trudgill, English Accents and Dialects, has a section on Leicester (although their example speaker is actually from Ashby de la Zouch) and doesn't mention it. There's a BBC Voices page here which mentions the vowel sound in border as a distinctive Leicester feature, but doesn't say what it is (and I think that listening to the recording and transcribing the vowel would count as original research). I'll either edit it along those lines, or leave it in with a [citation needed] template.--JHJ 16:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Manchester City are

See English plural#Discretionary_plurals. In British English, proper nouns that describe a collective entity are often treated as plurals, especially in the case of sports teams e.g. England are playing France, Liverpool have some great defenders. MCFC is an English football club, therefore Wikipedia uses the British English style for their article. It might appear a bit awkward to you, but it's standard usage on the eastern side of the Atlantic. Demiurge 09:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I live on the eastern side of the atlantic. The discretionary plural is awkward here because of the singular nature of the object of the verb is/are, that is a club. Britain are an Island makes no sense while Britain are at war with France does.--Mongreilf 14:27, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PGUK

I see you have found where the consensus building ran into a brick wall, so as to speak. I've looked through all PGUK's edits, and, as far as I can see, she was a model wikipedian, working respectfully and co-operatively throughout with other editors (including admins) and being hugely encouraged by them, until there was a fevered debate on AN/I, which she wasn't even informed about at first, till I discovered it and told her. It is hardly surprising, having been the subject of rampant speculation, that she opted out. It does not speak well of the project, unfortunately. Tyrenius 15:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand wikipedia is not a democracy, it's not, not really, but i think a lot of unpaid work is being done under the illusion that it is. The PGUK thing has made me realised that consensus is little more than a mechanism for writing wikipedia, rather than a central philosophy.
I'm also trying very hard not to go into the reasons behind the unusual responses to pguk (unusual even if she had been the worst anyone said of her, ie troll/vandal/sockpuppet) and stay in policy and reasonable, but sex is probably at the heart of this.--Mongreilf 15:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I started a written analysis, but unfortunately pressed the wrong button and lost it, so I'll have to start again. It is unfortunate that some major mis-perceptions occurred and did not get corrected. The arguments on both sides omitted a proper study of her history on the project. Tyrenius 06:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPA

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

Mongreilf: I must tell you that I find this comment of yours to be an offensive personal attack (on a few levels) and would like to ask you to please remove it. There is no call for such conduct towards me, especially given the civil conversation I thought we were having. Please remove that comment. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 16:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wasn't directed particularly at you, though i guess by inclusion it was. It's gone. I should have made the point better which is that liberals need to stay liberal in the face of difficulties--Mongreilf 16:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mongreilf - that comment of yours is till on Tyrenius' page. Would you please delete it? Thank you. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 22:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Copied from User talk:RyanFreisling:
I assumed it was a generalisation rather than a personal attack, and would have been happy with a statement to confirm that. However, I don't think it's particularly helpful anyway, and, per conversation above, I have deleted it. Tyrenius 03:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tyrenius 06:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emperor Penguin vandal.

If you want to report vandalism, you should try WP:AIV - Mgm|(talk) 07:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wheatgrass

Perhaps you can help mw with the item you pointed out on the WG page. I made some changes, but would appreciate you feedback. Anthon01 (talk) 16:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of 212.183.134.210 lifted or expired.

Request handled by: jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CP block

Forget trying to reason with Ed. I was permanently blocked for correcting spelling on an article he didn't like. Once you have the scarlet L, you're dead to him.Czolgolz (talk) 18:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but you are a liberal, so surely he was right? --Mongreilf (talk) 18:33, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think I'm a liberal? I'm just disenchated with CP. Oh, I guess it was the big 'I'm a liberal' sign on my user page. Forgot about that :) Czolgolz (talk) 19:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Liberal or not, I like the way he writes. And edits. --Uncle Ed (talk) 20:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a reflex minor spell/typo edit correcting habit that is entirely the consequence of however many years on wikis. It's almost like a nervous tic. ;)--Mongreilf (talk) 22:12, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:HMS_Shah_Escort.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HMS_Shah_Escort.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

shoop

Don't bother, "Lord Sesshomaru" is an obnoxious, authoritarian prick with an obsessive-compulsive disorder which will make trying to alter any article he's involved in the Wikipedia equivalent of slamming your dick repeatedly in a car door. Take my advice and save yourself the aggravation. Let him have his article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SmashTheState (talk • contribs) 22:06, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not patronising the oldies

Sorry about yesterday's comment. I was very tired and ratty, and I ended up snapping at people all over the place. I should really have turned the computer off. Very sorry :( Totnesmartin (talk) 09:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A centralised discussion which may interest you

Hi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

bentonite clay discussion

Dear Mongreilf,

You wrote something on talk:bentonite page about medicinal uses of bentonite. I agree with you that this is an important subject. Perhaps you'll be interested in the recent discussion there. I'm planning to add some more material about the medicinal uses of bentonite soon.

All the best, Dyuku (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A deletion review discussion you may wish to contribute to.

Hi. I've listed two deleted articles at Wikipedia:Deletion_review, following the discussion on "lists of unusual things" which took place earlier in the year. As a contributor to that discussion, you might be interested in expressing an opinion on whether the two deleted articles should be restored. SP-KP (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conservation International

Thanks for the heads up on Conservation International and greenwashing its wikipedia page. I've been meaning to update the page with articles and references to their greenwashing, but haven't found time. Would appreciate any and all help to do that. See e.g., Conservation International Duped By Militant Greenwash Pitch The Wrong Kind of Green Allthingstoallpeople (talk) 16:04, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mongreilf. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mongreilf. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mongreilf. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]