User talk:Bsnowball

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

Hello, Bsnowball, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -Phoenixrod 16:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

how to revert accidental reversions? my last edit of List of novelists by nationality undid a lot of previous edits, what to do about this?

Please see how to revert an article for details of how to do this. --pgk 10:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oz Lit and possibly plagiarised section

Apologies - didnt see your note till today - suggestion is we lift it out and plonk it in a heavily worded 'plagiarisaion suspected', 'unrefrenced' an suggest Afd for it even. SatuSuro 05:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC) i've tagged it for spitting Bsnowball 12:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment on my talk page

First off:

It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks! Particularly about "stop wasting other people's time"

Second:

The author in question skirts right along to lines for deletion. I am a new page patroller who usually uses Google before tagging a questionable article. I checked Google and found a relativly low number of hits and tagged it. New page patrol is a very constructive job. Again please do not make personal attacks.

Third:

Sign in as the user you wish to be identified as before you comment on pages, I'll post this on both pages just in case.

Philip Gronowski Contribs 23:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)



First: Your headline: "stop wasting other peoples time" can be seen as a personal attack (commenting on the contributor , not content). You are directly calling me a person who wastes other's time. Calling me a computer geek from the other side of the world is a personal attack as well: [1]

Second: The only other thing I can see on my talk page which points to me being a person which wastes other people's time is Showoff (band). An admin had thought that the article was a recreation and "deleted it" by placing a tag that said protection from recreation. They forgot to preotect the page and it was "re-created". I had that page open in one of my tabs during and after "deletion" and noticed it was re-created. I tagged it appropriatly because an admin had previously "deleted" it. The user then put a petition on my page and we resolved the conflict. I made no mistake of my own for marking it as a repost qualifying for deletion.

Third: I sure am ignorant in field of poetry. But am also ingnorant in the field of clubs and organizations. Does that mean I should not nominate articles about Joe Blow's Leaf Club because I do not specialize in their field?

Fourth: Speedy deletion tags specificaly say articles "'may" meet criteria for speedy deletion. Not that that they meet it. That they may meet it. A person can make mistakes. This may be one of them.

Fifth: The notability of the subject is still in question for me: Wikipedia:Notability has this as one of the criterea for notability:

Published authors, editors and photographers who received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work

Note the world multiple. Louise Crisp is a published author. Louise Crisp has (to my information) recieved only 1 award and I have not found any independant reveiws. Also being a new page patroller means being hit with many non-notable people that we do not really have time to go to the library and check for. Google is therefore my friend.

Could you please specify if you want comments on your page or my page? I'll post it on both of your pages, you have my permission to delete them if you want them on one specific page. Philip Gronowski Contribs 20:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TThanks for letting me know

You forgot to sign - but hey, maybe one day the source will be identified. I once knew an academic in chinese language and society with such superb menory of the required texts for his courses, he could catch plagiarists at ten paces! (In a manner of speaking) the short time that I ever did tutoring (in something v different) I could only guess and refer to others! SatuSuro 14:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH!

1st and foremostly, don't post to my talk page calling me "kid". I don't know where you get off tellimg me to learn manners and then calling me "kid". You don't even know me! Apparently where you are from it is OK to call people "kid" but where I'm from, it can be taken as a derogatory term. Secondly, I have fixed your precious "oh so important" little Australian playwrights page. I'm sorry that I offended you but maybe you are the one that needs to learn some manners! T. White 07:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Some articles

That I have seen with your moniker maybe require thinking in the Wikipedia:Words to avoid SatuSuro 15:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Also added a larger version of the welcome - might have some bits and pieces to keep the life on wikipedia in perspecttive! SatuSuro 15:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
point taken about geting carried away regarding other users. but cld u be more specific about probs w/ articles, thx Bsnowball 15:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Well well - for a start - the big intro section you just blanked (some admins and editors get quite uptight about that for good reason) - has items that might help you understand the protocols and policies for a start!
(1) look at the [The Penguin Book of Modern Australian Poetry] edit - and go to history and have a look at what I edited - you discursive opinionated and rather loose prose will get up the nose of many - what you need to do is go back to the secttion you blanked - and seek out about the style of prose that is required!
(2) give up on PA's and POV ( they are dealt with at WP:PA and WP:NPOV - please dont let me discourage your editing - we need editors who contribute - you need to discover the correct tone for the place :)
(3) be very very careful about blanking - some others would have your guts for various musical instruments on that one! - archiving is ok, blanking a no-no, anywhere! SatuSuro 23:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

BTW on other peoples talk pages - you must, la de da - you must, sign! SatuSuro 23:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] message

yr discursive opponionated & dare i say it carping advice will be taken for what it is worth
re that box, BOTTOM OF PAGE PLS also was superfluous, patronising & more importantly i find it useful to have the contents visible at top of page
so i hope it hasn't ruined yr day ;) User:Guess who could have posted this?
ps on the score of patronising advice: if s/one forgets to sign, u can always check the page history (it's the last last tab @ top of screen la de da)
pps when u have useful advice, pls be specific 1st time; annoying to have to follow up & then find it was, well correct, but, ah carping, i suppose (yes i'm looking, will look, for sources for claims about reception) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.7.210.129 (talk • contribs). which is a one edit red link - probably making someone a user of WP:Sockpuppet for the purpose of a WP:PA and disguised lack of WP:Civility SatuSuro 15:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

it was a joke & was actually put there by me, chill out Bsnowball 16:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Ok - if you do that stuff - that's your problem - you need to be prepared for problemsSatuSuro 16:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
pls do not make non-specific threats, i am aware u mean i cld be disciplined fr it, but u cld be misinterpreted. the point of my above was simply that u'r advice came across as patronising. using similar wording was meant to be a joke. we are getting carried away w/ this. apol. if i offended Bsnowball 16:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Put it this way - If you continue your behaviour to date - you will meet less tolerant editors/admins - and the effort anyone might make to alert you to correct wikipedia behaviour will be probably have wasted their time. I am out of this conversation - and good luck to you! SatuSuro 04:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indigenous vs. Aboriginal

Could you care to vote here? Zarbat 01:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Keltik31

(note: comments moved from here)

it was via this dubious page & highly objectionable comment that i encounter this oh so lovely user. it bothers me so i report it somewhere, & am told we have to wait until he is personaly offensive again. i'm newish here, is there no specific policy against hate speech per se? u seemed like u might know these things. thx in adv →bsnowball 12:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

He was recently blocked for 24 hours, and hasn't done anything naughty (or at all) since. Let's hope he either comes back and is a productive NPOV editor, or stays away. I hope that helped. -- weirdoactor t|c -- 02:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] lit and poetry links

Hi Bsnowball,

Thanks for the note. You mentioned a "see also" link to both lit and poetry year pages. That would have some advantages. For one thing, readers wouldn't be confused as to what is being linked to. Right now if a reader just sees that the year in the list is highlighted, he may think that the link goes to the general "year" page and not to the poetry or literary year page, which is a shame. Also, it would be a good thing to give readers the opportunity to go to both types of pages, "year in lit" and "year in poetry". My problem, however, is how to do that. I don't think there's a central "year" page anywhere. They all seem to be individual years or even decades. Even if we pick an arbitrary year, that means readers are forced to navigate and navigate until they reach the year they want, and I have a feeling (just a feeling) that moving to the year-in-poetry page will always be more of an impulse whim for almost everybody, so they won't want to bother navigating to get to some particular spot. Do you have any ideas as to what might be linked to in the "See also" section? I'm going to check one more time to see that there's no good central page to link to. By the way, I'm now favoring "year in poetry" links over "year in lit" because I think the interest will be greater for poetry, even though right now those pages are still sparse and sometimes not even constructed. I think there's a lot more potential there for something to interest readers of a poetry awards page. Also, those pages have links to the literature pages for that year and others, while the literature pages currently ignore the poetry pages. Anyway, if you have thoughts on how to do an overall link, I'd appreciate them. I'm thinking right now that perhaps a line just at the top of awards lists should mention that the years link to poetry pages and that year-in-literature pages also exist. I think that might be sufficient. What do you think?Noroton 19:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Aha! I see there is a List of years in poetry page and one for List of years in literature, which I guess are the most central pages for those things. I think they'd be useful in "See also" areas, and I'll add them. Do you have any objection to individual links to years in the awards lists? I think they're useful as well and the "see also" listings would be supplimental. Again, what do you think? Noroton 19:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

OK. Adam 12:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Let's act

Hi Bsnowball,

I don't think we're going to get any more comments on this merge proposal. Why don't we just do it now? Would you prefer to do it or would you mind if I did it?

Noroton 17:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Feel free

Hi B,

Yes, please start the merge (I notice you've put one award on the List of poetry awards page already. You mentioned (If I read your message right) that you still don't much like the idea of connecting the years in awards lists to the poetry page. You may not have noticed that I've been filling in many of the year in poetry pages, so I think they're much more substantial than they were, and more useful to readers. I've also been putting links in the "See also" sections of awards pages to link to the general List of years in poetry as well as List of years in literature pages. And remember: there are links to the year-in-lit pages at the top of every year-in-poetry page, so I think there's plenty of connection with the year-in-lit. Are you from Australia? I see many of your contributions focus on lit there. Perhaps for a nation with a smaller population the awards lists should link to the year-in-lit page because it will inevitably include more about that nation's literature (combining poetry and lit in general). For countries like the U.S. and the U.K., I think people with a focus on poetry will be more interested in going to a year-in-poetry page. In any event, I can foresee a time not too long distant when there will be just as much Australian information on each year-in-poetry page as the total that's there now.

Incidentally, last night I created pages for List of literary awards (cannibalized from the overall awards pages, with a little added), List of American literary awards and List of British literary awards. I expect to create a list of Canadian literary awards. I notice the Australian literature page has a list of awards near the bottom and I get the impression that that's sufficient, at least for now. Noroton 19:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: the great premier sock show

I'm fairly new as well - I've edited plenty of articles but my experience at solving these determined cases on Wiki is just about zero. I've gone on the assumption it's OK to revert his comments in T:IA and any pastes of that website, as thebainer (an admin) effectively gave us permission to do so. Might do to revert the revert in T:IA though just because Adam Carr also commented, but then kill off anything that happens subsequently. As for the other one, I'd say it's fair. Orderinchaos78 09:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC) (note - this entire comment now outdated - see Problems below)

138.25.106.45 may be another one Orderinchaos78 (t|c) 13:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problems

I would recommend User:Rebecca or User:Longhair in your timezone - - good mature admins who know what to do - trust all is well otherwise. I woudnt revert - let them sort it out! SatuSuro 12:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Gawd you get me in duplicate. Fate worth than an oscar wilde quote? I like your Borges one! SatuSuro 12:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry :D Orderinchaos78 (t|c) 12:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Good advice, and thanks! Edit: Hesperian seems to be onto it. We'll see how it goes :) Orderinchaos78 (t|c) 12:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to butt in here - I am pretty sure Hesperian read the archive - my observation and experience of him as an admin is of someone who is fair and reasonable, which was partly why I asked him to look at the page. I agree with what he's done so far - when you have an utterly unreasonable person with contrarian views, try to engage them, even appear to agree with them on less important points in the interests of achieving consensus, and then nut out exactly what should be in the article. It's the sort of thing I used to do in customer service all the time, but I'd had it up to here with Premier and thought maybe I wasn't the person to try it. I agree with you about the reverts, but I think the persistence of the situation meant that a new approach was required. Orderinchaos78 (t|c) 15:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Borges

Ben - I could tell you about (probably a few) articles that in the end I leave it up to others to watch for the crap and vandalism - otherwise my heavily over-used-talk-page count would outdo my contribs, and I might as well live on irc and float around in the ether of msn like two of my children... I want to get the choo-choos out of my brains so I can get on with what I call the really neglected part of west australian literature - the obscure poets, novelists and playwrights of Perth and hinterland, so - sometimes abstinence or hitting the unwatch button is the only way. yuk! SatuSuro 14:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] At last

Thanks for that! I had suggested it so long ago - thanks for that! As for getting over the railways/western tasmania - I keep getting pulled back to central java - too many interests, so little time. I dont think you should be nervous about it - its a good art it just needs some sources - and headings to break it up - and a photo of a poet performing - and you've probably got a f.a. ! (um some think its a bit more difff than thaat) and of course the good old GA looms as well. SatuSuro 12:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beit Hanoun

Could u please vote on the survey for the name change of the beit hanoun incident as well as adding your comment. It would help us advance faster.

Thanks--Burgas00 19:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

i proposed it, its obvious i support it. also it isn't a vote, will be decided on reasons given. & as i understand it, it will be left for a few "a few days" then decided on. we will have to wait. ben  ⇒ bsnowball  07:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Thanks for message on my talk page. Runed is currently blocked for 3RR and NPA. NotAWeasel is just a matter of time, I believe. What do you think of [2] ? Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 13:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newcastle Poetry Prize

Hi ... I see we've been crossing paths quite a bit recently. I have just started the page Newcastle Poetry Prize but am having trouble completing the list of winners and of anothologies. Do you have access to any sources that could help? Cheers. Stumps 14:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Ooh ... I didn't know that dob for living people was discouraged! Thanks for pointing that out. Good to know. Stumps 14:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] delsort/Judaism

Yes, of course, for the religion. Religious tract authors are ok, but poets who did not write on religious topics are not. I am not sure where this would be delsorted. Possibly nowhere! :) - crz crztalk 19:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My wording at WP:DRV for Ignatz Lichtenstein

Between the closing admin's response and yours (plus the thoughts I had last night before seeing either), I'd like to find new wording to use. Please keep in mind that my user page will continue to say "As a regular on deletion review, my review standard is abuse of discretion, not de novo review." Given that, would "reversible error" (without the wikilink) be better wording than "abuse of discretion"? If not, do you have other wording to suggest? GRBerry 12:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

  • as i said, i suggest rather than making up insulting rubbish you offer real reasons, as i pointed there was a very convincing one available in the form of new information. (pls don't follow this up, i'm not interested)  ⇒ bsnowball  07:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jewish Encyclopedia

Thanks for the comment. Feel free to make any changes that improve access or readability. I don't know what to do about transliterations myself, so I'm leaving them as-are. If you have a strong feeling that you'd like to see them some other way, go ahead. (Really, it would be so much work to change them all, I think there are probably better things to spend time on...) About the bibliography, I feel it needs to go together with the article. Being in academia a long time, I have learned that the Bibliography is an important part (sometimes the most important part) of the article, so it has to stay connected, in my opinion. Thanks again. Dfass 20:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. User:Shilonite already advised me to include links to the original JE articles, so I am trying to remember to do that now. I'm not entirely sure what to do about the double redirects. Hopefully someone will add pages for each tractate at some point, and then recruit the links that are currently pointing to the seder. Isn't there a BOT that comes through and resolves redirects? I don't know. Dfass 22:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_in_Australia#Australian_mining_in_literature.2C_art_and_film - thought it might amuse you, or not ...best wishes SatuSuro 14:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Someone with very limited knowledge of the subject put it up - when I find them I can think of about ten titles - KS Prichard and Gavin Casey, for Kalgoorlie - at least two novels andd about five short sstories - and so on. SatuSuro 02:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Gawd I keep getting distracted into strange threads - I reckon we should pull it out and make it a new article myself - ok start as a stub - but I reckon there's a good art quite sperate from the parent art SatuSuro 14:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Borges

Hey, what is the source for the Borges quote at the top of your user page? Just curious. Thanks. Dfass 15:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. It's just an interesting sounding quote. Oh well, I don't read Spanish. Too bad. I agree with you about the Talmud names. I'm just too lazy to change all the names, so I'm glad you are doing it. The Jewish Encyclopedia is surprising in that is seems it was written for academics, and not for the layperson. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dfass (talk • contribs) 16:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Pic

Sure, go ahead. --Striver 15:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/s/n/User_talk%7EBsnowball_cbb1.html"