User talk:Timwi/Archive/Jun 05 - Oct 05

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] The Latin language revival

You deleted my paragraph below on the grounds that it was an 'incoherent POV rant'. I don't know what POV is, but I don't think what I wrote was incoherent, and to call it a rant is quite an undeserved insult. The fact is that there is a Latin language revival movement that has even created a Latin wikipedia, so I think it's only fair to speak about it on that page. Now, how would you suggest turning my paragraph into a coherent, non ranting one so that you won't decide to delete it? Or can any of what I said be denied, and in particular that the Latin language revival has not so far received the same attention from authorities, either cultural or political, that other language revivals are receiving? I'm hardly ranting, I just ask you to find a wording that won't make you delete my work. Thanks in advance.

On the other end of the spectrum, the most emblematic language of European education throughout the centuries, which gave a cultural cohesion to the continent across all of her universities until the aforementioned period, continues to be neglected by all authorities, either cultural or political, and despite a precariously growing number of speakers.

It is incoherent because the reader is left to guess what the "most emblematic language of European education" is. It is POV (see Wikipedia:NPOV about this) because different people may have different opinions on its "emblematicness", about whether it "gave a cultural cohesion to the continent", and your claim that it "continues to be neglected" implicitly attributes some level of importance to it which is also POV. I flagged it as a "rant" because the paragraph seems to aim less at conveying information, and more at criticising those who don't acknowledge your perceived importance of Latin or don't give it what you perceive as adequate attention. — P.S. please create a user account and sign your messages. Thank you. — Timwi 22:41, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I grant that 'the reader is left to guess what the "most emblematic language of European education" is', and that can easily be rectified. I also agree that 'different people may have different opinions on its "emblematicness"', so I'll change that; but I don't see how it can be denied that it "gave a cultural cohesion to the continent" at least at an academic level, as it was the official language of university for centuries. Maybe I should just add that 'academy' precision. I have still to check the link about POV, but I'm a bit confused about your claim that my words "continues to be neglected" implicitly attribute some level of importance to it. On a merely human basis, I think we all attribute 'some level of importance to our languages', so I confess I do so about mine; I just think it's an acknowledged human and linguistic right to do it. But, as I said, I'll read the POV info to check what's so wrong with this.

It's fair enough to say that the paragraph may seem to 'aim less at conveying information, and more at criticising those who don't acknowledge your perceived importance of Latin or don't give it what you perceive as adequate attention.' It did aim at conveying information, but also, at the same time, I admit it, at pointing out a situation of abandonment. Again, can this fact not be stated without being accused of ranting? How can one describe poverty, violence, abuse, abandonment, famine, etc. without seeming to criticise someone or something?

Also, can you tell me how to create a user account to sign my messages? Thank you.

I'm not sure if arguing with me is going to be particularly helpful; I'm not much of an expert neither on the topic of language revival, nor on NPOV. But I think you should take a look around Wikipedia, especially the Wikipedia policies and guidelines (no, you don't have to read all of it before editing). Also have a look at the Introduction, the guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, and... you create an account by clicking "create an account" (top right corner). See also Why create an account. — Timwi 13:21, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Who should I argue with, as it was you who considered yourself with the authority to delete a paragraph I had considered useful? Now you say you are no expert on the topic of language revival, or on NPOV? In any case, I hope the new paragraph passes your criteria. I'll try to become more conversant with editing policies. Thanks also for the tip on creating an account. I should have seen it myself, sorry. Avitus.

Your new version is much better. :-) Thanks for fixing it. — By the way, just because I deleted it doesn't necessarily mean that I have the "authority" to decide what goes in an article and what doesn't. I am editor just like you; I make judgements in good faith, but I make mistakes. I don't really consider this a mistake, though, because clearly it helped you improve that paragraph significantly. :-) Maybe my edit summary, which you took as offensive, was a mistake though. So I apologise. — P.S. have a look at sign your posts on talk pages and use the quadruple-tilde to sign your messages. — Timwi 20:25, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your very constructive approach. I agree the paragraph is much more objective now. It's just that deletions make one feel so powerless. Discussion is always better, although it's probably only my fault for not having a wikipedia account yet. Regarding signature, etc. please bear with me, I have a lot to learn yet about wikipedia. Cheers for now though. Avitus 62.137.150.24

[edit] S2 link

Look at Talk:Singapore Changi Airport passenger traffic by airline. There is a discussion between me and the article's creator about the code links in the article that that is the talk page for. No one but me and the article's creator appears to have been in the discussion up to this moment. Who, between me and the article's creator, do you think is being more logical (please explain with your own opinions.) Georgia guy 14:43, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Although I am not entirely sure why you contacted me about this (just because I edited S2?), I am happy that you did because I also hate it when people insert links like those. :-) — Timwi 15:41, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Double redirects

Hi Timwi,

I wrote my own software to detect double redirects; I was validating its output when I noticed you had already fixed a vast majority of the articles that my software identified. Nice job I must say. I have a question: Are you checking the following:

redirects that exist at a name that is canonically identical to the name they point at
redirects that redirect to disambiguation pages

I only ask because I wanted to explore these but I don't want to duplicate work with you. Thanks and keep up the good work. Triddle 09:31, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

The answer to both is no, I'm afraid :) — My script is fully automatic. Both of the cases you mention require manual intervention (for the first one, I would check if an appropriate article exists elsewhere, if not delete the redirect; in the second case, you would need to find out which of the links in the disambiguation page it would be most sensible to redirect to). — The only reason I wrote the script is because I realised that many people are leaving double-redirects behind when they move pages. Because of that, I search for double-redirects by scanning Recent Changes. — Timwi 22:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] MediaZilla skin

I see the one you uploaded to http://download.wikimedia.org/bugzilla/, but it doesn't seem to be complete: it puts the side bar under the page. Is there any way you can put the current one there?

I didn't upload it there; Brion VIBBER must have put it there. And no, I don't have it anymore. Please contact Brion as he has access to the actual MediaZilla server. But my guess would be that the file there is complete and you've made a mistake or done something wrong. Since I'm not an expert at this, and I did it a long time ago, and I've lost interest in it, I'm afraid I can't help you. — Timwi 22:52, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] TNG pages

STOP! Read the project's naming conventions: Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Trek. Please understand before you revert next time. Cburnett 21:48, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

I have read those so-called "naming conventions" and I strongly disagree that they should have a right to override the global naming conventions of Wikipedia as a whole. If a page "XYZ" redirects to "XYZ (something)" then the latter should be moved to the former rather than adding those useless parentheses to every single link to it. The parentheses are for disambiguation, but there is nothing to disambiguate here. — Timwi 21:54, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There are at some articles such as Coming of Age or Emissary. ST episode lists have been "plagued" by false linking and using the dab technique on all pages ensures there's no false linking. Cburnett 22:02, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, so instead you ensure that everything not only violates Wikipedia style guidelines, but everything links to loads of redirects too. — Sorry, but I'm not happy with that. — Timwi 22:14, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You speak with big words when they don't apply. From WP:MOS:

The following rules don't claim to be the last word. One way is often as good as another.

From WP:RULES:

Those who edit in good faith, show civility, seek consensus, and work towards the goal of creating an impartial encyclopedia, should find a welcoming environment.

...all of which are being followed.

Maybe when all the articles exist and the episode lists aren't riddled with red links then the convention can be dropped. But right now, this one small facet of WP's style guide is more of a hinderance than a benefit. Cburnett 22:22, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Double-redirects

Re: Fix of double redirect on Liaotung... a redirect page What did you catch? Liodung is not strictly the peninsula, but all of eastern Liaoning Province. You may be correct, but the names and geo-regions mappings were so messed up in a few articles (including ones under research for additional expansion) I just want to check Wot Happend. Thanks! Fabartus 02:11, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Please fix your signature. :-p — I only fixed a double-redirect. I don't tend to look at what they're pointing at. If you think it's wrong, you can change it yourself. I don't know anything about Liaotung. :) — Timwi 08:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] OGG Vorbis sizes

On WP:SPOKEN you say that your sound files are too big for some reason. Have you looked at the usual causes, such as the OGG Vorbis quality setting in Audacity? — Chameleon 11:38, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes. And I've left the project. If you think the files are too big, please download them, re-encode them and re-upload them. I won't complain. — Timwi 22:34, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Copyright and Britannica Article List

Hi, i noticed on the mailing list you wrote I've asked this back when I did the Columbia list.., I do you still have this list? I am enquiring as it would eventually be a great addition to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles. It seems the britannica lists are safe now as far as i can tell, so i cant see why these would not be, plus the lists will be much smaller by now i guess. thanks Bluemoose 4 July 2005 10:17 (UTC)

[edit] Edits reattributing

Timwi, hi! For about half a year I have been contributing as Eleassar777 to the English Wikipedia (>5000 edits) and have made a large number of edits also to Slovenian Wikipedia (sl.wikipedia.org), Wikimedia Commons and Wikisource. Recently I left "777" out as I find it more elegant this way. If you would take a minute to reattribute my edits, I would be very very grateful. Thank you in advance and happy wiki-ing! --Eleassar my talk 4 July 2005 19:06 (UTC)

I do not have any access that enables me to do this for you, and I'm puzzled as to why you thought I did. I would be grateful if you could clarify this. — Timwi 5 July 2005 10:01 (UTC)

An admin advised me to do so. From my talk page: "I suggest you contact User:Brion_VIBBER or User:Timwi instead. Angela is possibly busy with matters that are non-developer related. Mgm|(talk) 20:52, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)".

Thanks anyway, no problem. --Eleassar my talk 5 July 2005 14:21 (UTC)

Oh, I see. That user was mixing me up with User:Tim Starling then. — Timwi 5 July 2005 19:47 (UTC)

[edit] Help desk wikiproject

I have created a new Wikiproject which aims to bring computer veterans and people who need help with software tools they use on Wikipedia together. I'm writing this to you because I saw you on the bot list and wanted to know if you would be willing to help. There is already an open case: WikiProject help desk/20050702 Dmcdevit. The Windows tool that Dmcdevit uses to perform Transwikis has broken since the software upgrade. Triddle July 6, 2005 22:30 (UTC)

[edit] Hoboism?

Why did you change hobo to hoboism? There are only 590 or so google hits for hoboism, so it's not really a commonly used term. I think it's more natural to leave the page as "hobo," since "hoboism" is so infrequently said. In comparison, look at the article Clown. The word "clowning" is quite common, but that page is still listed under its plain noun form, rather that the verbized form of the noun. There's no need to put hobo under the less common hoboism, when you consider that other articles are left in their plain form. --Carl 01:19, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

I just came here to ask the same thing. I have *never* heard the term "hoboism" and I'm pretty familiar with the lore and literature of hobos. Kaibabsquirrel 01:58, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

I can't say I've heard or read a lot about hobos, but I have certainly heard the term hoboism before. I just went by my feeling without checking Google. :-p – Timwi 21:31, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Okay, didn't mean to snap at you or anything. Sorry. It's been reverted. Kaibabsquirrel 02:57, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bot to fix double redirects

Timwi I read here that you have a bot that fixes double redirects. Can you share the script with me? I want it for a mediawiki on my site. Thanks 213.23.250.170 19:15, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

I can't without any contact details of yours... – Timwi 19:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, I forgot I'm not a registered user of wikipedia(en). My email is back2theprimitive1983 at hotmail. Thank you! 82.82.234.80 20:43, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] templates?

Hi! What was that thing with the language templates, I didn't quite get it? --rydel 16:08, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, the category for native speakers is called "Category:User (languagecode)-N", so for some reason I expected the templates to follow the same naming scheme. But apparently the native-speaker templates don't have the "-N", while for the categories, omitting the "-N" takes you to a super-category of all speakers of that language. – Timwi 16:30, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: ISO 3166-2

As I see you replying to others' messages here, I would like to ask for a follow-up of your message to me dated 12 Mar 2004 about ISO 3166-2 because I also replied to your message at my talk page. Do you know whether it is copyright-okay to post ISO 3166-2 codes here? I really have to know the exact answer before posting any ISO 3166-2 codes. Otherwise, I will not proceed any further on this.--Jusjih 23:00, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

12 Mar 2004? That's more than a year ago. :-) – I don't see any problem with posting a list of ISO codes; we already have lists of codes for countries and languages. But I'm not an expert, so I'm not quite sure why you're asking me. – Timwi 12:42, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Because when I posted some start-ups more than 1 year ago without codes first, you asked me. I made the reply at my talk page. This is what I think: codes alone should probably not be copyrightable. When we contend posting codes copyright-okay, I will proceed soon.--Jusjih 21:44, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Caspian James Crichton-Stuart IV

Hi, on your removal of this from the day log Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Log/2005 August 22, I think we don't do this because we use the day logs as archives when they've been completed. Just leave the completed discussion in place. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 18:29, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Scrabble tournament game 15.png, Image:Scrabble tournament game 18.png

I'm guessing and tagging these PD, like the others. Please correct me if wrong. --Duk 21:26, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, you can regard them PD, assuming no copyright or other restrictions from the maker of Scrabble (Hasbro/Mattel) apply. — Timwi 10:36, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Looks like Quadell had tagged the other ones PD last October. See [1].--Duk 16:09, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I know... see [2] :-) — Timwi 09:12, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Double article on Geographical Centre of Europe

Hi, I've seen that you have edited the Article on Geographical Centre of Europe to which I have added some material in July (as unlogge user). Now, returning to it I have realised that there are two articles: Geographic Centre of Europe and Geographical centre of Europe - both containig almost the same data - with minor differences. The second one has also the possibility of being redirected from Geographic centre of Europe.

The difference causing the existence of two seems to me to lie in the capital or lowercase "c" in "centre". I don't know how do it but one of them should be removed - and have the information transferred from the other. (Now, I couldn't synchronize them, as I am quite a greenhorn to Wikipedia). noychoH 19:10, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

They are the same article. One is redirecting to the other. — Timwi 19:38, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary

Hi Timwi. Could you explain the meaning of this edit summary? I was slightly surprised when it appeared on my watchlist... Cheers, [[Sam Korn]] 18:28, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Yep, gave me a strange look, too. I'd guess it's either a test whether long edit summaries, without spaces to break them in multiple lines, are bad (yes they are) or a general comment about about the article (I'd agree). --Pjacobi 19:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Heh. Oops. I hadn't thought of the line-wrapping problems caused by such edit summaries. I'm very sorry. I'll put spaces in next time. — The point in the summary is that this is at least the 47 millionth time I'm seeing led misspelt as lead. Maybe I need therapy or something. — Timwi 19:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] re: stop using align=right

Note that the dog-breed info table has used that format for at least 2 years, so only a few of the most recent use a different format. I was hoping that someone would get around to finishing the dogbreedinfo template that I started mucking with so that we wouldn't have to keep tweaking every one of the hundreds of dog-breed articles every time someone had a change like this. But I don't have time to figure it out (and one volunteer apparently doesn't either), so it sits. (And then there's a question of finding someone to make a bot to try to change most of the pages automatically...) I wonder whether it's really worth your time to go through all the articles in List of dog breeds to fix that one thing in the tables, which doesn't really seem to affect anything in the display as far as I can tell. (Oh, in case you want to take a look at the rudimentary template & some discussions about it--hint hint-- template discussion and links to template & sample /further template discussion .) Elf | Talk 20:24, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] MediaWiki_talk:Uploadtext

I noticed your alternative version of the upload text, on this page, (from back in 2004), and I really like it. I've made various annoucements trying to drum up enough support to get it implemented. Let me know if you have any new thoughts on that. (And thanks for the ~~~~~, I use it often for adding timestamps.) JesseW, the juggling janitor 20:45, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't understand. The "alternative version" that I proposed in 2004 was implemented back then (as far as I can remember). It has gone through further changes since. — Timwi 15:15, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh. Er. Odd I didn't realize that. Looks like I made a fool of myself, somewhat, then. I liked it because it was short and simple(unlike the current unreadable one); I didn't realize it had been accepted and applied back in 2004. Hm. Well, I guess I'll just have to hack the current one down to that size again. Thanks anyway! JesseW, the juggling janitor 02:15, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

I quite agree. People keep trying to put information in they think is important ("Watch out for copyright!" - "Use a copyright tag!" - "Use a descriptive name!" - "Remember there's also Commons!") and it ends up being a mess of them. The same was true back then. I guess this just shows that if you try to cut it down too much, people will just keep adding things chaotically again. – Timwi 08:52, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Stop abusing your admin rights

Stop abusing your admin rights by simply deleting stuff without any notice nor discussion. Please stop also merging stuff without notice or asking anywhere, especially if there allready were discussions. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

A less aggressive attitude on your part may be more helpful in approaching the issue. You have neither linked to any of my "deleting" or "merging", nor any of the pre-existing "discussions", so I am entirely in the dark as to what you are talknig about. I also don't think I have deleted or protected any significant pages, so your accusation of "abusing admin rights" is entirely without foundation. Your credibility suffers accordingly. – Timwi 17:40, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

How does my credibility suffer if you did it? You said yourself "I do not think I did not [comment from oct 18: the not is typo by Tobias] delete any significant pages". This shows your attitude. You simply deleted something, something that you call insignificant (your deletion summary was "pointless"), and then a non-admin cannot revert. If you do not know what deletion I talk about, I wonder whether you do this frequently? Please just put a note next time, and maybe talk to the creator, ok? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:19, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Inserting a "not" that I didn't write makes it sound so much more like what you want it to sound like, doesn't it? Your credibility is now gone. – What really happened is that I forgot about the one template I deleted. Clearly, you found an admin to do the undeletion for you, so stop being angry. I still think the template is pointless and insignificant, but now you can discuss your view (hopefully in a civilised manner) at Templates for deletion. – Timwi 20:31, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for the double "not" this was an error. I was just about to correct his. My credibility is gone by a typo? Wao. And you are an admin? No I did not found an admin for undeletion. I tried to remember what it contained before you abused your admin-rights. Why do you call me uncivilized, if you abused your rights and asked you to stop? I put a RfC about your abuse and your replies to my question to stop these abuses. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:26, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright

From your user-page I assume you need help, because you do not understand the concept of copyright. Sometimes it takes lot of energy to create something. If so there may be individuals that only create certain things if they can get some stuff back (spend hours on a work, but how to feed your children?). Not respecting copyrights may reduce incentives to create certain things. Thus, without any copyright at all the possibility exists that we are ALL worse off with copyright. Thus, by a policy of not respecting other people's rights you may be guilty of reducing the overall value of life. Glad to have helped you. (Note: I will not put your page on my watchlist, so replies may go unnoticed.) Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:18, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

I never stated that I disrespect the rights granted to people by copyright law. I'm sorry you misunderstood it that way. I'm also perfectly aware of why people generally believe copyright law is desirable, I don't need you to tell me that. – Timwi 17:44, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

From your words I don't understand copyright. I don't get the entire concept of "intellectual property". Are we a species trying to help each other improve each other's lives or not? If copyrights or patents prevent someone's work or discovery from improving someone else's life, then how did the work or discovery serve humanity? I guess it didn't. it is not clear that you know why copyright might be desirable. If you put up such statements I could not other, but guess you need help. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:23, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

What alternative wording do you suggest that is less prone to misunderstanding? When I stay "I don't understand", of course I don't literally mean that I don't understand what copyright means; it means that I strongly disagree with the entire concept and that I find it clear that the world would be better off without it. – Timwi 20:34, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Difficult question. Maybe something like: Even if there are cases where copyright might improve the quality of life for all of us, I think very often (or overwhelmingly) it is the opposite. I would like to tell you a story: friend of mine has large 78rpm collection of tango music. Lots of very rare records, maybe some stuff nobody else has. It would be nice to have this on CD and give it to the world. But it is lot of work. If he could protect the stuff with DRM he could cash in on it. But now he waits. Maybe there is fire in his house, maybe some other accident and the stuff is lost forever.

On the other hand copyright can be hinder some nice things on the first sight. E.g. what I do not like with so called "free"-WP, is a lot of the commons-wp-gpl stuff. Lots of fotos, but large part of them requires attribution. This stops me from using the fotos. I hope more people release fotos into PD. It's not that much work to shoot a foto. Attribution can really be a problem if you want to run a website and put some city-fotos there. For me copyright has two sides. But if there are humans that want to protect there fotos - well there are others that simply like to help. You and me we give our contributions in PD - and we are not alone. And even for us it might pay off - or at least for the society it does so.

maybe tell a story and try tp make your wording less polemic. - best regards from Berlin Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:47, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Both of your cases argue against copyright. The tango music is probably copyrighted, which stops your friend from redistributing it. If copyright didn't exist, some of his friends could easily copy some of his stuff. Via a series of small steps, the entire collection would eventually be available to the masses in electronic form. – Timwi 15:36, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Wrong. In the above story I did not mention any copyright problems with the music itself. Instead the story mentioned that it is a lot of work to put the music on CD, it's not just some friends coming around and copying it. He has maybe 50.000 recordings. There is hightech equipment with laser reading - so that the 78rpm are not touched. Today I got to know this costs 10.000 USD. He also has costs of storing, well they are in his flat, but he only rents bigger flat because of the collection. Furthermore it would be better of in another place with climate suited for storing records could be used. Who would pay this? Daily food is not for free, someone has to produce it and deserves some kind of payment. So it is for storing, reproducing etc. And for tango bands that play nowadays. How can they afford recording a new CD, if they cannot sell it for more than the price of blank CD? Next time when I have to paint the walls in my flat would you like to come and work for free? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:23, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfC

I have helped User:Tobias Conradi properly format his RfC and copied your comment from the TOC page to the response section of the subpage. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Timwi and endorse where appropriate; my plagiarism only goes so far. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 21:24, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I responded. I think the thing is settled soon. There are really much more important issues around! Best regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:27, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] de:alea iacta est

geworfen or gefallen: I suppose from the point of view of the dice this is a purely academic distinction ;-). T.a.k. 21:12, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RFC against you.

Seeing that nobody else certified it in 48 hours (in fact, no one had edited it in over 48 hours), I've deleted the RFC against you. Ral 315 W_S 00:02, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks :-) — Timwi 00:31, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Belated Birthday

Happy Birthday!
Here's a tasty Birthday cake. Best wishes to you! Hope you enjoy your day. Now, get on out there and have some fun! ;)

--Jen Moakler 15:30, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Oy! Why, thanks! :-) ... But my WikiBirthday is June 10! :-) — Timwi 22:01, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Contribution Count

The main reason why I have many user talk edits, is that I am a) part of the welcoming committee and b) part of the counter vandalism unit, which both mean that I have to leave a lot of messages on user talk pages. In my personal opinion, all edits made on Wikipedia should be counted when talking about edit counts because they are all contributing to something or other on Wikipedia. People shouldn't really care about edit counts anyway - editcountitis is fatal. Fir e Fo x 13:41, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/i/m/User_talk%7ETimwi_Archive_Jun_05_-_Oct_05_915e.html"