User talk:Cue the Strings
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia
|
[edit] Paolo Nutini
Wouldn't you consider 3 top 40 singles, god knows how many sold out tours and the plethora of fansites that have sprung up make this a high profile musicial, therefore it is acceptable to place links to fansites on his site.
All the best and sorry if i was rude before! --Themoomin
- Yes but mine is in english. I dont get much time to update it but i have recruited 2 people to help me.
- Please leave it as it is for a while whilst it is in the process of being updated.
- I do it to support paolo and make no money from it. --Themoomin 19:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] TWW broadcast history
I had a feeling that that was the reason why you edited it that way. I'm going to add a note on the page to reflect that. --Hnsampat 02:29, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, before I do that, could you tell me why it was that Season 6 ended in April instead of May? Thanks! --Hnsampat 02:42, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- From the episode airdates, it looks like season 6 premiered a month later than usual (at the end of October instead of September), but finished earlier because NBC planned to air the season rerun-free. According to a zap2it article I just found: "NBC Entertainment president Kevin Reilly told reporters...that he's holding back 'The West Wing' until Oct. 20 in part because a real-life presidential debate is scheduled for a Wednesday in October. He doesn't want to debut the show in September then have to pull it for a week soon after its premiere." The rerun-free aspect probably also has something to do with NBC trying to keep ratings up, especially after season 5, though that's just my speculation. Hope that helps. Cue the Strings 05:54, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pope John Paul II's Vacations in Lorenzago di Cadore
Strings, I'd like to go to bat for Lucifero4 on this one. The fact that the Pope repeatedly summered in this small town in the Alto Aldige is hardly irrelevant to an article about the town. In fact, it may be (and probably is) one of the town's main claims to fame. Typically, popes have spent their summers away from the heat and humidity (and odiferous atmosphere) of Rome by retreating to the papal palace known as Castello Gandolfo about twenty-five miles outside of town in the hills of Lazio. The fact that John Paul II departed from this practice is noteworthy in itself.
Also, the author of the article is, like me, rather new as a contributor to Wikipedia, has been quite prolific, and most of his contributions, while defective in English stylistics, are solid. He was shot down recently on an edit about some US Senator's daughter having been engaged to marry the heir to King Victor Emmanuel. I don't really have any quibble with that one; it was an interesting fact but not strictly relevant to the article's topic, -- the senator. It might have been better relegated to a "Trivia" section, but, as I said, whoever killed it (you maybe?) was justified in doing so. However, the Lorenzago di Cadore case is far stronger, and I'd like to see Lucifero4's contribution reinstated, if only to avoid discouraging a good contributing volunteer. (I know I would be a bit crest-fallen if this had happened to me.)
Relevance and noteworthiness is a tricky thing, and I thing all of us have a tendency to find facts that are "closer to home" (in every sense of the phrase) more relevant and noteworthy. Consider this: the article concerning the US resort town of Bar Harbor, Maine mentions the names of several famous people who summered there (Nelson Rockefeller, Barbara Bel Geddes, etc.), none of whom, I daresay, are as prominent as the Pope.
I am asking you a favor. Revert the change. Note that you had a change of heart. It would do far more good than harm. (I know this is a long blast on a tiny subject. I hope you will forgive me for that and understand my motives.) PeterHuntington 19:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments about Lucifero. I agree entirely. I will make a good-faith effort to get your point about reversions across to him. I don't know if I'm quite up to explaining it in Italian, but I will spoon-feed it to him somehow. I'm convinced that he's a good guy, bright, and enthusiastic about contributing to the English-language Wikis so that anglophones will learn more about Italy (and his home region, Lombardy) and appreciate/respect that culture more fully. I see no malice in him (so far). He is an idealist and an Italian patriot; neither is a bad thing, I think. I've got him working on two articles now: -- one about an Italian murder case, and the other about 1948 apparitions of the Virgin Mary near Bergamo that is something like the 1917 apparitions at Fatima, Portugal (but much less well-known.) If I can serve as an intermediary in the future, I am more than happy to do so. Cheers! PeterHuntington 09:44, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Roman Catholic Honorifics in Article Titles
I have a question. It seems to me that there is a potential problem throughout Wikipedia concerning titles of Roman Catholic "personages" vis-à-vis the names of articles. What I mean is: if John Doe has been beatified (the first step toward sainthood), should the article about him be called "John Doe" or "Blessed John Doe"?
Clearly, a full-fledged saint should have the honorific included. Take St. Anthony as an example. There are many St. Anthonys, but, without qualification, most would assume "St. Anthony" means "St. Anthony of Padua". However, if we strike "St.", "Anthony" is not a useful article title; "Anthony of Padua" is okay; but "St. Anthony of Padua" is best of all.
Another consideration: a priest or bishop or archbishop or even a cardinal may get "kicked upstairs", so including the honorific in the article title is probably inadvisable. Father Doe becomes Monsignor Doe becomes Bishop Doe becomes John Cardinal Doe, and this clearly leads to a maintenance problem that goes beyond disambiguation.
My opinion? Leave the titles and honorifics out of the article title altogether unless and until the subject reaches the top of his heap. Which should it be? General Eisenhower or President Eisenhower? I don't know. Which heap is taller? How about publishing the article at "Dwight D. Eisenhower" and leaving the rest by the wayside. Saints and popes might be different though. I don't know. Is there a policy? PeterHuntington 20:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Forest Whitaker
Strabismus: A manifest lack of parallelism of the visual axes of the eyes. Commonly presents with double vision.
Amblyopia: Visual impairment in the absence of an ocular lesion and not fully correctable by an artificial lens. Possibly caused by abnormal visual experience during early life.
[Amblyopia [1]] is the correct medical term for lazy eye.
However, I see your point when you say strabismus is more specific, but it is incorrect to say strabismus is a type of lazy eye. Strabismus, or squint, is one of the causes of ambylopia. When young children before the age of 8 have a strabismus, the brain ignores the input from the deviant eye. This becomes permanent after the critical age of 8, and they see using only the good eye. When lazy eye is caused by strabismus it is known as [strabismic amblyopia[2]].
Either way, I have not edited the Forest Whitaker article again, if you say that's what was written in the source article. However, would you mind telling me where the source article is from? I'm relatively new to editing wikipedia and wouldn't mind some pointers. Thanks.
KumarG83
[edit] Talk page vandalism
No problem. I discovered popups recently and still enjoy playing with them :) Algebraist 17:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
