User talk:Igor the Lion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Am currently on (yet another) short Wikibreak, but will be back as soon as possible. Cheers! Igor the Lion(Roar!) 11:54, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello Igor the Lion, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  --Cool CatTalk|@ 21:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Hello

I'm glad to see that you've decided to stay, and that your little project is up and running. Stay cool and don't frown :( too much, even if people are bothering you (I hope I'm not). Cheers and (advanced) Merry Christmas! Igor the Lion 21:28, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi! Oh I am trying to stick around, dont worry you are fine :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 21:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thank you for the comment. By the way, what does De gustibus non est disputandum mean :-)? smurrayinchester(User), (Ho Ho Ho!) 21:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merry Christmas...

to you too! smurrayinchester Merry Christmas!(User), (Go Carolling) 08:17, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Zanskar

No, no. I am not talking anything about grammar, etc. I am talking a new topic, different from the old one together. There is nothing to do with English, only the gallery design and his act of removal of my edit--a fact which I have added in on the populace. I touched nothing on his content. I have shown him examples for gallery design which all other articles have used--snow, Thubten Gyatso. Furthermore, I am already very unhappy with the way Moumine expected me to wait for his reply---ten odd days since I last posted my message. So please don't go too far. I beg you. I have my own life to go on, and I don't want to be hampered emotionally. Mr Tan 15:24, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

??? Igor the Lion(Roar!) 16:33, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

All right. Forget about humour. I want to ask you a straightfoward question. What do you think of my changes in correspondance to Moumine's opposition to them? Do you think that what I'm doing is worng? I don't understand why Moumine opposed to my edits even though I didn't touch his content on the article. All I did was a design change (to improvise) as well as adding some facts. The way he is behaving suggests that this article is owned by him, which is abhored by wikipedia, and he has no sense of consideration that his clients are waiting for his reply. I am tired of him, and I would like to hear from you instead. Thanks. Mr Tan 15:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I did voice out that I did not want to pursue this, but as you seem all too eager to drag me into your dilemma, then so be it. First of all, I made no reference whatsoever to your "gallery incident," and have had no desire to. In my comment on Talk:Zanskar, I was alluding to your atrocious grammar, your incompetence in English, and some of your poetic, yet sadly, erroneous "facts" shown by Moumine in one of the sections. As you want me to comment on your most recent actions, though, I will no longer hesitate to state my opinions. What I think, nay, know, is that you, Mr. Tan, have been inserting factual errors that seem to have been based on nothing more than information given in tourist brochures, have been lowering the standards of the said article each and every time you decided to edit it, and that you have, up to this day, refused to accept any reprimand or comment on your terrible behavior (and note, you have done this numerous times in the past - so often, I believe, that you even had an RfC regarding those matters). You suggest that Moumine thinks he owns the article. NO, Mr Tan. I believe it is you who thinks he owns the article. Your vehement refusal of criticism and nonsense edits attest to this. You have repeatedly attempted to impose your abhorrent manner of English upon the poor article, and that your view of yourself is so BlOwn uP that you refuse to accept the fact that your mastery of English cannot even be called mastery. You have taken the language of Shakespeare, Wordsworth, Dickens, and all the great writers of old, and have mangled it, turned it into an abomination that only you can understand. I take your persistence in believing that yours is the "right" English as an insult to me and to my fellow speakers. Also, you have been entirely inconsiderate of your fellow editors, ordering them to answer your questions without thinking that they could possibly be on holiday, be busy, have left the matter a long time ago, or simply not have read your message. You should have thought of those things. But no, the heck with their feelings! I, Mr Tan, care only about myself, and my self-esteem, and I don't give a damn about what those people are doing, all I know is that they didn't answer me, so they are being inconsiderate. If that isn't inconsiderate, Mr Tan, I don't know what is.
Still, I find it quite amusing, your persistence, that is, in refusing to understand the points of others and enforcing your own, and your refusal to improve your comprehension and writing skills. I am not suggesting that all your edits are bad. Indeed, you have contributed a fair amount to Wikipedia, let us not forget that. But your attitude in debating has to be improved, as well as your writing skills and your English. Looking forward to hearing from you soon - Igor the Lion(Roar!) 17:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

No. Please, that was the past. I am not continuing the past arguement, and this present arguement is completely seperate from the past. Yes, I believe that I was too childish, but you must understand that their attitudes towards me gave me emotional depression, often deviating from discussions from the mainstream. You can see that Mel Etitis himself had an RfC, because of his temprament. He did many reverts, often at the expense of innocent edits, and not reinstating them, reasoning that it is too tedious to spot out minor edits. For example, look at a short article. I made an addition of a fact, and everything is wiped out in one go. It really hurts me a lot, though.

You can reason that Moumine might be on a holiday. Still, a person's patience has its limits. You must consider the emotional hampering that the person himself had to suffer in the meantime. You must also consider that he is merely refusing to answer your question not because he forgets or whatsoever but simply to make you suffer. Wikipedia is not a commercial company. Everybody should edit happily at their own interests, and be considerate, for what you do merely satisfies your own mind and interest, and arguements should be avoided. Do I have to tie my life down to wikipedia for arguements? I have enough of it.

I was persistent in the past. But I am reasonable enough, at least, in this aspect. Waiting for so many days--twenty days is atrocious. Just imagine--a friend waiting for you at a station for three hours and yet he never turn up. Would you continue to wait, or go off to do your own things? The same real-life situation applies here. I can forgive Moumine if he is not a human user. But he is.

Certainly I will get pissed off at this rate, tearing me up emotionally. I have told you, my edit is only centered on the population, that Zanskar is populated by people of Tibetan and Dard origin, and the source is a travel guide. I only added a few sentences, and I made no changes to other parts of the article. Moumine rejected it, saying that sources from a travel guide (which I obtained the information from) is unreliable. If so, why is it circulated all around the world? No publishers would publish books that are unaccurate. In fact, the book is written by an American trekker. If I can't trust the author, the same applies to Moumine, who had also went to Zanskar, of which must of his information is obtained from his website. The photographs proves so otherwise. I am willing to provide references to support my edits.


Also, om the gallery, I don't understand why Moumine rejected it. In the first place, why would the admins design such a tool? Nobody would do useless and redundant things that would not benefit anything. Every human knows that vey well. And for the gallery business, I am using the tool which nearly every article uses it to organise images into a section which has a lot of images, and the article is too short to faciliate the images. I had a gallery section as well. You can see articles such as snow and Thubten Gyatso Did I do anything wrong here? It makes the article look more open and feasible to read.

Not only did I do anything to mutate his edits, but what I did was to add in some facts which I liked and found from some other sources. There is nothing on my English. Mr Tan a few months back may not necessarily be of the same character as he is now. And I never intended to raise my past. Get it? I hope that you understand, join in and solve this problem as quickly as possible, or problems and emotional tension may develop. Nothing big. My personal character and my past is inmaterial in this aspect for the moment on this topic. Thanks. Mr Tan 05:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I have a feeling that you didn't grasp what I was saying, or at least didn't read the whole thing through. Anyway, I'll explain the whole thing to you in simple terms. I was not referring to the past, though I did make some references. Most of my commentary was focused on your current attitude, which imo has changed only very slightly since when you worked on Zanskar. I never tried to bring up the past. If, as you say, your grammar is good, you'd have noticed the "have been"s in the above text. I suppose you already know that this pertains to the present rather than the past. If not, well, we all learn new things every day. And, again regarding your English, you cannot expect me to believe that you are writing on a professional level if your language is sophomoric and if you insist that there is "nothing on your English." Of course there is nothing on it. It is not a table. Maybe you mean "nothing wrong with your English." Many more examples lie in your texts.
Regarding the gallery, I also think it is unnecessary for the article. It stands quite well on its own, even without your gallery. If you want to add some pics, do so by all means. If you want to reorganize the existing pictures into some sort of gallery, then that is only a waste of time, and may be contrary to the ideas of the original authors. Do what you wish.
And as for Moumine being "inconsiderate", I think you yourself are being inconsiderate. Perhaps you haven't thought of the possibility that Moumine hasn't logged in since December 17? Apparently, you haven't, and apparently, even if you did, you'd still think that it was because of this deep-seated grudge that Moumine was holding against you. Why not resolve to be a bit less, say, self-centered or egotistic and paranoid this New Year? It might help out a bit, you know. Igor the Lion(Roar!) 14:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I know my English is not at its best. My focus is not at my English. My answers are straight to the point, no questions of very indirect intentions. Please follow suit as what i state and don't give deviating conclusions. That was probably the reason for the long-standing arguement with Mel Etits.

Moumine, I believe, might really has his problems, as what you said. But there are negative possibilities that he purposely does not want to log on because of me! There are plenty of reasons to it. Anyway, whatever the reason, I have waited his reply for a reasonable period of time, careless about his life or whatsoever. An impatient person would go on to do whatever he likes without telling the opposition his reasons, and wait for him to reply within a reasonable period of time. But I didn't, because I also know that the opposition will conduct reverts, which will not only develop chaos but worse emotional pain.

The emotional agony and impatience will automatically develop with time if the opposition member never replies, however patient the person himself may be. Patience has its own limits. It is just the matter of amount.

Life just can't stagnate there. You got to move on with time. You can't pull people up if they do not want to get up on their own.

For the grudges, Moumine only left me one reply on his feelings towards my gallery styling by saying that he does not like it. Personal tastes? Most likely. But, whatever it is, since he himself knew that he do not/can't come to wikipedia so often, he should have the consideration to put down his reasons first. Contradicting personal tastes must be resolved with reasoning through peaceful negotiations, preferably short-term.

I tell you why I want the gallery style. I explain my taste and official reasons to this as well. The main objective is to get to Moumine himself. (I will also post it on Zanskar). This analysis assignment has gone too far to e-mail this thing to Moumine. I got your opinion on this the first time, by the way.

You know that <gallery> this function is used for compiling images into a section for shorter articles with numerous images. Moumine wanted the original design, probably because of its size. If people wanted to get a detailed view of the image, they can merely click on it to enlarge, and whats the problem there? Also, this gallery function is designated by the adminstrators. Adminstrators will never, ever design wiki tools which would disbenefit wikipedia or dud tools.

That's all I have to say. Mr Tan 15:43, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Your "emotional agony" is all useless. Why not check this link here and see for yourself that the last time Moumine logged in was on December 17, 2005? (At the time of writing, Moumine has already logged in and left a message on Talk:Zanskar regarding the gallery thing, which I agree with totally) By the same token, maybe I should hold a grudge against you because you didn't answer a message I posted some days ago until three days had passed.
It is true that admins will never create tools that would worsen the state of Wikipedia, but that doesn't mean they should use these tools whenever they feel like it. Imagine if they blocked every user on Wikipedia. How would you like that? The issue here is not the tool, but what you do with it, a point that I have been trying to get across in vain.
And finally, you have to improve your English because I have a hard time understanding you sometimes. Igor the Lion(Roar!) 11:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


Yes, I know that my English needs improvement. And my school exam results shows the colours, which varies greatly from time to time. I have been trying to imrpove my English all along. Well, let nature take its course, for learning something under pressure will not do any good. I don't practice English assesments during my holidays, and that's when my English skills deprove to some extent.

On the message I did not reply for three days I must apologise on this case. However, three days is still a relatively reasonable grace period. Moumine is a different case, often I have to wait for more than five days before I receive a new message. This is not good at all. It would be far too much to wait for him.

Of course, the best thing is that is to post messages to each other as both sides log onto the wikipedia at the same time, even though both of us might be in very different timezones.

Tools created in wikipedia will not only worsen the state of wikipedia, but they also serve the purpose of convenience and enhancement on the outlook of the article itself. Of course, you must use it reasonably, moderately and not with an explicit slant.

I get what you mean, for your stance is neutral, but as I have said, users who want to get a look at the picture can just click on it to see the full enlarged version. There is no need to give an enlarged version on the article itself because if you do it in certain orientations, it will disfigure the layout of the article which makes it less appalling to read to many viewers. This gallery function is a widely accepted tool. Just imagine - One picture here, the other picture is just on top and below it, which makes the article itself follow a zigzag line. Or lining up the images as if they are to be sent for execution, and not categorised. Moumine's design does not appeal to categorisation of pictures within a single gallery/pictures section.

The vast majorty of the articles use this gallery function to organise images in a section, which is particularly useful for relatively shorter articles like this. Browse around wikipedia for a longer period of time, and you would encounter some as you pass. Mr Tan 13:28, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

No, wait, let me consider his message carefully posted on Talk:Zanskar which I have just discovered. Please have a look at his comment as well. Thanks.

For your information, I may not be free for these free days because of personal academic reasons. This is just an evaluation, you do not have a big part in it. I hope you won't mind. Mr Tan 03:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks...

Sorry about that. Still, I've corrected. A late Happy New Year and an early Happy Wikipedia Day to you! smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 12:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you, Igor the Lion
Thank you! for voting in my RFA. It failed with a result of 31/11/2. You get an Smurrayinchester Green Box TM! If you have any comments, please say so here. Thank you!

[edit] Hey there!

I thought I hadn't seen you around for a while. I don't mind being called "Smurray", which most people do (cos Smurrayinchester is a bit of a mouthful). smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 07:15, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, using templates/pages in sigs doesn't work anymore. After some users signatures were vandalised, the system automatically adds subst: to the beginning of every template in the sig code. My signature does use templates (you can see it in all its pointless glory here). The code is rather complex (today is Monday, so the sig is yellow. Tomorrow is Tuesday so it goes purple etc.), and so has to be subst:ed in anyway. I'd like to shorten the sig a bit though. Maybe reduce it to one colour per day (rather than the two subtly different colours for the Smurray and inchester bits. Thanks anyway! smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 10:23, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smurrayinchester's RFA

Thank you, Igor the Lion
Thank you! for voting in my RFA. It passed with a result of 100/1/0. Thanks for your vote! If you have any comments, please say so here. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 19:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC) Thank you!
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../i/g/o/User_talk%7EIgor_the_Lion_4ab1.html"