User talk:Lacrimosus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Talk Archives

• Current Talk
• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3

You should check the results for the 1998 Qld state election - in particular, some electorates have changed names. eg, the seats of Algester and Darling Downs didn't exist at that election - check the Hansard if you don't believe this.

I just edited the 1998 Qld state election page so that it's correct. I'm sorry, but it's foolish to say that ONP won the seat of Pumicestone, as that seat didn't exist at the 1998 election. Similarly, the seats of Algester and Stretton didn't exist. I'm surprised that you changed it to be wrong. Any political junkie who knows about Qld politics knows these sorts of things.

Hi. Are you User:Blumensacha? I put this talk message on that user's talk page in response to a comment left on mine earlier:

I do indeed know that the electorates have changed - I just haven't got around to updating that list fully (it was pasted from the 2001 version). I'll get around to fixing it eventually, but you're more than welcome to have a crack yourself.

And that's what I meant. I'm not a "junkie" or an "expert", I'm a Wikipedian. I created the page because none existed, not because I claim special expertise. This is a hands-on place: nobody owns articles, and if people see mistakes, they generally fix them themselves. That's the philosophy of Wikipedia. See this for more. Slac speak up! 08:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

My revert was from them version when you stuffed the wikilink, not to your change of content. Sorry. Xtra 02:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brisbane WikiProject

Hi Lacrimosus. I just dropped by to let you know that I am trying to revive the Brisbane WikiProject where you're listed as a member. You may have recently noticed the new list of suggested tasks on the project page. There’s also a new 'Recent Activity' section on the project talk page. You might like to add any Brisbane related articles that you've been working on recently to the list to encourage others to join in. If you have any comments on how to improve the project, please share them on the project talk page. Thanks. -- Adz|talk 06:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australian Greens & Dems

In Australian Greens you state that "In this context, the electoral decline of the Democrats can be seen as a key element of Greens success." Have you got a reference for this? It appears that a lot of the Democrat vote has gone elsewhere than to the Greens. Peter C Talk! 13:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, I would content most Democrats votes went to the Liberal Party, hence their victory in the senate. The Greens were seen as "too left" for many Democrats voters.Dankru 09:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Certainly the Democrat leadership has adopted this view, largely IMHO because they view a large portion of their support to have been transferred to the Greens. I suppose we all should look at the figures, but I might underline the view that Democrats voters abandoned their party for the Greens is a view certainly popular among the Democrats themselves. Slac speak up! 09:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Saints Wikiproject

I noted that you have been contributing to articles about saints. I invite you to join the WikiProject Saints. You can sign up on the page and add the following userbox to your user page.

This user is a member of the Saints WikiProject.

I also invite you to join the discussion on prayers and infoboxes here: Prayers_are_NPOV.

Thanks! --evrik 17:04, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WW2

No, no one has polled them but it is common practice and established that that date is the start of ww2 and it is not a "conventional view" but a very commen and accepted one. Just ask as many techers in as many schools you can find and you will get your own mini poll ;) (Deng 20:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC))

By the way I didnt change your words becuase that would be pointless. As long as you believe it is "conventional" then changeing it back and forward is pointless so it would be better if you yourself found out that it is not "conventional" (Deng 22:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Post-nominals

Why are you removing them from Edmund Barton? According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)#Other non-royal names, #4, they're only contraindicated for non-Commonwealth/British Empire citizens. Choess 02:01, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Botany Bay

Hey, thanks for the Botany Bay map!

[edit] Titles in electorates

Hi,

Would you like to give feedback on the use of titles in electorates?

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian politics/Electorates#Titles in member lists

-- Newhoggy | Talk 04:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 05:04, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Amherst5282 (talk • contribs)

I've reported Amherst5282 (talk • contribs) for violation of 3RR on her talk page, fyi. Ardenn 20:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] YL

Why the Scott Crawford thing?

[edit] My Username

Hi slac, thanks, I didn't notice that advice before. My name originally was "Remember Salvador Allende", but I felt that was fairly theatrical and a bit of a mouthful. I would prefer to keep my present name, Allende is a minor hero and I feel very emotional about the circumstances of his death, the name's meant to be a tribute. I wouldn't want to keep if it could be seen as offensive, I don't really think that it would, but that's just my personal inclination, if you feel differently please tell me. If, on the other hand, the name's only effect would be that people identified me as a bit of a lefty or to annoy conservatives, then I've no problem with that. Please give you response, as I'm new to the site's etiquette.

[edit] You have my answer

Talk:The Elements of Style. --VKokielov 02:23, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Roman Catholic Church

The factual information I have incorporated into the article is cited for its statistical accuracy. Please avoid using "POV" labels where they are inappropriate and non-factual. --66.69.219.9 00:05, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

You can be factually accurate and still be POV. Read the policy. Slac speak up! 02:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of Nova Roma

I'm not a member of Nova Roma, so I don't know if I'd be able to fix the article up (it clearly does need some work), but I think it should be obvious that the organization is notable enough. It is mentioned on the micronation page, has an active memership of over 1,500, and has actually minted coins. There are articles on several other micronations and simulation organizations, including Lovely, the Aerican Empire, Neue Slowenische Kunst, the Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands, Avram, and many others. OzLawyer 16:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Invitation to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy

Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick ^{talk contribs} 18:27, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Economy of India FAR

Hi

You look to be a contributor to this article, which is about to go into FARC unless we can get some input from economics people. A few of us, including me, have put a great effort into copy-editing and other improvements.

Can you assist? There are a number of unaddressed inline queries, and IMV the article needs more depth in a few places.

Tony 10:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2007, Queensland Election

I tried making a new Coalition pendulum but I mucked up the formating! Can you fix it and tell what went wrong. I'd fix it myself but I don't have the time. Aussie King Pin 02:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Queensland legislative election, 2007

Hi Slac,

The pendulum is looking great. Keep up the good work! Just wondering if you reckon the colour in the panel of Rosa Lee-Long (One Nation) needs to be differentiated from that of the Independents? The ABC election site has her in a brown colour and the Independents in black. Also, I think the shade of blue in the headers for the non-Labor seats may be too dark with the black font for some readers. Is it possible to get a lighter shade of blue? I'm a novice with colours in tables etc., so I'll leave this up to you! Cheers --- BrightLights 06:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Lacrimosus.jpg listed for deletion

[edit] Christianity discussion board

Slac, thanks for the tip. I wasn't sure if the things I changed were part of the original article or not.Jlujan69 05:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Irwin

Please explain why you reverted my edit that Steve Irwin was Impaled, which is the correct term for this type of injury. --The Land of Smeg 07:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

==Impalement==

Er, no it's not. Impalement is a human form of punishment that involves running someone through a sharpened stave. Slac speak up! 08:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

If you read the article, it says "The term impalement is also used to describe deep stabbing wounds that occur in accidents where objects are driven through the body, for example by falling onto a spike, or being driven onto one in an automobile accident". It doesn't imply that the act is deliberate (ie: punishment). --The Land of Smeg 01:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apologies

Hi, Slac. Reflecting upon my behavior during the Catholic Church naming discussion, I think I was unnecessarily harsh with you sometimes, especially when I first rebutted some of your arguments. I’m sorry. I’ll try to do better next time. --Leinad ¬ »saudações! 17:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] John Kinnamos

Hi! I noticed you moved John Cinnamus to John Kinnamos because apparently Byzantines are to be indexed under their Greek names. Shouldn't it then be indexed under Joannes Kinnamos, or Ioannes?

Also, you forgot to check the "What links here" for double-redirects. I think I fixed it.

→ (AllanBz ✍) 18:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Split infinitive FAR/C

Hi there

I wonder whether you're in a position to help to bring this one back to FA standards. Tony 11:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jesus Seminar

Hi,

So why did you remove the internal link to Paul Verhoeven? According to his page he does have some kind of unusual PhD. Eugeneacurry 17:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup tags

(Cleanup, wikify, uncat, linkless) Hi, please don't "subst" these, as it makes them harder to deal with in several ways. Rich Farmbrough, 12:03 23 November 2006 (GMT).

[edit] RC Talk page

I tried deleting those rants shortly after they appeared, but User:CyberAnth insisted on restoring it and things took off from there. I suppose we could tag-team the thing to avoid a 3RR for either of us if he tries putting it back again. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australia Zoo

I thought that since there was so much support for the Irwin's at this stage the news and current events would be appreciated. It's not like no one has heard of Australia Zoo. It might make a few people plan to visit on those dates, but I do not truly believe it's advertising as such, it is the notification of events that are OF INTEREST that are occuring at the zoo. NOTE! The events will be edited after they are over, i.e. removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.169.173.251 (talk) 10:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Prune

Hey Lacrimosus, Wikipedia doesn't usually delete talk page comments, unless they are vandalism. Instead comments are archived. Regards, -- Jeff3000 05:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I have not seen that policy, or seen anyone else do that. Pruning, can be seen, in my mind as censorship of some views. I would reinsert those statements, and then archive them. -- Jeff3000 05:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You deleted my comments dude

Admittedly they weren't too constructive. Props to you for being polite. We should geek out about being Catholic sometime 24.7.41.194 07:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ref

you want me to provide a source for every of those teams right next to it? there would be little hundred notation links there! and please dont revert it blindly there was other edits!--Thugchildz [1] good enough for you!--Thugchildz that those who participate in cricket tournaments across europe etc thats how they use to get chance to for qualifier for the world cup before the world cricket league came...

[edit] Memoriam edit

Gratias tibi ago! I can't beleive I made such a dumb typo. Thanks again. •Jim62sch• 21:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Byzantine Empire

Hi Lacrimosus. I'd like to know why do you keep moving the Greek name from the head of the Byzantine Empire? I know that it's not the translation of the article's title, but it's not meant to be. I added the word "native" to point that out. This article was voted as a featured article under that form, and such reformations cannot be decided by an individual editor. So can you please restore it? Miskin 01:07, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean to say that we're not allowed to make changes at all, but this is about a standard WP formula. Thanks for your understanding. Miskin 11:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I find that "the Greek-speaking half of the Roman Empire that survived throughout the Middle Ages" is much more specific than "the Greek-speaking Roman Empire", which is kind of a POV definition. If fact I was thinking of making some changes in that sentence myself. Miskin 00:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

What I mean is that despite Byzantium's political continuation to Rome (which is also ambiguous since the Emperors were not being approved by the city of Rome) scholars today draw a straight line between the Roman Empire which fell in the fifth century and all later Christian empires that claimed its heritage. It's not up to wikipedians to decide which Roman Empire is more entitled to carry the name. "The Greek-speaking Roman Empire" i.e. "just another Roman Empire" can only confuse someone who is beginning to learn on the topic. To someone who already knows about Byzantium it won't make any difference. Miskin 00:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's a POV to say that literally all scholars make a clear distinction between the Roman and the Byzantine Empries, after all this is a fact. Maybe it was just another Roman Empire that spoke Greek, but this is certainly not a consensus amongst modern scholars. Deciding that the Byzantine Empire was the "Roman Empire" without providing any explanations falls in the limit of original research. The Byzantine perspective is too complicated for us to understand, because we're dealing with an era where religious faith is above all other cultural factors, and especially above national factors. Most of the editors here are using "Romans" in an ethnic context which was simply non-existent in late antiquity, and it's truly hard to understand how it was perceived back then. The truth is that the Westeners had always been seeing the Byzantine Empire as a foreign 'Greek' entity which had been lucky enough to be running the Eastern part of the Roman Empire. This was such a common perception at the time that in their war with Justianian the barbarian Goths and invaders of Italy, the very people who had sacked Rome, "did their outmost to exploit the Italians' suspicions of the unmanly Greeks" as the The Oxford History of Medieval Europe. Indeed after the formations of Heraclius the Empire was cut off from its Roman past, and even the last traces of Latin language that had existed in administration disappeared. With the emergence of the Carolingian state in the 9th century Latin contempt towards the Eastern Empire becomes officiased as the Frankish Emperor is crowned in the city of Rome as the sole and de jure Imperator Romanorum, and the ecumenical claims of Regnum Graecorum could be now ignored at an official level. From that point on Byzantines were seen more and more as 'schismatic Greeks', Byzantium itself as a corrupted continuation of ancient Greece, and by the 4th crusade the average Latin wouldn't even know that Byzantium was ever linked to the Roman Empire. The Byzantines from their part start claiming a Hellenic (ancient Greek) identity by the 11th century, and its popularity grows along with Latin contempt, until the Emperors of Nicaea, Epirus and Morea make it official. So to sum up, I don't think that a "Greek-speaking Roman Empire" can give a precise description. However I'm not changing it back because it will most likely upset other editors who stubbornly insist on overemphasising a 2000-year old Roman history (without ever trying to examine what 'Roman' has meant). Miskin 02:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bjelke

"Imbued with the strongly pietistic Lutheranism associated with the Danish immigrants of the area" What does it mean? What is "pietistic Lutheranism" as opposed to non-pietistic Lutheranism? Are Danish Lutherans more "pietistic" than other Lutherans? Who says so? Are Kingaroy Danish Lutherans especially "pietistic"? According to whom? Unless this is (a) relevent and (b) sourced, it is just a piece of "bloat" of which there is far too much in this article. Adam 02:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy to leave it in if you think it important. Personally, I think Bjelke's public religiosity was all a sham for the yokels, and he was just an unprincipled old crook. What part of pietistic Lutheranism permits corrupt stock market dealings? But of course the Lord moves in mysterious ways. Adam 03:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BOT - Regarding your recent protection of Australian Labor Party:

You recently protected[2] this page but did not give a protection summary. If this is an actual (not deleted) article, talk, or project page, make sure that it is listed on WP:PP. VoABot will automatically list such protected pages only if there is a summary. Do not remove this notice until a day or so, otherwise it may get reposted. Thanks. VoABot 02:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AFD 2006 Victorian election campaign

As a contributor, you may wish to comment on this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006 Victorian election campaign. Peter Campbell 07:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] World domination

The references for the Neo-Nazi idea of establishing a Western Imperium are the Wikipedia article on the book Imperium by Francis Parker Yockey and the description of the proposed Western Imperium in the book I referenced by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke. Best wishes, Keraunos 06:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] European Voice

I would be happy to hear your criticisms for my new article about the European Voice newspaper. As far as I can see the tone is acceptable and fits generally within Wiki guidelines - but I am new to this game, so am more than willing to take guidance if you have the time to do so. Thanks for helping, I look forward to your response! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gwilym84 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Vichy

You have a strange knowledge of the facts, a fascist knowledge, not an objective knowledge
Moreover I notice that the French are responsible of their problems !, that the British government have no responsability with its refusal to help the Spanish republican ! after the request of the French government
Oh yes the British government is white like snow ! How old are you ?

Unless I am mistaken, the wikipedians have to be objective and impartial, it is not you case, you give your opinion !!! You consider Wikipedia like you blog, unfortunately it isn't not your blog.

Liv110 11:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It is clear that for you the vichy regime falls from the sky !, that nothing before are the origins of that regime !, it is God who suddenly decided to install it in France !!! in the Channel Islands !!! (amazing none link about the Occupation of the Channel Islands !! where the nazis have installed also concentration camps !!)
Why URSS, USA, Canada, Australia maintained their diplomatic relationships, ambassadors in vichy ? it is false ?
It is very easy to write "No references" when you destroy the links (official documents) !!!!!!!!
Like revisionnists or negationists you write the facts with reference to your opinion and feelings !!!
Liv110 21:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)