User talk:Pfahlstrom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck! Renata3 18:47, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Some of that is useful info not immediately obvious, but...I'd already been here and editing pages quite a few months before this message was left, so it came off as rather patronizing. Something less cookie-cutter might have been more appropriate. pfahlstrom

Contents

[edit] CAPS

Re: previous comment: wait, doesn't BLEACH violate WP:MOS-TM ?? Series titles can be in all caps, but company names cannot? In any case, since you've changed TOKYOPOP to Tokyopop, I just stopped by to invite you to change the title of the VIZ Media article, since VIZ is the name of the company and not an acronym for anything. pfahlstrom 21:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Writing Bleach in caps doesn't 'violate' WP:MOS-TM as such, I doubt you could trademark it, but as I said on the other guy's talk page, it is deeply silly, but largely down to misunderstanding how written Japanese works.
You're right on highlighting the Viz Media as another one that could do with moving. As demonstrated in that article, generally what the entity is refered to in the text body is a good indicator. Acronyms such as the GLC are consistant, and some gimmick names like eBay generally stick with that caps as given as it has a semantic purpose (e[cho] bay, cf. e-mail). However silly stuff like RESERVoir CHRoNiCLE is really just typography, and is generally ignored (largely because no one but the supremely anal could ever remember the 'right' version). Wikipedia, by and large, tries to do the 'sensible' thing, but manga/anime fans in particular have fun using the full range of unicode make pretty wordart. In the end though, as long as there are redirects, the actual page title doesn't matter a huge deal, and I can think of better things to do on wikip (like writing articles) than running around moving things.
Oh, and I sympathise with your reaction to the Template:Welcome, they get chucked around in such an impersonal manner that they lose all the 'welcome' they're supposed to give. --zippedmartin 21:41, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree that BLEACH is a matter of typography and not specifically the series' name, but I don't agree that specifically chosen capitalizations like TOKYOPOP or RESERVoir CHRoNiCLE should be ignored. I don't know the reasons for them being capitalized in this manner by their originators, but this was their specific choice and it is my feeling that it should be respected just as eBay's orthography is respected. Just because you can see a reason for eBay and not one for TOKYOPOP does not mean that some reason does not exist; though I'm confused about your reason for eBay, since we do not write eMail. Anyway, the TOKYOPOP orthography is found elsewhere besides the TOKYOPOP website; see many references on Anime on DVD
What annoys me most is when people write it as TokyoPop. This is just wrong, so when I see that, I go through and fix it to the correct orthography: TOKYOPOP. But again, as some small number of people who voted in the consensus on capitalization have determined, for some reason, it is not Wikipedia style to respect orthography where full capitalization is concerned even though every other exception to standard capitalization is respected, who am I to disagree? pfahlstrom 02:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh yes, and I looked it up: BLEACH is indeed a registered trademark at the USPTO as of January 31, 2006 in the realm of "comic books, storybooks, children's books and comic magazines," so clearly someone found it trademarkable.pfahlstrom 02:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Ehehehe, brilliant. The ability to trademark everyday words never ceases to amaze me. You'll note though that that database is single case, they wouldn't let me trademark 'bleaCH' in the field of comics now, at least. Sorry for confusing you over ebay, just trying to show that case can mark a break (or a join of two words), semantically it'd be the same as 'e·Bay' or 'e-bay' or 'E Bay' or whatever. As for Tokyopop, that's clearly two units as well, Tokyo + Pop, hence the tendancy to use the CamelCase you hate. Case is and always has been flexible in English usage, trying to make a word case-specific just goes against the grain. --zippedmartin 05:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An apology

Hi Peter, I leapt to a conclusion on the TP article and would like to apologize. I realize that I did not give you the benefit of the doubt when I posted earlier. Sorry, I must have been spending too much time on the politics side of WP and not enough on the anime end. :( I will refactor that talk page. Kyaa the Catlord 10:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aluminium

I know we are going to have a dispute about this, but before you revert Aluminium again, may I warn you of WP:3RR. For discussion on the spelling, lets go to the appropriate talk-page. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, lets try. Do you have any suggestions as to where to find a reference for this claim? --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:41, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR Result

The result of a 3RR report in which you were involved can be found here. --ZsinjTalk 02:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Query answered

Hi! You asked in Talk:West Bengal regarding religious breakdown and percentage in Demographics. West Bengal has been updated with necessary percentage, breakdown etc along with reference. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tite Kubo image

Re: Where did you get the image in the Tite Kubo article, and how do you know it is public domain? Please add the appropriate tag. —pfahlstrom 02:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I do not remember the exact site that the image came from. However, I did find several sites that host versions of the same photo of Tite Kubo.
I apologize and I'll get to work on fixing the tag right away. Ankoku22 07:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alternate future

Hi, since you edited the article, I thought I'd let you know that there's a discussion on Talk:Alternate future about the encyclopedic-ness of that article in which you might be interested in participating. —Lowellian (reply) 20:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

Hello and thank you for contacting me. However, there's not much I can do. Moves that took place in the past become irrelevant when there's a clear move proposal listed on WP:RM which doesn't result in a consensus to move. I just closed that poll, further discussions must now happen on the talk page in order to convince the other users involved that the current name is wrong and unfair. Regards, Húsönd 14:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/f/a/User_talk%7EPfahlstrom_bfac.html"