User talk:Randall00

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom and using headings, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: We, wikipedians, dislike fragmented discussions. If you leave a comment for me, I will most likely respond to it in here, in this same page, on my talk page, as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, always feel free to respond to it there, on your talk page. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Contents

[edit] Anonymous Fan Mail

Your a bitch guy.

Thanks!! However, in the future, please sign your comments using four tildes so I know how to properly address my fans.
Passionately yours,
Randall00 Talk 19:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Correspondence RE: Citation needed Redirect

[edit] Uh...

What are you talking about? Citation needed isn't a deleted protected page anymore. 1ne 22:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I see what you're talking about. That's to prevent people from linking it to Wikipedia:Citation needed. 1ne 22:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Citation needed has an overwhelming amount of rational support for a more appropriate redirect. That's fine if you protect it to prevent people from linking to nonexistent Wikipedia policies, but the current redirect should at least point to the right article. As several users pointed out, nobody who types "citation needed" into the Search box is looking for an article on citation. -- Randall00 Talk 22:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
That's great; consensus on DRV agreed with my protection move. 1ne 22:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Err, "that's great"?? Are you actually not going to fix that? -- Randall00 Talk 22:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
It is against policy to create cross namespace redirects per Wikipedia:Redirect#When_should_we_delete_a_redirect.3F:
You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):
5. It is a cross-space redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exceptions to this rule are the "WP:" shortcut redirects (like WP:RFD), which technically are in the main article space but in practice form their own "pseudo-namespace". All "articles" beginning with "WP:" are in fact redirects. -- ALKIVAR™ ☢ 23:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Can't argue with the terms I suppose, so I'll give up the fight on this one despite the overwhelming support. Though the entire experience has left me with the temptation to request that WP:RFD be re-directed to Arbitrary. -- Randall00 Talk 21:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

It seems that you added Daze (Queens) to the deletion log [1] but the article isn't under AfD. Was this an error? IrishGuy talk 22:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Yes, I was actually just in the middle of a multi-windowed Wikipedia project of sorts and that was on the list of things to do, but I clumsily unplugged my computer with my foot in the middle of the whole thing and completely forgot about the Daze article. Thanks for letting me know, but I've probably picked up one too many tasks these days to worry about that one for now. *thumbs up* -- Randall00 Talk 21:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User page

You have no right to defame my userpage! Unless you gimme a barnstar! >:-( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Partapdua1 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC). Partapdua1 21:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Well sure I can! By gum, I could even clean it up, remove all the false categorizations, take out the entire pasted Jesus article and nominate it for Article of the Day if I so choose! Trouble is, I can't think of anything that would be any more of a waste of time. -- Randall00 Talk 21:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kretek

Hey Randall00! I'm in the midst of my second year of college level Indonesian, so hopefully I'm somewhere in between knowing nothing and being way too technical. Thanks, in any event, for your questions!

In the Indonesian language, plural nouns are generally pluralized by context. So you might say "Satu kretek, dua kretek" meaning "One clove cigarette, two clove cigarettes". The word "kretek" has the meaning of "clove cigarette" and "clove cigarettes" based on its context, next to the numeral word.

Otherwise, you can pluralize a word through reduplication in order to talk about clove cigarattes in general. That is, "kretek-kretek" does mean "clove cigarettes" but it has a bit more of "in general, clove cigarettes...". So we might say "Dia merokok dua kretek.", "He smokes two clove cigarettes", or "Kretek-kretek kurang sehat.", "Clove cigarettes are less than healthy."

One would never, in proper Indonesian, reduplicate a word that is already plural, like "dua kretek-kretek". It just doesn't make sense.

As for pronunciation, to get technical about it, the final "k" is a glottal stop, but for all intents and purposes, you could just say "KREH-tehk".

Also, while it is incorrect in Indonesian, I have heard "kretek" pluralized in English to "kreteks".

Hope that helps! If you have more questions I'd be happy to answer. Way more information than you could possibly want can be found here Thanks! Gws57 23:51, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Aha! Thank you very much, Mr. gws57! That's far more information than I expected; looks as though I got lucky by selecting someone who not only takes courses on the Indonesian language, but is also willing to spend time discussing the correct protocol for pronunciation and speech with someone who hails from a country where nobody even knows the meaning of the word. Odds are nobody in Canada is going to call me on the full glottal stop!
Incidentally, being from Canada has crippled my ability to read phonetic letters due to constant online mockery of the "eh?" stereotype, almost exclusively from Americans. In fact, I'm not sure I can say I've ever met a Canadian who truthfully fits the stereotype. Either way, as a result, I am forced to assume that your phonetic interpretation of "KREH-tehk" is aurally akin to "cray-tek" but I guess I can't be sure. I hope that's the case, that's what I've been calling them. Then again, I guess there's other possible interpretations of the "eh" sound, too; once again, I am a victim of the shortcomings of text-based communication! -- Randall00 Talk 19:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/n/User_talk%7ERandall00_b0f3.html"