User talk:Reinoutr

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome to my talk page. Leave me a message here. For archived discussions, see: User talk:Reinoutr/Archive 2006. D R P

Contents

[edit] AMOC-NA

Sorry, I really don't have much to add. 21:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)-user:DB5

[edit] List of films with similar themes and release dates AfD

Hi, you've expressed an opinion in the deletion discussion of this article. I've recently suggested a compromise in hopes of improving the article while keeping both sides happy, and would appreciate if you could revisit the issue. Thanks. --Wafulz 18:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AFD relist (courtesy note)

Hi,

I've relisted Dudley (dog) (on which you recently voted) for AFD. I'm sorry for the almost immediate relist, the reason being, I was going to list it, and checking, found it had been recently listed. The relist is for two reasons:

  1. Per Wikipedia:Deletion policy "The most common reason for a repeat nomination is that there was marked lack of discussion or lack of consensus in the original decision and the second vote is required to clarify opinion." 4 editors in a 3-1 split isn't really sufficient to show a consensus by the community. It's worth a relist for more opinions.
  2. The real issue with this article, and the basis upon which it should have been listed for AFD, is lack of notability, rather than lack of verifiability. (Verifiability of existence of the term is easily confirmed via Google)

Again, apologies for the almost immediate relist; it's in fact completely independent of the first listing and for a completely different reason. Anyhow, a courtesy note so you are aware. FT2 (Talk | email) 12:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Map

Isn't this your map? [[1]] Just thought you might be interested. Davu.leon 14:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] From Fuck Director

Hey, I thought I'd give you a couple of notes on the "Uses of the Word in Movies" page. I don't want to go in and edit it, just to have it changed back. But I should be considered the ultimate source for this, as I created the film. It will be available on DVD on Feb 13th, 2006 and then anyone can see. Thanks!

1. The honest actual length of the film is 90 minutes. The earlier version of the film, shown at AFI Film Fest was 93 minutes. However that was almost the only screening of that version. But since the number was quoted a number of times on the web, the misconception persists. If you want the list to be correct, it should read 90 minutes.

2. Also, your note towards the bottom regarding the 629 uses in the AFI version is not correct. The film ALWAYS has had 800+ uses, what was wrong was the ON-SCREEN FILM GRAPHIC that quoted the number at 629. Again the issue was quickly resolved and the correct number put into the film. The same misconception exists as above. There is no need for the note as the film always had that number of fucks in it.

Thanks again, Steve steve@mudflapfilms.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.106.206.66 (talk) 17:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations

It looks as if mediation is going to go ahead. Please look at the end of this section of the above article - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations#Project mediator offer and respond to the questions I direct to you there. Thanks. --Bduke 09:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AADD

I responded to your post. I hope you will understand my reasoning for nominating it for a guideline.--CastAStone|(talk) 04:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

In response to your latest edit on the Kosovo article, may I remind you that consensus was reached on the language order, the same for the Kosovo template. As Serbian language is the official language in Serbia and Kosovo is a Serbian province, Serbian language should go first, regardless of the majority population. However, considering that most people in Kosovo speak Albanian, the Albanian name of Kosovo is right after the official, Serbian name. The version I have reverted to has been there for a long time, and the tension has died town significantly, even though it is a heated issue. I don't see why you would suddenly change that and support a disruptive edit by an annonimous editor who probably doesn't know about the consensus. Besides, I haven't seen you on Kosovo discussion page lately, and I would advise you to be careful when editing this very sensitive topic. Thank you :) --GOD OF JUSTICE 00:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

You are right, I shouldn't have written "vandalism" and I apologize. I didn't check the edit thoroughly and at first and assumed it was vandalism, but it was, as you stated, a case of misinformation. All the best, --GOD OF JUSTICE 01:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely agree :)) --GOD OF JUSTICE 01:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The HTML spaces in WP:AADD

... were added because the italicized "essay" followed by the non-italicized "on" looks like a single word, the space between them disappearing. With that added nbsp, the space looks normal. Hmmm... is this a difference in skins? I'm using plain vanilla Monobook, the default skin, and thus I suspect the one most commonly used. -- Ben 03:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Dear Ben, regarding the spaces I removed, the way you changed it, there appeared to be three spaces between "essay" and the next word on my screen. It looks normal with just one regular space. I am also using monobook, however. What browser are you using? Alternatively, we should ask some other people for their opinion on the talk page. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 07:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Firefox 2.0.0.1, with default sanserif font = Helvetica 16.
Okay, here's a comparison table, last column forced into my default font:
essay_on separator normal size small text as in WP:AADD small, default=Helvetica 16
no space ...of this essayon making solid... ...of this essayon making solid... ...of this essayon making solid...
one normal space ...of this essay on making solid... ...of this essay on making solid... ...of this essay on making solid...
nbsp plus space ...of this essay  on making solid... ...of this essay  on making solid... ...of this essay  on making solid...
space, nbsp, space ...of this essay   on making solid... ...of this essay   on making solid... ...of this essay   on making solid...
In the last column, you and I should be seeing the same thing. If the last two columns don't look alike to you, your browser uses a different default sanserif font, set in the "preferences"; please tell me what it is, and I'll try viewing the table that way. Thanks! -- Ben 12:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
One more thing: with my screen resolution, the small-text lower-case "o" (o) is only five pixels tall, the smallest still-legible size. I'm quite prepared to believe that the blame for the space disappearing between "essay" and "on" should be placed on my system/browser settings. If the text looks right to other people, I won't mess with it just to make it look right to me. -- Ben 12:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Dear Ben, thanks for going through the trouble. The two last columns indeed look different, but in both cases a space is clearly visible between "essay" and "on". For comparison, I included a row without a space to your table above.
I am not sure which standard font I am looking at here, but...
  • ...of this essay on making solid... (Helvetica)
  • ...of this essay on making solid... (Arial)
  • ...of this essay on making solid... (Times, only for comparison)
  • ...of this essay on making solid... (Standard)
...from this small test, it looks like my standard font is Arial (which is the standard sans serif font for Windows and Internet Explorer). But as stated above, even with Helvetica, I am clearly seeing a space between "essay" and "on".
Hope this helps, regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 13:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
It does indeed, thanks! In Arial, the spacing looks right. I've changed my default sanserif to Arial, accordingly, and to make sure that what I write looks the same to other people as to me. IE has a large enough user base to be a good "target audience". Thanks again! (It's also just occurred to me that there are subtly different versions of "Helvetica" floating around, so we may still not be looking at the same font there! Aiiiii!) -- Ben 13:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hl2

Thans, I appreciate it!--Crossmr 13:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] oldafdmulti Template

It looks fine. You might want to be a little clearer on the number choice. I just played around with it to see the variation, but was unsure of what I was doing based on the instruction. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 20:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

I had no idea that I did that. Some mistake. I clicked on edit on section. ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 13:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re : The use of Template:oldafdfull and Template:oldafdmulti

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 10:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

  • That's what happens when one runs an obsolete version of AfD-script. I'll update it. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 10:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dutch (ethnic group)

See my comment at User_talk:Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise#Dutch_.28ethnic_group.29.--Paul111 19:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

For the record, the article has already been through a Mediation proposal and RfC, it is all at the talk page archives.Paul111 19:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Mediation is voluntary, and the RfC did fail, since it attracted only one other editor in two weeks. Wikipedia discourages edit wars, but it doen't really have an alternative if two sides insist on different versions of an article, (except locking it, but that only delays things). That was the reason neither mediation nor an Rfc would work in this case anyway - mediation presupposes a common desire to reach a consensus, and there was none. As I said in the comment for FutPer, there is no point in further procedures.Paul111 20:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] check user on me

No, it's fine and good diligience... wasn't me, though. - Denny 20:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

In regard to the map of Kosovo within Serbia in the Kosovo-InfoBox template, I would like to make a few comments. First of all, I am fully aware of the discussion about the topic. The previous map was the result of a concensus reached that Kosovo will be in a similar color as Serbia, but darker, while the border would be a dotted line. The only difference between the old map and my new map is that my map shows the entire Republic of Serbia, instead of just its southern part. This adds to the clarity of the article, since the map below also shows Serbia with Kosovo in Europe, while my map zooms the colored part in the map below and labels it. The size of Kosovo in the new map is exactly the same, so no harm is done to the resolution. To conclude, there is nothing in the map that is in conflict with the agreed solution in the many discussions on Kosovo's talk page. All the best, --GOD OF JUSTICE 00:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/i/User_talk%7EReinoutr_013a.html"