User talk:Viriditas/Archive 16

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 16
| Archive 17 →


Contents

Category

Thank you for the notice, otherwise I probably wouldn't of caught that. You're right, most weren't recipies anyway. That's right, I misspelt recipe again. ReverendG 17:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC) Come to think of it, you deserve one of these

For helping to make the internet not suck, I ReverendG award to you the Banner of Unsuckiness.
For helping to make the internet not suck, I ReverendG award to you the Banner of Unsuckiness.

. ReverendG 17:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)






Sock puppet allegation

Hi Viriditas, I thought that you should know that you have been named as a suspected sockpuppet at: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Chondrite. Chondrite 08:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks like Simonapro finally lost it. I see he's been blocked indefintely as well. —Viriditas | Talk 10:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Straight-shooter

I figured I'd clean up Dugout (smoking) and add Straight-shooter as an alternate term. This page adds nothing and shall be prodded. ReverendG 04:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Novels WikiProject

Hi, and welcome to the Novels WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to fiction books often referred to as "Novels".

A few features that you might find helpful:

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the members, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget the Userbox. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Jews for Jesus

Hi and welcome to a good contender for most disputed page in Wikipedia. I'd really ask that you joing the discussion on the talk page rather than just reverting the article. The issue is being strongly debated; extra reverts don't help much.

With regards to your edit summary "..misrepresent the Jewish POV", I would hope I don't have to point out that Wikipedia is not supposed to be supporting the Jewish POV. We are supposed to be presenting the Neutral POV. Do have a look at the section where this is discussed. DJ Clayworth 15:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Writing for the enemey involves representing a POV. The edit you are defending deceptively presented a non-neutral POV as neutral by inferring that some Jews could be Jews for Jesus. Please don't bother replying here if you are going to keep playing these silly semantic games. —Viriditas | Talk 19:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Mission District references

You said the references I removed were "perfectly acceptable in this context, and serve to support the content". They're not. Did you actually look at them? I waded through pages and pages of bureaucratese and found nothing even remotely related to the statements they were supposedly referencing. It's not enough for references to be technically supportive: readers who open links like these should have some reasonable expectation of actually finding the reference in a short amount of time. That's why I removed them. +ILike2BeAnonymous 20:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

You've made an error. Please review the citations again. They support the content they were referencing entirely, and they are perfectly acceptable in this context. —Viriditas | Talk 20:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The Fountain

Dude! I don't think you get it. The paragraph has a run-on sentence, and the last sentence is unclear about who actually climbs the steps -- the conquistador or the priest. Fine, I'll renege on the temple/pyramid deal, but the other stuff, you can't just revert in whole. Change what needs to be changed, because if you're gonna keep a run-on over a valid sentence, you have a problem. --Erik (talk/contrib) @ 04:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

"His men are killed in battle and Tomás is captured by a crowd of Mayan warriors who spare his life, but force him to climb the pyramid." That is a run-on, son. If you're going to revert my edits, I'm going to point out each valid edit you revert on your talk page. Here's another: "Upon reaching the temple at the top, a Mayan priest stabs Tomás in the stomach." Is the Mayan priest or Tomas reaching the top? That needs to be clarified. --Erik (talk/contrib) @ 04:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Can I suggest adding a more accurate tag to the Themes and influences section, or at least write something on the talk page about why you think it needs improvement? The clean-up template you added to the section requests either course of action to communicate with other editors what could be improved. --Erik (talk/contrib) @ 16:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd still like you to add a more accurate tag or write something on the talk page for the Themes section. Otherwise, I'm just going to remove it, since you've obviously gotten this message and are preferring to edit on your own. In addition, I had the Themes and influences in one section because of sentences like this one: "Although ancient Mayan mysticism is a primary cultural influence in the film,[18] Jackman describes the story as a modern myth that helps humans understand the meaning of life. According to Jackson, these myths help explain the unexplainable, to reach a state of understanding: "These fables may not make scientific sense, but somehow they explain the world to us," which has influence and theme; and this sentence: "Director Darren Aronofsky also explores the modern theme of the Fountain of Youth; Aronofsky was inspired by an article in the New York Times that characterized aging as a disease that could be cured. In the film, Aronofsky considers the repercussions of actualizing life extension," which has theme and inspiration/influence. Where should they be located, then? I understand the reason why you broke them down, but I wanted to make clear that the actually defined themes from people who worked on the film were distinct from the reviewers' own interpreted themes. --Erik (talk/contrib) @ 15:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Prestige's importance

It's got a 74% rating on R.T. and 8.2 weighted average on IMDb, so I'm unsure of a Mid. It's not flopped like The Fountain mind. Wiki-newbie 19:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the Films WikiProject!

Welcome!

Hey, welcome to the Films WikiProject! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Cbrown1023 01:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

A message of appreciation is always welcome.

I haven't kept up with the lead and Themes, so I don't know that they need more than a routine copy edit. Cognita 18:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Newsletter

The November 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 23:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

comments pages for Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii rankings

Hi Viriditas,

I have no objections to anything at all that you choose to do. The ranking system belongs to Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii, not to me. :-)

The cool thing about those rankings is that the 'bot picks them up nightly and puts them in the table with the rankings; see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ethnic groups articles by quality/1 for examples (scroll down a bit; no comments on the highest-ranked articles).

Do you have a link to your summary tables on the WikiProject page? I forget...

But do whatever you want! They belong to the WikiProject..

.. do you want me to do it..? --Ling.Nut 21:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Any thoughts on enabling automatic assessment of stub-class articles to populate the lists/cats like the Military WikiProject? —Viriditas | Talk 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes. WP:AWB. --Ling.Nut 02:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Peter Tamony

Your main style guide should be Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies). Sometimes there may be some fine point not included there; you may wanna see WP:MOS.

Drop me a line when it's finished; I'll take a look. :-) --Ling.Nut 21:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Check your Wikipedia email :-) --Ling.Nut 01:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  • If you haven't rec'd an email yet, then just send me one. I'll send files. --Ling.Nut 01:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Advice about an obsessive updater

Viriditas, I've been impressed with your work on The Prestige and since you're a member of the Wiki Film Project I would like your advice. There were a couple spurious changes to the article's Cast list (addition of non-existent characters) which I reverted. Curious, I checked out the contributor (69.119.119.178) (I really have to check how to wikilink that!) and found a history of, shall we say, dubious edits, most regarding the Hollywood entertainment business.

A quick look at his/her edits shows that most are in the trivia category (list of films, roles, age, siblings, birthplace, etc.), but most cannot be verified (and many are erroneous). Also, contributions are voluminous, almost obsessive. I think most of her/his sources must be fan message boards or other publications; he/she also seems stalkerish about some celebrities. The user's talk page has a number of warnings about adding unverifiable entries, with accusations of vandalism. The user has been blocked a couple times, but seems to go on an editing spree as soon as the block expires.

I'm tempted to review a number of the user's edits for validity since many are in film articles, an area of interest for me, but I think if I start making corrections wholesale I'll ignite a flaming war (this user has been accused of online abuse of other Wiki contributors). Do you have any suggestions as to a productive path to pursue? I'm thinking a permanent block would be the answer, but since the user isn't intentionally vandalizing pages, I don't know if that's the appropriate route. However, does a consistent pattern of numerous, invalid edits constitute an actionable offense? Thank you. Jim Dunning 04:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hawaii geo stubs

How did you guess about the surfing? My user page. No I created the stubs ages ago using a map because it didn't seem covered. For the points and beaches and villages I suggest as you did that a list is created of Places of Hawaii by island e.g List of places on Maui which will include beaches, headlands, villages etc. I love Hawaaii visited in the year 2000 Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Unless you can find info to expand each of them then for the smaller places I dod suggest a redirect to the list.

I suggest : List of locations on Maui List of locations on Kauai etc. THis will include the headlands, beaches, smaller villages etc Ernst Stavro Blofeld 10:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

George Ewart

Hey Viri, thanks for the info. :) I haven't heard of George before, but it is possible he was very distantly related. Dad doesn't have any siblings, so I don't have many closely related Ewart rels, but there are quite a few in the very extended family. Anyway thanks for pointing that out to me, I found interesting. It's nice to see you back, but I hope you had a good break. :) Cheers, Sarah Ewart 14:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

LMAO at the section above: "Sock puppet allegation". That's the most hilarious thing I've read in ages!! I was actually laughing out loud as I read that report! I always suspected you were really Eddie's sockpuppet! :D Sarah Ewart 14:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I gave him another two months to think about it. The edits I looked at seem to be sneaky hoaxes that most editors probably wouldn't be too suspicious of if they didn't know the IP. Sarah Ewart 00:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Viri, just letting you know that I decided to extend the block to 6 months. Hopefully that'll give everyone some peace of mind. :) Sarah Ewart 03:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk page discussion

Thanks for the tip. I looked at the two pages you linked to and posted on the second one. S.E.'s talk page is really the main place where this discussion has gone on, so I don't know what else to use for it.

Proposing deletion isn't an issue now. The article about Z.T.E. had an AfD discussion some time ago, and the decision was "Delete." Cognita 22:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

This page links to the AfD discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Zach_Tyler_Eisen
I understand that, in general, straying conversations on someone's talk page would be inappropriate. Since S.E. is the admin who last dealt with Z, however, she may be the best person to follow the discussion about what he's been doing. His article makes it easy to find out his little sister's address and phone number, assuming the girl is real – I say this because he makes up other kinds of things. His own and his parents' privacy is also a concern. How can we get the article deleted, as it was supposed to be? Cognita 00:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
P.S.: If you meant that in this case it's best to post such comments on the talk page of Z's article, I'm afraid no admin would see them there. And, among the many things I don't know about Wikipedia, I don't know whether a blocked user is blocked from reading or only from editing. He's less likely to find me on someone else's talk page than on the talk page for his article. I'm trying to keep a low profile. With his history of vandalism, if I stuck my head out of the burrow, I could expect reprisals when his block expired (by the way, I think two months is too short and two years would be better). Cognita 01:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I was being fiercely protective, too, only with a different target. S.E. has taken care of the problem for now. I guess we're clear for another six months. Cognita 06:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

<copied from Cognita's page by Sarah>You did everything right, it's just that I've seen Sarah's talk page get so busy in the past, I felt bad for her, and I thought we could help cut down on her clutter by keeping the discussion somewhere else. You wouldn't believe how busy her talk page gets. It's clearly not my role to control entropy (or to pretend that I'm her secretary, heh). —Viriditas | Talk 07:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Viri. I do, most sincerely, appreciate you looking out for me. :) It's very nice to know that I have friends behind me. And I don't mind you being my secretary--I can send you some typing to do! ;) Sarah Ewart 13:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Creating user sub-pages

Viriditas, how do you create User sub-pages, such as your /to-do page? Thank you in advance? Jim Dunning 06:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The Fountain for Review

Since you edited tremendously on The Fountain to improve the wording of the film article, I thought your insights would be helpful in its review of the recent GA status. I've attempted to address the wording on the article, but if you have any suggestions or ideas, feel free to share them or edit accordingly. --Erik (talk/contrib) @ 15:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

WatchlistBot

I don't know what happened at the bot requests page. Some sort of odd caching thing I guess. Anyway, I'm caught up with other stuff, and could help with Hawaii if you want. My bot's pretty primitive really. I don't get any info about how active articles are, or even if they're new. I know there are ways to get some of that info through the toolserver, but I'm not familiar with that. You might talk to User:interiot who had some similar ideas for WatchlistBot and also has experience working with the toolserver. I'm not spending much time on wikipedia these days, but I find small WatchlistBot jobs to be entertaining. I did tag all Hawaii-related categories awhile back when I was testing that as a new feature. At the time I noticed that there were a lot of untagged articles. I posted to the project page to ask if anyone wanted me to tag them, but got no response. This is something the bot is already set up to do, and I could do it easily if you're interested. I could do this for just stubs and stub categories, like you mentioned, or for the whole project. Ingrid 21:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm tagging completely untagged stubs right now. When it's done, I'll add the class parameter to unclassed stubs. After that, I can look into the other things you suggested. Can you tell me specifically how to determine those things (cleanup, merge, etc). I can easily find articles which contain a specific template, or which are in a specific category. Finding overlap is also easy. That is, articles which are in a Hawaii category and tagged with a cleanup template. Or in a Hawaii category and also in a cleanup category. Ingrid 04:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I just started working on cleanup tags for Hawaii articles. It's not as easy as I'd hoped. There are a _lot_ of clean up categories, making it take a long time. Not necessarily a problem for a bot, but it makes it slower to test, and sometimes the bot crashes in the middle of a run. Probably not anything I can't work through, but I'm not sure when I'll get it finished. If you had a shorter list of categories, that would probably help. Ingrid 22:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

PocKleanBot

Well, I think we knew that would happen. Nobody likes a nag! :) Listen, I think there is still a need for this bot if you go with my original idea concerning WikiProjects. Instead of leaving messages on user talk pages, you could update WikiProject categories, tables, and discussion pages. Certain users could sign up with you to get detailed reports, and if necessary use the information to contact editors on a human to human basis. We need this bot, but we just need to put people on the frontline, not automated messages. I have to run right now, but when I return I will try and go into more detail. —Viriditas | Talk 22:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, but no thanks, I've withdrawn the bot and I'm going to move on, too many people had too many colourful ocncerns about this bot. It's too much hard work this way trying to get a bot through approval etc. It really did surprise me how irate some people got about a small message left with good intentions on their talk page. I'm going to just volunteer my services at "bot requests" from now on and develop any bots people want making on the proviso that they get the bot approval and I'll do the coding for them. I hate getting dragged into debates. I like writing wikipedia articles and I life writing bots, but I hate getting dragged into justifications for both so I'll stay clear as far as possible :-) - PocklingtonDan 22:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
...for all your hard work, and for dealing gracefully with all the flak you have received over PocKleanBot. I still think we can accomplish your noble goals by diffusing articles marked for cleanup into the relevant WikiProject categories, which should be contained under Category:Wikipedia cleanup categories (but most are not yet listed). WikiProject Hawaii, for example, would like to have a cleanup table updated based on article categories, and reports generated on a weekly basis for newsletter distribution. A WikiProject cleanup taskforce could opt-in to receive these updates or just view them on a project page. The cleanup process could benefit from this bot. I think this bot can also be used as an opt-in feature, similar to SuggestBot. For example, a cleanup task force could opt-in, and your bot could scan their edit contribs for similar articles needing cleanup. Or, Wikipedians listed by interest could put their money where their mouth is, and opt-in to cleanup articles based on that criteria. Any way you choose to do it, as long as you give the user the option, it will be successful. Unfortunately, automatic unsolicited talk page messages go against the prevailing culture of Wikipedia, and due to human psychology, nagging has a negative perception. I share your desire to speed up the cleanup process, and I hope we can work together to achieve those goals. Please don't take any of this personally; consider this failed bot run as an opportunity to improve your bot. We need you, and as your bot approval page demonstrates, you have support. Again, your efforts are greatly appreciated. —Viriditas | Talk 03:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments but I've taken too much heat over this one and I'm just not interested in continuing with it - PocklingtonDan 08:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Canvassing

In MY opinion, I think you're okay with contacting the members of a Project because they've signed up for the project, so it's like an opt-in, which is different from PocklingtonDan's bot, which was contacting people whether they had indicated they were interested in being contacted or not. User:Zoe|(talk) 18:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

small option of template

Viriditas,

The option to change the template size is becoming quite popular. I could arrange it so that the current version is completely unchanged, but an option for a smaller version is possible. I'm working on a small option at Talk:Popora people. Compare that to what you see on Talk:Hoanya people. The difference is that one has the small=yes option set (but that version is not done yet...)

I've already added a couple tags to the Hawaii template (before I saw your comments). It's very far from finished though.

Later --Ling.Nut 01:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

please do not remove merge tag from cannabis (drug)

Hi, I noticed you removed the merge tag. Please do not remove it to allow discussion of the proposed merge on the Talk page. Cannabis is not a drug, it is a species of plant. The drug THC is contained in the cannabis plant. --Bill Huston (talk) 11:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Political Cooperative

I am not sure if this is the correct place to leave you a message, but I was wondering if you can femove the tone tag from Political Cooperative?

Pco 15:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Ethiopia

Thanks for this i wil look into it, i am still learning about this wikipedia stuff. thanks i just joined--Halaqah 23:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Zionism and Racism

I have reviewed all policies. Please discuss your issues with each citation I inserted individually if you have any real debate over my content in this article. Otherwise, you are making baseless accusations. The article is about zionism and racism... get it?

Thanks. Pco 14:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

SarahEwart protected my userpages

Please unprotect them as I'd like to remove the suspected sockpuppet template accusation which is unfounded and included no evidence. Canuckster 14:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Have you tried to work something out with Sarah directly? Although the two of you might disagree on issues, she is very reasonable and fair. —Viriditas | Talk 14:27, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
That's your opinion but I find any contact with her by me results in a insulting comeback (usually calling me Ottawaman)from her. You said on my talk page; " If you have any further concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me" so that is what I am doing. You seemed to support her control of her user space so I was hoping you would have the same view of my user space (that I could have some control over it) and since you got involved before on her behalf I hoped you would do so again on my behalf. However, I will assume your interest and involvement is one-sided (imo) and you will choose to leave my user space page protections in place. I will look elsewhere for help in this regard.Canuckster 15:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

"replacing the image with a clear icon."

Hi,

On the talk page of WikiProject Hawaii, you said: "I would generally oppose any major changes to the template, except for replacing the image with a clear icon." I'm actually interested in the second half of that sentence. What do you mean by "a clear icon"? perhaps I can help. --Ling.Nut 00:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Newsletter

The December 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 00:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Hippie/Visual arts dispute

Feel free to weigh in V. Apostle12 01:15, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hippie edits

Viriditas -- You write:

Happy holidays, Bus stop. Could you make an effort to keep your comments brief and to the point? I'll also ask Apostle to stop the personal attacks. I'm also interested in resolving this argument, so if you want to try and convince me of why you think you are correct, you can use my talk page. Thanks. —Viriditas | Talk 00:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy holidays to you, Viriditas. Yes, please join in on the article's Talk page, if you would like to. It is under the heading "Hippie Influence On The Visual Arts." The participants have been, "Orange Mike," "Korky Day," "Apostle12," and me, "Bus stop." You don't have to ask Apostle12 to curtail his behavior in any way. I've enjoyed my interactions with all the participants thus far. Please feel free to join in. And I promise I will try to keep my comments to you "brief and to the point." Thank you. Bus stop 02:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey Viri, thanks for the "small" Christmas tree decoration! I shall arrange a special tree of suitable size so I may use it next year! I shall have to have a hole cut in my roof to accommodate it, though! Sorry about your dad, I hope he is okay. Next year I will try to get my Christmas mail done before members of your family maim themselves! LOL. All the best, Viri, Sarah 10:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hippie edits continued

Viriditas posts on my Talk page:

Hi. Due to time constraints, I was hoping you and Apostle could summarize the main points in contention. Looking at the discussion, it appears to be a semantic, not a content dispute. —Viriditas | Talk 23:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Viriditas -- How do you see "semantics" in operation in what we were discussing? I don't recall anyone else using that word, but I could be mistaken. I don't see why you are engaging in what seems like "shuttle diplomacy." Why not just weigh in with your thoughts on the article's Talk page? Bus stop 00:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Hippie edits, further continued

Viriditas says, on my user Talk page:

Hello, again. The meaning of visual arts in the context of the hippies appears to be in dispute, hence semantics, not content. As for the discussion, I am presently mobile, editing from my cell phone, and the IE ver. doesn't allow me to edit large sections for some reason, so I am unable to reply. I'll try Opera and see if that works. Either way, I would still appreciate it if you could summarize your position in 50 words on my talk page. Thanks! —Viriditas | Talk 01:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Viriditas -- If you want to weigh in with an opinion, please join in the discussion on the article's Talk page. I will certainly do my best to try to respond to you there. Bus stop 10:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Hippie edits...

Viriditas writes, on my Talk page:

Ok, but you do understand that I'm having difficulty replying to that section due to it's length, right? That's why I can't add a comment. —Viriditas | Talk 10:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

OK. I understand. It's not urgent. Be well. Bus stop 14:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC

Hi Viriditas. I was able to find on Wikipedia (where else?), an explanation for your Latin name. I like it.

I have been following the Phaedo page/discussion pages. Do you know how to read and/or write Classical Greek too? Thanks, warshy 15:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Last two sentences of introductory paragraph in "Hippie" article.

Viriditas -- In the "Hippie" article there is no source to back up the assertion that "Hippie opposition to The Establishment spread worldwide through..." That is a broad, sweeping statement. I don't think it should be made at all. I tried previously to change that statement to a lesser statement. I just wanted it to say something to the effect that the "culture," or the "philosophy," of the Hippies was expressed, or "spread," through the various means cited. But it has been changed back to "Hippie opposition to The Establishment spread worldwide through..." Again: I don't think such a grandiose claim should be made here. But if you are going to make that claim, it needs a source.

I have additional problems with the use of the term "visual art." I don't think it is the correct term to be used here. That phrase includes much more than what is implied here, or what is provided with a source here. A narrower term or phrase is called for, so as not to create the misleading impression that hippie culture had much of a bearing on "contemporary art," because it did not.

All that I am saying is in reference to the following two sentences, which I take objection to:

Hippie opposition to The Establishment spread worldwide through a fusion of early rock, folk, blues and psychedelic rock. To a lesser degree, hippie culture was expressed in literature, [11] the dramatic arts, [12] and many aspects of the visual arts, especially film, [13] posters advertising rock concerts, and LP album covers. [14] [15] Bus stop 19:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't write that, so when you say, "if you are going to make that claim, it needs a source" you need to choose your words a little more carefully. As for it being sourced, have you tried to find one? I believe there are many. Have you looked? BTW, I'm glad you stopped adding talk comments to the main article space. —Viriditas | Talk 19:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Viriditas -- I posted basically the same wording on Apostle12's Talk page and the article's Talk page. Sorry I didn't catch that wording implying that you made the change. Bus stop 20:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The January 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Favor?

A thank-you burrito. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
A thank-you burrito. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Viriditas,

Could you do me a favor? I've blocked User:The Blue Lion as an Eddie sock. He's saying he's not, and has gone so far as to try to open an Arbcom case on the matter. (Which was reverted as sockpuppetry, not by me). Could you look at the evidence I've given on his user talk page and see whether you agree with me that this is surely Eddie? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: burrito timeline

No problem. :) -- Kicking222 00:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Ping

The Chaco Canyon site had listed the overview details before specific site listings for the whole year that I've had the article on my watchlist. I'm puzzled as to why you are making these changes now. You put the "Geography" section before everything else, which is not how most geography FAs do it (they put "History" first, usually -- e.g., look at Australia or Antarctica). I'm willing to let that point go, because it makes some sense. But please explain further regarding why we need to list all the site examples before giving readers a proper orientation of layout. Thanks. Saravask 14:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, sounds good. Thanks for explaining. Saravask 19:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

More thoughts about the animal rights article

Hello again. I took another look at Category talk:Activists and it looks like getting involved there would exhaust me so I'll give a firmer no at this point. Trying to let some light into Animal rights is bad enough, with the signal to noise ratio of most of the available internet resources closely approximating zero since I no longer have access to the University library and its subscriptions. I looked at the other sections again. It is bad enough trying to figure out how to present Cohen better but the concept itself needs a critical review of assertions within the context of Hohfeldian classification...and that's original research! Regards.Trilobitealive 00:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

refine cat

Please explain more what you mean. Including what 'top level category' might mean, since there seem to be only a few 'tops' in the entire WP Thanks Hmains 03:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Does this mean for every category that has sub-categories, if those sub-categories have a main article, then all those main article would also be assigned directly to the category? This does not at all seem to be very useful. It means that any reader trying to look for the articles that are not in a sub-category has to wade through all (and this can be hundreds) of the 'main' articles that are actually in sub-categories and really be unable to find what they are after. It is also a pain to the maintainer of the category who seeks to properly place stray articles into their proper sub-categories. Thanks Hmains 05:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Please look at Category:Georgia (U.S. state) counties. I do not think that having all these articles directly under the Category:Georgia is helpful. I would remove those that have their sub-cat. Thanks Hmains 06:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Other opinions are always good. Who, from where, I do not know. I just do editing after reading what I see. Thanks Hmains 17:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Threats

See the policy on harassment. It's none of your business how I talk to Humus, who is perfectly capable of whining on his own behalf and doesn't need you to do it for him. No one is going to block me for chatting with Humus, dude, so spare me the threats too. Grace Note 05:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio

Please see this. Unless we know for sure that it was NPS employees who wrote all of that text (not just interns, contractors, or other non-employees), we cannot use their text. If you want further clarification on this point, please post a listing at Wikipedia:Copyright problems, where someone else can comment. Even so, adding their text verbatim would in effect constitute plagiarism, which is dishonest in and of itself. Whether or not there is a disclaimer, all of the above still applies. The current lead looks perfectly fine to me, and no one else has taken issue with it. If you continue to see such problems, point it out on talk instead of restoring plagiarized/copyvio text. Thanks. Saravask 22:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your encouragement V. As you well know, you helped me develop the discipline to write less from the cuff, do in depth research and cite my sources. Apostle12 05:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Children of Men

Yeah, it's nice to run into you again too. That little tid bit about Theo being dead was giving me some problems at my www.moviebodycounts.com site. Members were fighting me over giving it a "kill" count so I found the information to back it up. I figured if I was having the problem Wikipedia might be having it as well. Interesting to see that you were working on it too. - JenGe 01:59, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the haircut!

On the MacGuffin article, I mean. +ILike2BeAnonymous 08:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Children of Men's title

(I previously posted this to The Children of Men's discussion page, but seeing as how you are also reverting correct edits to the movie's article, I felt it best to post this here in case you missed my comments.)

According to many sources, the title is in fact derived from Psalm 90.3 of the King James Version that reads: "Thou turnest man to destruction; and sayest, Return, ye children of men" [1][2][3] [4] [5] In other versions of the Bible, there are different translations (as always) of this line which sometimes reads: "But humans you return to dust, saying, "Return, you mortals!" (New American Bible [6]) or "You turn men back to dust, saying, "Return to dust, O sons of men" (The New International Version [7]). Hebrew scriptures apparently have a translation that is similar to the latter.

In short, those anon IPs actually have a point! Hopefully this settles it. María: (habla ~ cosas) 01:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I still have issues with your argument. The external links listed at Psalm 91 are incorrect, if what you are saying is true; that the masoretic text is the same as the Greek (even though the Greek would make sense seeing as how we are attempting to point out that Children of Men is a Christian allegory), only plus one. The links lead to Psalm 91 (er, what is Psalm 91 in Christian texts, that is). The line the title was taken from is nowhere in sight, because it is listed under 90, not 91. So what is the point of even linking to it in the CoM articles? You were also incorrect in saying that "the source text is found in that direction," because it most certainly is not. [8] The redirect may have also been a wrong move. My little atheist mind is getting mixed up with all of this. María: (habla ~ cosas) 13:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
No problem, I understand completely. Everything makes a lot more sense now, thank goodness. 89/90 it is, then. María: (habla ~ cosas) 20:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Cabalism

[9] Thanks, Viri! That gave me such a laugh! :D Sarah 18:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Aussie Day wishes! You should be careful showing knowledge of things like that or you might single-handedly dispel the image of Americans being ignorant of other countries! ;D Thanks for pointing out your friend. I will keep an eye out and maybe she'll be good for an RfA in a few months. I ran her name through the edit counter [10] and she currently has only 470 total edits and most (312) have been this month, so it's probably a bit premature, but she sounds promising if she's showing admin qualities this early. :) Take care, Viri. Cheers, Sarah 13:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:Films Newsletter

The January 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Nehrams2020 06:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

--TomasBat (Talk) 02:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

activists & animal rights, again

Hi Viriditas - Just FYI; I was doing stub-sorting of various activists & SlimVirgin asked me, essentially, not to. I raised some questions @ the Animal rights movement page but don't expect any of them to ever respond to them -- they really don't seem interested in dealing with the fact that ARM categories affect the encyclopedia beyond their little turf area. If you're still interested in discussing though go right ahead. I've essentially withdrawn from touching any pages that implicate any of the animal rights categories, because I found them really difficult to talk to & work with. ... Finally, a CFD for Feb 1 has popped up on the "PETA activists" category, and on "Category:Activists" generally. Since I know you said you'd been working on activists too I thought you'd like to know. --lquilter 01:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

List of burrito fillings

List of taco fillings has been nominated for deletion, along with List of burrito fillings. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of taco fillings. BlankVerse 14:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, neither of the lists were sourced. I guess that because I live in Southern California, I figured most of the information in the lists was common knowledge. Besides, all of the lists that I've seen at articles like "Cuisine of Foo" have never been sourced. How can you reference those types of lists except add :
<ref>Menu of the El Norteña Restaurant, 1234 Main Street, Podunk, California; accessed (and consumed) 4 February 2007</ref>?
I guess that I'll just have to save the lists, and then figure a way to reintegrate the info back into the taco and burrito articles. BlankVerse 08:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

CoM plot

Is there any way you can tie in sentences in the Plot section to create fuller paragraphs? I've noticed that it's generally frowned upon in Wikipedia articles for paragraphs to consist of only 2-3 sentences. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 20:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Novels newsletter : Issue IX - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 17:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Shantih

I thought you were trying to remove the "Shantih" mention from the Plot section. I was cleaning up the backward reference since the mention was no longer in the Plot section, but solely in Themes. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 21:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, this shows you re-adding it. I guess all three of us got some edits mixed up, but you contest including the "Shantih" reference in the Plot section, right? —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 22:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
I argue in favor of having it, as it is an objective part of the movie, and not a subjective part, like lighting (although it does contain qualities of the latter, since it is open to thematic interpretation).Arcayne 23:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Our boy's calling you out on the talk page. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 22:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Who's calling who out?Arcayne 23:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
You are. From the talk page: "We don't think that is necessarily civil, do we?" which is tied into your edit summary here.
Oh, yes. That was a poke. I thought the edits were seeming a bit...well, high-handed. You tossing in the Royal We and not bothering to discuss potential changes and rv my changes 3 times did not help me love you. Ignoring folk is not the same as being civil. We've both had some friction, so an effort by both of us to get along helps matter tremendously.Arcayne 23:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Viriditas, I'm kind of throwing in random (but relevant!) bits of information into the article, though your help would be appreciated in tying it all together. I remember your concern with my clump of trivia points under "Themes and influences", so if you could advise on where things could go, that would be appreciated. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 23:16, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you can work this into Themes somehow, but I found this at The Scotsman: "Cuarón, who is 44 and has three children, says it is no accident that young people have been central to his work, in films such as A Little Princess, Y Tu Mama Tambien and Harry Potter, because children are very 'important in my own notions of hope. And Children of Men is a film about hope'." There still quite a bit of content left, especially production-wise. I want to get this long shot stuff straightened out, because there seems to be a contrast in the statements. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I haven't been able to get an idea of what long shots there were, and how many were used. I also need to find something about the director using source light (no set lights) in filming; it's in one of the citations, and is probably worth including. Nice edits to the production section, by the way, it flows better. Was wondering, though, can we take out the mention of "a story about hope and faith"? I was kind of trying to keep the May 2004 citation for the sake of the timeline, but the talk about the order in which he filmed his movies in the past decade takes care of that. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 14:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Arabs and antisemitism, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the nobots template on your user talk page


Heads up

You've reached your reverting limit for this 24 hour period. I'd thought I'd tell you in case you weren't keeping track.  BIGNOLE   (Question?)  (What I do)  00:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Go to User:Erikster/Sandbox#CoM and click "edit". A couple of print articles (that I don't think are available online) that might have some more insight about the film. The second article especially compares the book and the film, which could be of use for a "Differences between film and novel" section. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 18:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

A Different Approach

Seeing as this is going to escalate unless we can figure out a way to work together, let's try to find a different way to resolve this. Allow me to propose a hypothetical questions to you: if you had to find a way to incorporate the statements into the plot, how would you do so? I think that if we can answer this, I might be able to see your resistance to the problem a lot better. I am asking this question in good faith, trying to defuse all the tension here. I don't consider myself a troll, and would feel bad if there wasn't a way to help you work your way past that perjorative.Arcayne 04:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, this is a bizarre question considering that I addressed this very issue on the talk page of the article just minutes before [11]you added this to my talk page: you know the answer to the question, yet you keep asking it. —Viriditas | Talk 05:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I just finished politely requesting that you avoid my talk page and work on keeping the discussion on the article talk page, and right away, you leave me a comment on my talk page. This is the kind of trollish behavior I am talking about. I am willing to chalk it up as an innocent mistake on your part, but for now, please respect my wishes and leave my talk page alone. Thank you. —Viriditas | Talk 04:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
sigh...very well. I did try to resolve this conflict through talking with you about it. If you choose not to even try, then you only have yourself to blame for the results.
I don't have a personal conflict with you. I have chosen to resolve a conflict about article content on the article talk page. If you think you have a personal conflict with me, or believe that I have a personal conflict with you (even though I have just finished explaining to you that I don't) then I suppose you should talk to someone about it, preferably an administrator or a mediator. —Viriditas | Talk 04:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to request (as I am doing of the other editor) that you no longer comment on my talk page regarding any sort of "Shantih" matter. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 13:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

CoM cast

I don't have any specific preference with how to structure the character design in the film. Could be its own "Cast" or "Casting" section (although I'm not crazy about the listy form, which seems redundant), or it could be a subsection underneath Production -- have some main Production paragraphs, then have specific-production subsections such as "Casting" and "Cinematography". Just some thoughts. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 22:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, good buddy!

Hi! How've you been? Haven't heard of you for a long while, i thought you may have developed wikitis! On a wikipedia note.. can you take a look at my edits to Hydroxyzine, please? James.Spudeman 20:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I've only prescribed hydroxyzine a handful of times, mainly because it's been recalled for shelf-life problems. In terms of the vivid dreams, i've had one person explain to me their experiences, but it was aided mainly by the fact they had other concomitant CNS depressants as well as sensitivity to hydroxyzine and cetirizine in their notes previously. To be fair, pfizer haven't released that useful a guideline, so i've only got my own personal notes and clinical reference books to go by in terms of the subcortical suppression method of achieving antiemetic effects.

Benadril is a stronger sedating agent; it's used more widely as (transient) sedatives, because it's also available for use as an antitussive and has similar effects to Chlorpheniramine in contraindicatory, precautionary and interactive terms. James.Spudeman 22:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Consider it under-way! :-) Still, i have to say that the vivid dreams and soforth, are, in my experience, only seen when taken alongside more "potent" CNS agents; on the whole, it's one of the weakest sedatives, as sedation is a side-effect as it prevents the binding of histamine to receptors and changes shape to do so.

In all studies i've seen, there's absolutely no indication that there's direct links between vistaril or atarax with hallucinations or vivid dreams -- it's only got an affect on the formatio reticularis as a "calming effect", and is used in psych for such purposes. Perhaps vivid dreams could have occured in some from residual traces of other CNS agents.. who knows. James.Spudeman 23:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Editor dispute

Stop having dialogue with him if you're both going to bite each other's head off. Additionally, the accusation of sockpuppetry is a stretch, and Arcayne's 3RR violation was in error as I saw the situation take place myself. I know you're in disagreement with his perspective about the article, but your lack of civility is clearly showing. I strongly advise you to cut down on the diatribes and keep it objective. If he asks about something, just answer it with reasoning -- don't pad on your personal accusations. Keep it objective and succinct for the sake of minimizing future conflicts. Thanks. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 12:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../v/i/r/User_talk%7EViriditas_Archive_16_550c.html"