User talk:BigNate37/Archive 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions ending on July 2007. 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.

Contents 1 Barnstar 2 Your sig 2.1 Before 2.2 After 3 Public, separate and private schools in Regina 4 Edit summaries 5 While category lasts ... 6 Hello 7 Honorary 8 User page 9 First Nations University of Canada 10 N. Y. H. C. (film) 11 Request for comments on proposal re: unsourced stubs & articles 12 Definition please retarget 13 Templates 14 Proposed unmerge 15 R from member 16 View

Barnstar

		The Thank You Barnstar
		BigNate37, because of your willingness to take considerable time to help me find a signature to my liking, I hearby award you with this barnstar. The Kensington Blonde Talk 16:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Your sig

Hi, I spotted your message in Tony's page. I have a few tweaks which can shorten the code of your sig a bit, without changing anything from the aesthetics:

How do you like it? :-) NikoSilver 17:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I never thought of nesting the spans like that. Usually I avoid it unless I'm only altering each CSS property at only one level in the hierarchy. I've no problem adopting it, seeing as how it displays correctly on Firefox and IE. Thanks! BigNate37_(T) 17:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Public, separate and private schools in Regina

That discussion was months back and has long since been resolved. The editor who had made the insertions had not been aware of the history of separate schools. I forbore to insert the flag as to the contentiousness of the statements in question because it was easier and faster to talk directly with the person who had made them. Masalai 21:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi, BigNate37. We both seem to have Dirty Sanchez on our watchlists. I think it's funny how highly vandalized pages end up high in one's edit count, as if those are the topics in which one is most interested. If you look at my edit count by article, you'd think I'm really into cocaine and abortions, and the occasional Dirty Sanchez, of course.

Anyway, when I saw your edit summary just now, something occurred to me. With the text reproduced there, that person's name is preserved in the history now. Maybe it would be better to say something more generic, especially when the edit in question is in BLP territory, as this one could be. Just a thought. -GTBacchus^(talk) 20:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, you have a point about the edit frequency thing. I think that page is my most edited in the mainspace—I used to watch more "mainstream" vandalism target articles, but I settled on (among others) Dirty Sanchez because I found that it isn't on very many watchlists and can have vandalism on it for a while before being removed. At any rate, I didn't think that history pages are archived by robots.txt-obeying crawlers. I'm not sure where to find confirmation for that, but I'll try to avoid putting names in edit summaries in the future—if I remember. BigNate37_(T) 20:41, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I've certainly never seen a page history come up in Google search results, which is just as well. -GTBacchus^(talk) 20:56, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

That's how courtesy blanking works. Anyone who knows anything about Wikipedia can just click the history tab and go to the previous revision, but search engines don't pick it up. Melsaran 22:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm familiar with courtesy blanking. I'm pretty sure only the current versions of pages are crawled, but having put my foot in my mouth on something I was pretty sure about already once this month, I'm hesitant to say that histories aren't crawled with any certainty. Your example does provide a stronger case, though. BigNate37_(T) 22:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

While category lasts ...

Priceless! . Thanks for the laugh, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 16:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Heh, you're welcome! There's a lot of fun to be had with user cats. BigNate37_(T) 16:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Just came to say a big helloooo - really nice meeting you. --Bhadani (talk) 15:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and you. I see you used to be in Chennai; I have a friend/classmate there right now doing software development and it's always interesting hearing the stories and seeing the pictures he has. BigNate37_(T) 16:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Honorary

Hi. I reverted the Engineering article to the spelling "honorary", which is correct in all varieties of English, and is supported by all dictionaries (UK, US, and Cdn). Adding the "u" back is a hypercorrection; altho' honour does indeed possess the "u", it drops it for some (not all) suffixes. It's probably due to etymology: honour comes to us from French via Middle English, 1200s or so; honorary comes straight from Latin honorarius in the 16th cent. The Canadian Forces, for example, has a system of Honours, but has Honorary Colonels. Cheers. --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 05:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I couldn't find a spelling of honorary or honourary when I looked, but I did find honourable and assumed other suffixes would take the same form. I suppose it's egg on my face then, for not having been sure before acting on it. BigNate37_(T) 15:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

User page

Actually it's only happened a couple of times, and not recently. If it becomes an issue I'll take you up on the suggestion, for which my thanks, and which I've considered myself once or twice. How did you happen to notice? Masalai 00:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I was curious to check out what you had on your userpage; you've been on my watchlist a lot for editing articles on my home city of Regina, and I was interested to see if you had any userpage type stuff posted. You know, learning a bit about the people who cross your path often. BigNate37_(T) 04:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

First Nations University of Canada

Do you know the precise status of the FNUC vis-a-vis the University of Regina? The Saskatchewan Indian Federated College was of course a federated college, same as Campion and Luther, and FNUK's own material only refers to it having changed its name from SIFC to FNUC in 2003 but not to its having severed its federated status. The fact that it's FN University isn't dispositive: the federated colleges at the University of Toronto are also "universities": The University of Trinity College, for example. Masalai 06:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't. I could probably inquire personally, if you knew where such questions should be asked? BigNate37_(T) 06:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Doubtful their Registrar's Office staff really know the answer: front desk people are seldom very au fait as to such arcana. Prima facie the word "university" would probably suggest to anyone not actually in the know that the FNUC did sever its formal affiliation with the U of R but, as I say, in the U of T context it means no such thing. Maybe someone a little further behind the front counter in the main U of R Registrar's Office than the counter staff: anyone who is involved with organising convocation would know whether FNUC students receive their degrees from U of R, FNUC or both. Masalai 06:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I note that the University website lists three federated colleges — Campion, Luther and FNUC — so the question appears to be answered. Masalai 14:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, that's good. It was going to be another week or two before I was on the campus. BigNate37_(T) 15:13, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

N. Y. H. C. (film)

Thank you for following up on my request to have N. Y. H. C. (film) removed and/or swapped out with the correct page, N.Y.H.C. (film). However, someone came along today and deleted N.Y.H.C. (film), leaving just N. Y. H. C. (film). I have left a message on that user's talk page(Shell Kinney). Now that you have deleted the one that should have originally been deleted, do you know what should be done to reinstate the correct one? Uncle Cheech 18:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm in the process of having Talk:N.Y.H.C. (film) deleted so that I can move N. Y. H. C. (film)/Talk:N. Y. H. C. (film) to N.Y.H.C. (film)/Talk:N.Y.H.C. (film). After that, I'll have to go through Special:Whatlinkshere/N. Y. H. C. (film) and change any redirects to point at the article, preventing double redirects. The only thing slowing the process down is waiting for someone to delete the page I've listed on CSD. It should be fixed by tomorrow, though. BigNate37_(T) 18:39, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. (Diffs: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6].) In futher reply to your original comment, the deletion was correct as we want to delete the redirect from the correct title to make room for the real article to be moved (with history intact) from the wrong title to the right one. This automatically leaves a redirect behind from the wrong title to the right one, as well (thus completing the redirect reversal). BigNate37_(T) 19:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Ahhh, okay. Its all still kind of Chinese to me but I think I may be getting the hang of it. Thanks for the helpful explanations!! Uncle Cheech 22:30, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Request for comments on proposal re: unsourced stubs & articles

I've just posted a recommendation that addresses the issue of encouraging proper sourcing which sidesteps (for now) the matter of pushing for deletion. Based on your earlier comments, I'd appreciate your thoughts on my proposal. Thanks, Askari Mark (Talk) 18:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Definition please retarget

I sought but could not find a definition of your shorthand retarget used in Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_24 discussion on Mya (unit) and Bya (unit). Please visit my talk to educate me. LeadSongDog 18:03, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:LeadSongDog per RFD Nomination of mya (unit) & Bya discussion there. BigNate37_(T) 19:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Templates

Level 3? Foolish me, I should have previewed my edit. I'll undo it. Thanks. Acalamari 21:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I've also apologzed to the user as well. Now that I've seen their other edits, it's possible that they were trying to request the page being protected, and instead, mistakenly transcluded the page onto RFPP. Acalamari 21:29, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, there's no reason to revert it. It might as well go; my talk page isn't a userbox. Anyway, thanks for doing that and telling me about the warning. I've fixed that now. Acalamari 21:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Proposed unmerge

You commented in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 25#Wikipedia community → English Wikipedia. You may therefore be intersted in the discussion in progreaa at Talk:Wikipedia community#Proposing un-merge Your comments would be welcome. Thank you. DES ^(talk) 20:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

R from member

Cool. I'll discuss it further on the template talk page, since I see you express a dislike for fragmented discussions. Cheers. Xtifr _tälk 22:27, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

View

I hadn't thought of it that way. Thanks! :) (Not that I deserve it, mind you; I was an idiot in the first place for what I did.) Acalamari 22:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, perhaps you didn't, but that shouldn't matter. Anyone expecting perfection is setting themselves up for a major letdown—we're not infallible (though some would say we are indefatigable). In all seriousness, I know what it's like to become upset with events on the wiki—I had my share of frustrations in October 2006, and it took me quite a while to get back into editing daily. There's no getting around that fact that you can become upset when you're so deeply involved in something. What's important to the community is that you don't let it chase you away. BigNate37_(T) 22:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

After realizing what a bad idea it is to leave, I won't be going. I've been here since October 2006, and I've faced a lot since then. Leaving now, or sometime later, would be foolish. Acalamari 23:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)