User talk:Preslethe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If I start an exchange of messages by posting at your Talk page, please, reply at your own page. I'll keep an eye on your page for a while to see whether you reply.

If you start an exchange of messages by posting at my Talk page, please, look for my reply on my Talk page—unless your message is about a specific article, in which case I may well duplicate your message, and post my reply, at that article's Talk page.

You can see old messages in the History of this page. — President Lethe 16:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

For some months now, I've been on a hiatus from Wikipedia, sometimes checking in not even once a week. I expect this to continue for some months more. If you want to contact me, please, use the "E-mail this user" link, under "toolbox", in the left column of this page. Thanks! — President Lethe 17:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] RfA thanks

Thank you very much for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully today with a result of (62/18/3). I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! Guinnog 14:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)}

[edit] Barnstar question

How do you get a barnstar?

Wi-king 16:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Wi-king. For you to get a barnstar, someone should award you one—or, I suppose, you could award one to yourself. See Wikipedia:Barnstars. — President Lethe 16:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RAF Northolt

I didn't remove the audio because it was outdated but because it was a redlink which I now see got changed/vandalised a month ago. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, O.K. Thanks for letting me know. — President Lethe 01:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No problem

Hi, and thank you for saying thank you ;-). I also would like apologize if my edit summary sounded a bit harsh. I just tried to "shortened" what I meant to say. I do appreciate the hard work you put in the US article and the mistake of confusing population with households is actually quite common. Have a good one... Regards, Signaturebrendel 05:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] La Amistad

Greetings. Good work on the grammar/clarity of the La Amistad article. In the text for that article you asked about the legality of human trafficking at the time of the La Amistad incident, and I wanted to let you know I've changed that text and commented on the article's talk page. I also changed a bit of the text in the paragraph that describes La Amistad as a slave ship to make it somewhere between the original and the changes you made so that the article would express as clearly as possible the difference between La Amistad and a "true" slave ship. Thanks. Geeman 10:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date linking

Hi. I wondered if you would be interested in contributing to User talk:Guinnog/date linking? --Guinnog 18:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Doing something about the ridiculous date autoformatting/linking mess

Dear Preslethe—you may be interested in putting your name to, or at least commenting on this new push to get the developers to create a parallel syntax that separates autoformatting and linking functions. IMV, it would go a long way towards fixing the untidy blueing of trivial chronological items, and would probably calm the nastiness between the anti- and pro-linking factions in the project. The proposal is to retain the existing function, to reduce the risk of objection from pro-linkers. Tony 04:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: your comments on the date/time issue about choosing a single format

I agree with you. Problem is, there have been massive discussions over the same thing in regards to CE/AD and even as you mention American English/British English spelling. In fact, "color" and "colour" are both allowed in wikipedia and none is recommended over the other. I prefer consistency in all aspects, and would prefer for a specific form of English and a specific CE/AD time period to be chosen, etc., etc. Do you think we should start some comprehensive movement on this? I would be willing to join you in that. But I anticipate that fight to be *much* harder than the current one of just de-linking dates, which I think is also important and easier to accomplish if we don't try and change the existing consensus on everything from date time formats to English spelling to unit consistency. --MattWright (talk) 03:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi there.
Yes, both spellings are accepted (though there are recommendations about when to use which). But my main point is that we don't have any silly game of linking the words and having special display for their spelling. Having different national spellings doesn't bother me. I'm also not bothered by reading the date in different ways, as long as it's properly punctuated. But I am quite tired of how much I and others have spent time and effort on such a thing.
The main reason for which the battle to delink dates right now is so hard is that people are hung up on the idea of having specialized date display encoding.
If we completely removed the option of specialized display (apart from using a standard old piped link) from the table, people would be stuck with the sole question of whether a cross-reference was relevant. This would be true even if we allowed both "December 10" and "10 December" (regardless of cross-referencing). They might still fight about it; but at least they'd be fighting only about the relevance of cross-referencing.
My reason for suggesting a standard also for writing even non-linked dates is just to get the main benefit of standardization: one rule for everyone to play by, and the ability to direct any 'deviants' to the rulebook. We all drive on one side of the road within one country not because it's morally right to be on that side as opposed to the other, but simply because standardization makes it easier to deal with more-important things.
I would accept multiple standards for writing non-linked dates, as long as there were rules about those standards (including their commas ;)), and as long as the issue were entirely separate from the matter of cross-referencing. I would also prefer that we not introduce more codey syntaxy stuff; still, at least a new code would at least separate the matter of date display from that of date cross-referencing.
I bet a survey of all Wikipedia readers would find that most cared not much about whether they saw "December 10" or "10 December". This is an issue of much more fickleness than, say, spelling: British English has had colour for centuries, while Americans have had it without u for close to 200 years; but, while "December 10" is supposedly American and "10 December" British, the fact is that putting the date before the month is standard in the U.S. Armed Forces, while The Times of London and some other prominent British newspapers regularly write "December 10". I myself must have about seven ways of writing the date, in different contexts; I doubt I'm unusual in being able to understand more than one date format.
Sorry I'm babbling on.
If you described in more detail your comprehensive movement, I might be able to answer you more definitely. I think what I've written above, while it was intended only to deal with the date issue, may show that my opinion differs from yours on some other issues. Still, I'm curious about the details of your proposal.
I'm not spending much time at Wikipedia these days. I'm just giving some attention to the dates just now because maybe, just maybe, a turning-point has finally arrived.
Feel free to message me more; but I'm likelier to be aware of your message if you use the "E-mail this user" link at the left of this page.
President Lethe 04:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article American English, 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

[edit] Thanks for a great laugh

This may leave you scratching your head at the end of it, as it really has not much to do with you specifically...but in a story mostly written by me and collab'd on with several others, we have a favourite antagonist who has the ability to yank out a person's fear and throw it in their face; this he does with gusto and slight massive tendencies for megalomania and arrogant sadism. His name is Lethe. The very idea of our Lethe being president of ANYTHING was quite shocking - and then was absolutely hilarious. XD Lady BlahDeBlah 21:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shakespeare

You may want to rread this [1] Paul B 15:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I have. ;) I may post a little more about it at the article talk page where you saw my first post on this topic. — President Lethe 18:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good work!

I noticed you making this rather nifty little copyedit. Keep up the good work, and good to see you back! --John 00:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Puzzle jug altered.png

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Puzzle jug altered.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 02:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

A quick note of thanks for adjusting my puzzle jug photograph - big improvement. I hope that you get this copyright problem sorted without too much difficulty. If you need any help from me, just ask. Thanks again. Gaius Cornelius 11:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I came up with something. :) I also made yet another version today. My main concern was not wanting to convey the false impression that the image was truly, truly all my own work; after all, you're the one who made the original photo, even if you did release it to the public domain.
President Lethe 20:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
PS. I skimmed through your other photos, which I'll look at in more detail later. Good work!
President Lethe 20:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Please do feel free to make any changes to my photographs that you see fit. Gaius Cornelius 09:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Response from WP:MCQ

Hi, I'm responding from the media copyright question page. If you make a derivative work from a public domain source you are free to license it in any way you would like generally. Wikipedia policy requires that you license it under some free license however, or still under public domain. To choose your license please take a look at WP:ICTIC#For_image_creators. If you have any questions let me know. - cohesion 03:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, cohesion! Above now, you can see what my concern was and that I've decided on something.
President Lethe 20:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wm. Faulkner article cliché cleanup

Kudos on your journeyman editor's tweaks on the William Faulkner article made this afternoon. What drew my attention to them was your concise, masterful edit summary: '

Four words -> one word. Seven syllables -> three syllables. Eighteen characters -> nine characters. "on a regular basis" -> "regularly".

I would regret to contradict any part of it, but "regularly" has four syllables, not three. However, since a syllable is a phonetic element, you could be basing your count on a pronunciation from any one of a dozen or so global English sub-dialects that drop the "u" or sharply flatten it to the point that it's phonically annexed by either neighboring syllable. Having been a resident of William Faulkner's hometown, I can attest that the word is pronounced tri-syllabically there on a regular basis. — Bridgman (talk • contribs) 02:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] American flag in http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Wien_Besatzungszonen.png [Bearbeiten]

Hi Preslethe,

thanks for the information, I fixed the two images containing now the old flag with 48 stars.

Mit den besten Grüßen, de:Benutzer:c.lingg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.154.15.219 (talk) 14:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:FrogPondBostonCommon_enhanced_2006-06-07_1431CDT_PsCSJPG10.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:FrogPondBostonCommon_enhanced_2006-06-07_1431CDT_PsCSJPG10.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk 05:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:CONTEXT

Regarding this edit, it seems that you added some unnecessary or repeated internal links to the article - such as tuberculosis (already linked in the same section), adoption, suicide (common terms with no particular relationship to the article on Poe). Please note that this article has already been criticized for over-linking on its FAC page. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)