User talk:Szyslak/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. To leave a message, see User talk:Szyslak.

Hello Szyslak/Archive 1 and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Good luck!

re: San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge: Corporate conspiracy not POV - it is fact. General Motors, Firestone Rubber, and Standard Oil were convicted in court of conspiring to destroy urban rail lines through their joint venture National City Lines. -- Leonard G. 04:37, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I personally believe there was a corporate conspiracy. Nonetheless, the circumstances surrounding it are disputed (e.g. the endless POV disputes in the article General Motors streetcar conspiracy. This Straight Dope article gives a good overview of the controversy. --Szyslak 07:42, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Autism on peer review

I've made some comments, and also made a small alteration to the article itself. Great article! It just needs a few issues resolved and then I reckon it will be good enough to go to featured article candidates. This article will more than likely get to the main page. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:24, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No worries mate :) Ta bu shi da yu 23:58, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ling-stub

Just wanted to say template:ling-stub is a nice addition to the long-winded list of specialized stubs. --Circeus 13:01, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your message about my misuse of the ling-stub when I should have been using the lang-stub. Sorry for the mis-categorization and thanks for your positive words about contributing to the project. Courtland 2005-02-03 USA ~18:00 EST

I'd like to add that the graphic you made for that template is fantastic -- I laughed when I saw it, it's such a cool idea! -- Tarquin 11:54, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Learning styles

Learning styles has been nominated for Collaboration of the Week. You might be interested. --Westendgirl 04:14, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Note about the lame RfC

Thanks :-) Normally I wouldn't lock a page over a dispute over the NPOV tag, but in this case it was the only viable option! I think that more admins might start doing this when arguments get ridiculous... Ta bu shi da yu 00:35, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] hey there

hey ho. just stumbled upon one of your edits, saw you were UCSC, ands I ams too. thought i'd say hi. linguistics is cool. im in psych, but in it for language aquisition. in fact, language aquisition of sign language. so hey. coolio. JoeSmack (talk) 06:56, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

yep, im in psych of language too. i hope the writing intensive part don't suck. i guess i shoulda expected it from a class called 'psyc of language', but still ;) need to get that W outta the way some time.
how big is the linguistics major? i have a house mate named Kari who is a second year doin the old linguistics. syntax books and everything. ouch. JoeSmack (talk) 07:41, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
i've been told Fox Tree is good. ive had nothing but good experiences with most all of the psych faculty in upper division classes. you should be safe. :) JoeSmack (talk) 00:28, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Special Characters in your Signature

Hello Szyslak! Your signature displays with two boxes, which I assume are special characters my computer can't display. What are they? Do you know which font can display them? Thanks! Sebastian 09:47, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply! I keept the conversation on my talk page but I just realized that you may not have been aware of it. I actually still don't have any font that can display them. (Neither Arial Unicode MS nor Lucida Sans Unicode do the trick.) Which font are you using? — Sebastian 21:38, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)

[edit] Editing trick

I saw your edits to List of purported cults, and also saw you struggling with Posse Comitatus (U.S. movement). There's a cool trick to use with article names that have parentheses in them. If you insert a pipe character | after the last parentheses, the entire parenthetical phrase will be hidden, like this: Posse Comitatus. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. I hope this trick makes editing easier. Cheers, -Willmcw 09:19, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Banana Slug Mascot

The following response to your inquiry about why I deleted the reference to your mascot in the Banana Slug article was written by my wife who has a strong opinion on this matter: Fernkes 17:49, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

Hi. In response to your question, in my opinion sports mascots are not an appropriate topic in articles that are clearly nonsports-related in nature. When a person searches for an encyclopedia entry on, for example, an animal, cultural group, or historical event, he/she presumably does not want to slog through unrelated sports information that has no bearing on the topic other than the name of a sports team. Must a person seeking information on dolphins get bogged down with information about the Miami Dolphins? Must a person seeking information on the Revolutionary War get bogged down with information on the New England Patriots? Clearly this list could go on and on! Such references also bear the potential of becoming self-serving promotions or "puff pieces," which is also inappropriate. Some may even lower themselves to promoting childish rivalries. Since all such links are inappropriate, I do not see your defense that other such sports mascot references exist as relevant. My suggestion would be that a separate "Mascots" article be set up if it is so important that sports mascots be a part of Wikipedia, but they are simply not appropriate to nonsports-related articles. Peace!

[edit] Captain Flag

Now I am curious: why did you remove the ©vio tag from this article again? See User talk:Rik Offenberger, and please note that just because someone logs in with some name that also appears on the external web site doesn't prove yet that he indeed is that person. Lupo 08:51, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You wrote: "...I decided to assume the user's good faith and remove the copyvio tags. I guess that was a mistake, however." Maybe not, maybe I am overly suspicious. If he responds to my concerns, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of doubt, too, but if he doesn't bother to respond, I think I'll treat these contributions like plain copyvios. WP:CP is intended for suspected copyvios, anyway. Lupo 09:04, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for your supporting my RfA. I will make sure you don't regret your vote. Cheers. Phils 19:51, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for comment/RickK

Because you have asked me to comment on this RfC I have done so, though I still think it's nonsense. RickK 23:05, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Clunky delete button

I thought the Clunky delete button phrase was a funny reference to the defunct Clunky cartridge button article which has now been moved to the gaming Wikicity. Despite that, I would rather keep the Phony passport article since I find it encyclopedic. --SuperDude 02:25, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Hello, Szyslak. Thanks for your vote at my adminship nomination. I appreciate the support. Cheers! — Trilobite (Talk) 13:56, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Names/Surnames

I would appreciate your perspective as a linguist on Wikipedia:Deletion policy/names and surnames. -- BD2412 thimk 04:21, 2005 May 13 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Deletion policy/names and surnames

Hi there! This discussion has drawn to a close, so I've archived it and put up conclusions. Could you please look at them and indicate on the talk page if you find them acceptable by consensus? Thanks. Radiant_* 12:29, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know?

Did you know has been updated
and a fact from the article extension conflict, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you have another interesting fact to submit, then please suggest it at the section's talk page.

[edit] Christian punk

Hi,

Dunno if you've looked at this article at all since you appropriately suggested editing for NPOV, but I've been trying to work on it. It still needs a lot of work -- at present it's largely just a brain dump, because I found the earlier article so full of gaps. Nevertheless, I just wrote a first draft of the Philosophy portion which I anticipate would be the most POV portion. At any rate, if you have time, let me know what you think.

Cheers, PhilipR 03:06, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)