Wikipedia

User talk:Bkonrad/Archive 69

< User talk:Bkonrad
Latest comment: 8 years ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic The Signpost: 26 August 2015
Archive 65 ← Archive 67 Archive 68 Archive 69 Archive 70 Archive 71 → Archive 75

The Signpost: 01 July 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Confused

Latest comment: 8 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

I have no idea know what you mean here, but until you use the talk page to clarify what you mean, I'm going to revert you. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

You don't WP:OWN the page, and whatever discussion may have been had doesn't entitle you to edit contrary to guidance at WP:MOSDAB. older ≠ wiser 02:08, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
"A short description of the common general meaning of a word can be appropriate for helping the reader determine context." That's the guideline in this case. You only read part of it. I will keep reverting you on this every other day until you use the talk page, like we're all supposed to . That's normal WP procedure & behavior. You should know better. I find your edits to the page disruptive, because you apparently wish to deprive readers of a piece of important basic information expected to be found on that page. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
That general description applies to the first line. There is no provision got sing for adding entries that name make no mention whatsoever if of the term. Keep reverting and you will find yourself blocked for 3RR. older ≠ wiser 18:53, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
"There is no provision got sing entries that name no mention whatsoever if the term" I can't understand that, sorry. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 05:15, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, stupid autocorrect. If you look at MOS:DABENTRY, there is no provision for an entry that doesn't mention the ambiguous term. older ≠ wiser 11:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Let's do this on the article's talk page now. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:12, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

disambig

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Have you ever noticed that there another articles with name Gülnar. E.g. Gulnar Hayitbayeva. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.132.181.213 (talk) 07:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The Great One

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Would you please take care of checking the links before wiping away my job? Taiyi Shengshui, if you need the express mention, and a lot more.--Shanghainese.ua (talk) 12:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

There's no mention of "the great one" on Taiyi. At best, Taiyi Shengshui, might be a partial title match. Disambiguation pages are not glossaries for foreign language terms that don't have articles.older ≠ wiser 12:56, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
OK, suppose that, but what Aquarius and Denlai do there? And check this [1]. What precisely bothers you with this point of addenda to the Great One??? Is it against any rules?--Shanghainese.ua (talk) 15:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 July 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hijra (Islam)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Bkonrad. In books, it seems that the word "Hijra" mainly appears in Islamic context. The Hindi word hijra seems uncommon in English-language books. Nevertheless, we can list "Hijra (South Asia)" in a separate section since we have an article on that topic, which is a relatively heavily trafficked one. Except for that South Asian article, all the other wikilinks listed at the disambiguation page Hijra (the album and the novels) derive their meanings from the Arabic meaning (Hijra (Islam)), so I have listed them immediately below the Islamic article. And I have listed the article "Hijri year" in the See also section, because I think it is more appropriate there. I also just created a redirect "First Hijra" pointing to "Migration to Abyssinia", because that topic is mentioned in this form on the disambiguation page. Cheers, Khestwol (talk) 21:08, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Ignorant revert

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Don't remove information just because you're too lazy to add a hyperlink. Zmario111 (talk) 01:22, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

I've scanned through your talk page and noticed your snide, sarcastic, unproductive responses to most of the complaints about your editing here. Apparently, older doesn't mean wiser, it just makes you the bigger jackass. Zmario111 (talk) 01:32, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
See WP:DDD andWP:MOSDAB. older ≠ wiser 01:39, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 July 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Signpost: 22 July 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Inappropriate for Wikipedia

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Don't make edits like the ones you recently did on the Never Say Never disambiguation page it's not funny and inappropriate for Wikipedia, the song is by That Dog not Justin Bieber. TheDeviantPro (talk) 01:24, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. Someone else had previously changed the entry. I'm not familiar with "that dog" and your edit looked liked vandalism. older ≠ wiser 02:21, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
That's Okay, I'm pretty sure that Justin Bieber wasn't preforming back in 1997. TheDeviantPro (talk) 05:54, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 July 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Corridor

Latest comment: 8 years ago14 comments3 people in discussion

Do you really think you are helping the project by trying to sweep under the carpet the fact that we are missing basic articles? You are very wrong if you do. Redlinks should be left in the hope that someone will add them. Johnbod (talk) 02:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm not trying to sweep anything under any carpet. The simple fact is that your edit removed a completely appropriate entry with a misleading edit summary and replaced it with an invalid entry per disambiguation guidelines. Every entry required a blue link that supports the claimed usage. older ≠ wiser 10:20, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
It is a completely inappropriate redirect, even in American English, and certainly in British English. Corridors and halls are completely different things. Johnbod (talk) 11:25, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Not sure where you're getting your info, but in Am Eng they are often synonymous depending on context. older ≠ wiser 12:26, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
"often synonymous depending on context", right! Where are you getting your info? Not from books on architecture, that's for sure. Johnbod (talk) 12:28, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Most people are not architects and care little about specialist arcana. If you tell an average American to go into the hall, they will go out of a main room into a corridor. The hall article actually does a fair job of describing this. older ≠ wiser 12:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Consider some generalist dictionaries:
older ≠ wiser 12:41, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
You're looking at it the wrong way round - etc, etc. But it is pointless prolonging this. Johnbod (talk) 12:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
You claimed they are different things. I showed you they can be synonymous. Look at the synonyms for corridor. So please don't call me an idiot again when you are the ignorant one. older ≠ wiser 12:57, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
  • (talk page watcher) The hall article is a bit strange, certainly - it's somewhere between a disambiguation page, an architectural article, and an article/dicdef about the word "hall"; its "Types" section is odd, starting with an unsourced paragraph about types of corridor and then an incomplete list of other types of hall. I'm aware of the American usage which means what I'd call a "corridor", as well as the various related but different meanings of very large room / grand house of the village / building which is a large room for community gatherings / entrance hallway of a house or apartment.
Perhaps there needs to be a separate article on Corridor (architecture), but I'm not sure what it can contain. Could include the various claimants to "longest corridor in the world" (including RAF base in the Falklands, and Summer Palace in Beijing). (Hmm, a fascinating pub quiz question just comes to mind... "what have those two places got in common?" Too difficult, I think.) Perhaps there are some architecturally significant corridors with other claims to fame? Or Health and Safety-type rules for the design of them (eg to prevent crowds rampaging)? Are there design guidelines to prevent visitors getting confused? Or at what chronological point in different architectural traditions they began to exist, rather than rooms just leading to each other? The OED for "Corridor" gives various senses from 1620 onwards, with the "main passage in a large building" first sighted in 1814. OED at "Hall" doesn't seem to list a "corridor" sense at all; number 8 is "The entrance-room or vestibule of a house; hence, the lobby or entrance passage", from 1663 onwards.
Sorry to intrude on your discussions - I just got interested in the idea of "corridor", as a distraction from some RL stuff I ought to be doing. PamD 13:54, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
There is plenty to put in a proper article on "corridor", even without going into the sensational origins of the train corridor. Johnbod (talk) 14:42, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Given the separate existence of Hall (concept) and Hall (disambiguation), I'd say this is a complex matter as often is the case with common words. If the senses of hall as a great room were to be separated from the sense of a corridor, I think I'd argue to move the disambiguation page to the base name. Without modification (as in proper names such as X Hall, or in combined forms such as great hall or meeting hall), I think the more common meaning for hall in American English is corridor. As I mentioned above, if you ask most any American to go into the hall, they will leave a larger room to go into the corridor. I suspect this usage is simply a truncation of hallway and has largely supplanted the original meaning in AmEng. older ≠ wiser 14:24, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
... while a Brit asked to "go into the hall" would move from the passage or lobby or whatever into the main large room (church hall, village hall, school hall ("assembly hall"), etc), or in a house or flat would move into the (entrance-)hall. I tend to agree that the dab page should be at the base name, but wonder what rows there will be about whether the article title for the passageway should be "Hall (architecture)" or "Hall (passage)" (distinguished from "Hall (...)" for the great room) or "Corridor", with or without disambiguation!. Have fun. I'll watch. PamD 18:11, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Hall shows editors complaining about that article for some time; it's had pretty much its present form since at least 2006, as in this version, the first to reach 5k bytes (9 years later it's at 6k). And it's interesting to note that Corridor was created in 2002 as a redirect to Hall, but became a dab page with the next edit, in 2005, and has been a dab page for 10 years. PamD 20:52, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Request for revision of article titled BT

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi this is a request for you regarding the article BT. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BT

If you would, can you please find a way to bump up BT ( Brian Transeau ) closer to the top. He is a well known electronic music composer, soundtrack composer,a well known D.J., a pioneer in electronic music and he is also a software designer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BT_%28musician%29

Considering his talent and profile, I truly believe he should be much closer to the top considering he is the only person who is known as BT

I hope you take this into consideration, and thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.213.31 (talk) 21:55, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 August 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Barnstar

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  The Barnstar of Diligence
Thank you for your contribution to a successful mediation. Sunray (talk) 06:41, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Reverted Revision of Frankfurt am Main

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, I noticed that you reverted my revision of the Frankfurt am Main article. The only reason I removed the second paragraph in the introduction is because that same paragraph appears in the very next section ("Distinction of Frankfurt"). I don't think the paragraph should be in the article twice. What are your thoughts? Looking back on it, I just realized that I did not include an edit description explaining why I removed the paragraph; my apologies. Thank you, Superpsychotic21 (talk) 13:33, 10 August 2015 (UTC)SuperPsychotic21 10 August 2015

Oh, I see. Yes, this doesn't need to be duplicated. A brief summary possibly, but not duplicated. older ≠ wiser 13:57, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, and sorry for the confusion. :) Superpsychotic21 (talk) 14:32, 10 August 2015 (UTC)SuperPsychotic21 10 August 2015

Pirateville

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! I saw this edit of yours: [2]. Now, I am the one who proposed the page for deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pirateville), so I basically agree with your opinion. But, the discussion was closed without consensus to delete. Why did you edit the page without consensus? And, if you feel there is "nothing that currently exists in a reliably sourced article on Wikipedia", why didn't you delete it as WP:G8. The page, as you left it, is clearly violating WP:DPAGE. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:51, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Just because a small group of editors at afd choose to ignore WP:DAB and WP:MOSDAB, doesn't mean I our any other editor is bound to leave the malformed disambiguation page as is, though speedy deletion would likely be seen as pointy. older ≠ wiser 23:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
But, that is exactly what you've done: you left a malformed disambiguation page that does not disambiguate anything. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Better to be up front with readers that there's nothing here than to mislead with unverified misinformation. older ≠ wiser 23:45, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Monroe County

Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Why? It's perfectly germane to note that Monroe Counties are named after James Monroe. The "one-link-a-line" rule doesn't apply to the prose of a disambiguation page, and even if it did, there's still only a single link in that paragraph. I have undone your edit. pbp 20:08, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

No one will go to Monroe County page to find James Monroe. It is irrelevant for disambiguation and I am removing the link again. older ≠ wiser`
I think you're a bit hasty in saying that. It's reasonable to think people would go to Monroe County to find out who Monroe Counties are named for. Why shouldn't the person who they are named for be linked? pbp 23:43, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
That's not how disambiguation pages work. The more I think about, the factoid doesn't even belong on the disambiguation page at all. Compare Washington County or Jefferson County. older ≠ wiser 23:53, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Stop following me around trying to impose your will on these pages. A better example would be Clay County, a page that I haven't edited at all. Are you going to undo that one as well? Or Hancock County? You appear to be all along in your belief that the factoid and the link should be removed. Until you produce a policy (which I am reasonably certain doesn't exist) or a consensus for your edits, I will continue to add links and factoids to the disambiguation pages when appropriate. pbp 04:35, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Furthermore, it's debatable whether these are disambiguation pages at all. More than likely they're set indices, and there are different rules for set indices than there are for disambiguations. pbp 15:17, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I've asked for input from others at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Scope of links unnecessary for disambiguation. I suggest we continue there as it is unlikely that we will come to an agreement between just the two of us. older ≠ wiser 15:37, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 August 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

August 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lol (disambiguation) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • * ''[[Lailaa O Lailaa]]'', abbreviated as LOL, a 2015 Malayalam language]] film starring Mohanlal and Amala Paul

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:48, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


  Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to AWS may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • * [South Awyu language]], ISO 639-3 code, aws

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Bronkad!

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, and good day, Bronkad. This is concerning the wiki page of chess player Vishwanathan Anand. It all started in my bid to improve what was not a great wiki page for an all time great chess player. There is no an ongoing edit war despite the fact that I user proper citations from the highest authorities in the chess world to back up my edits. Those arguing against my opinion seem to be doing so because of a strong bias against the player, rather than any facts or citations. Thanks, I hope you get involved as I feel very strongly about the matter. Exxcalibur808 (talk) 23:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

I'd suggest listening to the other editors involved in editing this page and actually understanding what they are explaining to you. older ≠ wiser 22:58, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 August 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Siamese Dream and the STP disambiguation page

Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello! Regarding your edit and my earlier reverts on the STP disambiguation page, it's simple, the Siamese Dream article should be expanded a bit so it clearly states that "STP" is used as an abbreviation, preferably with a reference, and then it will be perfectly fine to add it to the STP disambiguation page. Right now, "STP" isn't mentioned at all in the Siamese Dream article, Ctrl+F yields nothing. Hope you agree. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 20:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

There is a song named "STP" mentioned on the page. It is under Siamese Dream#Reissue bonus material in a collapsed section labeled "2011 reissue bonus CD - Lollipop Fun Time". older ≠ wiser 21:52, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Got it now, thank you for the clarification! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 22:02, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Cahokia

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I presume you've stopped. I gave the other editor a 3RR warning. Doug Weller (talk) 15:52, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I will stop when the other editor stops adding unreferenced speculative details. older ≠ wiser 15:57, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Admin!

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Hello, Bkonrad. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 August 2015

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You're Invited!

{{WPW Referral}}

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bkonrad/Archive_69&oldid=1076247894"