User talk:Ewlyahoocom/Archive

four colour theorem

hi there ewlyahoocom, regarding your recent edits on Four color theorem. Not all of what you had to say is unencyclopaedic. In fact, there's definitely room on wikipedia for some discussion of the various ways in which the problem is equivalent to others (e.g. Tait colourings of cubic graphs; assigning +1/-1 to vertices such that the sum around each face is 0 mod 3; the network flow formulation, etc). You sound like you might know something about some of these. I would love to be starting some material like this myself but I just don't have the time now. But I encourage you to do so if you feel like it. Dmharvey File:User dmharvey sig.png Talk 18:08, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Moving articles on afd

When you move an article that's on afd, could you please create a redirect from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NewTitle to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OldTitle instead of moving the afd discussion? My bot can account for redirected afd discussions automatically, but it can't detect moved ones, and there isn't really an easy way to make it do so. —Cryptic (talk) 15:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Double redirects

Hello. I noticed you have created a double redirect when you made United stations redirect to United station. Please beware of these, because the Wiki software only akes the first redirect. Thanks. JoaoRicardo^talk 04:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Request for edit summary

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.

– Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Reply

I did not make money from Apple Stock. It takes money to make money, and I do not have money. But the stock split that already occurred is important business information. There were people, unfortunately for me, not I, who hextupled their investment. But the stock split is not trivial information. It is important information in an article about the company. Why are so many Wikipedian editors so uncivil and so contentious? I am not "crowing about how much money" I "made" on my "investments", since that is not the case. Why are you so uncivil and so unkind to others? Does it satisfy you in some way that you can do on the internet yet not in person? I thought Wikipedia was better than this. This is like those chat rooms that I avoid. DeveloperFrom1983 06:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

About the hypothetical graduate student

I would think that he or she was innovative and clever. I would have nurtured his or her enthusiasm and never used uncivil language, insults or name-calling. In fact, this has occurred more than once in real life, not just in the world of the internet when we do not meet face to face. If the person had an idea with which I disagreed, I would still keep an open mind and a civil tongue. DeveloperFrom1983 08:03, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

DeveloperFrom1983

It's come to my attention that you and DeveloperFrom1983 have had an unfortunate unpleasant interaction recently. I'm not sure if you're aware that DeveloperFrom1983 is a very new user, and really needs to have more experienced users give him a hand with learning how Wikipedia works. I'm sure that you never intended to bite him, and that you know how important new users are to Wikipedia. I'd appreciate it if you could look back over the communication the two of you have had and see where the miscommunications may have occurred and what you can do to help him out. I really appreciate it, and thanks for helping to make Wikipedia a better place. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 10:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

CheckUser confirms that user:DeveloperFrom1983 (talk • contribs) is a sockpuppet of user:MathStatWoman (talk • contribs). Kelly Martin (talk) 17:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC) Graham 01:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Four'N Twenty Pie

I really don't think the merge of Four'N Twenty Pie to Australian meat pie was a good idea, Four'N Twenty is one of several large brands, and is iconic in Victoria, being associated with their prefered football code. As there are many brands, jamming them into the main article will lead to clutter and confusion. Alex Law 05:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Height/Depth

In artistic perspective, depth is the third dimension after width and height, it is not "negative height", but spatial depth (the distance "into" the picture, perpendicular to the picture plane and toward the vanishing point). Thanks for coming around. --Dystopos 19:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was getting hung up on bringing some order to Third dimension, Three dimensional, Fourth dimension, Four dimensional, Second dimension, Two dimensional, 2D, 3D, 4D, etc. -- I forgot our readers. I'm not sure if Dimension is the best we can do e.g. that page doesn't reference the art meaning and doesn't even contain the word depth. But for now I agree: it's the best we currently have. Ewlyahoocom 20:16, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Honeypot

You just did pretty much the opposite of what I was going to do for honeypot, as was noted on the talk page: Because there are so many different uses of the term, I think that article should become a sheer disambiguation page, referring to all the other honeypots as separate articles, including a couple you just pulled into it. What do you tink? - DavidWBrooks 22:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

There was too much content cut out when you merged. I am going to revert your edits for now - please discuss on the Talk:Honeypot page. Thanks -SCEhardT 22:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Women's rights

Please do not redirect a disambiguation page. KillerChihuahua^?!? 19:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Page moves

Hi Ewlyahoocom. I notice that you have recently been moving pages related to Women's Rights. It appears that there has been some confusion as to what you are trying to achieve. Any chance that you could clarify? Thanks TigerShark 20:27, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Hello. I was disambig'ing the links to that page[1] and noticed that 99% of them intended the civil rights meaning.
• I couldn't find an appropriate page. The first link on the disambiguation page Legal rights of women looked promising -- until I read it: it's an article from the 1911 encyclopedia with really nothing from more recent times. Feminism isn't really right. Then I remembered "Women's rights are human rights", but Human rights wasn't quite right either. So I redirected to Civil rights which I still believe is the most appropriate place until a real article about Women's rights is written (or until I can locate it).
• (Looking at the history[2] I see that it was originally a very short stub, then a redir to Feminism. Then it was changed into a disambig[3] but perhaps that editor didn't bother to disambiguate any links that pointed there?)
• Ewlyahoocom 20:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

And why precisely don't you fix the redirects? and I am now home from work, where I can receive email, and trust you have received my reply to yours? KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

You moved a redirect, "fixing" some pages which were linked simply, and went to the redirect, rather than actually piping the links yourself. This was a Bad Idea. I reverted. Now you want to tell me I "broke" something? Wrong. KillerChihuahua^?!? 00:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, it's a little more involved: look at the list; look at the articles (most of the meanings use the physics meaning, or allude it like Spin (politics) or Spinning (cycling)); look at how many articles link to which pages. It becomes clear that Spin (physics) is the main meaning. Disambig the remaining links, fixup the dab entries, redirect Spin, and you're done... until someone breaks it. Ewlyahoocom 00:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Great idea, why don't you do that? KillerChihuahua^?!? 00:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Maggot Therapy / Maggot therapy proposed merge.

Thanks for your comment regarding this proposed merger. As it stands, one way or the other, we have got to shift one of those articles. I don't care which one, as long as we merge them both to make one single article. We do not allow for duplicated articles on Wikioedia, and personally I dont mind which one we merge into the other, as long as it results in a complete article. Any relevant information, such as that you mentioned, about the different types of necrotic wounds, would be preserved. Thor Malmjursson 13:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC) Thor's pet yack

Soft serve merger to Ice cream

I posted a response to your merger tag at Talk:Ice cream. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 20:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

You Suck I Hate You j/k ^_^

Haha, joking man, thanks for the notes on my user page. I'll be sure to look up on disamb. structure, and yes I do re-edit the same articles in a short period of time, my fault, I'll use the show preview more.

i can understand

hi!..well..i truly undrstand..but try to understand my problem to..iv tried several times posting my article even at WARP disamb..but it is simply erased..all iam askin for is some space at warp...our club is really in need of publicity..i can post my article after the weaving description..that seems fine..let me know your opinion..

why cant you merge that warp article with weaving??...that would be the end of the problem..n by the way..we need publicity only at international level..nationally..warp's a known name..better kown than weaving

Use of helpme

The better way to use {{helpme}} would have been to put it on your own talk page, but I'm looking into the matter anyway.--Commander Keane 14:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, CK, I'll know better next time. Ewlyahoocom 14:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Side of the road (traffic) -vs- Rules of the road

The plan is currently being discussed at the Talk:Rules of the road, at the bottom the page. The plan is to move the traffic laws stuff to Traffic law, and move the left/right stuff to Rule of the road. Right now, we have to wait for an admin to do the job, 'cos a copy-paste move wouldn't work too well. Then, stuff about left/right could be pointed to Rule of the road, and then Rules of the road would be a disambig page. Again, it's on Talk:Rules of the road, at the bottom. —Last Avenue [talk | contributions] 18:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

italics in general, and Ewlyahoocom's desire to make an exception for diambiguation pages

Re: your edit to Light (disambiguation), please refer to Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)#Linking_to_a_primary_topic. Ewlyahoocom 15:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Please don't modify the Manual of Style just to suit your tastes. If you feel strongly about italics on disambiguation pages please make the suggestion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) and allow it to be debated. Additionally be prepared to bring the 1000's of disambiguation pages into line with your new style. However, I would much prefer to invite you to help us fix-up the numerous disambiguation pages that need attention and edit them to meet the current style. Ewlyahoocom 16:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

This was about italics generally, not about italics on disambiguation pages. It is standard on Wikipedia, prescribed in Wikipedia:Manual of Style, and standard among publishers generally, that when writing about a word rather than using the word to write about what it refers to, one italicizes it (some publishers enclose it in quotation marks instead). I was merely proposing that one should not make an exception of disambiguation pages. To make a special exception for disambiguation pages, for no reason, just complicates things needlessly.

Why do you refer to my "new" style? I just say we should not make a special exception and forbid italics on disambiguation pages, and you call it "new".

Why do you feel so strongly that we need to make a special exception forbidding italics on disambiguation pages. Michael Hardy 21:35, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

It is not only in disambiguation pages that I use italics correctly. I follow the style manual in this regard.

I see no grounds for your insistence that we make a special exception for disambiguation pages. Michael Hardy 22:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for the kind words about Point! I enjoy tidying up disambiguations, especially for rather broad concepts like this one -- it's a challenge to figure out what needs to be included/excluded, and how to group things intelligently. I really appreciate you taking the time to say something, as most of this work goes unnoticed. Thank you for all your fine work, on dabs and elsewhere (a nice judgment on Crystal Palace, for example). Good luck! — Catherine\^talk 19:15, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

Hi Ewlyahoocom, thanks for your useful note on my user discussion page. Alas, I don't have time to devote myself to Wikipedia on a very regular basis (though the gods know the pages on subjects in my area certainly need lots of attention), except at times like this when I'm avoiding thinking about preparing teaching plans for the new year ... so of course it's difficult to keep track of all the Wikipedia policies and stylesheets. I depend on people like you to remind me when I go wrong!! Thanks. Petrouchka 10:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Psst

Check out this page. Pass it along. Nudge nudge. -- evrik 17:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to request the Crystal Palace (disambiguation) is moved to Crystal Palace

Hi Ewlyahoocom. I saw you moved the original Crystal Palace disambiguation page to the Crystal Palace (disambiguation) page. Then you made Crystal Palace a direct link to The Crystal Palace. I think this is wrong and I've made Crystal Palace and Crystal palace direct links to the Crystal Palace (disambiguation). But I'd never used Wikipedia's editing stuff before and am not sure about the protocal. I not sure how it works but shouldnt Crystal Palace be the disambiguation page? I was wondering why you made the change? I live next to the Crystal Palace Park, so I'll visit the museum tomorrow and ask their opinion on it. --Kelmorain 21:17, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

NVC

Hi - I've replied on the talk page. Let me know if you think you need more from me on this. SP-KP 14:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Not every dab page

• I've going through the dab pages that are most often linked to, listed at WP:DPL and cleaning them up or adding a cleanup tag (which I usually try to cleanup eventually). There's a category of dabs needing fixing at Category:Disambiguation pages in need of cleanup and I'm trying to clean all of those. You're welcome to help or review my work. Cheers. :) Gflores ^Talk 14:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks ;-)

Thanks for your humor on the MoS:DP talk page. Regards. --Muchness 06:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Fixing links

Remiss indeed. I failed to check the links when moving. "Emirates" links to the airline most often because the country takes the definite article. It is certainly odd to link to a derivative name (Emirates airline, Emirates Post, Mall of the Emirates, Emirates towers, Emirates airline, etc. etc.) where the primary denotation is obvious. And yes, in conventional usage in the Emirates, "the Emirates" refers to the country ;). Marskell 15:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Expand

Thank, I've put the tag on the talk page. Rich Farmbrough 21:51 28 March 2006 (UTC).

Curb vs Kerb

I have no issues with the current pages. Until yesterday, I had never seen kerb in any context. Though it could be cuz I'm American. -Alcuin 15:07, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd written a long-winded response to your accusatory "fettish" comment, but I have neither the will nor patience to argue with you. Going over the early versions of the article, I deem that this dif is the first major contributor, and clearly writes using Commonwealth spelling, and as such, I must format the article using the Commonwealth dialect. Happy editing, Mysekurity ^[m!] 21:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello! You've actually jumped into a discussion here about harmonzing the categories on kerb/curb pages e.g. kerb (road) didn't exist until very recently. See Talk:Curb#Curb versus Kerb for more, you might have an opinion on it.

I do apologise for my use of the word fetish. I meant it in the sense of "excessive or irrational devotion to some activity"[4] and I didn't intend for you to take offense at it. I've just been noticing a lot lately that editors are replacing links to redirects -- not double redirects, just plain fully-functional single redirects. According to Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken this is completely unnecessary. So I was honestly wondering why you, and the other editors, do it. [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] Ewlyahoocom 22:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I'd read your discussion on the Kerb talk page, prompting me to erase my comment. The rationale behind my redirect fixing (and thanks for wikistalking, by the way), is that I use Lupin's Popups, which have a link to fix a redirect. oftentimes the redirect will link to a misspelling or other attrocity, and it is considered bad form to link to a redirect, as I've been told many times over. Redirects are an easy fix, and deliever the user to the intended page, which often occurs after a move, or something to that effect. Pardon me for being culturally stupid, but is kerb really all that widely used? A GoogleFight of the two keywords (a highly scientific indicator of the notoriety) returns many times the results. Realizing the double-entandres possible, I re-did the search with "curb road" and "kerb road" as my two keywords, showing "curb road" got more than 10 times the results. This is not to say what is right, but what is popular usage, and we must therefore ask ourselves if we are to be dictating knowledge or recording it. Merriam Webster faced a conundrum of relevance a few years ago in which they defended their definition of McJob, much to the chagrin of McDonalds corperation. Are we here to record popular usage and report on that, or are we here to set precident? -Mysekurity ^[m!] 22:39, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/Current list

Thanks very much for your cleanup work. However, as noted on the page, please do not modify the formats of the list entries by adding <s> or any other markup, or it will cause errors the next time the script runs. The script will automatically detect and remove pages that are no longer disambiguation pages. --Russ Blau (talk) 01:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Subway

See Talk:Rapid_transit#Subway_Redirect_.2F_Dab for reply. Good work on the subway dab page by the way - it was far too verbose before... — SteveRwanda 08:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

predator and prey

Moved to Talk:Predator#Predator and Prey (or the name of this page).

Sports Franchising

Without wanting to casue offence, I have reverted this merge on the basis that I'm not convinced of its merits, and that there wasn't a chance for consensus to be developed, as the merge was not proposed.

To put simply, I don't think all users searching for 'sports franchising', or linking to it, would expect to read an article on the major American sports leagues. MK Dons is a perfect example here.

I'm not against having my opinion changed, nor against opening it up to the community if you want to propose it formally, however. Robdurbar 15:21, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Response at Talk:Sports franchising#Merge with Major professional sports leagues

Dab pages

Hey, just want to say thanks for cleaning them up. You always seem to cleanup a page even more after I've done so and that's great. I usually try not to make too many drastic removals, as I've been commented upon a few times. Keep it up! :) Gflores^Talk 20:59, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Right back at'cha! If you think I ever go too far or step on too many toes please drop me a note. I think we're both working off the "dab with links" pages (I'm mostly coming at them from Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages maintenance). I like to dab links, but it's so much easier to with a clean dab page. (Though, sometimes I wish I were also a good enough writer to actually write some articles.) I also notice that sometimes I'll tag a page disambig-cleanup, and soon after you'll have taken care of it. Coincidence? Or do you actively monitor that category? Ewlyahoocom 04:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Atomicity page

I've reverted your edit of atomicity because I don't feel it accurately describes the predominant meaning of the term in databases: namely, it appears to conflate atomicity with isolation. Apologies for the brusqueness. Most willing to discuss more constructive forward progress though! --Chris Purcell 23:50, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Discussion relocated to Talk:Atomicity#Revisions.

Copyvio general average

I'm not entirely sure what you tagged is really a copyvio, it's permissible to copy some text verbatim without violating copyright law, and the source is referenced. But I changed the wording of the two sentences to remove any concerns. --Stbalbach 17:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Followup at Talk:General average.

Sharting

Hi. I moved the "sharting" content back to Sharting and redirected Shitting oneself to Fecal incontinence. That just seemed more appropriate to me. Of course, you should feel free to change it back if you feel differently. Believe me, I'm not trying to pick a fight over this. That would truly be the lamest edit war ever.  :-) P.S. "I sharted!" dbtfz^talk 15:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it's good stuff, but I am concerned that if the page isn't allowed some room for expansion, then it could be be deleted the same as its predecessor at Shart. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shart (The result of the debate was Speedy delete as A 5 (was already deleted 3 times before)) and the Shart entry at wiktionary. Ewlyahoocom 02:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

It's a real phenomenon that everyone has experienced, but people generally don't talk about it, so it's hard to find respectable sources. As far as I know, "shart" is the first and only succinct term for it. I think that even the current stub goes beyond a dicdef in providing cultural context. It's one of the things that the most recent Oscar winner for Best Actor is most famous for. (Sad, perhaps, but true.) The article could be expanded by, e.g., providing some explanation of the physiological conditions that lead to sharting. I believe Charles Bukowski may have discussed sharting at some point in his writing (though he wouldn't have used that term for it). Also, I'm pretty sure Howard Stern has discussed the phenomenon at length on his radio show. These things could be covered in the article. I suppose the current content could be moved to a section of Fecal incontinence, but that's a very "serious" article and sharting is kind of silly (though it's very serious business if it happens to you in a public place). dbtfz^talk 04:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I'm going to post this discussion on the talk page for Sharting. Any further discussion on this should take place there, so other sharters can have easy access to it. dbtfz^talk 04:19, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Reverted

In case you really don't understand my revert to "New Orleans", your edit changing the reference to my home town to past tense is inappropriate (and IMO needlessly snarky as well). -- Infrogmation 15:42, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

First, I am sorry for any losses you may have suffered. I suppose it depends on the definition of "major city". Size of population? Size of economy? I'll restore my changes but drop the offensive phrasing, OK? Oh, and the piping is to deal with the way the names of ships and films are italicized, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)#Individual entries ("There is no need to emphasize the link with bolding or italics, although titles (such as for books and movies) may need to be italicized, in conformance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles)..."). Ewlyahoocom 05:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Re:Waterboarding

Re:[10] see Wikipedia:verifiable. I did not find your contributions very funny, they were actually, in my opinion, rather juvenile.

I am not watching this page, please direct comments to my talk page or the Waterboarding talk page.

Signed:Travb 00:16, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I can't find a good cite -- maybe it was something I heard on Limbaugh? Googling on waterboarding "fraternity prank" does return 130+ hits, though. Ewlyahoocom 05:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if early Americans called the extermination of the indians a "harmless fraternity prank", or the KGB or French in Algeria called their torture a "fraternity prank", or the Iraqis, Iranians, Saudi Arabians, and most middle Eastern countries called their torture a "fraternity prank", or the CIA called their torture manuals distributed in Latin America a "harmless fraternity prank", or American client states called their torture a "harmless fraternity prank". I wonder if the families whose relatives were tortured to death throughout the world consider their torture a "harmless fraternity prank".

But heh, they are third world "nig...s", "rag heads", "japs", "injuns", and (choose your own racial empetath here), less than Americans, who live in the "greatest country on Gods green Earth".

To quote something you actually have probably read/watched, in Hotel Rwanda, Nick Nolte plays a UN military peacekeeper who's ordered not to let his armed men use their guns to protect the Tutsis. When he learns that the UN has decided to abandon the Tutsis to their fate he is given a bizarre speech to Paul:

"The West, all the superpowers, they think you're dirt. They think you're dung. You're not even a nig***. You're African...you're worthless... You're the smartest man here. You could own this hotel, except for one thing. You're black. You're not even a nig***. You're an African. They're not going to stop this slaughter."

You know why I hate the "political correct" movement in America? Because racists and nationalists aren't as easily as identified as when they wore sheets on their heads and terrorized African-Americans.

I just don't understand people like yourself, I don't think I want to, either.Travb 01:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Equating listening to Rush Limbaugh with genocide is a bit of a strecth -- but not outside the realm of possibility. I'm not sure if fraternaties as we know them existed then, but I'm pretty sure early/middle/late/pre Americans have always equated the extermination of indians with "good fun". I have neither first hand knowledge of waterboarding/torture nor fraternities/fraternity pranks -- I just edit based on what I read. Ewlyahoocom 08:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Applying merge tags

Please do not apply the merge tag as in the article Information Age, unless you also start the discussion by giving a reason for the proposed merge. Otherwise people may be left scratching their heads. --Blainster 10:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

In cases like these, where it's 3 pages about the same thing with a different name, it seems to me the writers/maintainers are simply unaware the other pages exist. But if you feel it's unwarranted, please feel free to remove the tags. Ewlyahoocom 15:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I am not opposed in principle to the reason you have just given; you are probably correct about others not knowing about similar articles (an intermediate step might be to list them in the see also section). I agree that it is a good idea to place a merge tag before performing the action, to give others a chance to respond first, even if the reason seems obvious. My point is that it is still helpful to state the reason as a discussion starter on the talk page. Thanks for listening. --Blainster 17:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

You mean like this and this ? Ewlyahoocom 19:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

chattel

1. An article of movable personal property (often used to refer to livestock).
2. A slave.

KillerChihuahua^?!? 19:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Mom. Can you go back on your Wikibreak now? Ewlyahoocom 19:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead....

Go ahead, make a copy of the toolbox and other Wiki-links that are on my Userpage. Martial Law 05:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC) :)

CREAM

Just because something doesnt have an article does not mean it isnt notable. Disambigious pages often just have a definition of something that doesnt require a full article or stub. Its not doing any harm by being on the page, and directs others to the album wiki page. Unless you can come up with a better reason as to why is should not be on there, im going to put it back. --Gephart 22:27, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Your comment on teabagging

Was looking at the history on teabagging and saw the comment you left. Made me burst out laughing. Unfortunately, was drinking coffee at the time and sprayed it all over my monitor. Oh well, it was worth it. Thanks for the laugh. Best, Coolmojito 07:55, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Digimon franchise

Actually I've already started to replace many of those with Media franchise. And the Digimon part already links to Digimon, and that article will eventually become a more rounded article about the Digimon franchise. Thus, new intro messages will appear like this:

Agumon is a fictional character from the Digimon franchise, a reptilian ..."

--- Ned Scott 18:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Franchise

I was in the middle of MoSing the dab page, but you seem rather to have un-MoSed it to a certain extent (for example, by placing a central entry, Franchise (sports), in a "see also" section. Perhaps if you could explain which aspects of the article you think go against the guideline (remembering: "For every style suggestion above, there's some page which has a good reason to do something else. These guidelines are intended for consistency, but usefulness to the reader is the principal goal. So ignore these guidelines if you have a good reason."), we could come to come agreement. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: these edits:

• You're unnecessarily adding periods;
• You're unnecessarily piping links e.g.

* A [[Franchise (sports)|Sports franchise]], particularly in North American usage.
*''[[Franchise (book)|Franchise]]'', a science-fiction story in the anthology ''Nine Tomorrows'' and a 1989 novel by Isaac Asimov.

• You're unnecessarily adding dictdefs and irrelevant links e.g.

* As an [[Americanism]], the term may mean a key or star player in many American sports; such players may be referred to as ''The Franchise'', or a ''Franchise Player'', especially in television and radio news, talk-radio, and print news, including syndicated columns and weekly magazine coverage of sports. The implication is that without such a player, the team would not be able to contend effectively and only compete at a lower level unlikely to make a play-off berth.

• Did you happen to notice that Franchise (sports) is also a disambiguation page? Because you're not linking to it as though you understood that. And you're a little late with this sports definition, see Talk:Franchise (sports) for more info.

Did you even read the manual the of style? Yes, rules can be broken when there's good reason. Did you have a good reason? Ewlyahoocom 05:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

You went from politeness to sarcastic aggression rather rapidly. Perhaps that speed also explains why you didn't look at the history of the page very carefully: I did none of those things — they were there when I started editing, and I was gradually cleaning up the page.

Instead of losing your temper, you might calm down and try editing amicably. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 07:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

This is gradually cleaning up the page? Perhaps you should have started with a clean version instead of one with Fabartus's sloppy additions? Ewlyahoocom 07:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

One edit is part of "gradually..." (and the one that you choose comes from after your message in any case). No, I hadn't realised that there was another short dab page for the same word; that's peculiar and unncessary, and I've dealt with it — thanks for pointing it out. I've also discovered that one of the links is to a redirect, and I've dealt with that. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 07:55, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Ewlyahoocom, don't be a dick. -- Ned Scott 07:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey Ned, aren't you done cleaning up those Digimon pages yet? ('Cause it almost looks like you haven't even started.) Ewlyahoocom 08:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

If you are referring to the franchise to media franchise change, it was already taken care of by NedBot. (not that it is any of your business). -- Ned Scott 08:51, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Minirock (Lack) Model Dani 2.jpg

A pretty picture, but is it porn? Runcorn 16:32, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I've used seen worse. Around here, I figure, one takes what one can get. :-( Ewlyahoocom 16:43, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Lady Byron

Thanks for your comments on Talk:Annabella Byron, 11th Baroness Wentworth. A voice of iconoclasm on peerage discussions would probably do WP good. Septentrionalis 20:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I don't think you want me involved -- I believe most of it should be moved (along with the stellar catalog, the list of railroads and highways, the TV shows, the bands and songs, the pokemon and video games, etc.) to one or more new "fan" wikis. But I can appreciate that you enjoy it, and I wouldn't want to take that away. Ewlyahoocom 20:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)