User talk:Ajd

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~~~~

Dori 06:03, Nov 20, 2003 (UTC)

Good Witch of the North. Do you think there needs to be a cite for which book she is compared to Gaylette in, or a cite for how she is often compared to Gaylette by some scholars and fans of the series? (the later I am not sure how to do efficiently, but you can search any oz forum and see the topic come up, and I believe people would be compelled to do so if so intrigued.). To your other comment, yes I do believe this point is notable because let's face it, the GWotN is one of Baum's lesser characters and any substantial "reoccuring subject" attached to her that creates additional interest should be deemed notable to a full bodied entry. Oz in Black (talk) 21:04, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There needs to be a cite for the claim that GWotN is often identified with Gaylette; you can't just say something like that and hope people will go search Oz forums for it on their own. I don't think a reference to the forums themselves is usually considered valid as a reference either, although it would be better than nothing; ideally you'd want to find an article or essay by someone identifiable who either argues that GWotN is Gaylette or points out that that argument is often made. AJD (talk) 05:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I see now what you are specifically going for. While I generally agree with your cause and plight, there are sometimes tidbits, ideas and trivia that are unfortunately very difficult to quantify and cite… yet they exist in focused circles and established specialized discussion groups none-the-less. As you said, citing passionate 20 page forum discussions on the topic at hand is probably counter-productive, and mentioning that it has been a point of discussion amongst attendees in arranged discussion groups at various Oz conventions from time to time even less helpful still. I suppose in this case we’re talking about a re-occurring topic or theory that rears its head on every Oz platform of discussion amongst fans, fanatics, fan-fiction authors and “Oz scholars” that I can think of... none of whom having the resources, medium or opportunity to broadcast this more trivial aspect outside of their fan-base, the reach of the forums membership base or those who attended said seminars, to the world at large. However, even in the face of such an obstacle, I feel it would be a travesty to let such an interesting nugget of mystery and intrigue be excluded from a minor character in Baum’s books, especially one who needs every boost she can get in the public eye, or I would have never went out of my way to include it. While I don’t “hope people will go search Oz forums for it”, I would be honored to have caused the spark to create such an interest in a researcher to do so and perhaps open a new avenue to a budding Oz fan. In closing, I’ve shared the knowledge of the existence of the theory and have taken the entry as far as I can before judge and jury. Oz in Black (talk) 20:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not vandalism if it's true, you know. Only Americans use American English: All Americans are idiots. There you go, logical! Or are you American and that's too intelligent for you? Poor you. I'll send you over a dictionary.

I appreciate the time and effort you put into making this great site what it is today. In reference to your edit in regards to Milton MA. I would have to respectfully disagree. The town of milton is divided into two sections East and West. Anyone who has lived or spent time in Milton even if it was for a week can make the claim that west Milton's residents are primarily minorty and jewish residents. While the majority of East Milton residents come from Irish decent. If you need furhter proof you can look at data that sites demographics of the local elemntary schools in their respective east milton and west Milton neghborhoods. If you would like to visit milton and discuss this over a cup of coffee I would be happy too. If you have any questions regadring this matter you can contact me @ 617-529-1161. Thank you for being understanding in regards to this matter. I admire all the time and effort you put into repairing wikipedia. I especially admire the corrections you made to Cape Cod and the Barnstable villages. I also have a summer cottage in a Barnstable village. Thanks again

Thanks a lot for your kind words, anon. I don't need to visit Milton and discuss it with you; all you need to do is post a clear reference to some reliable source to back you up (such as the elementary-school data you refer to) when you post strong claims about the demographics of Milton; "anyone who lives there knows it" isn't a helpful enough reference. Thanks! AJD (talk) 16:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! Thanks for the repair! -- BCorr ? Брайен 17:59, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi again -- I don't think that you follwed the links I added. They did not go back to the Villages of Barnstable article. Go back to this version [[ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Villages_of_Barnstable%2C_Massachusetts&oldid=1967626]] and you'll see that. Thanks, BCorr ? Брайен 20:59, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I take it back -- I didn't realize that you had made redirects -- I'll do some more figuring out -- I had only checked Centerville, and I guess I just lucked out... -- BCorr ? Брайен 21:03, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

OK, here's what I'm thinking for the future: rather than redirecting all of the villages to an article that talks about the villages collectively, it would be much better to leave them uncreated, so that people will add information to them, rather than having redirects. People like to create those links to encourage articles to be written, and generally that won't even happen if a redirect is already living there (a lot of people don't know how to edit the redirect, since even that redirects you to the page that's pointed to.) Also, Hyannis, for example, will probably get it's own article sooner or later if there isn't a redirect. Also, you should visit WikiProject Cities for more info, as well as User:Rambot. Please let me know what you think. Thanks again, BCorr ? Брайен 21:13, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I get it now, I think you're probably right. Sorry for the confusion! - Hephaestos 02:57, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Your analysis was correct -- I ought to stop editing when I'm sleepy :-) -- BCorr ? Брайен 00:04, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

There I go again with Massachusetts. Let me know if you think Shirley, Massachusetts should be moved back. My personal feeling is that there should be at least one unambiguous article about each town, with the other census anomalies linked to it? - Hephaestos 05:39, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Regarding your edit to Boston, Massachusetts: a close study of the maps proved instructive. There is no question that Newbury Street, the defining locale of the Back Bay, is west of Tremont Street, although it forms an acute angle to Columbus Ave. The dividing line can be taken to be Huntington Ave. these days, which runs roughly northeast-southwest. Evidently you consider the north-south axis to be more significant. From my perspective, the South End having largely been filled prior to the filling of the Back Bay, its important north-south relationships are with the original Boston landmass (relative to which it is named) and Roxbury (from which parts of the South End were annexed before the rest of the town). The Back Bay fill properly includes the land west of the Southwest Corridor (ex-Boston & Providence RR) and north of the Boston & Albany. East of the B&P and south of the B&A is the South End.

In general, I appriciate the work linking the CDP and town articles. But, I have a question about Amesbury, Massachusetts. Why did you change 'town' to 'city' in the article. AFIK Amesbury is a town, and Amesbury (CDP) is the central villlage in the town. Thanks .... Lou I 17:55, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It's a city (though its official style is "the Town of Amesbury", much as Massachusetts is a state officially styled "the Commonwealth of..."). See e.g. the Mass. city-and-town map.

Thanks. I've updated the article with some details. I've also changed the description of your links to the (CDP) page, and shifted article titles. I've got a list of CDP articles that I plan to shift the same way, but I'd appreciate it if you would look at my changes to see if you agree before I adjust any other articles. Thanks, Lou I 09:04, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm a little leery about "central urban area"; "urban" doesn't seem the right word to apply to Amesbury or most of these CDPs. Maybe "central developed area"? Or "original center of population"? Other than that, your description seems fine, though I don't know how easily it will carry over to other corresponding articles: is it the case, in all towns with a CDP of the same name, that the CDP contains the central developed area, such as it is, of the town? The only thing I can think of is Barnstable, where the central developed area is Hyannis, not the village of Barnstable; but I think the village of Barnstable isn't a CDP so we're okay on that particular case.

I chose 'urban' as the description since Amesbury had become a 'city'. The coupole of these entrires I've handled before I used 'village', or sometimes 'neighborhood'. Essex County is clean, I'll put further discussion of that subject on the talk page for CDP's. Thank's for looking. I'll shift the rest of Essex County articles before I go back to history. (FYI, I got here in the first place while researching Josiah Bartlett). See you around the Wiki! ... Lou I 09:07, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

boston meetup?

Hi there, we're planning a Boston meetup on Nov 20 or 21. Leave a note on that page if you think you could make it. :) +sj + 06:54, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

rambot

When the rambot first created those articles, it labeled the CDPs as towns, even though they were not necessarily towns. Because in many states the term "town" has a specific legal meaning, it could not be used as a generic term. So we had no choice after many complaints to have the rambot change every article that SHOULD have said CDP. That meant replacing "town" with "CDP". In the case of Wakefield, Massachusetts, you were incorrect to change it back to town, at least in part. The demographic census data refers to the CDP of Wakefield, even if such a town really does exist in its legal form as a town. Because of this, it is factually incorrect to use the term "town" within the statistics, unless one can first prove that the CDP that the census bureau uses and the legal town limits are exactly the same thing, however, this is often not the case. I don't know if in Massachusetts the term "town" has a specific legal meaning and whether or not it can be applied to this particular CDP. We must be very careful not to reintroduce the same factual errors in the articles that were there before just because someone doesn't like the term CDP out of personal preference. Maintaining the integrity of the articles is far more important. Since you apparently know more about Massachusetts than I do, maybe you specifically know the answers to some of my questions above, but it is only fair that you know exactly why the CDP term has been restored to some 5,500 articles. If you changed it back to "town" in error, please restore the "CDP" term. Also the term "community" has been proposed as a better generic term than "town", although it is possible that "community" also has a specific legal meaning in some states. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 13:27, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, sorry to butt in here, but I had noticed Ajd's edits and the comment on Ram-Man's talk page. I've just been reading up about CDPs (and have updated the census-designated place article. Anyhow, I've learned some interesting tidbits (well, maybe only interesting to census geeks). First, the Census Bureau considers New England Towns to be minor civil divisions (MCDs), even though they are incorporated municipalities with strong government. Many of these NE towns (and most MCDs elsewhere) encompass both rural and urban areas (and historically they all were simply a means of providing a default government to geographic subdivisions of a county). However, many such MCDs are now heavily urbanized and have strong municipal governments, thus resembling cities, villages and other incorporated places. However, the data for MCDs appear in a separate category from places. So for MCDs which consist largely of urban area and have a strong form of government, the Census Bureau has defined CDPs that are coterminous with the MCD. This is to allow users of Census data to find the locality in either category. So Ram-man is correct, that these places are BOTH Towns and CDPs (and with a uniquely New England wrinkle, some Towns that have adopted city forms of government are still considered MCDs by the Census Bureau and so are also defined as CDPs). In such cases, I think it would be appropriate to simply note in the demographics section that the town (or city) has also been defined as a CDP. Any other references to the place can use the town (or city) as appropriate. older≠wiser 17:46, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

This is exactly the solution I would take, with the slight exception that in the demographics section I would make clear that the statistics are for the CDP, not merely that it has also been defined as a CDP. Of course this is a minor change in semantics. It is unfortunate that the rambot had to change all of the valid town entries back into CDP, but it had no way of knowing which "town" references were correct and which ones were wrong. They all had to be changed and thus we'd have to clean up the mess afterwards, but at least we'd have validity and data integrity at the (temporary) expense of article usability and clarity. The reason more Massachusetts cities have not been labeled as CDPs is because the census bureau does not consider those other places to be CDPs. In the case of Ashby, Massachusetts, the census bureau has labelled it as a town. The rambot knew which towns should have orginally been labeled as towns and which should have been labeled as CDPs (based on what the census bureau thinks they were), so that it only modified the potentially incorrect entries. Its probably a pain, but verifying the town status is the best solution to maintain accuracy. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 18:11, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

I might add, that I think in MA, even though some Towns have adopted city-forms of government, they may still be considered as Towns by the Census (or also by MA state government). For example, Weymouth, Massachusetts is a town that has adopted a city form of government, but it still called a town, is listed by MA government as a town [1], and considered by the Census Bureau as a town. And there is also a CDP that is equivalent to the Town. older≠wiser 19:25, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

Another note concerning using CDP to describe the statistics: actually in these specific cases there were (or should have been) articles for both the town and CDP with identical statistics. So in these specific cases, I would simply note that the Census Bureau has also defined the town as a CDP, but leave all the references as town. In cases where the CDP is not equivalent to the town, these should remain in separate articles and the CDP data identified as being the CDP (and not "community" as that may be understood somewhat different in local usage). older≠wiser 21:17, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

I agree about not using "community"; apparently in Mass. municipal government jargon, "community" is equivalent to "city or town", and so using it for 'CDP' would be counterproductive. Also, the Mass. government seems to be unsure about how to regard towns that have adopted city status with "Town of" names. The page you cite lists them as towns, but the official pdf map [2] marks them as cities; and mass.gov refers passim to the state as having 301 towns and 50 cities, which count includes the "Town of" cities as cities. I think nothing is gained by referring to the towns with equivalent CDPs as CDPs. The joint town-CDP status is essentially a Census Bureau–internal bookkeeping trick for making the data easier to sort; and whether or not a town is categorized by the Census Bureau as a CDP has no relevance to anyone who lives there, or to anyone who is trying to interpret the statistics. Of course it makes sense to refer to regular CDPs as CDPs, since that's the only way the boundaries of the area are defined. But we have no need to be echoing one of the Census Bureau's errors (i.e., failing to categorize Massachusetts cities and Massachusetts towns as equivalent levels of organization) just because that's the way the Census Bureau did it. Oh, and it might be worth checking in with someone who knows something about towns in Connecticut and other states whose incorporated towns the Census Bureau treats incorrectly, to make sure rambot didn't mislabel any of those around the same time.

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

IE box

yeah, sorry, I just reverted your changes. I am not sure about the syntax myeslf, but when I created the box, I just copied it from another box, so I suppose if this one was broken, others are, too. I have overlapping effects sometimes too, but I assumed this was due to rendering problems of the browser, and not because the html was incorrect. But I don't know. I reverted you because your change broke the box for me (it leaked somehow, affecting the ToC). But maybe I should ont interfere, sorry. dab (ᛏ) 19:26, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

right. that's ugly. what browser are you using? I think we'd best take this to the pump, where people will be more knowledgeable than me concerning wikisyntax. dab (ᛏ) 20:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Good idea. I'll do that. AJD 01:17, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Southern g-dropping

Why do you think that dropping the terminal 'g' is not southern? Do you mean that it is not specific to the South, or that it doesn't happen in the South? Dropping the 'r' and 'g' is often considered the classic indication of a Southern accent. Huntin' camp, shootin' range, etc. Mauvila 05:08, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The Newbie from Kingston

Thanks for setting me straight on the Kingston CDP article. I now understand the difference between CDP and TOWN. (I thought the population listed for Kingston was terribly low...). In a bonehead newbie maneuver I left a comment on your actual user page instead of here on your talk page. I have since deleted it. Please accept my apologies - I am learning. Thanks again.

So, Mr. Massachusetts Geography... Where are you from?! --AStanhope 20:07, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Merge

Perhaps the page titled merge could benefit from your attention. Michael Hardy 02:51, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Question about the origin of Yiddish word schmuck

Doesn't the word actually come from the word for jewel, and is used as a euphemism? Jayjg ^(talk) 19:27, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. One, Schmuck is German for 'jewel', but not Yiddish. Two, if an English word had come from a Yiddish equivalent of the German word Schmuck, it would have been spelled and pronounced shmook in English, not shmuck (compare the English word shnook). The Yiddish word that the English schmuck comes from is shmok, not shmuk. AJD 23:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hello,

I don't understand what the problem with using the name "Commonwealth of Massachusetts" is. On this page, and Boston article people keep changing the name from the full and common name to just Massachusetts. As one born and bred here, I find shorting the name distasteful and uncalled for. This was the Commonwealth of Massachusetts before there was an United States of America.

And quite frankly the essay on The Commonwealth is more important than a list of universities.

-Tomás

Æ-tensing

Thanks for you help on this! I think it's a really good article now! --Angr/_comhrá 04:50, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's my pleasure. And thanks for your help, and for your work on all the English dialectology articles. AJD 05:13, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I restored my edit on æ-tensing. Please give me a little time to back it up. Also, when Angr marked it as "citation needed" that prompts other users to help with that task. If you completely wipe it away, then it can't be brought to question. If I (or anybody else) can't find a citation after a reasonable time, then I will be happy to remove it myself. Statements that are not verifiable should be deleted, but I strongly believe that this is verifiable. ANAE isn't the only source available.LiuLanDi 07:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

baltic

thanks for negotiating with the balts on IE languages. Your statement

It is an unquestioned fact that Baltic is the most archaic of the living Indo-European families

is a bit strong though. It's "unquestioned" among Baltic students of Baltic, maybe, but that's as far as it goes. It is also undisputed that Baltic has a few very archaic features, certainly surprising for a language attested as late as the 2nd millennium AD, but that doesn't make the entire language "unquestionedly archaic". The Tacitus attestation may be debatable, but only if there is an unquestionably Baltic word (of which I haven't heard), not just because he mentions a Baltic tribe. dab (ᛏ) 13:22, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was trying to give his as much of the benefit of the doubt as I could. And anyway, those two or three archaic features are rather more than other typical living IE languages have. I'm only a grad student and by no means an expert; but several of my professors have described Lithuanian to me as the most archaic living IE language, so it's not an out-of-the-mainstream claim. AJD 14:18, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

by all means, some features are incredibly archaic, especially if you only consider living languages. Other features aren't archaic at all, otoh. I have no problem with celebrating the archaic ones, as long as we don't imply the language is "practically PIE", or more archaic than (admittedly extinct as first languages, although there are fluent speakers) Ancient Greek or Sanskrit). dab (ᛏ) 14:35, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RfC re Zivinbudas

I have started an RfC against Zivinbudas for his behavior on Indo-European languages. Please feel free to comment! --Angr/_comhrá 22:36, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for signing! But if I understand RfC correctly, you have to show evidence of yourslef trying and failing to resolve the dispute with Z in order to sign under "Users certifying the basis for this dispute". Otherwise you sign under "Other users who endorse this summary". --Angr/_comhrá 23:32, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do I put the evidence with my signature, or should I add it to the list labeled "Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute"? AJD 00:07, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

½

When you edited The Lion King, it seems that you have changed the link to The Lion King 1½ to read "11/2", thereby breaking the link. I have fixed those links, and I have also set up a redirect at 11/2, but for obvious reasons, we shouldn't link to 11/2. — Timwi 11:02, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zivinbudas

I've now officially requested an Arbitration against Zivinbudas. As one of the people who were involved in previous attempts at compromise with him, you might be interested in the case. Also, feel free to list yourself as one of the parties involved here. Halibu tt 04:05, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Fake Ivy

You forgot to sign your vote here. Cheers! --Nohat 21:14, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gelt and mensch

It has been brought to my attention that "gelt" and "mensch" can be found on both the List of English words of Yiddish origin and Yiddish words and phrases used by English speakers. As I recall, you were quite careful to keep these lists separate, so I thought you might want to take care of this. Cheers. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:25, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gelt I'm not worried about; it has different meanings as an English word ('chocolate coins') and as a Yiddish word used in English ('money'). Mensch I should fix. AJD 20:10, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Don't forget "gelt"

But shouldn't its used and original meaning be in one place? Grika 20:32, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean here. The List of English words of Yiddish origin page says it means 'chocolate coins' in English and comes from the Yiddish word for 'money'. AJD 22:56, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bricks

Just what is "not notable" supposed to mean? I went back and checked my DVD again before entering this item. There are TWO brick roads emanating from the same point, one yellow and one red. I don't get why you have a problem with pointing out this bit of trivia, which might be of interest to someone even if it's not of interest to you. Wahkeenah 30 June 2005 12:00 (UTC)

As Jerzy wrote in Talk:The Wizard of Oz (1939 movie),

"Non-notable" means in this context "not among the article-sized collection of most valuable aspects of the topic". The article is about as big as it should get, and specialized articles on notable sub-topics need to be created if WP is to have more detail on this film. (As to notability of articles, participating in WP:VfD discussions is probably the best way to develop a feel for the concept.) As to the RBR specifically, it is not the sort of thing that most viewers remember, nor is it important to understanding the film.

In other words, the red-brick road doesn't have any significance; it is never even referred to in the film! It is merely a background design element, less important than "Some Munchkins sleep in a large nest in a tree," which is not part of the Munchkin article because it is non-notable. It is not even certain that what appears to be a red-brick road is actually a road at all—since nobody refers to it or follows it, it could merely be a decorative brick path that doesn't lead anywhere. We don't know, and it's not salient enough to mention. AJD 1 July 2005 13:24 (UTC)

At least I'm not the only one to have noticed it and commented about it. I was thinking the complaints had something to do with "original research", which I take to mean that if I am the only one in the history of the universe that has observed something and/or it has not been published by someone else, then it "doesn't count". The original research concept is good, mostly for protection... if I cite a source that ultimately proves inaccurate, I have someone to blame ("I was led on by the treachery of others!" -- Alex, in "A Clockwork Orange"). However, according to the blurb you see when you edit the movie article, the article is overly long anyway. Maybe the article should be confined to the bare bones of the plot and there should be a separate page for much of the minutia that appears in the current article? Wahkeenah 2 July 2005 09:04 (UTC)

Revelation: The Red Brick Road is "referred to" by inference. Why does Glinda say "Follow the Yellow Brick Road"? So that Dorothy won't follow the Red Brick Road! If there was only one brick road, she wouldn't have to say "Follow the Yellow Brick Roard", but just "Follow the Brick Road", or maybe even just "Follow the Road". Yes??? That would change the song, of course. They wouldn't be singing "Follow the Yellow Brick Road". Maybe just, "Ease on down, ease on down the Road"! Wahkeenah 2 July 2005 09:15 (UTC)

Folk etymology

Thank you for steering the merge discussion on Folk etymology towards maintaining it as a technical linguistics term! I'd sort of drifted away from wikipedia for a while and just noticed the discussion now, and having cleaned up Folk etymology the first time through I would've been a sad mendel had it all been lumped together again. — mendel ☎ 17:03, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Philadelphia Request

Hi,

I would appreciate you looking at this page and making some comments in favor of the merger.

Category talk:Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Thanks! evrik 17:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to second that request! South Philly 01:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cream soda

Oops. Wrong revision... Ignore this warning ;) Xinit 21:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

comment mistakenly left on user page

I'm the guy who wrote the sections on Yiddish genders and case endings, which you fixed up. I now have a username. I must admit that you know English and Yiddish better than I do. However, I think we should add genitive to the case endings chart. In some sentences it is very clear that genitive is the same as dative. For example: Dos iz di Hoyz fun der froy. Because the word froy preceded by a prepostion, just like (most) dative phrases. However in the following sentance, on might use nominative by mistake: Der man's hoyz is veyt. because hoyz is the subject (nominative), and "Der Man" is part of the complete subject, one might say "der Man" instead of "Dem Man". Please write to me what you think. Eliezerke 05:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Thanks for fixing up what I wrote. p.p.s. I hope you can read the Yiddish words I wrote. I am not used to transliterating Yiddish ;

corrections to origins of Salem trials

I'm the person who inserted the paragraph on Cotton Mather and did not sign my name correctly by accident.Thanks AJD for proof reading it and correcting the syntax.Natalieduerinckx 22:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-European languages and "Out of India"

Yeah, if you notice, both Proto-Indo-European language and Indo-European languages (and, unsurprisingly, Indo-Aryan migration) have been modified to present the"Out of India theory" as one of the "three main candidates," even though equating Vedic with PIE is trivially wrong. The problem is that there needs to be some sort of referenced source that shows the breakdown of relevant researchers on the topic in order to not give undue weight to OIT on the pages, but I haven't been able to find one after some superficial searching. Any ideas? --Xiaopo ℑ 15:30, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't, off the top of my head, know of any such specific resource, sorry. AJD 17:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate dialectology?

I noticed you deleted my distinction between upper-class and working-class Boston accents on the Harvard Yard page. Do you have a source that demonstrates they have the same accent? Ever listen to Raymond Flynn as compared with any of the Kennedys? Bruxism 04:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to this edit? Basically my objection was to drawing some kind of distinction between "pahk the cah in hahvud yahd" and "pak the caa in havid yad"—this kind of ad-hoc pronunciation spelling is basically meaningless, in that it doesn't indicate in a way that can be clearly understood what pronunciations you're actually referring to. Moreover, pronunciation spellings like "pak" are actively misleading—no one with a Boston accent pronounces the word "park" the same as "pack", which is what the spelling "pak" seems to suggest; at least "pahk" is correct within the accent. (That is, someone with a non-rhotic Boston accent would pronounce "park" the same as the hypothetical word "pahk".) No one, to my knowledge, has ever documented geographic dialect variation within a large city unconnected with social class and ethnicity—e.g., there's no "South Boston accent" different from a "Charlestown accent". There are effects of socioeconomic class, of course, but in the cities in which they've been studied in detail, the different socioeconomic classes exhibit the same phonological variables and processes, merely carried out to a greater or lesser degree. AJD 06:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: shire town

I think you'll find this conversataion of interest. User_talk:Yellowdesk#Shire town Yellowdesk 19:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

Re>

Hello. Naming conventions for American geographical issues is Blahblah, State - for populated place like village or town, and Blahblah (State) for geographical landforms like rivers, bays, mountains etc. This convention also applies when a different features with the same name appear in the same state. - Darwinek 20:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is real mess there, I can't find it neither. But you can trust me. Ask at WP:NC talk page or ask specific user e.g. from Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)/U.S. convention change (August 2006). At NC talk page you usually get the answer. - Darwinek 21:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MIlton

Hey man, I appreciate you trying to help out the typos and fix the mistakes on the towns ans cities of Ma. But the majority of the milton Irish do live in the neighborhood of east Milton. If you are familiar with the area you would now that west milton is wealthy and more diverse. Thanks again. (posted by 67.105.229.162 in User:Ajd instead of here)

Hal Gill

Thanks for removing that erroneous Hal Gill factoid from the Concord, Massachusetts page. As far as I can tell, Gill was born at Emerson Hospital (the regional hospital located in Concord) but actually grew up elsewhere, like a lot of other notable personalities from the western suburbs of Boston (Steve Carell and Tom Glavine come to mind). Venicemenace 16:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quincy

Hey, thanks a bunch for clarifying the pronunciation issue in the Quincy article - I was about to do the same thing myself! We Qwinky folks can get our Irish fairly well up over that bit. :-) Take care! --Mary quite contrary ^(hai?) 22:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Census Designated Place

Please clarify that particular sentence. I still don't get it. Are you referencing to New England CDPs? Thanks. --Moreau36 23:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying, but next time be a little more clear so that it's understood eariler. Because according to census guidelines, a CDP can NOT be in a municipality, however, a community (who was paritally annexed by the neighboring city) can. Thus, only the unincorporated portion is counted as a CDP. Thanks. --Moreau36 23:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal: incorporated place and census designated place into place (United States Census Bureau)

While caught up in the argument about whether we should use the term "census designated place" as the primary term to refer to unincorporated towns and villages I did a bit of research. I think what I found was interesting and useful. However I found it awkward to incorporate the information into the census designated place article, partly because the material also belongs in the incorporated place article. Also, a lot of the CDP article explains how a CDP resembles, but is not, an incorporated place where the incorporated place article is practically empty. I don't think there is enough unique material for three separate articles so I'm proposing a merger into one article named "place (United States Census Bureau)". I have already written the article that explains the terms in a logical order. I am asking for opinions, edits, etc. from other people who have written on the issue. See Talk:Place (United States Census Bureau) for more information. Rsduhamel 00:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buses WikiProject

I notice that you have edited lists of bus routes recently. You might be interested in helping with the new WikiProject buses, especially the proposed Bus route list guide. We are also working out when a bus route should have its own article and other issues. --NE2 15:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Residents

Hello, you recently removed John A. Bailey from the notable residents of Waltham, MA. Mr. Bailey is known worldwide for his lid designs and plastic innovations which are used by millions of people every day. Please revert your modification.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=Kz42AAAAEBAJ&dq=john+bailey+lid

Dual Senate elections precedent

Thanks for clearing that up, I was moving a little too fast to remember those Kansas elections. --JMurphy 06:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Eleventh Hour (book)

I did NOT copy the solution to that cypher from a website!

It took me one-and-a-half hours to come up with that solution!

But I still kinda knew it would be deleted…oh, well…

66.31.126.225 15:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taskforce

You are being recruited by the Salem Witch Trials Task Force, a collaborative project committed to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the Salem Witch Trials. Join us!

Psdubow 16:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Detournement"

The word "detourn" is not vandalism. It's a word coined by the Situationists to describe precisely what this organization does to billboards. SmashTheState 21:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Northern American English

I am glad you provided a source, but here is where there is some disagreement in wikipedia articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_American claims the standard developed from another area of the Midwest and used Labov as a source. So, now I am confused is it the North Midwest or the Mid Midwest... Azalea pomp 04:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More American English

The General American and Northern American English articles need more sources. For example, the shaded area map in the General American article is not sourced and does not reflect one dialect or an area with similar pronunciations. I have looked at the map in the book American English by Walt Wolfram and Natalie Schilling-Estes (page 105, 1998). Well, if Labov says G. American was based on Northern American, who am I to argue...although I have never read that anywhere else except in that article. Interesting how the Standard was based on one dialect (Northern) yet now sounds more like another (Midland) although Northern and Midland do not share the same origins... Azalea pomp 23:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newton

Thanks for your recent reverts for lack of notability in the Notable people section in Newton, Massachusetts. Perhaps you can look at People from Newton, Massachusetts which was recently spun off from the main Newton article. Edits which were previously deleted on notability issues several times in the main article have reappeared in the the spinoff article. clariosophic 11:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected Copyvios

On 13 September you suspected a copyright violation at Clinton, Massachusetts, but left only a talk page note. Next time you have such a suspicion, please act, don't just talk. An IP editor asked for the entire page to be deleted today, and a faster moving admin might have deleted the entire page instead of patching and repairing as I did. Incidentally, the history section of that page now needs to be written again, which is within your scope of interest. GRBerry 16:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New England town center CDPs

Hi. You have edited New England town articles in the past and I would like your opinion on a prooposal of mine. I have suggested merging town center CDPs articles into the town article. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vermont#Merging town center CDP articles into town articles and Talk:St. Johnsbury, Vermont#CDP change for details. I'd like to hear your comments about whether the town center and the town should be treated as two different places or is my merger acceptable. Please see St. Johnsbury, Vermont (my most recent version) for an example of my proposal. Thanks. --Polaron | Talk 20:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commonwealth School: Jay Featherstone

You reverted my listing of Jay Featherstone as Joseph "Jay" Featherstone. He was always referred to as "Jay Featherstone" or "Mr. Featherstone" when I was a student there, and I frankly found it quite strange to see him listed as "Joseph Featherstone", although that was indeed the name that was embossed on the school stationery.

I had added the often-used nicknames of the other headmasters who had commonly used ones, because I didn't want the article to be inconsistent. However, I don't want to get into an edit war. So, User:Ajd, would you find it acceptable if only Mr. Featherstone was listed with the nickname? I'd put in:

Joseph "Jay" Featherstone

Please let me know if you still consider the nickname to be frivolous.  I believe I have explained above why I don't think it is frivolous, at least in his case.  I've also a comment about this on the talk page for Commonwealth School, soliciting feedback; feel free to reply there or on my talk page.  Thanks.  Saugart (talk) 03:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Philadelphia Accent

This is about my edits that you continue to revert in this article. I am from the Midwest (if that's what you mean by "Midland") and no one in my town pronounces the vowel sound in words like "row" the same way a southerner would. A person who pronounced it that way in my town would be made fun of terribly. Also, "Don", "dawn" and "on" all rhyme with each other. They are merged as [ɑ]. Many people speak this way across the United States. As much as I respect Labov, sometimes I question how he gets his information. What possible method could he use to find out how every single person in this great country speaks? I would rather do my own research and make my own conclusions. 208.104.45.20 (talk) 05:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Midland" specifically refers to the southern part of the Midwest, south of the area subject to the Northern Cities Vowel Shift; it includes Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and St. Louis, but not Cleveland or Chicago. The merger of the vowels of Don and dawn is in progress in the Midland, but by no means complete. Doing your own research and making your own conclusions is fine, but not for Wikipedia. What Wikipedia (ideally) uses is information available in independent, verifiable, and hopefully scholarly sources. So I'll take the published scientific research of America's preeminent dialectologist as the source we should use for articles of American dialectology. He doesn't have to find out "how every single person in this great country speaks"; he merely has to take samples and describe his research methodology. AJD (talk) 06:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The merger of the vowels in "Don" and "Dawn" is complete. I'm from there and you are not. I pronounce them both exactly alike just like millions of others across the country. I would still rather do my own research, thanks. If Labov doesn't know how everyone in the United States speaks, then how does he now for sure what is going on linguistically? Stop being a snobby, arrogant douchebag please. You follow me around on every dialect article on Wikipedia, and argue with everything I say. You're such a fucking asshole. Suck my cock please sir and then leave me the fuck alone and go masturbate to the Phonological Atlas of North America. Thanks. 208.104.45.20 (talk) 21:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to Sweeney Todd

Hi, the recent edit you made to Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street appeared to be unconstructive and was reverted. The edit preceeding yours did not need to be reverted, as it was perfectly accurate. In the future, please do not revert changes without a just reason specified in the edit summary. Thanks, Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 06:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC).[reply]

conceit

Check out my note to User talk:Twir... "Notion" is closer to "concept" than "conceit". Robert K S (talk) 03:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Notion" is closer to "concept" than it is to "conceit", it's true. But since people inexplicably don't want to use "conceit"—well, "notion" is closer to "conceit" than "concept" is. AJD (talk) 05:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milton, MA

Ajd, I was pleased to notice that you reverted an anonymous edit on the article for Milton, MA that included unverifiable information about the "irishness" of East Milton. The article has been afflicted by IP and single-use accounts that are intent on including this info for at least a year now, and I'm not sure how to go about curbing the trend beyond constantly reverting. A major difficulty here is that the editors frequently are unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policy or culture, and don't know how to engage in discussion at the talk page. I myself am relatively new to Wikipedia, so I'd be very interested in any ideas you might have to keep this problem from persisting. Take care, SaintCyprian ^Talk 20:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation

Could you explain how my yesterday's edit was a speculation? I mean you can't deny it that that award was introduced when the movie Shrek got it, so what's the speculation in my edit? 82.148.70.2 (talk) 09:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The speculation is that the reason no other animated film has been nominated for Best Picture is because the award for Best Animated Film was introduced. Animated films are still eligible for Best Picture, after all. AJD (talk) 15:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

English words of Hebrew origin

Thank you for your edits to this page. I've been using the Online Etymological Dictionary to make some improvements on the page (although I'm editing from an Internet cafe so I can't add the original Hebrew at the moment, only a transliteration). Anyway, this dictionary lists several words such as cider and balm as having Hebrew, and not related Semitic, origin, so do you have a source that they're not from Hebrew? I'm putting words of disputed Hebrew/Phoenician origin, such as rhotacism and alphabet, in the Hebrew section, since it's almost impossible to tell which of two mutually intelligible languages these words come from, and ultimately, it doesn't matter much. And since this is a list of words of possible Hebrew origin, words like brouhaha, copacetic and gun moll merit inclusion on the page, and listing them as "possibly of Hebrew origin" is redundant.--Yolgnu (talk) 00:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm referring to the American Heritage Dictionary and the Oxford English Dictionary for my etymological information. I take these as more authoritative than a web site by a non-linguist with no citations. The dictionaries say things like "from a Semitic source akin to Hebrew...". I don't regard "copacetic" as being "possibly of Hebrew origin" just because some guy with a web site says it might be, when no reputable dictionary offers this as a possibility. AJD (talk) 04:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Online Etymology Dictionary is the most accessible etymology source available on the net, so I wouldn't knock it too hard. Now, several words, such as cider, gun moll, hyssop and abacus are given as being of definite Hebrew origin by most dictionaries, and I don't think one dictionary can simply override all the rest. A Hebrew origin of brouhaha is also quite a popular theory, so I think we should leave it there (the world's not going to end if one word is incorrectly there, is it?). On another note, I don't think words deserve to be included here just because Hebrew is the only surviving Semitic language to have a cognate. If they're not of Canaanite (ie. Phoenician) origin, I think it's misleading to have them here.--Yolgnu (talk) 09:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moving the discussion to Talk:List of English words of Hebrew origin. AJD (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

Wishing you all the best on your birthday! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee.

Not my birthday, friend. AJD (talk) 12:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crimson presidents

The Crimson is one of the most prestigious college paper's in the world, and the election (the shoot) for the president is a very elaborate process, that of which carries a fair amount of prestige and is very involved. It's also interesting to see the evolved diversity of the position over the past two decades. It's one of the most celebrated leadership positions at Harvard, too. --THC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.103.29.10 (talk) 22:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moving discussion to Talk:The Harvard Crimson. AJD (talk) 00:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pine Hill

I reverted your move of the article because WikiProject Mountains guidelines call for use of the political subdivision name or names in disambiguating mountain/hill articles (and I think I checked, and there are other Pine Hills in Massachusetts — hardly surprising). And, to be fair, there is a teeny sliver of the county west of the canal. Daniel Case (talk) 20:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then why not Pine Hill (Bourne, Massachusetts)? AJD (talk) 04:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there's another Pine Hill on Cape Cod, no. County government in Massachusetts may be rather limited but the names and boundaries are still on the maps, after all. Daniel Case (talk) 14:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: And as it says at the mountains project page, counties are the next term after a state: "For example, in the United States, one would also add the county name: e.g. Brown Peak (Kern County, California)." Daniel Case (talk) 14:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a specific guideline so much as an example, and is likely to have been written by someone who was unaware of the deemphasized nature of counties in some states. I think sticking to counties instead of towns/cities for disambiguating locations in Massachusetts is a case of foolish consistency; but I suppose not one that I'm really willing to get exercised over. AJD (talk) 17:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Alright Already

I have nominated Alright Already, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alright Already. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:51, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Burlington, MA

This is regarding your edit to the Transportation section of the Burlington, MA page. Alewife is a very relevant station for many people commuting to Cambridge and downtown Boston from Burlington who don't want to drive or take the commuter train from Anderson - especially if they live inside 128. The town of Burlington lists the station on it's website: http://www.burlington.org/demograph.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.68.212 (talk) 02:11, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Southborough, MA

Hello, I'm a newbie so forgive me if I'm not following the proper protocol. I added a link to the Southborough news blog My Southborough in the Media section of the Southborough, Massachusetts page, but you reverted the change. Can you help me understand why? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.14.141.173 (talk) 19:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for asking. I reverted it because blogs are on the list of external links "normally to be avoided". If you've got a strong case to make that this should be an exception, though, go ahead and make it. AJD (talk) 21:54, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. My Southborough is a news blog, not a personal experience blog. It is very similar in content to the Southborough News site that is listed in both the Media and External Links sections. Seems if one is allowed, the other should be too. Another point of reference is the West Seattle Blog which is listed in the News Sources and External Links sections of the West Seattle, Seattle page. Both the My Southborough blog and the West Seattle Blog are news blogs that serve the community. Thanks for your consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.129.171 (talk) 19:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Winthrop, MA

Sorry about the non-info (under education); I meant to go back and add the info but forgot. Sewnmouthsecret (talk) 21:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indo-European languages

Hey AJD, I am new user, you reverted my edits in this article, could you explain me how come this is misleading? Sweetrealman (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. What you wrote was the following: "The great Aryan family of languages is devided into the following stocks Sanskrit, Persian, Slavonic, Celtic, Classical and Teutonic." This is extremely archaic and inaccurate terminology. The language family you refer to as "Teutonic" is actually known as the Germanic languages. The term Slavic languages is more common than to "Slavonic". There is no such language family as "Classical"—the classical languages Greek and Latin are not closely related and do not belong to the same subfamily. Sanskrit and Persian are both the names of languages, not language groups, and they do belong to the same sub-family, the Indo-Iranian family. You leave out several subfamilies entirely. And calling the Indo-European family "Aryan" is completely obsolete; the common name is "Indo-European". AJD (talk) 22:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Andover, Essex County, Massachusetts

Hello AJD, It is misleading to say that North Andover was incorporated in 1855 from Andover. The area of what is now North Andover was the first and primary settlement of Andover. Later the South Parish and West Parishes of Andover were created and in the 1800s petitioned to be separated or split from the original town. The original old Andover parish did not want the town to be split but the more populous and richer South and West Parishes won out. The Mass state legislature split Andover in 1855.

The more populous and richer South and West Parish got to call itself Andover because the prestigious Philips academy was there and the new town had much better political connections than the old town. Also it could not call itself South or West Andover since it was the combination of both parishes. The original and more northerly old parish ended up being called North Andover. Now stating this briefly will be a challenge. Maybe we can say North Andover was incorporated in 1646 as Andover divided and renamed North Andover in 1855. Best Regards, David Blackwell. DavidBlackwell (talk) 23:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC) If you have any questions please call 978 373-2358 and see the reference books I've linked into the North Andover article.[reply]

Preston (2008)

Hi, I thought I'd bring the issue of Preston out of the talk page because it's not really relevant. What I got from the talk was somewhat different. In my understanding, he said that in a diffusion context, a triangular system might appear because in those cases, the system tends towards less marked options. Actually, I want to look and see if that is what happened with one Latino speaker I have with an idiosyncratic and otherwise inexplicable vowel system. The quadrangle is just more marked in human language not English. When a dialect is learned from birth, the markedness question is less relevant, which is why quadrangular systems can remain robust over generations. Thanks for clearing up my confusion about the situation of low vowels. I was hoping you'd answer. mnewmanqc (talk) 12:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, he said that in cases of diffusion of the NCS, a triangular system might appear because the system tends toward less marked options—but he didn't argue that the triangular system is less marked than the quadragular system. The reason the triangular system appears in those cases rather than a quadrangle isn't because it's less marked—it's because it's a better approximation to the NCS, which is itself an extremely marked and asymmetrical system. AJD (talk) 13:49, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Lion King GAR

As a major contributor to The Lion King, I thought you'd want to know that that article is currently under going a Good Article Reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps. The article currently fails the good article criteria, as detailed at Talk:The Lion King/GA1. Its reassessment is on hold for seven days to allow time for the issues to be addressed. Thanks. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)H[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

False etymology > Folk Etymology

You participated in a discussion on the page Folk etymology as to whether it should be moved to False etymology. Despite the consensus on that discussion, the move was effected. I have requested that the move be reversed. I am notifying you as a party to that prior discussion. If you are interested, the current discussion is located here.μηδείς (talk) 04:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion

I have proposed merging Vermont English and Boston accent with New England English, a page you have worked on in the past. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at the merger discussion. Cnilep (talk) 05:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dominion (card game)

Thank you for the citations! Tbtkorg (talk) 11:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Thanksgivukkah, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Per wp:burden, if you wish to restore the sentence provide a proper RS inline ref at the end of the sentence. Epeefleche (talk) 01:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not persist in reverting edits that are verified by a reliable cited source without discussion. AJD (talk) 01:39, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You have done it once again -- there are zero refs after the sentence. You have yet again, despite it being challenged and despite me pointing out to you wp:burden, and the requirement that you add an inline ref after the challenged language if you wish to restore it, still persisted in failing to comply with wp:burden. Epeefleche (talk) 02:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Epeefleche (talk) 02:10, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanksgivukkah

Hi Ajd, Thank you for your work on the Thanksgivukkah article. I'm glad someone was able to get the facts right and present them coherently. Set theorist (talk) 06:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RfC concerning the article name for Broadway

Because you were involved in a previous discussion on the subject, or related to the subject, please see RfC: What is the best name for the article about the street called "Broadway" which originates in Manhattan? BMK, Grouchy Realist (talk) 02:31, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hard and soft G, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Germanic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global account

Hi Ajd! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 10:02, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1776 (musical), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Wilson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Greater Montreal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Laval. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Steven Universe characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Flashback. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:58, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ajd. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ajd. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request of pardon

Hello, sir. I beg your pardon. I was looking to expand the page, "New Jersey English," with more depth. I found a source, ^[1] , reliable as they come, that claims the Inland North dialect encompasses Upstate New York, Eastern Pennsylvania, and Northwestern New Jersey. However, prior, I did see the edit history where you replaced the "Inland North" with "Northern Superdialect." That said, I wish to dissolve any discrepancies before they arrive. Therefore, I desire to know if you would object that I reinstate "Inland North" as long as I add the appropriate scholarly source to the article. I wish to hear your opinion before I take any action. Thank you, sir.LakeKayak (talk) 04:28, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The page you link doesn't actually claim that the Inland North encompasses northwestern New Jersey. Or, to be more precise: Aschmann's map colors northwestern New Jersey with the color of the Inland North, but if you look closely you'll notice that he doesn't report any data or speakers from northwestern New Jersey. He has no evidence at all for the status of northwestern New Jersey one way or another, and doesn't really make a claim about it. To the best of my knowledge there's no scholarly research establishing the dialectological affiliation of northwestern New Jersey.

Also, Aschmann's map isn't as "reliable as they come". It's pretty good, but scholarly research based on phonetic analysis of multiple local apeakers would be more reliable. For example, Aschmann places Canton, NY in the Inland North region, apparently on the basis of his impressionistic judgment of the speech of one highly-educated speaker. However, scholarly research has found Canton to be outside the Inland North region, on the basis of sociolinguistic interviews and acoustic analysis. It's not the most robust conclusion—the study only includes nine speakers from Canton, not the most accountable sample, and so it's conceivable that future work might find Canton is actually part of the Inland North, or was in the 1950s. But I know which one I'd trust. AJD (talk) 05:55, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By "reliable as they come," I only mean that other sources I found were not as reliable. They were blogs.LakeKayak (talk) 17:50, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have just look at the source you provided. Thank you, sir. It seems that the Northwestern New Jersey is in the Hudson Valley dialect. It seem that this should be the name of the section as opposed to Inland North. I thank you for your help.LakeKayak (talk) 17:57, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, though, be careful there. As far as I know there's no data more recent than Kurath (1949) providing evidence that northwestern New Jersey is in the Hudson Valley dialect region. AJD (talk) 19:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, sir. It seems I made a mistake. I looked at the map on page 20, thinking that it was Dinkins' map. I'm sorry.LakeKayak (talk) 00:39, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I beg your pardon, again, sir. For one final note, there aren't too many recent studies on New Jersey accents, anyway. Or if studies are done, they are usually done by amateurs.

An example of a recent amateur study that I know of was done by Brian Donohue in an episode of Ledger Live: "New Jersey accents: beyond caw-fee and hoagies." In his research, he divided a map of the state into different color-coded regions, each representing a different accent. However, he did not provide the linguistic names for his color-coded regions. Therefore, it is not a source that I even could use.

So, unfortunately, it seems that either the sources on the page will be mediocre like Ashmann, or they will have obsolete information like Kurath. I am sorry for troubling you, sir.LakeKayak (talk) 01:18, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello, sir. I apologize for being a nuisance. I have one question regarding an edit you made on the page "Cot-caught merger." I have no objection to the edit. I only misunderstand what you meant in your reason for the edit. You removed the pairs "born/barn" and "starring/warring" as counterexamples to the cot-caught merger, claiming:

"rm misleading barn/born counterexamples; lack of cot-caught merger before r is not the only reason these are not merged."

Would you please say for what other reason are they not merged? Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 22:15, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's misleading to say that barn/starring contain the "cot" vowel or that born/warring contain the "caught" vowel. They have (arguably) merged with "cot" and with "caught" respectively in some dialects, but by no means all of them. So the lack of merger between barn and born is not directly relevant to the cot/caught merger at all. Moreover, in general the prerhotic vowels of English function as a distinct subsystem, acting as diphthongs more than as sequences of vowel phoneme plus coda /r/; it doesn't make much more sense to say that barn has the same vowel as cot or father than it does to say time or loud does. AJD (talk) 03:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, can we at least be consistent? The section cot-caught merger was restored on the page Phonological history of English low back vowels, with the line which you removed. I feel that the line should be on both pages or neither. I wish for your opinion before I make the edit. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 18:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. AJD (talk) 18:24, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sir.LakeKayak (talk) 18:44, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But still, the question of pre-r vowels needs to be addressed somehow, in both articles. It certainly isn't accepted universally (or even particularly commonly, I think) that pre-r vowels form a distinct subsystem. So if we decline to mention them, we're misleading many readers into believing that the merger is more complete than it actually is. W. P. Uzer (talk) 22:53, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chomsky

In Hebrew, 'ch' is pronounced [x]; e.g., Chanukah, l'chaim, Chaim Potok, etc. [tʃɒmski] is a spelling pronunciation of Chomsky's name in English.

From what I've seen, Chomsky introduces himself as [tʃɒmski], but that doesn't mean it's the correct pronunciation. For example, I am born and raised in the U.S. but am of Indian ancestry. My given name is Vivek (e.g., as in Vivek Murthy). Americans and other non-Indians almost universally pronounce it as ['vɪvək] or [vɪv'ɛk], which is how it's spelled in English, and that's also how I introduce myself 9/10 times. However, the correct pronunciation is [vɪv'eɪk], which myself and others of Indian heritage know--I just almost never introduce myself to non-Indians that way because it's not an intuitive pronunciation for them. In other words, I deliberately mispronounce my own name when introducing myself to others just because it's easier that way, and Chomsky, unassuming as he is, almost certainly does the exact same thing. Other Jews also pronounce N.C.'s name as [xɒmski]: https://linguistlist.org/ask-ling/message-details1.cfm?asklingid=200403427 Vrrajkum (talk) 14:53, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Chomsky introduces himself as [tʃɒmski]" does mean it's the correct pronunciation. A person has final say over what the correct pronunciation of their own name is (modulo dialect differences, I guess). You don't get to try to read his mind and say, well, he would introduce himself [xɒmski] under some hypothetical circumstances. AJD (talk) 15:21, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AJD: Except that he would: https://s14.postimg.org/wn90gqez3/homsky.png

Noam only uses the correct pronunciation of his name with other Jews, the same way that I only use the correct pronunciation of my name with other Indians. If you had a commonly mispronounced name you would understand why we do it. Vrrajkum (talk) 07:46, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He says the [tʃ] pronunciation is the only one he uses, except when visiting Israel (which is not the same as "except with other Jews"). If someone uses one pronunciation of their name almost all the time, and in English, and a different pronunciation in a foreign country where a different language is spoken, English-language Wikipedia should use the pronunciation the person actually uses, in English.AJD (talk) 16:13, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He's saying that [x] is the correct pronunciation, he just chooses not to use it in most circumstances. His father used it, and the pronunciation of his surname did not magically change when it was passed to him from his father. Noam's personal habits do not change the proper pronunciation of his name; if they did, any common mispronunciation of any term would override the correct pronunciation (not to mention that it just wouldn't make sense for Noam's surname to be pronounced differently than his father's).

For example, even though the name 'Caesar' is commonly mispronounced as SEE-zur in English, the English-language Wikipedia article on Julius Caesar lists the proper pronunciation of KY-zur. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be encyclopedic and should therefore be objectively correct, not just conform to popular opinions or practices. Vrrajkum (talk) 20:41, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He isn't saying that [x] is "the correct" pronunciation. He's saying that it's "the original" pronunciation, which his father used "in some circles" but not others. Your "if they did" is a total non sequitur. People can determine the pronunciation of their own names, even if that differs from the pronunciation used by other people with the same name (for which there is no evidence in this case), regardless of whether it would "make sense" to do so.

['sizɚ] isn't a "mispronunciation" of Caesar; it's the standard pronunciation in English. The Wikipedia article lists the Latin pronunciation, specifically flagging it as being the Latin pronunciation, rather than the English pronunciation. It is in some cases possible for a public figure's name to have standard pronunciations that differ in different languages, especially if it's a person who lived millennia ago. It may or may not be the case that this is true for Chomsky, even though he is currently living. The Latin pronunciation of Caesar is worth listing because Caesar was a native speaker of Latin who lived in a Latin-speaking country; the same argument implies the use of the English pronunciation of Chomsky. AJD (talk) 21:31, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New York-New Jersey English listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect New York-New Jersey English. Since you had some involvement with the New York-New Jersey English redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. LakeKayak (talk) 21:00, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Old English

Please provide your comments here.

Thanks.

-- MC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.131.2.3 (talk) 20:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Old English, again!

Hi, have to go to work - can you check the recent edit to the above? Thanks Denisarona (talk) 13:05, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited When You Believe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Exodus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ajd. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Castle of Llyr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Black Cauldron (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Champions (U.S. TV series). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Amaury (talk | contribs) 02:06, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ajd. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ajd. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Change Your Mind (Steven Universe), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Montage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gem Harvest (March 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Legacypac was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at List of Steven Universe episodes instead.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gem Harvest and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Gem Harvest, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Legacypac (talk) 11:05, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ajd! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Legacypac (talk) 11:05, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a new editor. AJD (talk) 15:34, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gem Harvest (March 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Legacypac was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Gem Harvest instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

If you wish you can post this over the redirect at this title.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Gem Harvest and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Gem Harvest, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Legacypac (talk) 05:32, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gem Harvest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Traditional marriage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 21

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Aleph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Digraph

Waw (letter) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Digraph

Yodh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Digraph

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PJHunt007

Please see today's reverts in Stockbridge, Massachusetts by User:PJHunt007. I am hoping the user will not continue the Edit War. —GoldRingChip 12:43, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 15

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

A Dance with Dragons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to King's Landing and Wildling

A Feast for Crows (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Wildling

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:35, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Siege (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miles O'Brien (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:33, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Gem Harvest

Hello, Ajd. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gem Harvest".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (📧) 14:50, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Steven Universe (character), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Change Your Mind (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:23, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing edit

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Good_Place_(season_4)&oldid=prev&diff=930992886 ? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:41, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting the title as "The Paley Center Salutes The Good Place" makes it look like th3 title is just "The Paley Center Salutes", and "The Good Place" is not part of the title of the special; that's why it's confusing. It's hard for the reader to easily identify what the title is. AJD (talk) 07:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello, I'm Alex 21. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:List of Steven Universe episodes that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -- /Alex/₂₁ 09:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:List of Steven Universe episodes. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. -- /Alex/₂₁ 09:50, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Trek: Picard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:26, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

yeet

Callanj123 (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Palpatine novelisation in Rise of Skywalker

Hi mate,

I saw you reverted my edit explaining that Palpatine was a clone in RoS as you didnt see it as important enough for the lede. I couldnt disagree more as he is a central character in the movie as the primary antagonist and it explains his literal role and answers logic gaps that would otherwise be unanswered and confusing to the general reader who otherwise wouldnt know how a deceased man returned. I think the note, with the sources to support it (perhaps cut down to 1 source to keep it neat?) is essential.

Perhaps we can cut it to a more minor note with one source in support? Davefelmer (talk) 06:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't revert it, I just moved the information to a more appropriate place in the article. I stand my assertion that it's not important enough for the lede; it's not even a fact about the movie (but rather about the novelization of the movie). AJD (talk) 06:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Dragon Prince

You raised some good points in your last edit. I created a talk page entry so we can discuss further. Pretzel butterfly (talk) 18:29, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Destiny (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phaser (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Our Man Bashir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miles O'Brien (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited In the Cards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Montage.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Behind the Lines (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Defiant.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sacrifice of Angels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dukat.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:25, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Redwall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adder.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Magnificent Ferengi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zek.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hanukkah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Secular Jew.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 28

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Paradise Lost (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine)

added a link pointing to Phaser

The Emperor's New Cloak

added a link pointing to Parallel universe

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On your edit to Hanukkah

When I saw your undo on Hanukkah I only noticed you reverting the kamatz ā back to á, hence my revert. Only then did I notice the actual error which you had corrected, that I had accidentally doubled the 'n' and not the 'k' in the transliteration. I've since corrected this. My apologies for jumping the gun, and thank you. Zhomron (talk) 16:11, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Dogs of War (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rom.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited American Animals, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Birds of America.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hello, I have noticed you have done an amazing job improving Star Trek articles. Also, I am impressed when we reach compromises on some pages, which is really in the spirit of the Wikipedia. Congratulations on doing a fine job editing and improving these pages. Sincerely, Starspotter (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! AJD (talk) 00:19, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cardassians (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Melora.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Sound of Her Voice, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miles O'Brien.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For outstanding writing and editing of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine articles. For trekkers everywhere, Qapla'! Starspotter (talk) 22:29, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! AJD (talk) 05:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shattered Mirror (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hans Beimler.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Profit and Loss

I caught a rather unfortunate typo in one of your edits. I came here to ask if it was in fact a good faith edit... but when I see your extensive edit history, and a lot of edits in the Star Trek subject area, I think I can safely assume it was an accident.

Anyway, you misspelled Gul Toran as "Torah." That hit my troll alarm, but I'm quite certain now it was a mistake.

Thank you for all you do for the project!! J^♯m (talk | contribs) 02:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Thanks for catching that. AJD (talk) 03:50, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Take_Me_Out_to_the_Holosuite

After looking at again I realized I had let myself get carried away by the sources and had been excessively verbose and long-winded about it. Your rephrasing made the point more succinctly and much better, and certainly improved the article. In short: thanks. -- 109.79.85.185 (talk) 23:51, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sons and Daughters (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bring It On.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

puzzle hunts list

Hi there, I'm new to editing Wikipedia so I apologize if I broke any conventions. I recently edited the Puzzle Hunt page because I wanted to compile a list of many of the recent hunts. I understand there's a list of notable hunts above, but those list broad events rather than specific hunts. There are a number of one-off hunts recently that don't necessarily fit those "famous annual hunts" list but I'd like to add to Wikipedia somewhere. (Additionally, some of the listed hunts haven't been run in a few years, e.g. DASH hasn't happened since 2019, Google games hasn't been run in several years, etc)

My desire is to create a table with specific hunts including Puzzle Potluck, Huntinality, Teammate, Paradox, Cryptex, Pixar, CRUMS, MITMH, UMD, CMU, Halpins, Edrics, inteGirls, etc. with links to each hunt and a little bit of info about each.

The list could eventually grow pretty large (~50-100 rows), so would it make sense to instead create a separate page "List of Puzzle Hunts" or something similar? Also, is it ok to add rows to the table incrementally, or does it have to all be in 1 edit?

Thanks

Pzzl (talk) 04:42, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm sorry if my edit was abrupt or unwelcoming. I think the problem you're falling afoul of here is that Wikipedia is not supposed to be an indiscriminate collection of information. Surely there are dozens of puzzle hunts every year, but Wikipedia isn't supposed to be an index of links to all of them individually, and there don't seem to be any objective criteria you're applying to determine which ones are of sufficient significance to list. The list higher up the article is supposed to be of puzzle hunts that are of sufficient notability to have their own Wikipedia articles (theoretically a more objective criterion), and then links to the archives of those hunts can be found on those articles, but they don't belong on the overall article about puzzle hunts in general. Thanks for your interest, and I hope you keep editing! AJD (talk) 05:05, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks for explaining. I guess I was led astray because of pages like 'List of films', but the guidelines you cited make sense. I'll probably do this somewhere else then (not on Wikipedia). Pzzl (talk) 05:46, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Fiddler: A Miracle of Miracles for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fiddler: A Miracle of Miracles is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fiddler: A Miracle of Miracles until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:13, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Knives Out editing message

idk why you changed my edit back. "apparently" in that instant sounds horrible. not to mention my edit flows with how the movie goes much better. idc if you think you are some sort of authority in editing, it was a bad decision. and for the record, if you do think you are some sort of authority figure when it comes to wikipedia, then you need to re-think that assumption bc my edit of that sentence was much better than what you changed it back to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.50.254.210 (talk) 02:37, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for making an edit you don't like. If you still prefer your version, you can edit it back, or you can start a discussion on the article's talk page. For the record, the reason I like "apparently" is because it can have scope over the entire rest of the sentence, meaning "leaving Harlan only minutes to live" is covered by "apparently" also; in your version, the proposition that Harlan had only minutes to live is implied to be true. (And "while also not being able to find the antidote" really means just the same thing as "and could not find the antidote", but takes more words to say it.) AJD (talk) 05:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re singular they

Greetings. First of all, I appreciate all your input on the Singular they talk page. Your linguistic logic hasn't gone unnoticed. I hope some iteration of your premise prevails. Why don't you have another crack at revising the current lede as I wrote it? Your effort will probably be better than the current worded.

If our paths cross again there or elsewhere, please keep in mind that I'm not 'hung up on other things not being described as "the use of" something'. Slap me for often straddling the WP:NOTAFORUM threshold, but I regularly posit statements (and even edits) that I don't wholeheartedly believe in. My ultimate goal is to improve an article, but my modus operandi often involve using a Socratic means of generating relevant comment and analysis.

In all sincerity, I don't categorically shun defining a lexical item as constituting "the use of" something. Context always matters. Yet, in my experience with lexicography and legislative drafting, only certain lexemes are readily amenable to that phrase. E.g., gerunds can be neatly defined a la "fracking is the fracturing of bedrock formations..." or "in American football, holding is the impermissible use of hands to blah blah." Also, when defining phrases, it's customary to say, e.g., "In this section, excessive force means the use of force that is blah blah."

We both know that Wikipedia is WP:NOTADICTIONARY, and I keep that in mind when I edit ledes. If I had an abiding interest in the other articles you mentioned, I might edit them to say, e.g.:

"information technology is ~~the use of~~ a field and occupation that uses computers to process data
engineering is the field, occupation, or use of scientific principles to regarding the design and ~~build~~ construction of machines, building, and other complex structures
sarcasm is ~~the caustic use of~~ an instance of caustic irony
multilingualism is ~~the use of~~ an act or instance of using or expressing competency in more than one language
fallacy is ~~the use of~~ an act or instance of invalid reasoning
do-support is ~~the use of~~ the auxiliary verb do ~~to form~~ in a manner that ~~negated clauses and questions~~ (1) predicates a question in a simple present or simple past tense construction, (2) comprises a verb catena in a verb phrase that entails "not" and a subsequent infinitive verb, or (3) functions as an intensive that corresponds to a contextually subsequent infinitive verb.

I appreciate your pointing out the examples, only one of which (i.e., do-support) I'd come across on my own. Let's not argue whether or to what extent the examples themselves are defective or whether my suggested changes are improvements. I can only point to style manuals that provide similar guidance while I acknowledge how there are likely to be exceptions that are circumstantially reasonable. In the case of do-support, I'm content to just shake my head at how awful the article while I'm content just to stand clear of that miasma. Re the so-called "singular they," lets agree that it has a use while we can agree to disagree that the term (or, otherwise, the sense of the term) is a use.

In truth, I have a self-interested reason to be pleased when Wikipedia defines something in ways I deem to be syntactically, stylistically, or substantively infirm. In such cases, if need be, I can emend it for my own purposes without editing it here, thereby allowing me to claim copyright in my derivative definition without attribution or linking to Wikipedia.

So, no, I don't edit here for fun. In an instance like "singular they," I regularly kick myself for wasting time to navigate all the talk page static when I could more easily define it as I see fit for my own lexicon, and to let that new definition compete with whatever verbiage the consensus approves here. I am THIS close to letting the article churn, summersault, or rot without my having a further hand in it. Certain other editors would then rejoice! Anyway, good luck to you re that article and all your other pursuits. Cheers. --Kent Dominic·(talk) 00:17, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Star Trek: Lower Decks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page First contact.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NO! NO! NO!

I didn't want anyone to undo my edit on the Steven Universe character page because Greg's real last name was revealed to be DeMayo in one episode before he changed it to "Universe". This wasn't accurate, NOT inaccurate. Don't say that cuz you made it sound like it's false. I want to let this website know that so it can mention Greg's original last name.Chidie345 (talk) 06:35, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DeMayo isn't Greg's "real" name. It's his former name, but during the time period of the show, Universe is his real name. That's why I said your edit was inaccurate. Moreover, it is a minor detail, mentioned in basically one episode, which doesn't help the reader of the article understand important things about the character or his role in the show, and I'm trying very hard to keep that article from getting cluttered up with trivial details. AJD (talk) 07:31, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A dance with dragons

You undid my edit pertaining A Dance with Dragons in which I deleted the sentence claiming it to be published while the TV series was airing.

The book was published on July 12, 2011 whilst Game of Thrones (season 8) premiered on April 14, 2019, as stated in the respective Wikipages themselves.

That means that the book was published before the series was aired, as I explained in my edit. Your argument for undoing is it doesn't say it was published during the 8th season. Instead the sentence that I deleted said exactly that: It was the only novel in the series to be published during the eight-season run of the [[HBO]] adaptation of the series, ''[[Game of Thrones]]''.

Can you clarify what you mean?

Thanks for your reply.

Munifico (talk) 15:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The TV series Game of Thrones aired from April 17, 2011 to May 19, 2019, a period of eight seasons. The novel A Dance with Dragons was publushed on July 12, 2011, during that period of eight seasons: specifically, between the first and second seasons. The sentence that you deleted and that I restored doesn't say that the book was published during the eighth season, which is how you seem to be interpreting it. It says that it was the only one of the novels to be published during the entire period of the TV series. AJD (talk) 16:31, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Islands (Massachusetts) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Islands (Massachusetts), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Islands (Massachusetts) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Priestly Blessing

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Priestly Blessing, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Count of Monte Cristo - Bertuccio backstory

Excuse me, as I am new to Wikipedia, but it appeared as though you deleted almost all of the background information on Bertuccio! Why would you do this? Its deletion gets rid of an essential element of the story, and reduces what could be a comprehensive report on the novel to a bare bones summary. Is this the purpose of Wikipedia? The prioritization of brevity over comprehension and character seems to be making this website a useless heap of barely readable information that could be better served with a side of sleepy-time tea. Trying to condense the content of a nearly 1300 page book (depending on the print/paper size) into a roughly 15 paragraph recitation is like trying to scrawl the entirety of human history onto a restaurant napkin. Mrlocochicken (talk) 03:21, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is, because I was trying to keep the amount of information in the synopsis relatively proportional to its importance to the story, and its necessity for the reader to understand the overall plot. Bertuccio's backstory is roughly 2% of the novel; there's no need for it to be 20% of the novel's synopsis! AJD (talk) 08:28, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even so, it's an important element, and perhaps reducing it to a lesser extent would be better. Mrlocochicken (talk) 19:07, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, but you're welcome to start a discussion on the talk page for the article. AJD (talk) 19:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Birdhouse in Your Soul edit

Thanks for the correction...I should have looked a little closer. Jay Leno was guest hosing that night, so I assumed that it was his version of the show. Change02 (talk) 20:28, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^ http://aschmann.net/AmEng/#LargeMap

[1] ttp://aschmann.net/AmEng/#LargeMap

[1]