I've decided to categorize my old talk by subject. The traditional method of archiving my date can be simulated by using Page History
Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! -- maveric149
Thanks for the info on HP. I can absolutely believe that it will be time consuming, but it's got to be done. I've spent a lot of time researching Florentin Smarandache as well. Oh well, it was a public holiday here and I didn't have much else to do. I recently put a disclaimer like the one you're talking about on pataphysical situation, but hopefully that article will be deleted altogether eventually, as will Cartographic Congress, I hope. -- Tim Starling 13:34 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Hi Pete, I have seen that you live in London. I lived for two years in London and I still miss the city... Fantasy 11:12 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)
I was THAT close of doing just what you did to "erdos", but then I noticed he was a painter, not a polymath. Better you than me ;) -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 16:05 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Actually I think erdos is a "painter" in the sense that it is a fractal painting programme for computers. Did some googling... -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 13:08 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)
PNG is for computer-generated diagrams and the like. Things with nice big blocks of constant colour. JPEG is much better for photos like Image:Geyser exploding 1 large.png. -- Tim Starling 08:55, Aug 16, 2003 (UTC)
I've converted two of them, are you going to do the rest, or will I do it? -- Tim Starling 08:58, Aug 16, 2003 (UTC)
Wow - nice photos! Alas, my digital camera can't take photos fast enough to get action shots like that. -- mav 09:09, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Hi Pete, when you updated the Geyser article with jpg instead of png could you please also update Wikipedia:Brilliant pictures and Wikipedia:Brilliant pictures visible? Thanks ;-) Fantasy 11:08, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Congratulations, you have just been made a sysop! You have volunteered for boring housekeeping activities which normal users sadly cannot participate in. Sysops basically can't do anything: They cannot delete pages arbitarily (only obvious junk like "jklasdfl,öasdf JOSH IS GAY"), they cannot protect pages in an edit war they are involved in, they cannot ban signed in users. What they can do is delete junk as it appears, ban anonymous vandals, remove pages that have been listed on Votes for deletion for more than a week, protect pages when asked to by other members, and help keep the few protected pages there are, among them the precious Main Page, up to date.
Note that almost everything you can do can be undone, so don't be too worried about making mistakes. You will find more information at Wikipedia:Administrators, please take a look before experimenting with your new powers. Drop me a message if there are any questions or if you want to stop being a sysop (could it be?). Have fun! —Eloquence 02:45, Aug 19, 2003 (UTC)
Hi! Thank you for your comments. I am not sure, but I think Fair use material is, while not encouraged, allowed on Wikipedia. www.pics4learning.com has a very slack image policy [2] and WP seems to be a perfect example of a site that is allowed to use their images - "intended to provide copyright friendly images for use by students and teachers in an educational setting". BL 12:07, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)
The Iceland series is great! I didn't even see it that good in Yellowstone! -- Menchi 19:47, Aug 23, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks Pete, I know some bird pics are going to be difficult to get, but I thought someone would have an image of this unmissable swan! Jim
lol.. it's alright no harm done... i do stuff like that all the time :-) Evil saltine 14:24, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Nice Sperm Whale - you do a lot more research than me! Jim
About George Thomas: it looks like some people didn't read the edit summary of your original response. ;-) Good call. Cheers, Cyan 13:09, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I have put the sources of WINOR here (zip file). Needs wxWindows to run; project file is for DevCpp. Good luck! -- Magnus Manske 12:41, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)
FYI re Talk:Weblog: I fixed the edit history thing. :-) -- Cyan 16:12, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Indeed it does, Pete. Unfortunately, I don't even remember adding the picture, so the only thing I know about it is what I wrote at the time in the edit summary. I assume that I found it through Google. I'm contributing less text these days because I'm spending a great deal of time taking photographs - but birds, not whales. Not many whales in inland Australia! Best -- Tony ( Tannin)
Pete:
It may well be a joke, but it's also true. See, eg, talk:Rachel Corrie and talk:Images of Rachel Corrie. If you believe that Lir is a troll, that's fine, but always best to base such judgements on the facts. :) Martin 17:30, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hello, Mr. Pete. I was just wondering what you had against the recently added bits on the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion page. I always found the boilerplate text, in particular, to be very useful, as I could copy and paste it straight from there onto any pages that needed it. I don't suppose it can be anything to do with space considerations, can it? Because that text only took up about 0.2% of the page, you know... ;) -- Oliver P. 11:55, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
P.S. - Thought of anything to add to the Selwyn College, Cambridge page, yet? :)
Thanks for the compliment. Your creative spelling of his name ("the very good on article on Fritz Speigl") shows me I was right in including the information contained in the last sentence of the article. :) All the best, -- KF 18:16, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hello. It seems that you are an extremely valuable contributer to Wikipedia, but I have not made your acquaintence yet. I would like to introduce myself to you and wish you the best. By the way, could you give me that python script you were talking about on Wikipedia:Village pump? Thank you in advance, Alexandros 04:10, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to comment on my Concorde pic, I apppreciate it. Thank goodness the pic came out so well because that was the last ten seconds of Concorde flight EVER!
I live about ten miles from Filton and estimate that about 5000 people were at the runway.
Adrian Pingstone 13:39, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Heh, I was going to move the Rachel Scott stuff too - you did it seconds before me! Good call, and thanks for helping with the housework. :) Martin 00:48, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Just because you don't like an edit, is not sufficient reason to revert it. Lirath Q. Pynnor
Thanks for help on Charles Ingram. Still needs more work from me - DoB, career etc. Mervyn.
Re: thank you to that person whose name I unfortunately can't remember right now - very imaginative! - I think you're talking about User:Dori? See User talk:Dori#Signatures Dysprosia 06:00, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Good to see that others are also interrested in having the redistributors of wikipedia material comply with the GFDL. See Wikipedia:Sites that use Wikipedia for content#wordIQ for the response I received. -- snoyes 15:43, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for catching that!... -- Viajero 15:56, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Do you think anyone would object to this idea?
General Points Whenever possible, headings and a table of contents should be included.
Please consider adding the following boilerplate text at the end of your articles and the top of their Talk page.
This article is part of WikiProject Poetry. Please read the guidelines set out there before editing the page.
I don't want to include it if other users or admins will start deleting it. Bmills 10:14, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thanks. I put in on Wikipedia:Village pump for feedback. Nothing so far. Bmills 13:13, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hello, I enhanced your No_stubs.PNG image. Enjoy! Greenmountainboy 03:15, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Dear Pcb, check the Brilliant prose nominees talk page. I placed some thoughts there. Cheers, Muriel Victoria 16:11, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Re your changes to Downing Street, First Lord of the Treasury and Prime Minister are not and never have been the same. Both are usually held by the one person, but they need not be (the last time they were not was at the beginning of the 20th century). 10 Downing Street is the residence of the FLOTT, not the PM (as the sign on the door makes absolutely clear) and if the two posts are ever again separated the FLOTT will live in Number 10 and the PM will have to live elsewhere, as he had to do 100 years ago. Britain does not have a residence for the PM. FearÉIREANN 21:23, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I want to know about every vote. Not just VfD. And I HAVE missed votes. and it sucks, and makes me sad. Wikipolitics is important, and needs changes. Thats what I'm about on this one. Jack 10:10, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thanks. I guess who is or is not "successful" at any given point in time is very much a subjective judgment. By what yardstack is success measured? In Cherie Blair's case, is it because she has presumably high-profile clients, and charges accordingly? Or is it just to boost Tony Blair's image?. What if Cherie somehow fell from grace and was able to sustain only an average practice, enough to keep a roof over her head but no longer with high-profile clients and not particularly newsworthy in its own right? Would you still call her "successful" then? If somebody is not described as "successful", people do not immediately jump to the conclusion that they have somehow "failed", so the successful tag adds no value, and is simply unnecessary waffle. Hilary Swank won the Best Actress Oscar a couple of years ago - one can't get a much higher industry accolade than that, so she is undoubtedly "successful" in the eyes of her peers - but her public profile is so low and her films so non-box office that most people would probably say "Hilary who?". I haven't checked, but I'd bet a million dollars her entry in Wikipedia (if there is one) does not describe her as "a successful American actress", but simply "an American actress". Basically, Wikipedia is about factual information - describing somebody as "successful" (or anything else like that) is not factual, but simply somebody's opinion - and it also smacks of marketing hype which also goes against the grain in this context. I don't propose to remove it, but I still think this has no real place here. Cheers for Christmas JackofOz 23:20, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
This is where we start to enter into a philosophical minefield. Is Tony Blair the UK PM, or is it only somebody's subjective opinion that he is the UK PM? What is and is not factual is sometimes very difficult to determine - and until there is virtually universal agreement on a particular point, it will remain in the realm of opinion, supposition, hearsay, hypothesis, etc. And that's where we're talking about "historical" information. It's a whole different ball-game again when we get into the area of subjective attributes. Writers and communicators generally need to be extraordinarily careful about using adjectives to describe people, and should be sparing with use of the verb "to be". What a person did is one thing, that might be recorded on film for example (and even then we can have arguments about what really happened) - but what kind of person they are/were is not possible to pin down outside each individual observer's mind. For example, by general consensus there really was a King of Macedon called Alexander III, who is usually referred to as "Alexander the Great", but does that title alone prove that he was a "great" king or a "great" individual? I doubt it. You might think he was great, I might disagree. Who's right? Nobody. Who's wrong? Nobody. Even if you think that only a crackpot would argue against the saintly attributes of Mother Teresa, that does not mean that the "crackpot" is ipso facto wrong. The point is that there simply is no universally accepted measure of such things as "great", "successful", "evil" etc etc - which is why they are and will continue to remain fundamentally subjective, regardless of how many people you may find to agree with you. (Yes, I can ramble on as well as the next man, as is by now probably painfully obvious) JackofOz 01:48, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Dunno about the Redd Foxx photo - I snagged two versions from a couple places, and cleaned them up substantially in photoshop. It looks like that was all deleted. Just getting back to here - reading old mail, etc.- 戴眩sv
Hi, thanks for your clearing up the species of Bottlenose Dolphin. Just one question: is T. gillii considered to be a subspecies of T. truncatus or of T. aduncus? Thanks, AxelBoldt 15:33, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)
See my comment at the end of Wikipedia:Sites that use Wikipedia for content#wordIQ. -- mav 05:20, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What's that "prototype wiki-text to PDF converter"? Is that free? -- Yacht ( Talk) Q 02:34, Jan 27, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for Wikipedia:Possible misuses of admin privileges - I think (unfortunately) somebody had to do it, and you did a good job. -- Camembert
This whole thing is, I think, rather tricky. As I personally consider Jack a kind of low-grade troll, I'd much rather have ignored him completely. However, the ill-advised nomination made that more-or-less impossible. I restored the comments manually (not reverting, yr comment is still there) because one of his favourite tactics is to delete talk that shows him in a bad light. The last thing the community needs is for him to be able to claim precedent for that kind of thing. I feel it is vital that any dealings with Jack are not only by the book, but are seen to be so. However, I fully understand that you may not see any of this the same way. Bmills 13:56, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I am intruiged by Bmills statement regarding my "favourite tactics". Can he cite any circumstance of me having done this? The only thing I can think of is in regards to CbU, and I never deleted any talk there, but rather deleted repitition of it (tannin went and cut and pasted anything bad said about me on there from other entries, and put them into his complaint against me). When angela asked me not to do that, saying it was unseemly, I never did it again, and even now, there is a rather (unfair and out of context) unflattering segment on CbU regarding me. Unsubstantiated accusations like these coming from admins are among the reasons why I am finding less and less of a place here for myself. Sam Spade 22:52, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Yes it does stand for article of the day. Currently, it is only being used on Sennheiser's homepage. Sennheiser 15:52, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
==You are now a sysop (on meta). welcome aboard== (from User:Bmills)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flowers
Belizian 02:55, 2004 Feb 8 (UTC)
Thanks! I recieved your message. Sennheiser ! 21:15, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I am claiming 3ψ as a reward for writing an article about Henry Dudeney and removing him from Wikipedia:Articles requested for over two years. I'll handle adjusting our WikiMoney accounts (you may reverse the transaction if for some reason you feel the article is not substantial enough to qualify for your reward). -- Michael Snow 23:10, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi Pete! Just getting back to you about the comment you left on my talk page. Your original is in black; my reply in red.
Hi David, I ended up reading your comment on Talk:Born again. Just a heads up, you don't have to log in to be a "proper" user. There are good anonymous contributors and bad logged-in users too. We have to judge people on their edits not on their logged-in-ness. If you haven't seen it already, take a quick squizz at Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. Everyone is new once, and different people take different amounts of time to understand what the implications of tiny little phrase "NPOV" really are. Moulding newcomers into fine contributors in a patient way is the only way Wikipedia can continue to grow. Thanks, Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 11:56, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC).
Hi Pete. I just saw your new Pygmy Sperm Whale entry and was reminded to drop by and say what a fantastic job you are doing with those whale and dolphin articles. Hard and careful work, long sustained. We should have a Wikipedia MVP award for you. Tannin
Thanks for taking the bull by the horns with the WordIQ bandwidth situation. It's all up to the guy who pays for it, of course, but that sort of trick has always struck me as a particularly perverse sort of vampirism (vampiracy?). Best, – Hajor 19:14, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi, just thought I'd let you know Pcb22 has been desysopped by E23. He recommends you don't change your preferences for a while though using the pcb22 name as without doing something with memcached, it might not work. Angela . 20:10, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
On User talk:Dino you noted,
— I got rid of the country reference, leaving a few small English fixes I did. Aint no big deal. — dino
Good work on the Big Mac index article. I have added it to the list of economics topics as you requested. mydogategodshat 21:55, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
You made some complaints about the way thumbnails look with the new image syntax, so I'm just letting you know a design competition has been launched to replace the gray border and icon. You can add your suggestions till March 15, or just vote on other people's suggestions after that date: meta:Image Box. :) fabiform | talk 15:26, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the message on my talk page. Yes, I have taken some time away from editing Wikipedia, as I found that some aspects of it were annoying me too much, and I wasn't really enjoying working here as much as I should do... However, I think it's safe to say that any absences of mine will always be temporary. I can never leave! :) Anyway, I see that you've done lots of good stuff while I've been inactive. I was wondering when Ant and Dec would get an article. :) -- Oliver P. 00:23, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hi. Just read your message about my IP address problem. Yes, I suppose I was quite unlucky (and poor, that's why I don't have broadband yet) :o( But I reeeeally appreciate your help. Thanks!! Rumpelstiltskin 11:55, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hi. I note you moved the article from "Key West, Florida" to " Key West". If I remember correctly, a while back it was decided to include the state for cities and towns in the USA, eg " Chicago, Illinois", although I can't currently find that on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places) (I'm probably looking in the wrong place). Personally, I'm fine with Key West at either name, as its an island in additon to a city; others might have other opinions. However, when you move a page I would like to reccomend that you help take care of fixing links to there in other articles. Note at What links here: Key West that more pages link to "Key West, Florida" than to "Key West". Best wishes, -- Infrogmation 15:25, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
From vfd:
Hi Pete, Thanks for your welcome! In a fit of activity I also added short entries for Sca Fell and Mickledore if you're interested. I presume from some of your other articles that you're not only a fellow Lake District fan but also a fellow mathematician, so we may bump into each other here quite a bit! I do have one piece of advice to seek - where should I respond to a comment on my talk page - on my talk page, on the other guy's talk page or by email? Best wishes, Cambyses 05:44, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Many thanks for the formatting changes Pete, I will number my replies in future to make it easier reading ( or is there a more accepted method here? :)13:52, 8 Mar 2004
Would wou mind taking a quick look at football (unqualified). I noticed that the history section of this article was getting bigger (and inaccurate) so I moved the stuff I'd written at history of football back into football article and completed it (I'd got bored writing the old article). Initially a dirty merge, so it needs a good copyedit from another pair of eyes. Cheers. Mintguy (T) 18:48, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)~
I don't mind being challenged on VfD. I think it makes for stronger decisions when there is an active discourse. But I don't think terse comments that "you don't know what you're talking about" are at all helpful. If you disagree, please say why and share your evidence. If you don't understand someone's point of view, ask a follow-up either on the page or via Talk. If you think I just misunderstood, please explain. I do try to not post complete nonsense and I try to give other Wikipedians the same benefit of the doubt. Flawed as VfD is, please help me keep the conversation civil. Thanks. Rossami 16:39, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I should apologize, too. VfD makes for thin skins. It is also difficult to have a long rational discussion because of the ever-present threat of edit conflicts. I did finally explain at length to the VfD entry for the 125 list. I'm still not sure where the confusion lies but I hope that this time all my assumptions are out in the open. Thanks. Rossami
Cool. It could do with some pictures before it becomes worthy of becoming a featured article. Mintguy (T)
You had a post to the Wikien-l mailing list which was "held for approval" -- I guess because you're not signed up correctly? Anyway, I sent it on to the list. -- Uncle Ed 18:37, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hey, there. I put some comments on the talk page of the recursion article re: existence proof. Your fears were well-grounded...the argument you gave is, essentially, circular. I wouldn't feel too bad about though...a lot of textbooks give about the same proof! Anyway, I didn't mean to sound too harsh. I hope I gave a reasonable short explanation why the proof doesn't work. I also gave a reference to where a correct proof can be found (it's one of the standard graduate algebra texts...or at least, was 20 years ago). I might return to the article and put something back in, but you can have a go first if you want. I have other things I should be finishing, anyway! :-/ take care, Revolver 01:39, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hello, Pete, I just wanted to pop in and thank you for your help at the article (as you guess, it is quite important for us in Spain). Pfortuny 18:13, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hi Pcb,
I've amended the proposal on 24 hour bans for edit wars. In short, the amendment calls for a quickpoll to take place before any such ban can be implemented. If you support this, I'd like you to add your vote in favor to the 24 hour ban vote, with the comment "with quickpolls".
Please also participate in the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Quickpolls. —Eloquence 22:16, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)
Why have we suddenly got two Talk archives at the Madrid attacks article? Adam 12:14, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
So did I. I think we somehow archived the same Talk twice. Adam 12:27, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer in mavs talk page. It would be indeed more practical to use the boilerplate instead. See you around, Muriel 08:56, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Why is anything I do on my Talk page any of your business? RickK | Talk 01:55, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Thank you. I believe the more the merrier, as long as mary gets credit. Denni 00:19, 2004 Mar 20 (UTC)
From the pump: It would've been polite to tell the original uploader about changes you made to a photograph from their private collection. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 08:19, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Yeah that was my first edit, and I realised afterwards how to do it properly... Still learning... Thanks for fixing :-) Ned 13:05, 21 Mar 2004 (GMT)
On Wikipedia:Peer review, you posted a request for comment on Jamie Bulger. I thought that was a well-written and balanced article on a very difficult topic. I only made two very minor changes.
I have one additional thought, but would like your thoughts on how to link it properly. In the article, you use the term "tariff" to describe time served. (At least that's what I assumed from the context.) That is not the common usage in the US. Rather than clutter up the article with a definition, I wanted to just link the first usage, but tariff is not right, tariff (disambiguation) would have to be restructured and Wiktionary:Tariff does not yet exist. Since it's outside my experience (I'm assuming this is a British English usage), I am reluctant to meddle. Rossami 22:54, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
D'oh! Lorraine Kelly was my fault. Jiang posted an anon's contribution list under wikify (we were supposed to know that meant all its contribs needed wikifying), but that confused Mark R. and myself, and Mark asked for it to be replaced. I remembered seeing an unwikified article earlier, jumped to it, saw it was still unwikified, and listed it. I had checked one of its phrases on Google and got no hits, so I'd thought it wasn't copyvio. My mistake! Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. :-) Jwrosenzweig 00:54, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
When you delete an article, you need to delete its corresponding talk page, click on "what links here" for both the article and its corresponding talk page and delete any (now empty) redirects. If the article being deleted is on an obscure subject, then also orphan the article. For example, Talk:Maudlyn A. White should be deleted and [Maudlyn A. White] should be orphaned by delinking the name from the casualities. -- Jia ng 01:55, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings because that is far from my intent. Having more admins cleaning up that overburdened page is a good thing. But how else am I supposed to convey this to you? Sit silently and watch? -- Jia ng 19:52, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I was not aware that you had taken a 4 day break. I saw your name in recent changes and registered that I last contacted you 4 days ago. I checked your talk page to see Talk:Maudlyn A. White still there, so I thought you might have read the message below and missed mine. Well...it is still there. I wasn't trying to be rude then, but I am now. Should I plead and beg you or just do it myself?
If a talk page is not deleted, it should be posted on the archives, not left an orphan never to be found... -- Jia ng 01:04, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Repeat: If the article being deleted is on an obscure subject, then also orphan the article. I never said every deleted article should be orphaned. You are correct on that point. Empty redirects, however, show up blue and need to be deleted. It's pointless to leave junk talk pages. -- Jia ng 01:53, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I noticed on Wikipedia:Requested articles/UK people that you emailed webmaster@tonyslattery.com for permission to use material without any joy. Thought I'd suggest another email address to try: admin@micaelita.net (linked to from [4], from a link at the bottom of http://www.tonyslattery.com/). Lupin 09:13, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
You just beat me to deleting the April Fool. If we can't have a joke on London Congestion Charge I don't think we should have one on the front page. Mintguy (T)
Hi Pcb21, just like to say thanks for editing the Denise Lewis page that I wrote.
Haven't got as adventurous as laying it it out properly yet.
many thanx User:Scraggy4
Thanks for your note Pete. :) I was surprised how much comment it created, especially since when it was first put on featured article candidates the first comment we got was that it wasn't notable enough! It's really nice working on an article which came together so well and so quickly, of course you gave it a great framework right at the start, which helps to much! There are a few more murdered British children who I think deserve articles (because the cases were high-profile), but I'm not about to rush to start them all at once (it's not the most uplifting topic). fabiform | talk 08:46, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Appreciate that you moved it, I'm still very new and don't want to annoy anyone by unduly wrecking someone's work calexico 23:32, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I noticed your change to Jimmy White. There doesn't seem to be much on individual snooker players, so I thought I'd expand what there is, and add some new articles - probably the current top 16, plus a few players from the past. I'd appreciate any comments on what I've done so far on Jimmy White, Tony Drago and Mark Williams, particularly the new infobox. I'm new to Wikipedia, and don't want to do too much without some sort of indication I'm headed in the right direction! Thanks, -- Auximines 15:08, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Many people are aware of the Rambot era when 35,000 articles were added to the database in about a week (October 2002). This increased article count by about 60%. However there was another blip in late February 2002 when around 5k articles were added, again in about the space of a week, this was another 25% or so rise. My question: what were these articles? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 10:19, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, thanks for the sarcasm, I appreciate that. How about having the MotD stuff at the end of the article, though? Otherwise it seems odd closing on a comment about screen ratios. -- bodnotbod 21:44, May 3, 2004 (UTC)
That's not my image. Mintguy (T) 09:01, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
imps, et al.
Hi. I don't think we've spoken before, though you've evidently been around quite a while. Did you feel I was overdoing it with the "roguish" description? Some might say that was non-NPOV. Deb 17:12, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for formatting the image on the WcDonald's page (which I couldn't figure out how to do). And I did put some copyright information on the image; sorry about not doing that sooner! - Litefantastic 18:51, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
I'm not sure that "nothing special about ECSU" qualifies as a good reason for zapping the page! Emmanuel College and ECSU are two entirely separate organisations, and while they maintain a close relationship, are independent of each other, and so they deserve separate entries. Peter Parkes.
Your image, Image:Geyser exploding 2 large.png, has been listed on Wikipedia:Images for deletion. It has been obsoleted by Image:Geyser exploding 2 large.jpg. Grendelkhan 00:57, 2004 May 12 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice and flattering comments on Talk:World Snooker Championship. I started writing snooker biographies a few weeks ago, and it's sort of snowballed, with others making corrections and additions. I can see why people get hooked on Wikipedia. There's now a new Wikipedia:WikiProject snooker if you're interested. -- Auximines 12:01, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
At the village pump you say that Slashdot is past its prime, based on site traffic data. I have no idea whether this is true, but using Alexa as a basis for this conclusion is deeply flawed. Aside from the normal bias of Alexa due to its relatively small userbase and the kind of people that install it, it is especially biased with a Linux-oriented "geek" website. Non-Windows users cannot install the toolbar, and the Windows users on Slashdot would be those least likely to use Alexa. Thus, it does not reflect the userbase of Slashdot at all. At most, you might be able to figure the interest of casual, non-techie's in the site but, again, that furtherless sample is likely skewed significantly. It is impossible to conclude from Alexa any changes in Slashdot's popularity. Centrx 01:14, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
I wrote that stub specifically because I was put off by the idea of a link to the concept of comic relief going to an article about the charity. None of the articles currently linking to the small 'r' version intend to link to the charity.
Either move it back, or list it on VfD as a dicdef. I don't appreciate your action, but I don't intend to get into an edit war over it. If neither has been done in a few days, I'm moving it back myself. -- Cyrius| ✎ 18:27, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
No apologies necessary. Thanks for noticing that this had already been done. -- Dominus 19:58, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
Well, Eloquence is conducting a poll here on what the title should be... presumably you'd be voting for the original title, "Abu Ghraib Prison Abuse Scandal"... why don't you take a look at the poll and express your opinion.
I'm hoping that maybe everyone could agree on "Abu Ghraib Prisoner Abuse". Dpbsmith 23:11, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
Just out of interest, is your name a CRSID? Marnanel 02:57, May 20, 2004 (UTC)/tjat2
You took the VfD header off Simpson vs. Savoie, but didn't delist it from Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Old. Given the weirdness of the debate, and Rossami's "6-8 weeks" for confirmation, I wasn't sure if this was intentional or not.
Because there were so many "Keep if verified" votes, I was going to stick it under VfD's ongoing discussions section and wait. I suspect that if Rossami comes back with an actual verification answer, it's going to shove the votes firmly to consensus in one direction or the other. -- Cyrius| ✎ 22:51, May 20, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your refactoring on Fathers 4 Justice and related pages; I think you've improved the articles considerably. — Matt 11:38, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
I've moved the above page to... err... there, rather than
Human Rights Act (UK), to follow the general practise of referring to Acts like that. Have deleted the (much much) older article to make way, rather than delete your history in a copy-and-paste thing. Hmm. Maybe the XML export/import thing would have been useful here. Might redo somewhat later. No matter.
I'm rambling. Just thought I should let you know directly.
James F.
(talk)
22:35, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
Italian history is not my field, sorry. Adam 14:20, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
I noticed your summary comment at Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom - saying that the category+infobox bug will be fixed "in a few hours". Do you know for sure it will be fixed in a few hours? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
Hi, I removed the mathematics category from Ramsey's theorem in line with my interpretation of Wikipedia:Categorization#Hierarchicalization. Seems to make sense to me so that Category:Mathematics doesn't get too cluttered. Lupin 12:46, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
I've decided to categorize my old talk by subject. The traditional method of archiving my date can be simulated by using Page History
Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! -- maveric149
Thanks for the info on HP. I can absolutely believe that it will be time consuming, but it's got to be done. I've spent a lot of time researching Florentin Smarandache as well. Oh well, it was a public holiday here and I didn't have much else to do. I recently put a disclaimer like the one you're talking about on pataphysical situation, but hopefully that article will be deleted altogether eventually, as will Cartographic Congress, I hope. -- Tim Starling 13:34 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Hi Pete, I have seen that you live in London. I lived for two years in London and I still miss the city... Fantasy 11:12 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)
I was THAT close of doing just what you did to "erdos", but then I noticed he was a painter, not a polymath. Better you than me ;) -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 16:05 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Actually I think erdos is a "painter" in the sense that it is a fractal painting programme for computers. Did some googling... -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 13:08 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)
PNG is for computer-generated diagrams and the like. Things with nice big blocks of constant colour. JPEG is much better for photos like Image:Geyser exploding 1 large.png. -- Tim Starling 08:55, Aug 16, 2003 (UTC)
I've converted two of them, are you going to do the rest, or will I do it? -- Tim Starling 08:58, Aug 16, 2003 (UTC)
Wow - nice photos! Alas, my digital camera can't take photos fast enough to get action shots like that. -- mav 09:09, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Hi Pete, when you updated the Geyser article with jpg instead of png could you please also update Wikipedia:Brilliant pictures and Wikipedia:Brilliant pictures visible? Thanks ;-) Fantasy 11:08, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Congratulations, you have just been made a sysop! You have volunteered for boring housekeeping activities which normal users sadly cannot participate in. Sysops basically can't do anything: They cannot delete pages arbitarily (only obvious junk like "jklasdfl,öasdf JOSH IS GAY"), they cannot protect pages in an edit war they are involved in, they cannot ban signed in users. What they can do is delete junk as it appears, ban anonymous vandals, remove pages that have been listed on Votes for deletion for more than a week, protect pages when asked to by other members, and help keep the few protected pages there are, among them the precious Main Page, up to date.
Note that almost everything you can do can be undone, so don't be too worried about making mistakes. You will find more information at Wikipedia:Administrators, please take a look before experimenting with your new powers. Drop me a message if there are any questions or if you want to stop being a sysop (could it be?). Have fun! —Eloquence 02:45, Aug 19, 2003 (UTC)
Hi! Thank you for your comments. I am not sure, but I think Fair use material is, while not encouraged, allowed on Wikipedia. www.pics4learning.com has a very slack image policy [2] and WP seems to be a perfect example of a site that is allowed to use their images - "intended to provide copyright friendly images for use by students and teachers in an educational setting". BL 12:07, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)
The Iceland series is great! I didn't even see it that good in Yellowstone! -- Menchi 19:47, Aug 23, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks Pete, I know some bird pics are going to be difficult to get, but I thought someone would have an image of this unmissable swan! Jim
lol.. it's alright no harm done... i do stuff like that all the time :-) Evil saltine 14:24, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Nice Sperm Whale - you do a lot more research than me! Jim
About George Thomas: it looks like some people didn't read the edit summary of your original response. ;-) Good call. Cheers, Cyan 13:09, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I have put the sources of WINOR here (zip file). Needs wxWindows to run; project file is for DevCpp. Good luck! -- Magnus Manske 12:41, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)
FYI re Talk:Weblog: I fixed the edit history thing. :-) -- Cyan 16:12, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Indeed it does, Pete. Unfortunately, I don't even remember adding the picture, so the only thing I know about it is what I wrote at the time in the edit summary. I assume that I found it through Google. I'm contributing less text these days because I'm spending a great deal of time taking photographs - but birds, not whales. Not many whales in inland Australia! Best -- Tony ( Tannin)
Pete:
It may well be a joke, but it's also true. See, eg, talk:Rachel Corrie and talk:Images of Rachel Corrie. If you believe that Lir is a troll, that's fine, but always best to base such judgements on the facts. :) Martin 17:30, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hello, Mr. Pete. I was just wondering what you had against the recently added bits on the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion page. I always found the boilerplate text, in particular, to be very useful, as I could copy and paste it straight from there onto any pages that needed it. I don't suppose it can be anything to do with space considerations, can it? Because that text only took up about 0.2% of the page, you know... ;) -- Oliver P. 11:55, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)
P.S. - Thought of anything to add to the Selwyn College, Cambridge page, yet? :)
Thanks for the compliment. Your creative spelling of his name ("the very good on article on Fritz Speigl") shows me I was right in including the information contained in the last sentence of the article. :) All the best, -- KF 18:16, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hello. It seems that you are an extremely valuable contributer to Wikipedia, but I have not made your acquaintence yet. I would like to introduce myself to you and wish you the best. By the way, could you give me that python script you were talking about on Wikipedia:Village pump? Thank you in advance, Alexandros 04:10, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to comment on my Concorde pic, I apppreciate it. Thank goodness the pic came out so well because that was the last ten seconds of Concorde flight EVER!
I live about ten miles from Filton and estimate that about 5000 people were at the runway.
Adrian Pingstone 13:39, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Heh, I was going to move the Rachel Scott stuff too - you did it seconds before me! Good call, and thanks for helping with the housework. :) Martin 00:48, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Just because you don't like an edit, is not sufficient reason to revert it. Lirath Q. Pynnor
Thanks for help on Charles Ingram. Still needs more work from me - DoB, career etc. Mervyn.
Re: thank you to that person whose name I unfortunately can't remember right now - very imaginative! - I think you're talking about User:Dori? See User talk:Dori#Signatures Dysprosia 06:00, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Good to see that others are also interrested in having the redistributors of wikipedia material comply with the GFDL. See Wikipedia:Sites that use Wikipedia for content#wordIQ for the response I received. -- snoyes 15:43, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for catching that!... -- Viajero 15:56, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Do you think anyone would object to this idea?
General Points Whenever possible, headings and a table of contents should be included.
Please consider adding the following boilerplate text at the end of your articles and the top of their Talk page.
This article is part of WikiProject Poetry. Please read the guidelines set out there before editing the page.
I don't want to include it if other users or admins will start deleting it. Bmills 10:14, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thanks. I put in on Wikipedia:Village pump for feedback. Nothing so far. Bmills 13:13, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hello, I enhanced your No_stubs.PNG image. Enjoy! Greenmountainboy 03:15, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Dear Pcb, check the Brilliant prose nominees talk page. I placed some thoughts there. Cheers, Muriel Victoria 16:11, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Re your changes to Downing Street, First Lord of the Treasury and Prime Minister are not and never have been the same. Both are usually held by the one person, but they need not be (the last time they were not was at the beginning of the 20th century). 10 Downing Street is the residence of the FLOTT, not the PM (as the sign on the door makes absolutely clear) and if the two posts are ever again separated the FLOTT will live in Number 10 and the PM will have to live elsewhere, as he had to do 100 years ago. Britain does not have a residence for the PM. FearÉIREANN 21:23, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I want to know about every vote. Not just VfD. And I HAVE missed votes. and it sucks, and makes me sad. Wikipolitics is important, and needs changes. Thats what I'm about on this one. Jack 10:10, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Thanks. I guess who is or is not "successful" at any given point in time is very much a subjective judgment. By what yardstack is success measured? In Cherie Blair's case, is it because she has presumably high-profile clients, and charges accordingly? Or is it just to boost Tony Blair's image?. What if Cherie somehow fell from grace and was able to sustain only an average practice, enough to keep a roof over her head but no longer with high-profile clients and not particularly newsworthy in its own right? Would you still call her "successful" then? If somebody is not described as "successful", people do not immediately jump to the conclusion that they have somehow "failed", so the successful tag adds no value, and is simply unnecessary waffle. Hilary Swank won the Best Actress Oscar a couple of years ago - one can't get a much higher industry accolade than that, so she is undoubtedly "successful" in the eyes of her peers - but her public profile is so low and her films so non-box office that most people would probably say "Hilary who?". I haven't checked, but I'd bet a million dollars her entry in Wikipedia (if there is one) does not describe her as "a successful American actress", but simply "an American actress". Basically, Wikipedia is about factual information - describing somebody as "successful" (or anything else like that) is not factual, but simply somebody's opinion - and it also smacks of marketing hype which also goes against the grain in this context. I don't propose to remove it, but I still think this has no real place here. Cheers for Christmas JackofOz 23:20, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
This is where we start to enter into a philosophical minefield. Is Tony Blair the UK PM, or is it only somebody's subjective opinion that he is the UK PM? What is and is not factual is sometimes very difficult to determine - and until there is virtually universal agreement on a particular point, it will remain in the realm of opinion, supposition, hearsay, hypothesis, etc. And that's where we're talking about "historical" information. It's a whole different ball-game again when we get into the area of subjective attributes. Writers and communicators generally need to be extraordinarily careful about using adjectives to describe people, and should be sparing with use of the verb "to be". What a person did is one thing, that might be recorded on film for example (and even then we can have arguments about what really happened) - but what kind of person they are/were is not possible to pin down outside each individual observer's mind. For example, by general consensus there really was a King of Macedon called Alexander III, who is usually referred to as "Alexander the Great", but does that title alone prove that he was a "great" king or a "great" individual? I doubt it. You might think he was great, I might disagree. Who's right? Nobody. Who's wrong? Nobody. Even if you think that only a crackpot would argue against the saintly attributes of Mother Teresa, that does not mean that the "crackpot" is ipso facto wrong. The point is that there simply is no universally accepted measure of such things as "great", "successful", "evil" etc etc - which is why they are and will continue to remain fundamentally subjective, regardless of how many people you may find to agree with you. (Yes, I can ramble on as well as the next man, as is by now probably painfully obvious) JackofOz 01:48, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Dunno about the Redd Foxx photo - I snagged two versions from a couple places, and cleaned them up substantially in photoshop. It looks like that was all deleted. Just getting back to here - reading old mail, etc.- 戴眩sv
Hi, thanks for your clearing up the species of Bottlenose Dolphin. Just one question: is T. gillii considered to be a subspecies of T. truncatus or of T. aduncus? Thanks, AxelBoldt 15:33, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)
See my comment at the end of Wikipedia:Sites that use Wikipedia for content#wordIQ. -- mav 05:20, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What's that "prototype wiki-text to PDF converter"? Is that free? -- Yacht ( Talk) Q 02:34, Jan 27, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for Wikipedia:Possible misuses of admin privileges - I think (unfortunately) somebody had to do it, and you did a good job. -- Camembert
This whole thing is, I think, rather tricky. As I personally consider Jack a kind of low-grade troll, I'd much rather have ignored him completely. However, the ill-advised nomination made that more-or-less impossible. I restored the comments manually (not reverting, yr comment is still there) because one of his favourite tactics is to delete talk that shows him in a bad light. The last thing the community needs is for him to be able to claim precedent for that kind of thing. I feel it is vital that any dealings with Jack are not only by the book, but are seen to be so. However, I fully understand that you may not see any of this the same way. Bmills 13:56, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I am intruiged by Bmills statement regarding my "favourite tactics". Can he cite any circumstance of me having done this? The only thing I can think of is in regards to CbU, and I never deleted any talk there, but rather deleted repitition of it (tannin went and cut and pasted anything bad said about me on there from other entries, and put them into his complaint against me). When angela asked me not to do that, saying it was unseemly, I never did it again, and even now, there is a rather (unfair and out of context) unflattering segment on CbU regarding me. Unsubstantiated accusations like these coming from admins are among the reasons why I am finding less and less of a place here for myself. Sam Spade 22:52, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Yes it does stand for article of the day. Currently, it is only being used on Sennheiser's homepage. Sennheiser 15:52, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
==You are now a sysop (on meta). welcome aboard== (from User:Bmills)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flowers
Belizian 02:55, 2004 Feb 8 (UTC)
Thanks! I recieved your message. Sennheiser ! 21:15, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I am claiming 3ψ as a reward for writing an article about Henry Dudeney and removing him from Wikipedia:Articles requested for over two years. I'll handle adjusting our WikiMoney accounts (you may reverse the transaction if for some reason you feel the article is not substantial enough to qualify for your reward). -- Michael Snow 23:10, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi Pete! Just getting back to you about the comment you left on my talk page. Your original is in black; my reply in red.
Hi David, I ended up reading your comment on Talk:Born again. Just a heads up, you don't have to log in to be a "proper" user. There are good anonymous contributors and bad logged-in users too. We have to judge people on their edits not on their logged-in-ness. If you haven't seen it already, take a quick squizz at Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. Everyone is new once, and different people take different amounts of time to understand what the implications of tiny little phrase "NPOV" really are. Moulding newcomers into fine contributors in a patient way is the only way Wikipedia can continue to grow. Thanks, Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 11:56, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC).
Hi Pete. I just saw your new Pygmy Sperm Whale entry and was reminded to drop by and say what a fantastic job you are doing with those whale and dolphin articles. Hard and careful work, long sustained. We should have a Wikipedia MVP award for you. Tannin
Thanks for taking the bull by the horns with the WordIQ bandwidth situation. It's all up to the guy who pays for it, of course, but that sort of trick has always struck me as a particularly perverse sort of vampirism (vampiracy?). Best, – Hajor 19:14, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi, just thought I'd let you know Pcb22 has been desysopped by E23. He recommends you don't change your preferences for a while though using the pcb22 name as without doing something with memcached, it might not work. Angela . 20:10, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
On User talk:Dino you noted,
— I got rid of the country reference, leaving a few small English fixes I did. Aint no big deal. — dino
Good work on the Big Mac index article. I have added it to the list of economics topics as you requested. mydogategodshat 21:55, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
You made some complaints about the way thumbnails look with the new image syntax, so I'm just letting you know a design competition has been launched to replace the gray border and icon. You can add your suggestions till March 15, or just vote on other people's suggestions after that date: meta:Image Box. :) fabiform | talk 15:26, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the message on my talk page. Yes, I have taken some time away from editing Wikipedia, as I found that some aspects of it were annoying me too much, and I wasn't really enjoying working here as much as I should do... However, I think it's safe to say that any absences of mine will always be temporary. I can never leave! :) Anyway, I see that you've done lots of good stuff while I've been inactive. I was wondering when Ant and Dec would get an article. :) -- Oliver P. 00:23, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hi. Just read your message about my IP address problem. Yes, I suppose I was quite unlucky (and poor, that's why I don't have broadband yet) :o( But I reeeeally appreciate your help. Thanks!! Rumpelstiltskin 11:55, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hi. I note you moved the article from "Key West, Florida" to " Key West". If I remember correctly, a while back it was decided to include the state for cities and towns in the USA, eg " Chicago, Illinois", although I can't currently find that on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places) (I'm probably looking in the wrong place). Personally, I'm fine with Key West at either name, as its an island in additon to a city; others might have other opinions. However, when you move a page I would like to reccomend that you help take care of fixing links to there in other articles. Note at What links here: Key West that more pages link to "Key West, Florida" than to "Key West". Best wishes, -- Infrogmation 15:25, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
From vfd:
Hi Pete, Thanks for your welcome! In a fit of activity I also added short entries for Sca Fell and Mickledore if you're interested. I presume from some of your other articles that you're not only a fellow Lake District fan but also a fellow mathematician, so we may bump into each other here quite a bit! I do have one piece of advice to seek - where should I respond to a comment on my talk page - on my talk page, on the other guy's talk page or by email? Best wishes, Cambyses 05:44, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Many thanks for the formatting changes Pete, I will number my replies in future to make it easier reading ( or is there a more accepted method here? :)13:52, 8 Mar 2004
Would wou mind taking a quick look at football (unqualified). I noticed that the history section of this article was getting bigger (and inaccurate) so I moved the stuff I'd written at history of football back into football article and completed it (I'd got bored writing the old article). Initially a dirty merge, so it needs a good copyedit from another pair of eyes. Cheers. Mintguy (T) 18:48, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)~
I don't mind being challenged on VfD. I think it makes for stronger decisions when there is an active discourse. But I don't think terse comments that "you don't know what you're talking about" are at all helpful. If you disagree, please say why and share your evidence. If you don't understand someone's point of view, ask a follow-up either on the page or via Talk. If you think I just misunderstood, please explain. I do try to not post complete nonsense and I try to give other Wikipedians the same benefit of the doubt. Flawed as VfD is, please help me keep the conversation civil. Thanks. Rossami 16:39, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I should apologize, too. VfD makes for thin skins. It is also difficult to have a long rational discussion because of the ever-present threat of edit conflicts. I did finally explain at length to the VfD entry for the 125 list. I'm still not sure where the confusion lies but I hope that this time all my assumptions are out in the open. Thanks. Rossami
Cool. It could do with some pictures before it becomes worthy of becoming a featured article. Mintguy (T)
You had a post to the Wikien-l mailing list which was "held for approval" -- I guess because you're not signed up correctly? Anyway, I sent it on to the list. -- Uncle Ed 18:37, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hey, there. I put some comments on the talk page of the recursion article re: existence proof. Your fears were well-grounded...the argument you gave is, essentially, circular. I wouldn't feel too bad about though...a lot of textbooks give about the same proof! Anyway, I didn't mean to sound too harsh. I hope I gave a reasonable short explanation why the proof doesn't work. I also gave a reference to where a correct proof can be found (it's one of the standard graduate algebra texts...or at least, was 20 years ago). I might return to the article and put something back in, but you can have a go first if you want. I have other things I should be finishing, anyway! :-/ take care, Revolver 01:39, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hello, Pete, I just wanted to pop in and thank you for your help at the article (as you guess, it is quite important for us in Spain). Pfortuny 18:13, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Hi Pcb,
I've amended the proposal on 24 hour bans for edit wars. In short, the amendment calls for a quickpoll to take place before any such ban can be implemented. If you support this, I'd like you to add your vote in favor to the 24 hour ban vote, with the comment "with quickpolls".
Please also participate in the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Quickpolls. —Eloquence 22:16, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)
Why have we suddenly got two Talk archives at the Madrid attacks article? Adam 12:14, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
So did I. I think we somehow archived the same Talk twice. Adam 12:27, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer in mavs talk page. It would be indeed more practical to use the boilerplate instead. See you around, Muriel 08:56, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Why is anything I do on my Talk page any of your business? RickK | Talk 01:55, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Thank you. I believe the more the merrier, as long as mary gets credit. Denni 00:19, 2004 Mar 20 (UTC)
From the pump: It would've been polite to tell the original uploader about changes you made to a photograph from their private collection. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 08:19, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Yeah that was my first edit, and I realised afterwards how to do it properly... Still learning... Thanks for fixing :-) Ned 13:05, 21 Mar 2004 (GMT)
On Wikipedia:Peer review, you posted a request for comment on Jamie Bulger. I thought that was a well-written and balanced article on a very difficult topic. I only made two very minor changes.
I have one additional thought, but would like your thoughts on how to link it properly. In the article, you use the term "tariff" to describe time served. (At least that's what I assumed from the context.) That is not the common usage in the US. Rather than clutter up the article with a definition, I wanted to just link the first usage, but tariff is not right, tariff (disambiguation) would have to be restructured and Wiktionary:Tariff does not yet exist. Since it's outside my experience (I'm assuming this is a British English usage), I am reluctant to meddle. Rossami 22:54, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
D'oh! Lorraine Kelly was my fault. Jiang posted an anon's contribution list under wikify (we were supposed to know that meant all its contribs needed wikifying), but that confused Mark R. and myself, and Mark asked for it to be replaced. I remembered seeing an unwikified article earlier, jumped to it, saw it was still unwikified, and listed it. I had checked one of its phrases on Google and got no hits, so I'd thought it wasn't copyvio. My mistake! Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. :-) Jwrosenzweig 00:54, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
When you delete an article, you need to delete its corresponding talk page, click on "what links here" for both the article and its corresponding talk page and delete any (now empty) redirects. If the article being deleted is on an obscure subject, then also orphan the article. For example, Talk:Maudlyn A. White should be deleted and [Maudlyn A. White] should be orphaned by delinking the name from the casualities. -- Jia ng 01:55, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings because that is far from my intent. Having more admins cleaning up that overburdened page is a good thing. But how else am I supposed to convey this to you? Sit silently and watch? -- Jia ng 19:52, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I was not aware that you had taken a 4 day break. I saw your name in recent changes and registered that I last contacted you 4 days ago. I checked your talk page to see Talk:Maudlyn A. White still there, so I thought you might have read the message below and missed mine. Well...it is still there. I wasn't trying to be rude then, but I am now. Should I plead and beg you or just do it myself?
If a talk page is not deleted, it should be posted on the archives, not left an orphan never to be found... -- Jia ng 01:04, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Repeat: If the article being deleted is on an obscure subject, then also orphan the article. I never said every deleted article should be orphaned. You are correct on that point. Empty redirects, however, show up blue and need to be deleted. It's pointless to leave junk talk pages. -- Jia ng 01:53, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I noticed on Wikipedia:Requested articles/UK people that you emailed webmaster@tonyslattery.com for permission to use material without any joy. Thought I'd suggest another email address to try: admin@micaelita.net (linked to from [4], from a link at the bottom of http://www.tonyslattery.com/). Lupin 09:13, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
You just beat me to deleting the April Fool. If we can't have a joke on London Congestion Charge I don't think we should have one on the front page. Mintguy (T)
Hi Pcb21, just like to say thanks for editing the Denise Lewis page that I wrote.
Haven't got as adventurous as laying it it out properly yet.
many thanx User:Scraggy4
Thanks for your note Pete. :) I was surprised how much comment it created, especially since when it was first put on featured article candidates the first comment we got was that it wasn't notable enough! It's really nice working on an article which came together so well and so quickly, of course you gave it a great framework right at the start, which helps to much! There are a few more murdered British children who I think deserve articles (because the cases were high-profile), but I'm not about to rush to start them all at once (it's not the most uplifting topic). fabiform | talk 08:46, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Appreciate that you moved it, I'm still very new and don't want to annoy anyone by unduly wrecking someone's work calexico 23:32, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I noticed your change to Jimmy White. There doesn't seem to be much on individual snooker players, so I thought I'd expand what there is, and add some new articles - probably the current top 16, plus a few players from the past. I'd appreciate any comments on what I've done so far on Jimmy White, Tony Drago and Mark Williams, particularly the new infobox. I'm new to Wikipedia, and don't want to do too much without some sort of indication I'm headed in the right direction! Thanks, -- Auximines 15:08, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Many people are aware of the Rambot era when 35,000 articles were added to the database in about a week (October 2002). This increased article count by about 60%. However there was another blip in late February 2002 when around 5k articles were added, again in about the space of a week, this was another 25% or so rise. My question: what were these articles? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 10:19, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, thanks for the sarcasm, I appreciate that. How about having the MotD stuff at the end of the article, though? Otherwise it seems odd closing on a comment about screen ratios. -- bodnotbod 21:44, May 3, 2004 (UTC)
That's not my image. Mintguy (T) 09:01, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
imps, et al.
Hi. I don't think we've spoken before, though you've evidently been around quite a while. Did you feel I was overdoing it with the "roguish" description? Some might say that was non-NPOV. Deb 17:12, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for formatting the image on the WcDonald's page (which I couldn't figure out how to do). And I did put some copyright information on the image; sorry about not doing that sooner! - Litefantastic 18:51, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
I'm not sure that "nothing special about ECSU" qualifies as a good reason for zapping the page! Emmanuel College and ECSU are two entirely separate organisations, and while they maintain a close relationship, are independent of each other, and so they deserve separate entries. Peter Parkes.
Your image, Image:Geyser exploding 2 large.png, has been listed on Wikipedia:Images for deletion. It has been obsoleted by Image:Geyser exploding 2 large.jpg. Grendelkhan 00:57, 2004 May 12 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice and flattering comments on Talk:World Snooker Championship. I started writing snooker biographies a few weeks ago, and it's sort of snowballed, with others making corrections and additions. I can see why people get hooked on Wikipedia. There's now a new Wikipedia:WikiProject snooker if you're interested. -- Auximines 12:01, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
At the village pump you say that Slashdot is past its prime, based on site traffic data. I have no idea whether this is true, but using Alexa as a basis for this conclusion is deeply flawed. Aside from the normal bias of Alexa due to its relatively small userbase and the kind of people that install it, it is especially biased with a Linux-oriented "geek" website. Non-Windows users cannot install the toolbar, and the Windows users on Slashdot would be those least likely to use Alexa. Thus, it does not reflect the userbase of Slashdot at all. At most, you might be able to figure the interest of casual, non-techie's in the site but, again, that furtherless sample is likely skewed significantly. It is impossible to conclude from Alexa any changes in Slashdot's popularity. Centrx 01:14, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
I wrote that stub specifically because I was put off by the idea of a link to the concept of comic relief going to an article about the charity. None of the articles currently linking to the small 'r' version intend to link to the charity.
Either move it back, or list it on VfD as a dicdef. I don't appreciate your action, but I don't intend to get into an edit war over it. If neither has been done in a few days, I'm moving it back myself. -- Cyrius| ✎ 18:27, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
No apologies necessary. Thanks for noticing that this had already been done. -- Dominus 19:58, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
Well, Eloquence is conducting a poll here on what the title should be... presumably you'd be voting for the original title, "Abu Ghraib Prison Abuse Scandal"... why don't you take a look at the poll and express your opinion.
I'm hoping that maybe everyone could agree on "Abu Ghraib Prisoner Abuse". Dpbsmith 23:11, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
Just out of interest, is your name a CRSID? Marnanel 02:57, May 20, 2004 (UTC)/tjat2
You took the VfD header off Simpson vs. Savoie, but didn't delist it from Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Old. Given the weirdness of the debate, and Rossami's "6-8 weeks" for confirmation, I wasn't sure if this was intentional or not.
Because there were so many "Keep if verified" votes, I was going to stick it under VfD's ongoing discussions section and wait. I suspect that if Rossami comes back with an actual verification answer, it's going to shove the votes firmly to consensus in one direction or the other. -- Cyrius| ✎ 22:51, May 20, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your refactoring on Fathers 4 Justice and related pages; I think you've improved the articles considerably. — Matt 11:38, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
I've moved the above page to... err... there, rather than
Human Rights Act (UK), to follow the general practise of referring to Acts like that. Have deleted the (much much) older article to make way, rather than delete your history in a copy-and-paste thing. Hmm. Maybe the XML export/import thing would have been useful here. Might redo somewhat later. No matter.
I'm rambling. Just thought I should let you know directly.
James F.
(talk)
22:35, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
Italian history is not my field, sorry. Adam 14:20, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
I noticed your summary comment at Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom - saying that the category+infobox bug will be fixed "in a few hours". Do you know for sure it will be fixed in a few hours? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
Hi, I removed the mathematics category from Ramsey's theorem in line with my interpretation of Wikipedia:Categorization#Hierarchicalization. Seems to make sense to me so that Category:Mathematics doesn't get too cluttered. Lupin 12:46, 31 May 2004 (UTC)