Hi Spring, thanks for the welcome and for the rose! It's nice to be back, even if only partially. I'm sorry to hear that your father passed away, and you have my deepest condolences. You and your family are in my prayers. -- Kyok o 12:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm going to convert from png to jpeg to make load time a lot faster, no worries :) I'm still working on the subpages, right now things are mostly redirects... Gotta love vacation, you get time to work on stuff like this! <3 -- Editor at Large • talk 00:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
You best get a plane to Cardiff, because you're getting a cameo on Doctor Who... starring Franz Liszt! :P Will ( talk) 00:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Um, Spring? How do you always know when I'm logging on? Twice today I've had a message from you pop up on the screen within two minutes of me showing up....spooky... K. Lásztocska 01:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
What, you thought I was István? I'm still confused. K. Lásztocska 01:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
And cross the creaking rope bridge to FAC? (And, while we're at it, which one of us crosssing the bridge is Michael Caine and which is Sean Connery—that is, if you remember that film? :-) ) Jonyungk 07:02, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Are those <pre> and <nowiki> tags supposed to be there? — $PЯINGεrαgђ 17:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
take another look at the intro section of the Tchaikovsky article. It's still four paragraphs but the info you (and I) really didn't want to go is BA-A-A-ACK. Jonyungk 02:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a lot :) Frankly, I was not expecting this, especially at a time I have been mainly inactive due to some off-wiki preoccupations. Thanks again, though. See you around soon.-- soum talk 11:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello Springeragh, the Cabal Conquering Cabal has officially taken all of your pages. Resistance is futile. Instead join us in conquering all the other cabals... CCC Cheers, Lig hts 12:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
GTpls? Will ( talk) 21:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Started doing a final polish on Tchaikovsky. Innocent enough, right? Seemed like there were some continuity gaps in the early sections. Remember when you warned me not to cut out too much? So for all the words I cut out in polishing, I've been adding at least as many back from previous drafts to plug the gaps. The article flows better now when I read it, and at 42K it's still a manageable size. Let me know what you think, though. I'd really appreciate it. Thanks a lot! Jonyungk 00:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks man, I'm making do with what I've got. The Bluetac works sporadically, but I think the message up top is really freaking people out. I've got like, two messages this week. Also, I'm listening to the A-Team theme ong. Goes like this:
Do do - Do Dodo Do Doodo! Dododo Do Do Dodododo!
Do do do , DO DO DO DO DOO! Do do do , DO DO DO DO DOOOO!
Cheer! Dfrg. msc 08:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
if you're ever in email contact with Antandrus much, just FYI I've been communicating w/ him about a certain issue you and I have both been involved in. La commedia may soon be finita. K. Lásztocska 04:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
FYI I want to use wikimail as little as possible--it's always felt kind of dishonest and sneaky to me, plus after being known only as K. Lastochka for so long, revealing my real name can get surreal. :) I'll probably disable wikimail as soon as first steps have been taken (i.e. hopefully tomorrow.) K. Lásztocska 04:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Not immediately--I don't really like the idea of protected user talk pages. Perhaps soon though, if the situation persists after the protection of Liszt and Thalberg. K. Lásztocska 18:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
BTW, the Irish guy we were talking about was some guy with just an IP address here. He was pestering us about a "Roma and Crime" section, so I finally said, "OK, OK, I'll finish (re)writing that section once and for all!" Now he seems happy. For now, anyway :) -- Kuaichik 01:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the cookies. :) I'm OK, just a little fried and lacking in motivation. I'll be back to normal probably in a matter of days. K. Lásztocska 12:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
It is a non-notable company. There were no third party sources indicating notability, see WP:CORP and WP:N and WP:RS. If you think that such sources can be found, I'd restore it to a user subpage for you to improve it, but most local coffee houses, and coffee companies aren't notable. Carlossuarez46 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Check out the latter half of the Tchaikovsky article. Found some great things to flesh it out but don't want to ring too many alarm bells. Jonyungk 00:25, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, technically he has voted. He voted to abstain and said he didn't care one way or the other so now everyone had to judge his article by its merits rather than what he wanted. Did you read that? I thought that was quite cool. Would that all articles subject did thus! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I noticed your question about whether I played runescape a few weeks ago, but you've recently returned from hiatus, so here I am. No, I haven't played runescape. Why? -- Iriseyes 17:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Now to get Theresa to block some Matthew-haters for me. Will ( talk) 23:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the userpage msg - I forgot to watch the work page so would've otherwise missed your reply. Unfortunately I'm not the biggest Elgar fan, so don't have any recordings to make a median figure from, and unlike Bruckner/Mahler, it probably won't be easy to find anyone who cares enough about total times to have made a list of them online. I'll see if I can ask some people who may have recording(s) of the work to check the movement times, and if I find any I'll post them on the talk page, and can begin a collection of results for people to see where we got the median figures from. Le the 22:23, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Can't speak for Jeeny, of course, and I'm not sure you've followed this whole saga for the last few weeks. In a nutshell, the situation now borders on the ridiculous (I won't go into the details). I try to stay as level-headed as I can in such a frustrating situation, and I decided I'd rather try to laugh it off than get upset myself. I apologize if my comments lacked the necessary decorum, and I just hope you'll understand this was an exceptional situation where I'd rather make a joke about it than start the cycle of recriminations: it's way less disruptive and it decreases the steam pressure all the same. Thank you for your concern, though. :) -- Ramdrake 23:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
After the last round of critics from peer review, I first reverted the Tchaikovsky article to a state before I started working on it, then corrected some facts in the early years with info from my last version. Evidently, opinions are not facts, neutral viewpoint does not mean NPOV, and I am an essay writer, not a Wikipedian. That does not mean I didn't do a good job—in fact, I may have done a great job. But it does mean there's no way what I wrote would make featured article status or even be acceptable under Wikipedia's criteria. Sorry to bail on you like this, but I think it's for the article's best, as well as my own. Jonyungk 19:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
...I know you meant well by commenting out A.S.'s remark, but I think that's probably not a very good way to handle the matter. First of all, I usually don't like mass deletions of incivil comments in the midst of an ongoing debate anyway (it feels like hiding the evidence), second of all deleting his comments will probably just piss him off and make him even grumpier, and then it's a vicious cycle and we're back where we were last month. K. Lásztocska 04:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Well yeah, that's just my personal take on that issue. Think like Machiavelli for a minute (and Scholar, if you're reading this, I am now speaking in hypothetical terms and not applying any of these adjectives to you personally): if someone makes a complete twit of himself, why should the evidence of such behavior be shoved out of sight? Why not have their obnoxious comments in full view of everyone and thus make them accountable for said comments?
As for the scholar, I figure we should just be as cool and businesslike as possible with him, and not respond in kind to his baiting. István mentioned a great quote once about fighting with internet trolls: "Never mud wrestle a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig likes it." :-D K. Lásztocska 04:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Spring! I saw your post on AfD; good to see you back on deck again. (Sorry about your loss.) Have you had time to think about this matter? Regards, Pdfpdf 12:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I'm afraid that purple, (particularly the shade that your talk page comes up on my screen), will never be my favourite colour. Oh well. C'est la vie. Pdfpdf 12:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm so sorry that I forgot that!. No worries - it was never urgent - but thanks for the politeness, and thanks for the response. Unfortunately-for-me, it didn't change my impression that being an administrator means you have to put up with vandalism, unpleasantness, endless challenges and endless requests for explanations of "stuff" that should be obvious. As I concluded earlier, I can see the costs, but (due, no doubt, to my continuing ignorance) I can't see the benefits.
However, it doesn't really matter what I think, particularly as I have no interest in being an admin. What really matters is: you are the one who wants to be an admin, and you can see benefits (which presumably out-weigh the costs). So, Good Luck and Best Wishes in your "quest". Cheers, Pdfpdf 10:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi again. I think I missed something somewhere; I'm getting the impression that purple has a special significance for you? Pdfpdf 10:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I agree that pink would not be an improvement, and a white font might be - but I'll reserve my judgement on the latter. Pdfpdf 10:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I have to admit that hearing this doesn't surprise me one little bit ;-) Pdfpdf 08:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Spring, thanks for the welcome and for the rose! It's nice to be back, even if only partially. I'm sorry to hear that your father passed away, and you have my deepest condolences. You and your family are in my prayers. -- Kyok o 12:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm going to convert from png to jpeg to make load time a lot faster, no worries :) I'm still working on the subpages, right now things are mostly redirects... Gotta love vacation, you get time to work on stuff like this! <3 -- Editor at Large • talk 00:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
You best get a plane to Cardiff, because you're getting a cameo on Doctor Who... starring Franz Liszt! :P Will ( talk) 00:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Um, Spring? How do you always know when I'm logging on? Twice today I've had a message from you pop up on the screen within two minutes of me showing up....spooky... K. Lásztocska 01:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
What, you thought I was István? I'm still confused. K. Lásztocska 01:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
And cross the creaking rope bridge to FAC? (And, while we're at it, which one of us crosssing the bridge is Michael Caine and which is Sean Connery—that is, if you remember that film? :-) ) Jonyungk 07:02, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Are those <pre> and <nowiki> tags supposed to be there? — $PЯINGεrαgђ 17:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
take another look at the intro section of the Tchaikovsky article. It's still four paragraphs but the info you (and I) really didn't want to go is BA-A-A-ACK. Jonyungk 02:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a lot :) Frankly, I was not expecting this, especially at a time I have been mainly inactive due to some off-wiki preoccupations. Thanks again, though. See you around soon.-- soum talk 11:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello Springeragh, the Cabal Conquering Cabal has officially taken all of your pages. Resistance is futile. Instead join us in conquering all the other cabals... CCC Cheers, Lig hts 12:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
GTpls? Will ( talk) 21:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Started doing a final polish on Tchaikovsky. Innocent enough, right? Seemed like there were some continuity gaps in the early sections. Remember when you warned me not to cut out too much? So for all the words I cut out in polishing, I've been adding at least as many back from previous drafts to plug the gaps. The article flows better now when I read it, and at 42K it's still a manageable size. Let me know what you think, though. I'd really appreciate it. Thanks a lot! Jonyungk 00:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks man, I'm making do with what I've got. The Bluetac works sporadically, but I think the message up top is really freaking people out. I've got like, two messages this week. Also, I'm listening to the A-Team theme ong. Goes like this:
Do do - Do Dodo Do Doodo! Dododo Do Do Dodododo!
Do do do , DO DO DO DO DOO! Do do do , DO DO DO DO DOOOO!
Cheer! Dfrg. msc 08:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
if you're ever in email contact with Antandrus much, just FYI I've been communicating w/ him about a certain issue you and I have both been involved in. La commedia may soon be finita. K. Lásztocska 04:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
FYI I want to use wikimail as little as possible--it's always felt kind of dishonest and sneaky to me, plus after being known only as K. Lastochka for so long, revealing my real name can get surreal. :) I'll probably disable wikimail as soon as first steps have been taken (i.e. hopefully tomorrow.) K. Lásztocska 04:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Not immediately--I don't really like the idea of protected user talk pages. Perhaps soon though, if the situation persists after the protection of Liszt and Thalberg. K. Lásztocska 18:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
BTW, the Irish guy we were talking about was some guy with just an IP address here. He was pestering us about a "Roma and Crime" section, so I finally said, "OK, OK, I'll finish (re)writing that section once and for all!" Now he seems happy. For now, anyway :) -- Kuaichik 01:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the cookies. :) I'm OK, just a little fried and lacking in motivation. I'll be back to normal probably in a matter of days. K. Lásztocska 12:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
It is a non-notable company. There were no third party sources indicating notability, see WP:CORP and WP:N and WP:RS. If you think that such sources can be found, I'd restore it to a user subpage for you to improve it, but most local coffee houses, and coffee companies aren't notable. Carlossuarez46 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Check out the latter half of the Tchaikovsky article. Found some great things to flesh it out but don't want to ring too many alarm bells. Jonyungk 00:25, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, technically he has voted. He voted to abstain and said he didn't care one way or the other so now everyone had to judge his article by its merits rather than what he wanted. Did you read that? I thought that was quite cool. Would that all articles subject did thus! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I noticed your question about whether I played runescape a few weeks ago, but you've recently returned from hiatus, so here I am. No, I haven't played runescape. Why? -- Iriseyes 17:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Now to get Theresa to block some Matthew-haters for me. Will ( talk) 23:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the userpage msg - I forgot to watch the work page so would've otherwise missed your reply. Unfortunately I'm not the biggest Elgar fan, so don't have any recordings to make a median figure from, and unlike Bruckner/Mahler, it probably won't be easy to find anyone who cares enough about total times to have made a list of them online. I'll see if I can ask some people who may have recording(s) of the work to check the movement times, and if I find any I'll post them on the talk page, and can begin a collection of results for people to see where we got the median figures from. Le the 22:23, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Can't speak for Jeeny, of course, and I'm not sure you've followed this whole saga for the last few weeks. In a nutshell, the situation now borders on the ridiculous (I won't go into the details). I try to stay as level-headed as I can in such a frustrating situation, and I decided I'd rather try to laugh it off than get upset myself. I apologize if my comments lacked the necessary decorum, and I just hope you'll understand this was an exceptional situation where I'd rather make a joke about it than start the cycle of recriminations: it's way less disruptive and it decreases the steam pressure all the same. Thank you for your concern, though. :) -- Ramdrake 23:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
After the last round of critics from peer review, I first reverted the Tchaikovsky article to a state before I started working on it, then corrected some facts in the early years with info from my last version. Evidently, opinions are not facts, neutral viewpoint does not mean NPOV, and I am an essay writer, not a Wikipedian. That does not mean I didn't do a good job—in fact, I may have done a great job. But it does mean there's no way what I wrote would make featured article status or even be acceptable under Wikipedia's criteria. Sorry to bail on you like this, but I think it's for the article's best, as well as my own. Jonyungk 19:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
...I know you meant well by commenting out A.S.'s remark, but I think that's probably not a very good way to handle the matter. First of all, I usually don't like mass deletions of incivil comments in the midst of an ongoing debate anyway (it feels like hiding the evidence), second of all deleting his comments will probably just piss him off and make him even grumpier, and then it's a vicious cycle and we're back where we were last month. K. Lásztocska 04:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Well yeah, that's just my personal take on that issue. Think like Machiavelli for a minute (and Scholar, if you're reading this, I am now speaking in hypothetical terms and not applying any of these adjectives to you personally): if someone makes a complete twit of himself, why should the evidence of such behavior be shoved out of sight? Why not have their obnoxious comments in full view of everyone and thus make them accountable for said comments?
As for the scholar, I figure we should just be as cool and businesslike as possible with him, and not respond in kind to his baiting. István mentioned a great quote once about fighting with internet trolls: "Never mud wrestle a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig likes it." :-D K. Lásztocska 04:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Spring! I saw your post on AfD; good to see you back on deck again. (Sorry about your loss.) Have you had time to think about this matter? Regards, Pdfpdf 12:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I'm afraid that purple, (particularly the shade that your talk page comes up on my screen), will never be my favourite colour. Oh well. C'est la vie. Pdfpdf 12:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm so sorry that I forgot that!. No worries - it was never urgent - but thanks for the politeness, and thanks for the response. Unfortunately-for-me, it didn't change my impression that being an administrator means you have to put up with vandalism, unpleasantness, endless challenges and endless requests for explanations of "stuff" that should be obvious. As I concluded earlier, I can see the costs, but (due, no doubt, to my continuing ignorance) I can't see the benefits.
However, it doesn't really matter what I think, particularly as I have no interest in being an admin. What really matters is: you are the one who wants to be an admin, and you can see benefits (which presumably out-weigh the costs). So, Good Luck and Best Wishes in your "quest". Cheers, Pdfpdf 10:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi again. I think I missed something somewhere; I'm getting the impression that purple has a special significance for you? Pdfpdf 10:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I agree that pink would not be an improvement, and a white font might be - but I'll reserve my judgement on the latter. Pdfpdf 10:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I have to admit that hearing this doesn't surprise me one little bit ;-) Pdfpdf 08:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)