text:
User talk:Dryguy

 * /Archive 1

Template:Fact
Thanks for the nod. dryguy 23:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I do think some of the points you were making in that discussion were valid, but by going to TfD, the only thing that was heard was "Don't delete that template!". --DragonHawk 00:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of similarities between Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy (second nomination)
Your analysis at the AfD has been altogether sagacious and cogent; you are to be commended. Joe 20:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Aw shucks, twerent nuthin'. (blush) dryguy 21:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Lincoln Kennedy Rewrite
I thank you very much for that rewrite. It truly created an article worthy of Wikipedia. I would just ask that you had waited for the AfD discussion to close, so as to not confuse the admin who has to determine whether or not to delete it. Thank you again though, I believe the article does not need to be deleted anymore. --kralahome 19:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your kind words. I believe that if you change your nom to a vote to keep, it will carry great weight with the admin who makes the final decision. dryguy 19:21, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Very good work on the rewrite. I'm always pleased when I get to change my "vote" to keep. I hope that you or others watchlist the article to prevent its reverting to a "didja know," but your changes were worthwhile and really did help. Geogre 20:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

JFK, AL and MrDolomite thank you!

 * Thanks for the note on my talk page, that had almost fallen off my radar. And I was pleasantly suprised on the fabulous improvements.  Certainly restored my WP:FAITH in the AfD process. — MrDolomite | Talk 23:46, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the very kind words. dryguy 23:51, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

L-K Markup
ach! sorry I missed that because I was in a rush. Thanks for fixing it!! --Errant Tmorton166(Talk)(Review me) 08:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Tfd
Sure. thanks for bringing the missing day to my attention. Unfortunately, I am very busy right now, and I will need trchnical help to close some of the nominations, so it might be a few days until all of the debates are closed. RyanG e rbil10 (Kick 'em in the dishpan!) 02:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Recent change to WP:CITE
I personally, support your change. I don't think anyone ever asked for "every statement" to have an in-line cite, just enough to base WP:V meaning that important claims can be verified. For GA consideration, you just need enough to be considered well-referenced. Agne 00:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I object to the claim that the poll was "unanimous"
Subject line says all. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Semantics, in my opinion. A neutral and a non-vote aren't opposing votes. dryguy 01:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Semantics, indeed. And the dictionary says: "u·nan·i·mous ADJECTIVE: 1. Sharing the same opinions or views; being in complete harmony or accord. 2. Based on or characterized by complete assent or agreement." That's not a fair description of the situation. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It is fair enough. In any event, I can't change the comment line. dryguy 01:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:CHILL
Hey, I redirected WP:CHILL back to its original spot, both to preserve the integrity of debates where it was previously used (of which there are many) and because it is as relevant where it was as anywhere else. As the ... mastodon page already has 4 shortcuts (including WP:CHILLOUT), and shortcuts are available on a first-come basis, I think the WP wheels will keep on turning. Kylu and I discussed the need for complimentary articles a while back and I'm glad to see CHILLOUT has found an appropriate home. I've been contributing less often for a couple of months thanks to some interesting real-life stuff, hence the reason I haven't noticed this before. Cheers,  Dei zio  talk 22:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/The Irascible Professor (second nomination)
Hey, I'm not gonna fuss about if you think its worth keeping but I hope you realise that the reslist was mainly due to the problems with the original nom. If the comments of users with potential conflicts of interest or odd voting patterns are removed, it leaves a 'score' of 2 for delete and no keep votes; to my mind, the sort of discussion that would be relisted for more input. --Robdurbar 10:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup template messages
Please stop putting the unreferenced template on the talk page of Inheritance semantics. Template messages/Cleanup clearly states that ...should be added to the articles needing cleanup, not to their talk pages.... The OR template is a little more open to interpretation. But I think the fact that it directs readers to the talk page (implying they aren't there already) is a pretty good indication that it is intended to be placed in the article rather than the talk page. --Allan McInnes (talk) 05:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Related discussion

Many editors prefer to have cleanup tags placed on articles' talk pages. dryguy 19:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

 * The fact that some users prefer to insert the tags in a manner that defies consensus doesn't mean that we should instruct them to. —David Levy 20:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

 * There is no consensus to have tags go on article pages. dryguy 21:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Consensus != unanimity. It is a long-standing, well-established, discussion-backed convention to place these tags on article pages. They are not talk page templates. —David Levy 23:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Somone removed the language about talk pages on December 10. I don't see how that constitutes longstanding consensus. If you are referring to a discussion in which consensus was reached that I somehow missed, I would be much obliged if you could point me to it. dryguy 23:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Somone removed the language about talk pages on December 10. I don't see how that constitutes longstanding consensus.

 * You inserted the language in question on 12 November and 20 November, unilaterally overriding advice that had been in place since 20 March 2005.

 * If you are referring to a discussion in which consensus was reached that I somehow missed, I would be much obliged if you could point me to it.

 * I wasn't referring to one discussion in particular, but this issue has been discussed on various talk pages (such as those of some of the individual templates). I don't have any links handy, but these discussions should be findable.
 * The outcomes are evidenced by the cleanup templates themselves, most of which lack "CoffeeRoll" coloring (the standard talk page template scheme, as described at Talk page templates) and feature links to the articles' talk pages (as noted above by Allan McInnes). The few that don't fit this description are the ones for which consensus dictated talk page placement (because they pertain to relatively unimportant concerns that are of less interest to most readers).  —David Levy 00:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I appreciate your input. I'm aware there have been various discussions about where tags should go. What seems to me to be missing is the consensus to require templates to go on talk pages. There have been a number of discussions in which no consensus has been reached regarding the placement of meta-tags on article pages (these discussions are also findable). This was the reason for my edit of March 20, 2006. As to the claim that I did so "unilaterally"; this edit has gone without change or comment until it was removed for consistency with Cleanup resources. You are the first to object to my edit on the basis of its actual content. dryguy 00:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * You performed these edits in November (last month), not in March. Your language remained in place for 20 days (because I, among others, didn't notice the changes) until Ceros reverted for consistency with another page's correct advice.  (Notice that Ceros didn't edit the other page to match your advice).  You're attempting to construe those 20 days as implicit acceptance, despite the fact that the previous advice (for which you claim consensus doesn't exist) had been in place for 20 months before you altered it.  —David Levy 01:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Apologies for my dyslexic editing. You are correct that I made the change in November. You also mentioned the March edit which was still in my mind at the time I was writing above. In any event, there was no discussion for the March edit either, unless I missed it. Without discussion, there is no consensus. dryguy 01:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * That's patently false. If a convention is generally accepted by the community, that's consensus; no discussion is required.  The edit in question reflected such consensus, and it remained unchallenged for 20 months.  —David Levy 02:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Lack of discussion could just as easily mean that few editors care about this issue. In that case it is up to those who do to discuss it and come to consensus, regardless of the timeframe. dryguy 02:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry, but you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works.
 * To my knowledge, we haven't held a formal community discussion to determine the coloring of our articles' text and backgrounds, but that doesn't mean that no consensus exists and "few editors [would] care" if some users were to begin authoring articles with orange text on purple backgrounds. It's simply understood (and can be regarded as policy) that black-on-white is the correct format.  When this type of standard is deliberately followed by most editors, that's consensus.  —David Levy 03:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * You aren't the sole arbiter of how Wikipedia does or does not work. Nor does this comment really touch on anything we have discussed. The examples you give are set as software defaults by Wikipedia sysops. That's really irrelevant to what we are currently discussing. dryguy 03:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * You aren't the sole arbiter of how Wikipedia does or does not work.

 * Of course not. Feel free to ask some other experienced editors whether it's true that "without discussion, there is no consensus" (meaning that it's impossible for consensus to be established by observing the community's conventions) and that a lack of explicit discussion about a particular issue—even one for which a clear set of rules is applied by most users—means that "few editors care about this issue."  —David Levy 04:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I would be one of those experienced editors. You don't speak for me or any other experienced Wikipedia editor. dryguy 04:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, that's what I just wrote. I acknowledged that I am not "the sole arbiter of how Wikipedia does or does not work" and invited you to solicit the opinions of other experienced editors.  Are you actually reading my sentences, or are you picking out random phrases to criticize out-of-context?  —David Levy 03:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Nor does this comment really touch on anything we have discussed. The examples you give are set as software defaults by Wikipedia sysops.

 * Our software defaults are programmed by MediaWiki developers, not by Wikipedia sysops. (You can take my word on that one, given the fact that I am a Wikipedia sysop.)  Of course, a MediaWiki developer can also be a Wikipedia sysop, but that has no bearing on the software defaults.  —David Levy 04:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Again, utterly irrelevant to this discussion. dryguy 04:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I disagree. Irrespective of the validity of my analogy, your incorrect believe that Wikipedia sysops set the software defaults demonstrated your relative unfamiliarity with how Wikipedia works.  —David Levy 03:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Mediawiki allows the sysops to change the default settings that were set by the developers. Even if the sysops leave the defaults in place, that is the sysops choice, not the developers. To the user, those appear to be the Wikipedia defaults. dryguy 14:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Mediawiki allows the sysops to change the default settings that were set by the developers. Even if the sysops leave the defaults in place, that is the sysops choice, not the developers.

 * It is not a sysop right to determine Wikipedia's appearance. We possess the technical capability to make such changes, but it's our responsibility to do so as community consensus dictates.  (We can be "bold" in areas where such opinions have not been expressed, but we must respond appropriately to whatever reaction occurs.)

 * To the user, those appear to be the Wikipedia defaults.

 * Perhaps so, but it's incorrect to state that these traits are "set as software defaults by Wikipedia sysops." —David Levy 15:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * When changes are made, they are set by Wikipedia sysops, even if that is in response to community based consensus. dryguy 16:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Agreed. —David Levy 16:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Here is one of the discussions I was thinking of in which no consensus was reached. Again, I was not acting "unilaterally", but I was definitely removing a restriction to which I object, and for which there is no consensus. dryguy 00:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * You're pointing to a lack of consensus regarding a correct location for all article status templates. Again, discussions have occurred on the talk pages of individual templates, some of which do belong on talk pages (and are configured/documented accordingly).  —David Levy 01:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Cleanup tags are a subset of all meta tags. So far, you haven't cited any specific discussion that would convince me of your claim that there is consensus regarding the location of any cleanup tags, much less all of them. Anyway, if you are arguing that the discussion for all tags is not related to the discussion for a specific subset, then why do you also argue that if discussion for some cleanup tags indicates they belong on the article pages, then it follows that all cleanup tags belong on the article pages? dryguy 01:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I have made no such claim! As I plainly stated above, some of these templates do belong on talk pages.  The wording that you modified merely refers to the default location (if none is specified for a particular template).
 * As it stands, most of the cleanup templates are configured for placement within articles (with talk page links and non-talk page coloring, which render them inappropriate for use on talk pages). If you believe that a particular tag belongs on talk pages instead, you're welcome to propose such a change.  —David Levy 02:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm merely going by your edit, which specifically says "Unless otherwise noted, they should be placed at the top of the article" and your comments above. You even put all in bold. dryguy 02:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm merely going by your edit, which specifically says "Unless otherwise noted, they should be placed at the top of the article" and your comments above.

 * Yes, unless otherwise noted. How does that contradict what I wrote above?

 * You even put all in bold.

 * Yes, I added extra emphasis to my acknowledgement that there is no consensus regarding a correct location for "all article status templates." I then noted in the following sentence that some of the templates "belong on talk pages."  —David Levy 03:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * If that isn't what you meant, then would you accept the following changes to Template messages/Cleanup:
 * Current: "The following tags should be added to the articles needing cleanup. Unless otherwise noted, they should be placed at the top of the article. Some tags have alternate versions that apply to situations of greater specificity."
 * Proposed: "The following tags should be added to the articles needing cleanup, as noted in the instructions for each specific tag. Some tags have alternate versions that apply to situations of greater specificity." dryguy 02:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * That would force us to add otherwise redundant instructions for dozens of tags. Most of them are configured for use at the tops of articles, so I don't understand your objection to the current wording.  —David Levy 03:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * The current wording is instruction creep. It prescribes a universal solution of putting a tag at the top of an article page as the default, when this is often not the best solution. Also, based on various discussions regarding meta tags, one of which I cited (there are others, but I don't have time for further discussion tonight, so I can't look them up now), there is significant opposition to certain uses of metatags on article pages. dryguy 03:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * The current wording is instruction creep. It prescribes a universal solution of putting a tag at the top of an article page as the default, when this is often not the best solution.

 * It isn't instruction creep. It's practical wording that eliminates the need for us to include otherwise redundant instructions for dozens of tags.  More importantly, it eliminates the need for people to read otherwise redundant instructions for dozens of tags.  If no such notations are included, they can simply assume that the template is configured for use at the tops of articles (as most of them are).  In cases where this is "not the best solution," we can include notations to the contrary.

 * Also, based on various discussions regarding meta tags, one of which I cited (there are others, but I don't have time for further discussion tonight, so I can't look them up now), there is significant opposition to certain uses of metatags on article pages.

 * Again, you've cited evidence of a lack of consensus for establishing one blanket location for all article status tags. That doesn't mean that there isn't consensus for the locations of any.  As it stands, most of them are configured for placement at the tops of articles.  They lack talk page template coloring (which was determined via formal voting, incidentally), and they contain links to the talk pages (which become nonfunctional when the templates are placed on the talk pages).  Again, you're welcome to propose reconfiguring any specific template(s) that you believe should be moved from articles to talk pages, but the current pattern of use is overwhelming.  That's consensus.  —David Levy 04:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Interesting point. I will try and look up that vote, but I'm not yet convinced. dryguy 04:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * What aren't you convinced of? —David Levy 03:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Briefly: they add clutter to articles which is minimized if they are put in talk space, they are often added and rarely removed (as evidenced by their growth rate, indicating they aren't often causing articles to comply with the tags' various requests), and they usually contribute to poor layout of articles in which they are used. Have a great evening (or morning, or whatever)! dryguy 03:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * 1. Your "clutter" and "layout" arguments are one and the same. It's frequently noted that matters of aesthetics are outweighed by the importance of bringing cleanup issues to readers' attention.  Of course, less urgent issues typically receive smaller templates.
 * 2. The template growth rate can be attributed to Wikipedia's growth rate. (More articles = more articles in need of cleanup.)  But if an issue does remain unresolved, it remains important for readers to be made aware of it (whether it's a deficiency or the existence of a similar article with which a merger has been suggested).
 * 3. Despite having written the above, I'm not really here to debate this. The point is that a clear consensus exists (as evidenced by the manner in which the tags typically are used).  You're entitled to disagree with the consensus, you aren't entitled to disregard it.  —David Levy 04:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, if you aren't open to debate, I don't know why you stay at Wikipedia, because debate is essential for forming consensus. You instead stick to the claim that consensus supprts you (even though you are unable to demonstrate it by citing a discussion where said consensus was achieved. Silence!=Assent). Since you really don't seem interested in working toward consensus (as evidenced by your comment about not wanting to debate), I may take this discussion to a broader forum than our talk pages at some point in the future when I have the time. I'm unlikely to reply further here, unless you express some desire to hash out a more inclusive solution. dryguy 04:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, if you aren't open to debate, I don't know why you stay at Wikipedia, because debate is essential for forming consensus.

 * I didn't say that I'm not open to debate, and I'll ask you kindly to please stop distorting my comments. I stated that "I'm not really here to debate this," meaning that my purpose for writing this is not to argue that a particular viewpoint is correct.  I'm merely pointing out that a particular viewpoint (irrespective of its wisdom) is backed by consensus.

 * You instead stick to the claim that consensus supprts you (even though you are unable to demonstrate it by citing a discussion where said consensus was achieved. Silence!=Assent).

 * No matter how many times you claim that consensus cannot be achieved without explicit discussion, it still won't be true.
 * I've plainly stated that there is no consensus regarding a correct location for all of these templates, and I don't believe that there should be one. I don't understand, however, how you can dispute the fact that most (not all, but most) of them usually are placed in articles.  This has been true for quite some time, and the advice in question remained on the page for 20 months until you altered it.  I'd still like you to explain why you choose to ignore this time span while citing the 20 days that your version remained as evidence of acceptance.
 * If you want me to cite an example of a discussion that determined some of the templates' placement, see this page.

 * Since you really don't seem interested in working toward consensus (as evidenced by your comment about not wanting to debate), I may take this discussion to a broader forum than our talk pages at some point in the future when I have the time.

 * 1. It's entirely unreasonable for one editor who objects to a widely accepted practice to demand that others "work toward consensus." There already is consensus, and the fact that a minority of users objects doesn't change that fact.
 * 2. Having said that, it is possible for consensus to change. You absolutely are entitled to initiate a discussion in a broader forum, and you might succeed in forging a new consensus.  Until then, please respect the existing one.  Thank you.  —David Levy 03:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I did not ignore you when you pointed out the previous 20 month time span. I acknowledged the previous 20 month time span with my comment above: "You are correct that I made the change in November." And yes, I read your comments. Are you reading mine? I do respect consensus - I came to you to find out your opinion didn't I? I haven't changed the page since I began discussing this with you have I? (Even though I don't agree that you have demonstrated there was a "longstanding consensus" for your version, only longstanding inactivity.) I have no wish to distort your comments, only to understand your point of view. I thank you for your clarifications, but we may simply have to disagree on this issue of "longstanding consensus" for now. In any event, I have no plans to change the page since I am aware that you so strongly disagree, until such time as a broader discussion sheds light on what the true consensus may be. Thank you for pointing me to the discussion about template placement. dryguy 13:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * 1. You implicitly acknowledged that the 20-month time span existed, but you disregarded its relevance (despite citing the 20 days that your version remained as evidence of acceptance). In other words, you haven't explained how advice lacking consensus managed to remain in place for 20 months.  Such text van be overlooked for 20 days (as I did with your changes), but 20 months is very long in wiki-time.
 * 2. I'm not citing this as the sole evidence of consensus. I've directed you to some discussions, but the clearest proof is the simple fact that most of these templates are configured for placement in articles and used accordingly.  That isn't a matter of opinion.
 * 3. Thank you for discussing this matter and not reverting. I do appreciate that (and I certainly wouldn't accuse you of edit-warring).  —David Levy 15:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I haven't disregarded anything, I just don't agree with you. As you acknowledge, I am respecting your concerns despite our disagreements. dryguy 16:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I haven't disregarded anything, I just don't agree with you.

 * You haven't provided your reasoning behind the disagreement in question. You cited the 20 days that your version remained as evidence of acceptance, and you haven't explained why it's unreasonable to draw the same conclusion from the fact that the previous advice remained for 20 months.

 * As you acknowledge, I am respecting your concerns despite our disagreements.

 * Thanks again for that. —David Levy 16:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * You have given your point by point rebuttals to my reasons several times. How can you say I haven't provided my reasoning? dryguy 16:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I didn't say that. I said that that you haven't provided your reasoning behind one specific disagreement.  —David Levy 16:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I made this statement "Somone removed the language about talk pages on December 10. I don't see how that constitutes longstanding consensus," in reply to your comment "It is a long-standing, well-established, discussion-backed convention." I did not make the argument that 20 days is evidence of acceptance, I was only questioning why you said it was long-standing. You later clarified that a previous version existed for 20 months, which I have acknowledged. I have never made the argument that edit duration is an indicator of consensus. dryguy 16:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I was referring to the following:
 * "This was the reason for my edit of [November] 20, 2006. As to the claim that I did so 'unilaterally'; this edit has gone without change or comment until it was removed for consistency with Cleanup resources. You are the first to object to my edit on the basis of its actual content."
 * Also, my "long-standing" remark described the convention itself, not the documentation that appeared on that page. —David Levy 17:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * My point there was that I was not acting unilaterally. In other words, I was not somehow forcing my changes to remain for those 20 days; they remained because no one else made changes. When a change was made, the reason given was consistency. Until you came along, no one had explicitly voiced objection to the content. When you did so I approached you to find out why. None of this is "unilateral" on my part. I have not ever asserted that your changes overturned some form of "silent consensus" that was established in those 20 days. dryguy 17:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * You seem to be applying an incorrect definition of the word "unilateral." It is not synonymous with the word "dictatorial."  I only meant that you, alone, decided to alter long-standing instructions (without first discussing this with anyone else).  —David Levy 17:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I know the definition of unilateral, and I also know that it is commonly used in the context of dictatorial actions. If I inferred something you didn't intend, then disregard my arguments against the unjustified inference. I already pointed you to some of the discussions in which others have voiced objection to meta-tags on article pages. I am not alone in my opinion, which is another reason why I object to the term "unilateral." dryguy 17:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * 1. You've correctly demonstrated that there is no consensus regarding a single correct location for all article status templates. This, however, is not what the text in question prescribed.
 * 2. Again, "consensus" does not mean "unanimous agreement." There certainly are people who agree with you, but there's a big difference between disagreeing with consensus and deciding to override it.  It was the latter act that you undertook unilaterally.  (I realize that you dispute the existence of said consensus.)  —David Levy 20:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Your relentless, aggressive, point-by-point attempts to refute even the tiniest detail of my efforts to explain my reasoning is really becoming very tiresome. I wished to explain my position to you and understand your own. I think both missions are accomplished, even if we continue to disagree. It is not necessary for you to continue - it isn't winning me over, and is really beginning to border on harrassment. dryguy 20:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * You and I have been responding to one another, and suddenly my posts "border on harassment"? This exchange has been as frustrating for me as it evidently has been for you (given your continual misunderstanding/misrepresentation of my comments, which forced me to reiterate and clarify them numerous times), but I've persisted as a courtesy (because ignoring your concerns would have been rude).  I'm taken aback by your accusation of bad-faith, but I shall honor your request to end this discussion (provided that you act in kind).  —David Levy 22:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Orange and green marbles
Hi. Your orange and green marble question is best (IMO) opinion answered by appeal to likelihood. Suppose you observe $$a$$ green marbles and $$b$$ orange ones. The likelihood of $$p$$, the probability of the machine producing an orange one, is $$p^a(1-p)^b$$. Note that this formula applies to $$a=b=0$$. If either a or b is greater than zero, one can then give a best estimate by reporting the maximum likelihood (this would be $$a/(a+b)$$. This is superior to the Bayesian approach because it explicitly makes no assumptions about $$p$$.

HTH, Robinh 20:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Captain Obvious
An article that you have been involved in editing, Captain Obvious, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Captain Obvious (3rd nomination). Thank you. lk (talk) 17:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of User page
I have nominated User page, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/User page. 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?  Sandstein  11:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dryguy


text:
User talk:Supergroupiejoy

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:25, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Supergroupiejoy


text:
Krisna

Krisna is a genus of leafhoppers in the family Cicadellidae. There are more than 30 described species in Krisna.

Species

 * Krisna antaea Linnavuori & Quartau, 1975
 * Krisna bakeri Viraktamath, 2006
 * Krisna colorata Baker, 1919
 * Krisna concava Li & Wang, 1991
 * Krisna daiyunensis Zhang, Zhang & Dai, 2008
 * Krisna delta Viraktamath, 2006
 * Krisna furcata Zhang, Zhang & Dai, 2008
 * Krisna gravis (Stål, 1858)
 * Krisna indicata (Walker,1858)
 * Krisna kirbyi Kirkaldy, 1900
 * Krisna magna Baker, 1919
 * Krisna megha Viraktamath, 2006
 * Krisna minima Baker, 1919
 * Krisna muirii Baker, 1919
 * Krisna nigrifrons Baker, 1919
 * Krisna nigromarginata Cai & He, 1998
 * Krisna olivacea Linnavuori, 1969
 * Krisna olivascens Baker, 1919
 * Krisna penangensis Baker, 1919
 * Krisna raja Viraktamath, 2006
 * Krisna rosea (Bierman, 1910)
 * Krisna rufimarginata Cai & He, 1998
 * Krisna sherwilli Distant, 1908
 * Krisna simillima Baker, 1919
 * Krisna straminea (Walker, 1851)
 * Krisna strigicollis (Spinola, 1850)
 * Krisna varia Viraktamath, 2006
 * Krisna veni Viraktamath, 2006
 * Krisna villiersi Linnavuori, 1969
 * Krisna viraktamathae Zhang, Zhang & Dai, 2008
 * Krisna viridula Li & Wang, 1991
 * Krisna walayari Viraktamath, 2006
 * Krisna walkeri Metcalf, 1955

title: Krisna


text:
User talk:Aristotle334

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:27, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Homeschooling project
Hello, My name Master Scott Hall (you can call me Scott). I am relatively new contributing to Wikipedia, though I have been a user of it for some time. I am currently soliciting for interest in a Wikiproject that I have proposed on the subject of homeschooling. Before finding Wikipedia, my wife and I were seriously considering, but not quite convinced, to home educate our children.

After discovering the depth, scope, and long-term goals of Wikipedia, as well as the individuals driving it, I am convinced that WP has the potential to revolutionize homeschooling. I am also convinced that home education is the right choice for my family. I have, however, been somewhat discouraged by the oversight of home education in most of the education related projects on WP. There are many potential reasons for this discrepency, but I have resolved to try to do something about it.

Although I personally have very limited experience in building complex Wikiprojects, -templates, -portals, etc., I am confident that the right team can be assembled to tackle these issues. I would like to invite you to join this effort to make Wikipedia the resource for the home education of our children. If you are interested, please visits the temporary project page I have set up. Thank you --Master Scott Hall 00:12, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Update: The proposed project on Homeschooling was met with a very positive response. As a result, the project has been ugraded to an official WikiProject and can be found at WikiProject Alternative education. We have several experienced Wikipedians on board, as well as some new faces. We still need contributors with backgrounds in education, education theory and philosophy, and specific alternative education methods, such as homeschooling, charter schools, and E-learning from both teacher and student perspectives. There is also a lack of quality resources regarding anti-alternative education issues. If are interested in contributing or just have an interest, please visit the project page, or if you prefer, ask us a question. Thank you again, Master Scott Hall 18:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 10:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me

Proposed deletion of Urban Studies and Planning

The article Urban Studies and Planning has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "unnecessary disambiguation page"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aristotle334


text: Talk:Industrial design

title: Talk:Industrial design


text:
User talk:Baoutrust

Sorry?
I don't believe I ever edited the QuakeAID page. Andre ( talk ) 17:58, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

Complaints
User pages should not redirect to article pages. Also, blanking talk pages is considered bad form. Both are misleading. Maurreen 19:12, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Advice
If you intend to continue contributing to Wikipedia, I'd suggest taking the time to learn more about how it works. This whole dispute about QuakeAID may be one huge misunderstanding, and it may be 100% legitimate... but directly attacking other editors is something that is simply not tolerated on Wikipedia: No personal attacks. Tverbeek 22:02, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Fraudster
Based on the looks of it, you sound like a fraudster pure and simple. How can you sleep at night? Brownman40 23:09, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks as if he/she cannot fathom the idea of the Wikipedia, or the idea of Charities, for that matter. Fraudster pure and simple. The magical Spum-dandy 19:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That doesn't solicit the use of personal attacks. Let's play like Wikipedians, let the bad guys do the rule-breaking. BigBlueFish 20:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Suspicion of fraud
Hello. Three things:

FIRST: While I am unsure if you are just playing coy or legitimately new to Wikipedia, it is generally a bad practice to spam Wikipedia with self-promotional vanity material. You have clearly done this with your Kaith and George Dracos articles. This is only exacerbated by the fact that you've then gone through and laced a bunch of articles on subjects such as Abstract expressionism with falsehoods stating that George Dracos is a main representative of that genre. Studying arts for well over a decade now I know that not to be true, regardless of the fact that George Dracos pulls in a mere 9 hits on Google.
 * He is a Greek artist that does not promote on the Internet. That does not mean he does not exist.  Oh, I forgot, if it's not in Google, in the US or if you don't know about it, then it's fraud.  --BAOU 07:34, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Please indent your replies with : or * 's, if you would. It will help format the discussion.  I dont appreciate the insinuation that I would ever be so myopic as to disregard someone not on Google or not within the United States.  You added George Dracos to the Abstract expressionism article under a list of people who were main representatives of that genre.  That is mis-information through-and-through and only shoots your credibility on other things... Such as non-profit earthquake relief organizations.  I don't buy your Chewbacca-does-not-make-sense, so-we must-acquit-styled logic for one second.  —RaD Man (talk) 07:46, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

SECONDLY, it is considered rude and impolite to blank Talk pages. You've done this multiple times. Stop it.
 * Not true. I made one mistake.  You know it.  You are a liar.  --BAOU 07:34, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * *SIGH*

LASTLY and to the heart of the matter... You are going around spamming your QuakeAID and Baou Trust organizations into any article remotely related to earthquakes or the recent December 2004 Indian Ocean tragedy. Based on your questionable edit history, the fact that the organization is barely a blip on the Google radar and the fact that QuakeAID has not been verified by an independant third party such as the Better Business Bureau, Charity Navigator, American Institute of Philanthropy or Guidestar, is extremely worrisome at best. Thank you for bringing your organization to light on Wikipedia, we'll get to the bottom of this soon one way or the other. Together. —RaD Man (talk) 07:18, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * QuakeAID is the only organization that is 100% dedicated to relief for vicitms of earthquakes. You are ignorant of that fact.  That is not our problem. --BAOU 07:34, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Your organization has been in existence since 1998? And its now 2005 and you still have yet to apply and obtain non-profit exemption status within the United States.  'Nuff said.  —RaD Man (talk) 07:18, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Hello, That's your answer? If so, fine.  Do as you wish with the pages for QuakeAID, George Dracos, Kaith, etc.  --BAOU 07:34, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thank you
Hello Greg Lloyd Smith, Katerina Theohari-Smith, "Jennifer Monroe" and company. I just wanted to visit and say thank you for the wonderful article you wrote about me on your newswire at Official Wire. As a result, I've been receiving a steady supply of warm and supportive emails. Again, thank you, and happy new year to you all. —RaD Man (talk) 05:23, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Redirect of Quakeaid
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Quakeaid, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Quakeaid is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Quakeaid, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 00:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Baoutrust


text:
Category:Geoglyphs

A Geoglyph is a large-scale image or design made by removing soil or by piling rocks.

title: Category:Geoglyphs


text:
User talk:Nigel Cross

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:29, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

design books
maybe you are right and my choice of books was rather arbitrary and even pointless. on the other hand - there are basic works in design practice and theory that should be mentioned. so while gedenryd's dissertation was an eye-opener for me and thus placing it on the website is highly subjective, christopher alexander might be worth mentioning somewhere. of course it might also be the case that one of your books should be listed :-)

for now, i've remove the book list.

what about starting a page on "design theory" and putting the books there? of course, you would be one of the persons able to write such an entry while i'm rather not. Martinpi 09:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Books and articles on design methods?
I thought you might be able to offer some much needed expertise to a discussion we're having concerning the Design methods article. I'm still trying to understand what the author (the one editor has written almost the entire article) means by design methods, but he repeatedly asserts that Jones' "Design Methods" is the only book ever written about design methods. I've provided a link to a workshop I participated in some years back which includes a good reference list, including your own "Engineering Design Methods". Care to offer some perspective and a bit of your expertise by recommending good books and articles on design methods, or alternatively if I'm mistaken, backing that Jones' is the only one? --Ronz 18:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

=Books= Of course Jones is not the only one! I studied with JC Jones and have great respect for him, but his book was written in the late 1960s and has never been revised except for his adding comments as prefaces. He regarded his book as his 'farewell present' to the design methods movement, but it may still have relevance for many people.

Apart from the excellent 'Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for product design' (3rd edition, Wiley, 2001) by the Cross fellow, recent others include:

K. Krippendorf 'The Semantic Turn: A new foundation for design' (CRC Press, 2006) (includes some methods, in a wider context)

C. Nemeth 'Human Factors Methods for Design: Making systems human-centered' (CRC Press, 2004) (excellent)

K. Ulrich & S. Eppinger 'Product Design and Development' (3rd edn., McGraw Hill, 2003) (really good)

These are mostly aimed at product design, and I realise that there are other set of interests and methods centred on systems design, interaction design, etc. but unfortunately I'm not familiar with those.

I remember being alerted to the original design methods entry in wikipedia, but I thought that it had so much wrong with it that I couldn't start to revise it! I feel similar despair about the wikipedia 'design' entry! I see that there is now a huge history of discussion on the design methods article, that I wasn't aware of (It's not on my watchlist). Good luck!

Nigel Cross 18:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the recommendations! --Ronz 18:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

= WikiProject Industrial design and Design Portal =

I recently posted the following text on Wikipedia regarding the creation of a new Visual arts/Technology-related project in Wikipedia:

WikiProject Industrial design is a Wikipedian community that aims to better organize information in articles related to Industrial design (also called Product design).
 * If I'm cor-rec-to, there are about 1850 articles on Industrial design in Wikipedia...
 * At least, it's more than for Typography, and there IS a Typography WikiProject...
 * And it's more than the Fashion WikiProject with 482 articles...
 * There is also an Urban studies and planning project and a Video games portal so...
 * Now you can also see a proposal for the Design Portal. (that portal would be for Industrial design AND Graphic design/Interior design)

Please  support this initiative, --   Alain R 3 4 5   Techno-Wiki-Geek    19:55, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Jab843 (talk) 00:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Design methods, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AEI ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Design_methods check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Design_methods?client=notify 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) 10:10, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:William Balchin
Hello, Nigel Cross. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:William Balchin, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:William Balchin

Hello, Nigel Cross. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "William Balchin".

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 and remove the, , or  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! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:53, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nigel Cross


text:
User talk:Roblindblad

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:30, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:42, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Note that Wikipedia is not a place to post promotional links about yourself or a business. Pakaran (ark a pan) 12:52, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Continuing to do so will almost certainly lead to being blocked from editing Wikipedia. Pakaran (ark a pan) 12:56, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Okay, so you claim that you can find children down to the street corner. Here is the deal, I will ask you to find my parents' child three times, and if you are right each of those times, I will personally email Randi to request that he review your case and if I recieve no response from Randi, post that online, and then edit the article. If you fail, I will post that online as well if I so choose. I will provide my full legal name and a photo that has been taken in the last year. Jrincayc 13:50, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Note that this user is blocked for another ~23 hours (not by me, though). Pakaran (ark a pan) 14:05, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If you can read french you can see that what I stated (which was deleted) is true. Read the articles of 31-5-98 and 1-6-98 of the Journal De Montreal, which are on my website, and the proof is there. Unless James Randi is willing to state that Le Journal De Montreal, J.E. (an investigative reporter program), the parents of the missing child, and the police are lyers he should PUT UP AND SHUT UP. And Graham because you can't believe something doesn't make it untrue. I know where you're coming from I used to not believe in psychic phenomena either. I don't feel offended and if you ever have a problem with a missing child I'll be there for you... no problem.
 * I will listen, just tell me where I, Joshua Joseph Cogliati, am on 23 Dec 2004 21:00 UTC. If you can't edit wikipedia, email me, jrincayc at my yahoo.com address. Jrincayc 04:12, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Roblindblad


text:
Liljeholmen

Liljeholmen is a district of the Hägersten-Liljeholmen borough in Söderort, the southern suburban part of Stockholm.

History
In 1860 Liljeholmen became the first suburb outside Stockholm city limits. The district was then one of two self-governing villages within the Brännkyrka rural district (the other was Örby), until 1913, when it was incorporated into Stockholm. During the 1912 Summer Olympics, it hosted parts of the cycling and equestrian events.

Economy and transportation
Liljeholmen contains industries and offices in Årstadal, apartments in Nybohov and Nyboda and Lake Trekanten. New residential areas are being built around the central square, former industrial areas near Årstaviken, and at Marievik as a part of several projects to enlarge the inner core of Stockholm. Metro lines 13 and 14 stop at Liljeholmen Metro station and there are 3 tram stops for Tvärbanan in the district: Årstadal, Liljeholmen and Trekanten.

Sightseeing

 * The Fruit Park in Liljeholmen is a popular playground near Lake Trekanten where all of the equipment is shaped like fruit.
 * The Nybohovs vattenreservoar water reservoir, located on a hill on the southwestern corner of Lake Trekanten provides a good view of the lake and surrounding area.

title: Liljeholmen


text:
Talk:Altai Mountains

Altai or Altay
The word "Altai" actually is a Turkic word meaning "Red Mountain". In modern Turkish (i.e. spoken in Turkish Republic), it is pronounced as "Aldag", though "Altai" is used as the private name for this region. "Altaylar" is used in Turkish as "Red Mountains" and is the real name for this region. This is reasonable, as Turkic folks predominate in this region from the earliest times in history.

 * This is bogus reasoning - the region (not the mountains) is already well-known in English as "Altai". We only use untranslated names when there is not an existing English version. Stan 02:24, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

If both are equivalent that's fine, but we probably should stick to just using one when naming articles and the such. Currently Altai seems to be the more common of the two as far as naming articles is concerned, so maybe this one should be renamed.

Or am I missing some distinction between the two names? --Moritz 21:45, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

No, you are correct, Altai is the English version and the correct transliteration from Russian. If there are people who understand the region's name as "Altay" we can include a link from the "Altay" page to "Altai." this is what wikipedia often does in the case there are two accepted spellings.

-- Aaron Xavier —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.181.115.76 (talk) 19:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

"Altay" means "Gold Mountain" < Altun(Gold) - Tag (Mountain), in Chinese Jin Shan Jin(Gold)- Shan(Mountain) Böri (talk) 16:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Glaciers
The article mentions glaciers that are "30 square kilometeres in aggregate area". Is that the situation in 1911? Given the Retreat of glaciers since 1850, it seems likely that it is less now. Does it make sense at all to include the glacier situation from 1911 in the article? I added a note, but perhaps the fact should be removed alltogether. Is there a template that is suitable to add here (something like "needs updating")? --Gerrit CUTEDH 09:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

There's always the "as of yyyy" thing. See As of for more information. ~user:orngjce223how am I typing? 18:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Not verified
The text is cut'n'pasted from EB1911, which seems to contain some bullshit. I detected this trying to write the Sailughem Mountains article. It turns out that EB191 seriously contradicts here to Great Soviet Encyclopedia and some tourist texts.

Skitalets.ru
from skitalets: Горная страна Алтай лежит на юге Сибири между 48° и 56° северной широты и тесно смыкается с лежащими к востоку горными кряжами Кузнецкого Алатау, Салаира, Западного Саяна, Танну-Ола и Монгольского Алтая. Алтай связан с ними и по орографии и по структуре, поэтому четкую границу здесь провести трудно. На юге и юго-востоке Горный Алтай соединяется с Монгольским Алтаем через пограничный массив Табын-Богдо-Ола и отходящие от него хребты Южно-Алтайский, Сайлюгем и Чихачёва. Юго-западные окраины Алтая протягиваются до котловины озера Зайсан. К северу Алтай резко, уступами, низвергается к Западно-Сибирской равнине, в западные степи проникает веером невысоких хребтов.

GSE
Сайлюгем, горный хребет Юго-Восточного Алтая, на границе Горно-Алтайской АО РСФСР и МНР. Длина 130 км. Высота до 3500 м. Водораздел между истоками рр. Аргут и Чуя (бассейн р. Оби) и реками бассейна р. Кобдо. Сложен известковистыми песчаниками, глинистыми сланцами, лавами и туфами. В высокогорьях преобладают лишайниковые и каменистые тундры, на южных склонах ниже 2600 м появляются участки со степной растительностью на горных каштановых почвах.

Contradiction
Russian sources say thay Sailughem is southern appendage, while EB 1911 says it is Northern. My guess guess is that EB describes what Russian texts call Mongolian Altai.

I will try to figure out WTF (and you may try as well). `'mikka 00:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC) P.S. Колыванский хребет / Горная Колывань is somethine else as well. `'mikka 00:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I have the file of a geologic map that unfortunately I can't find the online source for anymore. It shows the Saylyugem range along the border between the Bayan-Ölgii Province of Mongolia and Russia, seperating the Mongolian from the Russian Altai. The incorrect location isn't in the original EB, which actually calls it "the backbone of the region". The text has been rearranged heavily here, which must have introduced the error. Btw: The article Sailughem Mountains should be renamed to Saylyugem Mountains according to WP:RUS --Latebird 09:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Another contradiction is Mount Belukha, which is way higher than 3,500 m stated as max for Saylughem in Soviet Encyclopedia. `'mikka 18:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Sailukhem (Sailukymi / Sailukemi) Altai
The word is without no doubt of Finno Ugrian origin, as the Russian version Kolyvan Altai, itself derived from ancient Baltic Finnic Kaleva which, in fact, was the name of mythologic hero in Finno Ugrian mythology and even appears in Kalevala and Kalevpoeg. Khem might be a Turkonized version of Finno Ugrian Kymi and Kemi / Kem, a name for big river (stream). Please compare with Ulug-Khem, Biy-Khem, Ka-Khem, Balyktuk-Khem, and Kizil-Khem.

According to Professor Johannes Gabriel Granö 1882-1956, a Finnish geographer who researched Altai area in 1906-1916, the local Kazakh population in Chinese Empire (Mongolia) and Imperial Russia (Turkestan divided Altai to White Altai, Blue Altai, and Black Altai. J.G.Granö used also heard Finno Ugrian word Iki-Altai (Etern-Altai) in his classic Altai, Volumes 1 & 2 WSOY, Porvoo 1919-1921. He made ten research expeditions to the Altai and took more than 1.000 photographs, all rareties today, and preserved in Helsinki SKS (Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura) Archive. This collection is commonly not known at all outside Finland, Estonia and Sweden. His book Altai is now being transliterated into Russian language but his style of using Finnish language makes it impossible to transliterate it in English language without loss of the original meaning of much of the text.

One glacier in High Altai was named after J.G.Granö as Granö Glacier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.191.15 (talk) 18:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 21:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC) Altay Mountains → Altai Mountains

The more common English use seems to be Altai. See also this discussion, or Category:Altai. Yaan (talk) 18:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Per WP:RUS, you are required to show proof that the spelling you are proposing to move the article to is more common in English.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * google scholar hits:

 * "altai range": 221
 * "altay range": 40
 * "altai mountains": 3040
 * "altay mountains": 576

 * merriam webster has "Altai", Encyclopedia Britannica Online has Altai Mountains . Yaan (talk) 19:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Good enough for me. Support.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I suspect that the current spelling was chosen based on WP:RUS, because most of it is located in Russia. In contrast, WP:MON says "Altai". In either case, given the common English use, it makes sense to rename. --Latebird (talk) 05:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:RUS was amended since then to give more preference to established English usage when such usage exists and can be documented.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Support. This is the only spelling I've ever seen. – Axman (☏) 15:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Rename related articles?
Now that this one has been changed to Altai, what about Altay people, Altay language, and several others, including the DAB page Altay? I'm not sure if the same logic applies to all of them, just to those based in Russia, or only a few. I guess they'll have to be addressed individually, but I just wanted to make sure that they're not accidentally forgotten. Yaan, that's your cue! ;-) --Latebird (talk) 05:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Dab pages for Russian names should comply with WP:RUS (which means "Altay", not "Altai"), but since Altay contains not only Russian, but also other names, it makes sense to make an exception. The rest of the Russia-related Altay articles should have something on their talk pages showing that the i-spelling is indeed more common in English (this, again, is per WP:RUS).  In other words, as Latebird said, all of them will need to be looked at individually, with separate move requests.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Uch-Sumer
I've inserted the another name for Belukha: Uch-Sumer. See article in: http://eng.altai-republic.ru/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=57&page=1 Chonanh (talk) 04:19, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The second highest mountain of Russia - Belukha is situated nearly in the centre of the biggest continent-Eurasia, practically at the same distance from all oceans - from the Arctic Ocean in the north, the Indian Ocean in the south, the Atlantic Ocean in the west and the Pacific Ocean in the east. Its absolute height is 4506 m, and geographical co-ordinates are 49° 50' NL and 86° 45' EL. A white iced cap covers it and that might explain the origin a Russian name Belukha ("white"). Altaians call it Kadyn Bazhy which means "The Top of the Katun River" or Uch-Airy-"Three Forks". But most often it is called Uch-Sumer "Three Tops" with a special semantic meaning. This is a sacred mountain, an object of special reverence for the indigenous population of the Altai. Uch - Sumer - "Three Tops" is represented on the coat of arms of the Altai Republic.

What does it mean by a "cultural enigma"?
The Altai Mountains have been identified as being the point of origin of a cultural enigma termed the Seima-Turbino Phenomenon[5] which arose during the Bronze Age around the start of the 2nd millennium BC and led to a rapid and massive migration of peoples from the region into distant parts of Europe and Asia. What exactly does this mean? What is the "enigma"? The Seima-Turbino Phenomenon article doesn't help. Wardog (talk) 15:26, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Jin Shan
in Chinese. Böri (talk) 10:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Altai Mountains. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070314172727/http://www.pacificenvironment.org/article.php?id=934 to http://www.pacificenvironment.org/article.php?id=934

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:09, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Altai Mountains. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316155209/http://eng.altai-republic.ru/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=57&page=1 to http://eng.altai-republic.ru/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=57&page=1
 * Added tag to http://www.smz.waw.pl/images/wydawnictwa/biuletyn2/20_Sipko.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:37, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Snow Leopard in Hemis National Park.jpg

title: Talk:Altai Mountains


text:
User talk:Brother Dysk~enwiki

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:34, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Brother Dysk. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Brother Dysk~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 22:42, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 11:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

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) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Brother Dysk~enwiki


text:
Patricio Rey y sus Redonditos de Ricota

Patricio Rey y sus Redonditos de Ricota, also known simply as Patricio Rey, Los Redondos or Los Redonditos de Ricota, was a rock band formed in La Plata, Argentina. The group was active from the mid 70s up to the early 2000s. They are known for shaping Argentine rock and their enormous fan base.

Name
Patricio Rey is the name of a fictional character or group consciousness, and not a real person or member of the group, Los redonditos de ricota (lit. "the small ricotta 'roundies'") is the colloquial name of a variety of home-made buñuelos filled with ricotta cheese, round in shape (hence the name).

The beginning: 1976–1984
The band was formed in 1976 by lead singer Carlos "El Indio" Solari and guitarist Skay Beilinson, and to play at various bars and clubs in La Plata, Solari and Beilinson’s hometown. Skay had played for other bands, such as La Cofradía de la Flor Solar, where he met with the artist and illustrator Ricardo "Rocambole" Cohen, who became the band’s only graphic designer. By the late 1970s, the band did their first tour through Argentina, mainly in the country's northwest.

In 1982, Solari and the Beilinson brothers moved to Buenos Aires, recorded a demo and signed with a major label. The rest of the musicians were the young bassist Semilla Bucciarelli, Rodolfo Gorosito on rhythm guitar and the drummer Alejandro Pensa (cousin of the luthier Rudy Pensa). Also, Skay (together with Alejandro) had a stint as guitarist of the Edelmiro Molinari's band La Galletita.

Their first deal was for RCA, and they immediately realized the need for a professional session to record a demo tape, which included "Super Lógico", "Mariposa Pontiac", "Pura Suerte" and other songs. After this, RCA refused to hire Patricio Rey, because they weren’t confident in the track-list.

They started getting spins in a few Buenos Aires' radio stations, gaining positive responses from the radio presenter and journalist Lalo Mir and the general public. Patricio Rey gained popularity in the underground scene. An important aspect of this rise in popularity was the group's successful performances in places such as Teatro Bambalinas, Stud Free Pub, Go! Disco and La Esquina del Sol. In 1984, Alejandro Pensa and Rodolfo Gorosito left the band, and were replaced by Piojo Ávalos and Tito "Fargo" D'Aviero, respectively. That same year Patricio Rey y sus Redonditos de Ricota got a new record deal with the Wormo label.

Breakthrough success: 1985–1990
In August 1985, the group released their first studio LP Gulp, that included tracks such as "La Bestia Pop", "Superlógico", and "El Infierno Está Encantador esta Noche" that got various spins in the radio. They had kicked off a tour in March, but the album was presented officially at Cemento, after the cancelled gigs at the Teatro Astros, by the Valeria Lynch shows.

In September of the next year, the tour finished while the band was working on their second LP, Oktubre, with Daniel Melero and Claudio Cornelio as guests, and the last with Tito D'Aviero, Willy Crook and Piojo Ávalos. The LP included more “mainstream” hooks, but still kept the classic feel of the group.

After the departure of D'Aviero, Crook and Ávalos, which put Solari and Beilinson at the artistic centre of the band, drummer Walter Sidotti and saxophonist Sergio Dawi were added to the line-up in 1987, remaining with the band as continuous members.

During the late 1980s, the band recorded with the two new members their albums Un Baión para el Ojo Idiota in 1987, the last made under the Wormo label and ''¡Bang! ¡Bang! Estás Liquidado'' in January 1989, which was the first published by Del Cielito Records, as well the shows made in Uruguay for the first time.

Both of those LPs were the first nods to a more commercial sound, with simpler songs that brought back some classic rock influences, but the band's strength, which lies in the semantic power of its lyrics, that discuss, but isn’t limited to, politics, drugs and women with a philosophical and existentialist approach, stayed constant. The obscurity and complexity of Solari's writing often was compared with Baroque writers, particularly Francisco de Quevedo, but with a corrosive approach to the present day, being Neoliberalism in Argentina, the Gulf War, political corruption, the media, drug culture and the dark aspects of love.

The Estadio Obras Incident: 1991
The first negative media event that hurt Patricio Rey y sus Redonditos de Ricota was during their 1991 show at the Estadio Obras Sanitarias, where a young man called Walter Bulacio was stopped and arrested for incidents, which ended with his death from severe injuries caused by the police.

After the incidents in Obras, the city’s authorities imposed an order to ban the band from performing live.

That same year, the band released their fifth studio album La Mosca y la Sopa, one of the band's most successful albums to date.

Back to stages, Lobo Suelto, Cordero Atado and Luzbelito: 1992–1997
Then, Los Redondos gets the municipality of Tandil, Buenos Aires, to allow the group to play without legal problems. At the time, they had edited their only live album En Directo in 1992, although it was not officially endorsed by the Del Cielito label then. By 1993, Los Redondos released Lobo Suelto, Cordero Atado, in two volumes. The first album includes the hit single "Un Ángel Para tu Soledad", which became the band's new signature song and a perennial radio favorite.

The return of Patricio Rey to the big stage occurred in 1994, at the Estadio Huracán, in front of 80,000 fans. In San Carlos, Santa Fe province, in August 1995, where they performed two shows in a nightclub with a capacity of 3000 people, which was completely filled.

In 1996, they released the eighth studio album Luzbelito, another one of the band's biggest albums, recorded between Brazil, United States and Buenos Aires.

Patricio Rey closed the year with two dates on October 26 and 27 at the Estadio Polideportivo in Mar del Plata and at the Estadio 15 de Abril, Unión de Santa Fe on the anniversary of the band, on December 28.

New sounds, struggles and break-up: 1998–2001
In late December 1998, they performed at the Estadio Racing Club with Hernán Aramberri as keyboardist and "Conejo" Jolivet as special guest, to present Último Bondi a Finisterre, their ninth studio album. The two shows with more than 45,000 fans, were guarded by the police and a crew of firefighters at the stadium, where an audience member threw a flare to the stage causing minor damages and the anger of Solari.

One of the band's most important achievements was to reunite more than 140,000 fans at River Plate Stadium, Buenos Aires, in April 2000, proving the band's popularity, and like the Racing Stadium concerts, was heavily guarded by the police and stadium authorities. At the April 15 show, Jorge Ríos, a thief who was in the audience began to attack several people with a knife, and then he was lynched by the people. That same year, Momo Sampler was released.

In 2001, Patricio Rey played at the Centenario Stadium, in Uruguay with two dates on April 22 and 23. Finally, Momo Sampler Tour's last show was at the Chateau Carreras, Córdoba on August 4. By November of that same year, it was announced via website that Patricio Rey had disbanded, mainly due to internal tensions within Indio Solari and the rest of the band.

After the split and solo projects: 2002–present
After the break-up, several former members are still active and pursuing solo careers and new projects. Skay published his first album: A través del Mar de los Sargazos in 2002.

Indio Solari in the late 2004 formed a new band: Los Fundamentalistas del Aire Acondicionado, with Marcelo Torres on bass guitar, Pablo Sbaraglia on keyboards, Julio Saez (then replaced by Gaspar Benegas) and Baltazar Comotto on guitars, and Hernán Aramberri and Martín Carrizo on drums, with Sergio Colombo and Miguel Ángel Tallarita as horn section. The band had released 4 albums.

Walter Sidotti returned with his band La Favorita between 1997 and 2004, to travel to Spain. Today, Sidotti plays regularly both with his own band and with Sergio Dawi in some Patricio Rey tribute shows.

Semilla Bucciarelli works as painter and illustrator, producing some works for La Renga's Detonador de Sueños in 2003, La Favorita and the Le Mie Parole cover in 2013, for Jesús Granero. Sergio Dawi formed Dossaxos2 with Damián Nisenson, then recorded in 2004, Estrellados his first solo album. In 2007, he created the interactive-visual group "VideoSaxMachine". In 2008, he released his second solo album Quijotes al ajillo, together with Juan Benítez on guitar, Mariano Pirato on piano, guitar and backing vocals, Martín Tabuyo on bass, Pablo Belmes on drums and Rodrigo Collado as DJ. The album features "Gato Negro", a duet with his former bandmate Indio.

In 2005, the band received the Konex Award as best Rock Group of the 1995-2005 decade, distinction shared with Divididos.

Band members

 * Core Members (1987–2001)
 * Indio Solari - Lead Vocals.
 * Skay Beilinson - Guitars.
 * Semilla Bucciarelli - Bass guitar.
 * Walter Sidotti - Drums.
 * Sergio Dawi - Saxophone.

 * Other Members
 * Hernán Aramberri - Samplers (1993, 1997–2002).
 * "Conejo" Jolivet - Lead guitar (Late 1970s, 1993, 1997–1998)
 * Tito "Fargo" D'Aviero - Rhythm guitar (1984–1987).
 * Daniel "Piojo" Ávalos - Drums (1984–1987).
 * Willy Crook - Saxophone (1984–1987; died 2021 ).
 * Andrés Teocharidis - Keyboards (1986–1987; died 1987).
 * Rodolfo Gorosito - Rhythm guitar (1982–1984).
 * Roddy Castro - Keyboards (Late 1970s).
 * Pepe Fenton - Bass guitar (1976–1982).
 * Alejandro Pensa - Drums (1982–1984).

 * Collaborators
 * Carmen Castro ("La Negra Poly") - Manager.
 * Ricardo Cohen ("Rocambole") - Graphic artist.
 * Enrique Symns - Spoken word, monologues.
 * Lito Vitale - Piano and Keyboards.

Discography

 * Gulp! (1985)
 * Oktubre (1986)
 * Un Baión para el Ojo Idiota (1988)
 * ¡Bang! ¡Bang!... Estás Liquidado (1989)
 * La Mosca y la Sopa (1991)
 * En Directo, Live (1992)
 * Lobo Suelto - Cordero Atado, Vol. 1 (1993)
 * Lobo Suelto - Cordero Atado, Vol. 2 (1993)
 * Luzbelito (1996)
 * Último Bondi a Finisterre (1998)
 * Momo Sampler (2000)

title: Patricio Rey y sus Redonditos de Ricota


text:
User talk:Rohan Jayasekera

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:43, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Image source
Thank you for uploading Image:AllisonCrowe.jpg. Please leave a note on that page about the source of the image because of copyright law. Thank you. --Ellmist 22:40, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Done. I wasn't sure where exactly to put the note, so I added it under "Discuss this page" (i.e. Image talk). Rohan Jayasekera 02:49, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rohan Jayasekera
Actually, the page should not be moved. The suffix (cricketer) should be added only if there are more than person by the same name. For instances, Mike_Smith (cricketer) is needed because there are a hundred Mike Smiths. If you won't mind, I'll move back the contents to Rohan Jayasekera. Are you the cricketer mentioned in the article ? Tintin Talk 17:23, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[responded on Tintin's talk page] Rohan Jayasekera 17:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks, didn't know about the other article. And thanks for the submarine info as well :-) Tintin Talk 18:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikimedia Canada
Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there!--DarkEvil 15:07, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Greetings
Hi Rohan! Fancy meeting you here. It's a small world. I noticed your change to the Jeffrey Shallit page. Roger Hui 14:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rohan Jayasekera


text:
User talk:ManikMike69

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:44, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:ManikMike69


text:
User talk:Johnq

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~ ~ ~. Four tildes (~ ~ ) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 12:46, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Johnq


text:
Republic (Faroe Islands)

Republic (Tjóðveldi), formerly known as the Republican Party (Tjóðveldisflokkurin) is a pro-independence left-wing political party in the Faroe Islands.

History
The party was founded in 1948 as a reaction to the islands failing to gain independence despite the outcome of the 1946 independence referendum, after which independence was subsequently declared but annulled by the Danish King.

In 1998, Høgni Hoydal succeeded Heini O. Heinesen as party leader.

During the 20 January 2004 legislative elections, the party won 21.7% of the popular vote and eight out of 33 seats. However, after the passing of an amendment adding the term "sexual orientation" to paragraph 266b of the Anti-Discrimination Act, MP Karsten Hansen announced that he was leaving the party owing to a difference in opinion. He later joined the Centre Party.

At the elections on 19 January 2008, the party won 23.3% of the vote and eight out of 33 seats.

On 14 September 2007, the party changed its name from Tjóðveldisflokkurin to simply Tjóðveldi (i.e., from "the Republican Party" to just "Republic").

In the Danish parliamentary elections of 2007, the party received 25.4% of the Faroese vote, thereby retaining one of the two Faroese seats in the Danish national Folketing. In the 2011 election, however, its votes declined and it lost its seat to the Social Democrats. It regained its seat in the 2015 election, then lost it again in the 2019 election.

Current members of the Løgting
As of the 2022 general snap election:

 * a. Formerly a member of the People's Party until mid-November 2022.

title: Republic (Faroe Islands)


text:
User talk:Dr.psycho

Welcome on Wikipedia !
As a fellow admirer of both LHCs (LHC and Les Horribles Cernettes), I am very pleased to wish you lots of fun and stimulating experiences on Wikipedia.

Judging by your valuable edition of Les Horribles Cernettes, I suppose you don't need the usual encouragements for new contributors. Nonetheless, should happen to have any question, do not hesitate to drop me a line, or come on the IRC channel #wikipedia, on irc.freenote.net.

Thank you, and my best wishes ! Rama 12:52, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks!
I'm very pleased by your welcome message! I'll not exhitate to ask you every possible question about wikipedia policies and customs :)
 * You are very welcome ! hint for starter : you can sign you messages using four tildes in a row like this : ~ ;) Have fun ! Rama 15:18, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Did You Know ?
Hi ! As you might have noticed, Les Horribles Cernettes has been featured on the front page in the "Did You Know", with a link to First_image_on_the_web, a mainly for this reaon. Congratulations ! Rama 14:24, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:LHC5.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:LHC5.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:02, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dr.psycho


text: Category:Connective tissue cells

title: Category:Connective tissue cells


text:
Cordel

Cordel may refer to:

 * Cordel, a unit of length, see Obsolete Spanish and Portuguese units of measurement
 * Cordel literature, popular and inexpensively Brazilian printed booklets or pamphlets containing folk novels, poems and songs
 * Cordel Do Fogo Encantado, a popular band from Pernambuco, Brazil

title: Cordel