text:
User talk:Bill Thayer/archive2

Heya
Hey howya doin. Love you website, great resource for those works that for whatever reason don't show up on Perseus. I think you'd be amused to know that the kids in my class on the Roman Principate have taken to citing you as a source in their last paper on Augustus. Just wanted to get the word from you as far as what degrees or academic positions or whatever you may have under your belt before explaining how they need to cite sources found on your website. Thanks. pookster11 01:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Great War on Styles
You have already been told that this has been discussed in detail and produced bitter debate. The agreement was to leave articles as theu are for the moment until things have calmed down. That means articles will styles should have them left in, those that don't shouldn't have them put in. Since you don't don't seem to be bothered to check the archives, here are just some of the most recent bitter debates on the topic.   Please stop trying to trigger off this edit war and let things calm down, please! (In the last few days, you have been joined by a blocked user from Canberra under false names trying to start off the war again. You may not have known what you were likely to cause, but he did. You should avoid hanging around in company like that, to be honest. You are a genuine user. He is a troll who stalks users and abuses them, hence his ban.) Fear ÉIREANN \(caint)  00:58, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Umm, thanks for the obscure link. I tried finding some such discussion, and just couldn't. Mind you, from what I've read of it so far, I find a bunch of people arguing, quite rightly, about an absurdly complex system of voting, rather than the question itself.... The fact that X is supposedly a troll should not have us all scurrying to do weird stuff because X doesn't like it; if Osama bin Ladin likes bananas, should I deny myself a banana split? One of the cardinal principles, supposedly, of Wikipedia, is that this is an encyclopedia, not an exercise in democracy. Since it's quite impossible to avoid the latter — see for example the POV that passes for consensus under Adolf Hitler, Terry Schiavo, split infinitive and many other articles, complete with virulent aspersions on the minority and constant reverting, suggests that it is not — it all boils down to the fundamentally American myth that everything is solvable by democracy at the lowest denominator. Here we have a question requiring very very little specialized knowledge (everyone knows the Pope is "Your Holiness") therefore everybody feels we can chip in usefully. Majority voting on this kind of thing leads to stuff that is just plain wrong (a very large majority of people refer to ancient theaters as "amphitheaters" — it's still wrong). Wikipedia's credibility is at stake; and something this obstinately stupid, held to as policy, you tell me, to spite some poor schmuck in Canberra — doesn't make me feel good about editing anything; I mean, what good am I doing? Bill 09:52, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, this Jtdirl's recurring accusation vendetta against a "schmuck in Canberra" has already received overescalated measures. It has emerged that Jtdirl shoots before asking. If I heard it correctly, Jrdirl has told that he succeeded in getting some sort of long-term ban against the "schmuck" partially on basis of the "schmuck" having stalked "poor" Jtdirl. Also, our short-fused user colleague has now blocked a new user on basis of that being someone banned's sockpuppet. Of the veracity of that I do not know enough, but I realized that Jtdirl did it also clearly because they have different opinions, and I realized from earlier discussions that Jtdirl has been reprimanded for more-or-less unfounded blocks. I have seen Jtdirl's general behavior, and I can easily believe that he does things without deeper consideration, without prudent caution, hastily, without proof, often on basis of his own error, and generally in midst of hotness. (It could be proper if Jtdirl is asked not to made any admin actions in situations he has himself been involved, nor to users he himself feels to have been victim to. In such situations, it would always be better if a more objective admin makes the findings and decisions, not the one who "feels threatened" or "wants revenge".) Also this discussion here, but as well some in other cases, have alerted me to undertand that Jtdirl easily starts to enforce something he wants to think (or believes) as a decision (be it originally even not his own opinion) and is all too overeager in enforcing, even in cases where a decision has not been reached. In my opinion, styles (be they as "important" as majesties and holinesses) should not be USED by Wikipedia, but rather such should be explained in the text of the article. Having checked the referred earlier talks about the sort of great style war, I did not find anything clear as decision, as consensus. Rather, I found a number of eager proposals (from several quarters) apparently all shooted down by a dissatisfied majority, as it seems that always there could be a combination of opinion-wings to form a majority against any tangible solution. That means that all solutions will remain intangible (and impossible) :)) 217.140.193.123 10:30, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Bill,

 * Believe it or not I too am uncomfortable with using styles in the manner in which they are used. I strongly urged against it at the time. But it was adopted as policy. Re-opening the issue right would be akin to throwing petrol on a fire. All the protagonists would go full force into yet another nasty row, leaving no end of ill-feeling. My guess is that it is better to leave the stalemate option alone for a while: those articles that have them should keep them. Those that don't have them should not have them added. In a couple of months tempers will have cooled, some of the protagonists may have left and a calm debate may become possible. But right now doing anything that might provoke Round II of the wiki-wide edit war should be avoided at all costs. The bitterness is still too raw. People are still waiting for an opening to get back at the other side. It was a thoroughly nasty debate that descended into chaos — not helped by a disastrously mishandled vote and an attempt to interpret the results (or rather the non-results) is a very questionable way. I simply reverted the pages because I don't want to give either side the opening to say oh look. If they are breaking the 'lets do nothing' rule, we'll do it too. I don't want, like last time, to have my entire watchlist full of simultaneous edit wars. My strong advice is to leave things as they are for now. Right now if we tried to have another vote, even with a proper voting system, I doubt there would be a consensus on anything, just a reopening of old battles and scores to be settled.

Fear ÉIREANN \(caint) 22:54, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 *  I too am uncomfortable with using styles in the manner in which they are used — Yes, I read one of the things you posted to a Talk somewhere, where you said as much. Now by temperament, I usually steer far clear of any kind of controversy, as well as the endlessly unproductive dullness of such things as that vote page you sent me to (Condorcet methods and politics and hoo-ha, yipes). Unfortunately, here the sheer eccentric stupidity of the hypercorrection — omigosh, we're dissing Queen Victoria, let's all dive in and defend her against the Ostrogoths — casts Wikipedia in such a patently foolish light that I thought it worth trying to get back to standard practice. I'm currently using the excuse that (on a Memorial page for the recently dead, but I'm overlooking, I'm overlooking) there does exist a page at the British monarchy site where some dead people get their styles, to keep me out of it. But it's making me rethink what the am I doing on Wikipedia.... In sum, faced with this kind of stupid stubbornness out there, it's back to work on my own site and let them all slug it out — Best, Bill 23:04, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Bill Thayer, bless my soul. You and I last communicated about the time of 9/1/1, when you were feeling bad. Subsequently I reinstalled my system and lost everything, and then moved and changed my address. I have only just now arrived on Wikipedia, in the midst of a storm. First of all, Bill, thank you so much once again for your most excellent LacusCurtius site. Second, you work harder than anyone I know or have known. Third, it seems to me this Wikipedia site is democracy in action. Democracy is nothing if not controversy, bickering, recrimination and negotiation. You make deals. You keep at it. In ancient studies, where's the line between original and non-original, fact and speculation? Who said what when and was he/she the first? It isn't so easy to determine. Personally I'm glad there are some monitors here and some rules to follow. Best of wishes, you wonderful man.Botteville 17:02, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, bless your soul indeed David; I still have your e-mails by the way! (What are antiquarians for if not to collect and keep old stuff?) Yes, Wickedpedia is democracy in action, even if this is vociferously denied by its luminaries (Jimbo Wales: "Wikipedia is not an experiment in democracy"); methinks they do protest too much — Anyhoo, there's not much I have enough of a stomach to bicker or be bickered at for, I just find it all depressing, to say nothing of horrific grammar-inducing. Best, Bill 20:51, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Marble sculpture, article tags in edit notes
Greetings, and thanks for your edits and interest in wikipedia. Regarding the article, I thought it best to let you examine the article to see if it now merits removal of the cleanup tag that you included, as the article has been is substantially improved since your edit.

Regarding your placement of the cleanup tag in the marble sculpture article, this took a while for me to find as you had tagged |your edit as slight copy edit, rather than add cleanup tag, so I had to do a binary search to find it (perhaps there is a faster way, if you know how to do this please let me know). Thanks, and best wishes, Leonard G. 14:23, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Much, much nicer; this is now a real article, thanx for the alert. Tnx also for the implicit advice to include "added cleanup tag" in any edit descriptor. Best, Bill 15:39, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

proposed solution to style wars
I've proposed a possible solution to end the style wars. you opinions are most welcome. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (biographies)/Style War proposed solution. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 03:45, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Asking for a special favour
Hi Bill, you helped me out once on a language issue. I'm still no native English speaker, but embarked on another round of policy-writing. I'd very, very, much like if you had a look at Naming conventions (people). It's new, and should be able to streamline a few issues. I haven't the slightest idea whether policy-writing interests you. But I'd think it sad this one would only get discussed on language flaws. So that's why you would do me a great favour to open the page and improve the language where you think appropriate! Tx! --Francis Schonken 15:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Very little to improve on, unless people are being very picky; I did it, though. The two most important items are seldom (*seldomly does not exist, it is a barbarism); and, even more important, you meant advisable, not advisory: advisory means, speaking of a notice or panel of people, that takes on the function of advising (as in an Advisory Board), but advisable means, speaking of a course of action, to be recommended or preferred. Best, Bill 16:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks! Probably I made these errors not for the first time. I'll try to remember. Anyway: did you like the concept of the guideline? --Francis Schonken 16:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

 * It all seemed quite commonsensical. My only point of contention, and you yourself seem to be somewhat on the fence about it, is in re Saint Augustine, etc; but not enough to argue about it. (I've backed off Wikipedia a lot, my own site needs constant care and improvement.) Bill 16:45, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I provided a less "dogmatic" description for Naming conventions (people) - rather a "let the examples speak for themselves" kind of approach. Looking forward to know whether this would be more appropriate in your eyes. Can also be compared with Naming conventions (Western_clergy) - which is a text I just copied. This text explains it simple, maybe too simple, while only touching on disambiguation with "popes". Even then: if this saint/pope rule were applied Saint Peter would be wrong (...or there would be the next fight whether or not Saint Peter was the first "pope"). --Francis Schonken 14:53, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Article Signatures
To keep the attribution reasonably visible to administrators, I did move it to the talk page. Worst case should be a casual editor slaps the copyvio tag on the main page without checking the talk page and an administrator notes the talk page and quickly reverts it back. Of course, the ideal solution would be to rewrite the article so that it doesn't duplicate text found elsewhere.

Sorry you got caught in the crossfire, there's another editor who does the same as what you did there, but sticks it on every single page they start (pages which are much more dreadfully written than Treia and thus likelier to be spotted as copies) which is why I called it a "vanity" signature. When I came across that page doing the same, I applied the same medicine. Caerwine 15:45, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Spasibo za popravku
You will have no controversy from me. I only carried over what I read in Italian language, apparently with a little...uh...editorial intervention...--VKokielov 00:48, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Borealis
Yes, de borealis sol is ungrammatical; but I think you are prescribing more than Latin does: the ablative of i-stems is variable; compare turris/turre. Also, while I cannot think of a compact way to put this (or I would have) the intention of the anagrammatist may be to use borealis, correctly, as a genitive (although there is also the dreadful possibility that this is dictionary-Latin, ignoring inflexions entirely). Septentrionalis 16:30, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

 * It was a slip which the Wiki software just would not let me correct in the little box! What I meant was not that -is words had ablatives in -i (as you point out, of course), but that -alis words did (without exception); the grammatical expression would have been "de sole boreali". For what any of this is worth, of course, because of the making of silly pseudo-anagrams to bolster even stupider theories there is no end, either in this connection or in others.... Bill 18:15, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Caesar Augustus
Thanks for correcting me on Caesar Augustus. I didn't realize that was the standard abbreviation. — Laura Scudder | Talk 23:30, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Ariano di Puglia
I noticed your advanced understanding of Italian, and was hoping you could help. I'm trying to finish creating all the articles from the 1911 Britannica that we still don't have. The 1911 Britannica has an entry for Ariano di Puglia, but I couldn't find it in the Italian Wikipedia or on Italian websites. The closest I can find is Anzano di Puglia. Can you figure out if these are the same place? Or maybe Ariano is called something new now. Thanks. — BRIAN 0918 • 2005-10-12 15:40

 * The place is almost certainly Ariano Irpino.

 * (1) Ariano Irpino is in the province of Avellino, in Campania, and its former name, according to at least one webpage was "Ariano di Puglia"; but Anzano di Puglia is (now) in the province of Foggia, in Puglia. On the other hand quite a few provincial borders have been adjusted since 1911.

 * (2) Ariano Irpino is something like "24 miles" (about 39 km) E of Benevento. Anzano is about 60 km E of Benevento.

 * (3) Ariano Irpino is a sizable town, currently 22,000 people. Anzano di Puglia is (now) about a tenth of that, 2200. Allowing for population trends, Ariano is a better fit.

 * (4) Aequum Tuticum, mentioned in the 1911, is (now) thought to be S. Eleuterio, near Ariano Irpino. But then the 1911 states (my italics) that "should probably be sought at S. Eleuterio 51 M. north." Now 51 miles S of S. Eleuterio would put the article's town somewhere around Eboli — hardly E of Benevento: therefore "51" is a scangarble, probably for "5".

 * But:
 * (1) The altitude given in the Britannica article seems to be — allowing for the scangarble — around 1500 feet, which converts to about 450‑500 meters. Anzano di Puglia is at 776 (2546 feet), Ariano Irpino is even higher, at 809 meters (2654 feet). Neither one fits.

 * (2) Neither one of them is (now) on a rail line. But in fact the rail network has shrunk since 1911. Then again, loosely speaking, Ariano — but not Anzano — has a station not far off, about 7 km away, calling itself "Ariano".

 * Hope this helps. Bill 16:23, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Venezia.Net
Please, movie venezianet in this category "Galleries, Bloggers, Visitors, Directories" and not in "resources". ok? by Noluogo@gmail.com or Noluogo (User:Noluogo 27 Oct 2005)
 * Why? It's not a gallery — there's plenty of text on the history of the city, transportation, etc. It's not a blog, they're not visitors, it's not a directory (of such things as hotels, etc., although it sort-of includes some). The site is a fairly complete informative site on Venice, by people who are actually in Venice. It's a resource on a par with the kind of resource provided by non-commercial sites (like my own, for example, although I've never been to Venice, so I have nothing on Venice, but say on Umbria). Bill 21:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * fyi Bill, http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussione:Venezia . Regards Jcr2 19:02, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Vandal User:167.206.174.99
Thank you for alerting me, Bill! He seems to have stopped after the warning you issued to him. If he continues, let me know and I'll block him again. Owen× ☎  17:40, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Viterbo
OK. You know I wrote one time Viterbo's history and then lost it, this is why I repeated the Etruscan note. On my guide it was cited as Surrena (?). Hope you like how the story is now. I think Papal Palace would need a page for itself, wouldn't it? Best regards. Attilio

 * Certo; e la stessa cosa per moltissimi monumenti del Viterbese (o forse faccio un po' troppo lo specialista?). Cmq, solamente in Italia, ve ne sono tante cose che una Wikipedia non bastarebbe. Ehm — dovrei scrivere Annio of Viterbo.... Ciao, Bill 00:26, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

User:Celestianpower
Thank you very much for returning my edit to its rightful owner! :) --Cel e stianpower háblame 21:46, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

-
I noticed that you had been removing some vandalism and you are not a member of Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit You might want to join it. Also there is a bot that finds vandalism the bot is in #wikipedia-en-vandalism on freenode.net

By the way if you join you will be the 100th member --  A dam1213   Talk +  08:15, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Help with History of Rome
Ciao. Qui è Attilio! I ask for your jhelp as I have noticed you improved some of my articles about histories of the cities. I'm slowly writing my in-depth article about history of Rome (I'm from Rome), but, as English is not my first language, users have banned it (I think they're right) as badly written. Could I ask you to check it and correct freely my Bad English? My idea is: I put the infos, you improve tha article after I've written... if you've time, of course. Let me know and thanks in advance. Attilios. P.S.: I wrote also History of Naples, Neapolitan Republic (1647) and Neapolitan Republic (1799).
 * Yes, you can correct my English as well as you want. No problem. I think it's stupid to consider enemy someone who corrects your errors: ot in the Wikipedia mood, isn't it? Conosco il tuo sito. Davvero ben fatto. Fammi sapere se e quando interverrai sui miei articoli. Grazie.

Barnstar

On account of your many contributions, especially to articles on places in Italy, I award you this Barnstar on behalf of the Wikipedia community. -Willmcw 00:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Bill
 * (musta hit the wrong button...) You're welcome. The Barnstar looks neat like that, maybe more of a Shedstar. No matter the size, you've earned it. Cheers, -Willmcw 13:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

User:64.141.49.2
Thanks, Bill. I fixed the warning you issued to this vandal. Since his vandalism is low-frequency, I'm reluctant to block at this point, but let me know if he continues. Owen× ☎  17:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Move to require registration for editing!
An excellent move! I noted it in an edit summary of yours. How can I make my voice heard in this sensible move? --Wetman 21:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't know. I'm one of the least political of animals, and that applies to Wikipedia as elsewhere, so I haven't the faintest idea. Maybe the Village Pump or some other place to air the question; would you believe I don't even know where the Village Pump is?? My hope is that by attaching my plaintive bleat to every reverted vandal edit of mine, someone will come along who can focus those who think it's a good idea. (By the way I'll be mostly offline Nov. 17‑29, so will almost certainly not be tracking anything here during that time.)
 * Not the most efficient answer, wuzzit? Best, Bill 15:15, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Using a photo from your site
I added the picture of San Martino ai Monti taken from your site. If you don't agree, please delete it and correct the article. Thanks and compliments for your work. Attilios

 * Hmm; it's OK this time, all the more so that I haven't used that photo on my own site yet, so for now it's just going to waste – but please don't do that again! My photos are, at any rate, definitely NOT in the public domain, and I edited that part. No harm done; next time, ask me first: the odds are about even I'll say yes. Best, Bill 15:36, 20 November 2005 (UTC) (PS: despite appearances, I'm basically offline thru Nov 29, in rural Kentucky on someone else's computer a tiny bit, dial-up no cable, and not really spending much time on computers.)
 * Sorry, the idea behind add it without asking was, in the freely editable Wikipedia view, that you could simply remove it if you didn't agree. Thanks for the final permission, anyway. But I'm here to ask again your help for the following articles: Reggio Emilia, Pisa and Santa Maria della Spina, as I added several architectural terms I'm not so confident with. Thanks and good work. Attilios.
 * Here I am again! I hope one day I'll feel sufficient confident with my English to need not your help. My last masterworks (?) regards Palermo (I was there in 2000, I added a couple of my sister's pictures): Palazzo Abatellis, Santa Teresa alla Kalsa and Santa Maria dello Spasimo in the main article, and Cuba, Palermo and San Cataldo. Just a questions more: I'm hearing about this move for registration-to-edit, I think it could be a powerful anti-vandalism move (maybe asking also an e-mail as deterrent). How can I take part in the process? Thanks and best regards (P.S.: maybe one day we'll meet in Rome, who knows?) Attilios.

St. John Lateran: heads-up
I just saw your comment on the name the St. John Lateran is placed at on Wikipedia. I agree totally. It has been bugging me for months having it at a version of the name that is not used generally by English speakers (in fact few would have a clue what it was in Italian). I've proposed a vote to move the page. It is at Talk:Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano (hopefully not for too long more). FearÉIREANN \(caint) 05:17, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanx! Went, did. Bill 14:23, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

User:168.11.96.2
I am, unfortunately, not an admin, but I have taken the necessary action to have this dirt bag blocked. I'll let you know.Gator (talk) 17:23, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Vandal blocked by User:Nlu.Gator (talk) 18:36, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

User:81.105.181.61
Sorry, I'm not an admin. When someone exceeds the 4 warning limit, I create an entry on the vandalism in progress page. It looks like this individual gave up after the last warning anyway. Back to the grind! Jasmol 17:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Caietae Portus
Dear Bill, Gaeta is MY city. I have a fantastic house there directly above the sea (see picture). Therefore I'm working for the article: in minutes you should be able to see it in an acceptable form (correct every typo you see, of course). The Caieatae Portus was really full of mistakes... I can't imagine how many errors we are propagating through the ... Probably also a beach subsection will be added. Attilios.

 * Oh, I know! But, shouldn't you at least mention the Atratinus mausoleum for example (I know that's real, since I have photos of it, as well as a xerox of a very detailed city guide that talks about it, both provided by a frequent visitor who loves the place), and carry over the dimensions of the Mausoleo di Planco? One of these days by the way I do hope to go to Gaeta myself: the town is on my "B" list, along with about two dozen other places in Italy like Loreto, Stilo, Pentema, Modena, S. Leo.... (My "A" list still includes such places as Venice, a number of places in Puglia, Labro, Cerveteri, it's an endless process!)
 * Check it. Now Atratinus have his space in Wikipedia too!! Caius Atilius Funelius.

Canoscio
That is a coincidence... I just wanted to create a link to Canoscio so it would no longer be an orphan page, I hope my link is acceptable (doing that kind of maintenence means you're often editing articles a bit outside your field of expertise) - also I just figured it was better to point that redlink to something related to its intended target, rather than keep it a redlink.

Very intriguing page on Jenkins, actually right up my alley (another coincidence) as I'm interested in the history of older towns and neighborhoods around these parts. My (currently fledgling) project here on Wikipeda, Louisville neighborhoods, should reflect that.

Thanks for the note, I look forward to seeing you around WP. --W.marsh 22:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

User:209.232.148.110
Thanks; I'm not an admin, but I'll try to keep an eye out for him. Tom Harrison (talk) 00:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

His talk page shows a level four. I imagine the level one on his user page got put there by accident. He's made no edits since the eighth anyway. If it's a dynamic IP address, we wouldn't want to block him unless he's presently vandalising; Otherwise, we risk blocking a regular user who just happens to have that IP address at the moment. Tom Harrison (talk) 23:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

AIV
I saw a message you someone left last Wednesday about getting someone blocked - I'm sure you know about it already, but you don't, Administrator intervention against vandalism will be of use! Dan100 (Talk) 09:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I didn't, thanks! Bill 12:01, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Re; Artemis of Ephesus, breasts
The main article claims they're bull testicles. I really have no clue, so I probably shouldn't have adjusted the other page to fit that one. Sorry about that! But I think fixing both and citing some source would be worthwhile. Maybe it would make sense to investigate the anti-breast claims? Heehee. Anti-breast claims. --67.188.47.81 01:18, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Astronomy heads up
Hi - I edited astronomy last night to remove some excess astrology stuff, including the listing of astrology as a field of study under astronomy. My changes were quickly reverted by a self proclaimed judicial astrologer. As you have argued for rationality in the astronomy article before, I thought you would find it interesting - and help may be needed :-) Thanks Vsmith 14:24, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I saw a lot of rewording, much of it rather poor writing, but nothing much to quibble over one way or the other. The style of the anti-astrology editors is better than that of the pro-astrology editors. As for the meat of the subject, on balance, the article Astronomy should reflect what is now called "astronomy", with only a tip of the hat to the history of the discipline, in which astronomy and astrology were more or less fused; the astrology/astronomy connection would be best explored on the History of astronomy page, but I notice that that article has been taken over by the anti-astrology camp; the official POV — Wikipedia NPOV being utter nonsense, of course, and each article having its own POV determined by local majorities, the majority riding rough-shod over the minority — is anti-astrology in both. I won't step into this mess again, mostly because it is doomed to be an endless revert war; with a 5000-page website of my own, I got better fish to fry, I'm afraid. Bill 15:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, Thanks and good luck with them better fish :-) Vsmith 16:09, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Tower of Hercules
Bill, I've added to the article on this Galician lighthouse, and I wish you'd vet my translation of a sentence from Paulus Orosius, when you have time. It's just a minnow. Thanks! --Wetman 02:42, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Are you interested in being nominated for admin?
I noticed a message you posted about being frustrated with reverting vandals. I was surprised you weren't already an admin. Are you interested in being nominated for admin? Among other things this would give you the convenient rollback button. You seem to have made lots of edits and been active for some time. The questions is: are you interested? RJFJR 02:00, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Thank you no; because of my own site I'm not able to give Wikipedia the time it would require. Best, Bill 11:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

195.194.119.220
just to let you know this is highbury college, not just one peep vandalising this so it could be a whole group of people, (just letting you know.) L.C.Z —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.119.220 (talk • contribs)

 * Yes, that's one of the many problems with anonymous users. The vandalism problem would be taken care of immediately if Wikipedia required registration, with e‑mail (like most other bulletin boards and blogs and so on), before one could edit. They're already doing it with the creation of new articles, and the stupidity — see Special:Newpages — instantly dropped to almost zero.

 * As one of the serious users, you might consider registering: strange as it sounds by the way, registered users are actually more anonymous, since the ISP identifier is no longer displayed or accessible (except to high-level admins). It's an easy matter to trace a numerical ISP address using a "WhoIs" program. . . . Best, Bill 12:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Caught the guys doing it and gave them a slap. If they do it again i apologise for it :p, L.C.Z

A fair man
Hi Bill, just wanted to let you know that you are one of the few fair and decent people on Wikipedia. Good Luck - WhiskyWhiskers 02:02, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Goodness. Thank you. Bill 03:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Churches of Rome
Hi.

I do not understand this edit, in particular if the deletion of some churches was intentional. --Panairjdde 22:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Neither do I! I don't know how the churches came to be deleted; I've gone back and redone it, the way I thought I'd edited it.... Best, Bill 23:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Unnoticed vandalism
I do in a way appreciate your experiment with watching a random act of vandalism to see how quickly it is reverted (or not-quickly, in the case), but I think, for the good of the project, it's about time to fix it, or tell someone about it. Consider it proved that vandalism often does not get reverted in minutes, and remember it as an example of one of wikipedia's problems, but letting vandalism go for so long only hurts the project and aids the vandals. This edit, while it didn't last for months did stay until I fixed it here more than two weeks and 16 edits later. And this was a glaringly obvious one. There are serious problem with wikipedia, but not fixing vandalism isn't the answer. Thanks. -R. fiend 15:09, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Trobriand
Thanks for your help with the French stuff. Are you certain about no accent on Denis? I have two references listed that include it. Hal Jespersen 15:15, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, he just conceivably might have had some peculiar spelling of Denis, idiosyncratic to his family — and that I don't know — but the standard name Denis is accentless. (Google confirms this, if very curiously: the spelling Denis gets, the spelling Dénis — but then almost none of these latter pages in fact have Dénis, rather Denis — a Google mystery. Bill 15:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Deus Caritas Est
Thanks for your help with the Greek. I was having problems with your literal polytonic letters, but found a way to see them using a <span>, copied from polytonic.

Are you sure that the letters are right? They disagree with the reference (which could be wrong instead, I suppose). Thanks again. -- ALoan (Talk) 19:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, I do a lot of polytonic Greek for my own site (sample here), and type the stuff — aided by a polytonic keyboard — regularly. Your ref may have decided to transcribe Greek as monotonic, which is either post-1982 or . . . understandably, because all the jots and titles, to coin a phrase, get very tedious indeed . . . lazy; we've all done it. Still, the citation is from the Septuagint, and thus monotonic Greek is an anachronism. Best, Bill 20:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, as I said in my edit summary, the cited reference has a lowercase theta, an acent on the iota, and ends with a nu... otherwise, your composition is the same. -- ALoan (Talk) 21:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair 'nuff, now that you've gone and dug up the passage, and you've noticed my own partial revert, too. I would have written ἐστι without the added -ν mind you, but then I'm not the author! Bill 21:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Divine inspiration, I am sure ;) -- ALoan (Talk) 21:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Gosh - are you the chap behind this? I have been tweaking a few Roman pages recently (Gardens of Sallust; Obelisks in Rome) and your pages have been a great help. Thanks! -- ALoan (Talk) 11:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Not an admin
Unfortunately, I am not an admin either, so my ability to respond is this same as yours. However, if you see this user vandalise again, you can use Administrator intervention against vandalism to alert any logged in administrators about the vandalism. I will however, request adminship some time before Febuary, possibly even today. Prodego talk  20:49, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Louisiana
I read your message on my talk page. My native tongues are both French and English. I know from years of listening to French news or reading French newspapers that the article is not used. Only with US states in the masculine is the article used, so you find État du Maine, État du Maryland. For states in the feminine, the article is not used: État de Californie, État de Louisiane. Don't try to identify grammatical rules, it's just usage, a special rule for formal names I guess ("État de"). Likewise, people say "le Land de Bavière" or "la Communauté autonome de Catalogne" (no "la" article). On the other hand, of course people would say "l'économie de la Louisiane", "l'histoire de la Louisiane", etc. Compare this with French régions. People say "Région Bretagne" or "Région Picardie", that's official name, but they would say "l'économie de la Bretagne", "l'histoire de la Picardie". To make things more confusing, people say "le soleil de Provence" or "une ville de Provence" (no article), but they say "l'économie de la Provence" or "le passé de la Provence" (article). Go figure! It's just usage. Hardouin 00:20, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't know who wrote the "la" in the first place, and if it's you please do not feel offended. My comment was mainly addressed to people with little knowledge of French who frequently butcher French on the English Wikipedia, which is irritating. Once, at the Detroit article I saw a guy who wrote that the name of the city comes from French "d'étroit"! In fact I get upset anytime I see people butchering foreign languages, be it French, Chinese (often butchered on English Wikipedia too), or any other language. About Gironde, French people say "département de la Gironde" (article). Don't ask me why! lol. Now that I think about it, most feminine départements keep their article, but there are exceptions ("conseil général de Loire Atlantique", no article). Why? Why? Why? French is the craziest language on earth. I wonder how foreigner can learn it. Anyway, for Louisiana, you can also check this French wikipedia page . As you can see the article wasn't used. Hardouin 00:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Category:Archaeological sites in Italy

 * Well the category exists and is useful for the larger category of Category:Archaeological sites by country, but I agree it is better for the major sites. If any I marked are insignificant, feel free to remove them.  I'm just going through the lists of anything marked already in parts on the archaeology category. By the way, I totally agree with your thoughts on Wikipedia.  What additionally bother me is the systemic bias against experts and lack of regard for anyone with specific knowledge.  (Except of course if you knowledge is the details of video games)Pschemp | Talk 18:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Nerva and Narni
Can you please add to the Nerva and Narni pages what your source is for stating that the birthplace of Nerva is not known? Thanks.Wjhonson 01:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I think I fixed it
I went through and found the offending links on your talk page. Tinyurl is a site that automatically shortens links for you and for some reason it was linked above. It is on the spam block list. Now that that is gone, I hope your page will get back to normal :) It seems to be working! YEah (I'm just making sure) hehe Pschemp | Talk 16:32, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Footnotes & diacritics
Hi Bill, replied to (& acted upon) your remark here: Wikipedia talk:Footnotes.

Not that I leave a note on a user talk page every time I do something in wikipedia... Came here to ask a "special favour" again (like I did before): could you have a look at Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics)? I mean, both w.r.t. (ab)use of the English language and content of the thing, since I also know you're a (dia)critical expert! --Francis Schonken 13:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Tx! did the Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics) section make any sense on your Mac? I mean, I checked Linux- & Windows/MSIE-wise (both with a completely different lay-out, tried to write it thus that it doesn't become complete nonsense in either typography) - but I didn't have Mac feedback yet. --Francis Schonken 14:30, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Tiridates I
Hello Bill, I was wondering where you found this image of the statue of Trdat I located in the Louvre and if I can use it for Tiridates I of Armenia, if so under what license. Thanks.--Eupator 21:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

 * The status of that book and its illustrations (public domain) is indicated on the orientation page.... Bill 21:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I assumed that only applies to the text. There was no clear indication that the images are from the book as well and not supplemented by you.--Eupator 14:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Tsk-tsk . . . . although no harm done — and certainly courteous of you to inquire in view of your doubts. The orientation page does state, however, "The book contains 65 engravings and 28 photographs. Some of them relate directly to the text, others illustrate it only loosely; I've reproduced all of them." — and, at the foot of every one of my pages, it is stated that anything with a single asterisk in the URL is public domain, and that explanation links to further details on copyright. At any rate, your particular item is public domain. My own photographs, when I add any, are very clearly set off, but I admit that that's a negative indication. I may need to add to that page and similar orientation pages that unless stated otherwise, all illustrations come with the text. And so, by input from others, especially careful readers, we all progress. Best, Bill 14:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Please check your WP:NA entry
Greetings, editor! Your name appears on List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct: Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! bd2412 T 04:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
 * 2) If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
 * 3) Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Rome article improvement drive
Ciao! Come stai? Ti va di votare per l'improvement drive dell'articolo Rome (vedi Article Improvement Drive? Più che altro credo ci sia bisogno di migliorare History of Rome... Un saluto da Attilio.

 * Fatto, votato; invece, sono occupatissimo dal proprio sito in questi giorni -- ci accerchiamo del centenario del terremoto di San Francisco (18 Apr 06) e, in più delle altre cose "in allestimento" (come si dice in Rete), un libro sulla tragedia.... Quindi non faccio quasi nulla su Wickedpedia; riscrivere un articolo su Roma, che lavoro! Saluti, Bill 14:16, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Carondelet
I have no objection to the article on the Louisiana governor being at "Francisco de Carondelet" (nor "Francisco Luis Hector", nor "Hector de Carondelet" nor "Francisco Luis Hector de Carondelet", or whatever consensus shows the better choice). I do object to having two seperate articles at different titles. As one of the two articles was longer and older, I redirected there. Please, let's combine them, and do a proper page move if/as needed. (Perhaps we should wait a couple days to see if any other editors wish to comment?) Your thoughts, objections? Cheers, -- Infrogmation 22:22, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking care of it. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 17:08, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Please fix the error
At Talk:John Seigenthaler Sr. Wikipedia biography controversy, you state that you know of an intentionally introduced error in Wikipedia that has gone uncorrected for a very long time. You have left the mistake unchanged for long enough to prove the point that some mistakes in Wikipedia will persist for a long time. I don't think it is a good idea to allow the mistake to persist. Whether it gets reverted tomorrow, or if it takes 3 more months, the point has been made. In the meantime, as you say, hundreds of people are either leaning an incorrect fact or getting a bad impression of us. Instead of watching this problem to gauge our flaws, it is time to work to correct our flaws by fixing the probelm. I urge you to take action now and correct the error in the article. Thank you, Johntex\talk 23:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Churches of Rome
I wonder why you removed my edit to the list of churches at Churches of Rome, specifically, Santi Petro e Paolo. The church is in EUR, which I understand to be within the city limits, and probably deserves a page of its own one of these days. (See http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~tjmoore/imagesofrome/Mussolini/EUR/church.jpg)Brecchie 17:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Roman Empire/reorganization
Hi Bill, I say you making some improvements to 'Roman' articles lately. Have you noticed that Roman Empire is currently being reorganized (and hopefully improved), on Roman Empire/reorganization? Maybe you would like to join the effort. Cheers,--Hippalus 06:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I'll take a peek, but I've kinda stuck to pointing the way to improvements that someone else can make. I've been, as usual, busy very much fulltime with my own site. Sorry, Bill 12:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Tagging articles as speedy
Bill, When you are tagging articles (or other miscellany on Wikipedia} for speedy deletion, you shouldn't mark the edit as minor. Secondly, you might like to archive your talk page, it is very long and on some browsers this causes problems. --Gary Kirk (talk) 12:57, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bill Thayer/archive2


text:
Achaeus of Syracuse

Achaeus of Syracuse (Ἀχαιός ὁ Συρακούσιος; lived 4th century BC) was an ancient Greek tragedian native of Syracuse, Magna Graecia. The Suda ascribes to him 10 plays, while the Pseudo-Eudocia 14. He may be the "Achaios" who won a victory at Athens' Lenaia festival in 356 BC.

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

title: Achaeus of Syracuse


text:
Ayrshire cattle

The Ayrshire (IPA ) is a Scottish breed of dairy cattle. It originates in, and is named for, the county of Ayrshire in south-western Scotland. Ayrshires typically have red and white markings; the red can range from a shade of orange to a dark brown.

History
The origins of the Ayrshire are not known. It originated in the county of Ayrshire in Scotland before 1800. It was variously known as the Dunlop, later the Cunningham, and finally, the Ayrshire. These are all parts of the County Ayr. Although they are now native to Ayrshire, Scotland, some historians believe the Ayrshire breed originated in Holland. In 1750, they were crossbred with other breeds of cattle, which led to their distinctive brown spots. The cattle were recognised as a distinct breed by the Highland and Agricultural Society in 1814. Many modern dairy farmers favour Ayrshires because of their longevity, hardiness, and easy calving. These traits are thought to have developed due to the rugged conditions of its native habitat.

The Ayrshire was exported to the United States from 1822, primarily to Connecticut and other parts of New England. The environment was similar to their native land of Scotland. The American Ayrshire Breed Association was founded in 1875. The Approved Ayrshire Milk programme, which licensed farms that owned Ayrshire cattle, began in the 1930s. Ayrshire milk was identified as being of higher quality compared to that of other breeds. Today, the cattle are owned by farmers in many areas of America, including New York and Pennsylvania.

Characteristics
The Ayrshire is a medium-sized breed. The average adult individual "should weigh over 1,200 lb at maturity." Their milk production can reach 20,000 lb or greater per annum. With butter fat content of 4.13% and 3.30% protein content

The cattle are usually red and white in colour, the red varying from very deep to a lighter shade. Calves may be de-horned for ease of handling; if they are not, the horns can grow to 30 cm in length. The cattle are typically strong and adaptable to many farming methods, and better suited to extensive management than breeds such as the Friesian.

Temperament
A study of the social behaviour of Polish Black-and-White dairy cattle and their F1-crossbreds with Ayrshire, Jersey, Holstein-Friesian and Swedish Black-and-White breeds, found the Ayrshire crossbreeds were most dominant, least attacked by their group-mates and least susceptible to a group change. A further study found that among Ayrshire, Holstein, Jersey, Brown Swiss and Guernsey (the other common dairy breeds), the Ayrshire had the highest number of agonistic interactions, however, this was not related to bodyweight.

Population
In 2008, 63,356 Ayrshire cattle were registered in the United Kingdom. In the United States, Ayrshire cattle are classed as a "recovering" breed by the Livestock Conservancy, despite a significant decline in registrations over the last 30 years. This means more than 2,500 registrations occur annually, but the breed is "still in need of monitoring."

title: Ayrshire cattle


text:
User:MLBOSU

LETS WIKI WIKI!!!!!!
What is going on people?? My name is Matt. I am from Oklahoma. I'm new on here (as of July 22, 2005). I'm just learning how to edit pages, and make them better. Making them look good is kind of tricky, but whatever.

Good talk, I'll see you out there.

title: User:MLBOSU


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Joyner

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was ALREADY DELETED, but by User:Seglea. -Splash 02:55, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Mark Joyner
Vanity. smoddy 20:39, 22 July 2005 (UTC) ''see also Mark Joyner Constructs, Mark Joyner Construct Zero, Spread the Meme

which incidentally ranked #1 on Amazon due to pure Internet Promotion, the book was largely promoted by email (which isn't spiderable by Google) Note: the book reached #1 in 24 hours of launch and succeeded in knocking Rudolf Giuliani off the #1 spot (who incidentally was promoting his book, 'Leadership' every half hour on CNN. There are 36,000 hits on google referencing "Mark Joyner" Even J Conrad Levinson (the grandfather of Guerilla Marketing said this: "Mark Joyner is an Internet Marketing Genius. He is the best. No question." PS I added this name space Davejohnson 23:45, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, smells of self-promotion. I have just tagged a number of related articles for vfd. Mark Joyner main claim to fame according to the article, his ability to promote MindControlMarketing.com, only gets 914 google hits, which is not much for a term which should be notable for having been artificially hyped on the internet. Thue | talk 21:08, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * KeepI Just updated to remove reference to mindcontrolmarketing.com
 * KeepI Just updated to remove reference to mindcontrolmarketing.com
 * KeepI Just updated to remove reference to mindcontrolmarketing.com
 * Delete, looks very much like an ad... and if your book goes to #1 on any major site, it will definitely get more Google hits than that. --Idont Havaname 23:53, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Hey Idont Havaname - in that case, what is the Wiki entry advertising? :)

take a look at these Google results for this specific search term mindcontrolmarketing.com amazon #1 it's pretty conclusive. like I said, the book was cleverly promoted using email, which doesn't get spidered by google. I can understand why you find this hard to believe, getting a #1 at amazon the way he did, and without spending money on advertising is exactily the reason Conrad J Levinson (Author: Guerrilla marketing cites Mark as an Internet marketing genius, and that is exactly the reason why I believe he deserves his place here on Wikipedia Davejohnson 01:10, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity. JamesBurns 04:45, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * delete The book is now 47,586 on Amazon and being discounted. That is probably <1,000 sales. It is very difficult to believe it was ever No #1. This is unverifiable vanity--Porturology 06:03, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: The author may want to read Autobiography to understand why this is being received so negatively. Thue | talk 06:50, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I might be persuaded otherwise if Mr Joyner sorry Johnson could give us the date that his book went to number one, and the total number of copies sold. DJ Clayworth 13:25, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure of the dates, but if anyone's interested in validating these facts, you could try googling this Mark Joyner Internet you'll find over 121,000 references to him, I'm sure there will be some entries with details of his best seller, dates volume etc. I don't know the figures, I mearly read the book. Davejohnson 22:02, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

PS.. Interestingly the legendary british football manager Terry Venables only has 26,600 google hits when searching analogously Name + Field ie Terry Venables Football Davejohnson 22:17, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Surely if would only be classed as vanity if I were him -which I'm not, but I admit I'm probably a little more fanatical about this guy than most :) Davejohnson 22:18, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment: This is Mark Joyner, the topic of this entry. Allow me to comment on a few things.  1.  Mr. Johnson, I'm flattered and appreciative of your support.  If you could provide a link to your site or some other way of identifying yourself it might be helpful to folks who are suspicious that you may be me posting under a pseudonym for the purpose of self-promotion.  2.  Amazon best-sellers.  First, whether or not I wrote a book that was a #1 best-seller may not be the best gauge of the worthiness of my entry here.  Next, the number of Google references is certainly not a valid metric for determining whether or not a book was ever once a #1 best-seller (nor is it's current rank).  However, if you wish to verify that it was a #1 best-seller I suggest checking with Amazon.  It was a very well-publicized campaign and there are many a witness to the fact that it beat out Rudy's book (if only for two days).  What was important was that it was all done with grass-roots marketing.  The fact that Amazon just pre-ordered 3,000 copies of my upcoming book might give you an indication of the faith they have in my marketing abilities.  3.  Self-promotion.  While I would love to have references to my books in here, what's really important to me is that Dave mentioned the Mark Joyner Constructs.  If nothing but that project were mentioned here I would be delighted.  The intent of that project is to change the world consciousness in a way that prevent humanity's self-destruction - a far more important topic than my books about sales and marketing, and far more interesting than dissecting the facts.  I do hope those ideas remain here.  4.  Accuracy.  As the topic of the post I can vouch that what Dave has said is true.  Again, for the Amazon case I'd recommend contacting them directly.  I'm not sure if they maintain an archive of the past best-seller lists (it's updated every hour), but that would be the best objective 3rd party to settle the matter.  -- Thanks again, Dave for your support regardless of the outcome.  I hope I can see hanging out in my community.  [Mark Joyner]
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Sheila MacRae

Sheila Margaret MacRae (née Stephens; 24 September 1921 – 6 March 2014) was an English-born American actress, singer, and dancer.

Career
MacRae appeared in such films as Caged (1950), Backfire (1950), and Sex and the Single Girl (1964). On television, MacRae played herself in an episode of I Love Lucy, "The Fashion Show", in which she asks Lucy to participate in a Hollywood fashion show organized by Don Loper and featuring actors' wives as models.

In her first continuing role on television, between 1966 and 1970, MacRae played Alice Kramden on 52 episodes of The Jackie Gleason Show, taking over the role from Audrey Meadows. She went on to have her own short-lived television series (The Sheila MacRae Show), and to play Madelyn Richmond in 1991 on the long-running soap opera General Hospital.

Personal life
Sheila Margaret Stephens was born in London in 1921, but evacuated with her parents to Long Island, New York, in 1939, shortly before the onset of World War II. She finished high school when she was 15.

She married actor and singer Gordon MacRae in 1941; the couple divorced in 1967. They often appeared on the stage together in musicals such as Bells Are Ringing (in a 1964 production), and Guys and Dolls (as Miss Adelaide, a character that she took to Broadway in the 1965 revival). They were the parents of two daughters, actresses Heather and Meredith MacRae, and two sons, William Gordon MacRae and Robert Bruce MacRae. One of Sheila's four children, Meredith, predeceased her.

She later married Ronald Wayne, a television producer.

MacRae became a naturalized United States citizen on 20 March 1959 in California.

Death
MacRae, a devout Christian Scientist, died suddenly on 6 March 2014, in Englewood, New Jersey, aged 92, at the Lillian Booth Actor's Home. She had suffered from dementia, but was otherwise in good health and had been hospitalized for a minor surgical procedure, when her death came suddenly from natural causes, said her daughter, Heather. She was soon cremated.

title: Sheila MacRae


text:
User:Thereverendeg/films

Yes, this will be added eventually.

title: User:Thereverendeg/films


text:
Perevolochna

Perevolochna (Переволочна) is a former fortress and town in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and Cossack Hetmanate, and later a village in Poltava Oblast. Before the establishment of Kamianske Water Reservoir in the 1960s, here also existed a river crossing. The settlement was situated at the bank of the Dnieper near the mouth of Vorskla River, where a ford across Dnieper enabled people to cross the river, hence its name. The crossing Perevolochna – Mishuryn Rih was also a key crossing during the Battle of the Dnieper in October 1943.

History
Perevolochna was founded at the turn of the 13th to 14th century by the Lithuanian Great Duke Vitaut as a fortified settlement in order to protect his empire against enemies from the East.

Again Perevolochna is mentioned in 1640s belonging to Yuri Nemyrych (Jerzy Niemirycz), but which was also claimed by Potocki family. Since the start of Khmelnytsky Uprising, the town belonged to Chyryn Regiment, since 1661 it was part of Kremenchuk Regiment. Since mid 1660s it belonged to Poltava Regiment. Claims to Perevolochna laid the Zaporizhian Sich. Role of the town has increased from mid 1680s being the main fort on the Crimean direction.

In April 1709 Russian forces burned down Perevolochna. On July 11, 1709, three days after the Swedish army had been defeated at the Battle of Poltava, the remainder of the Swedish army under General Adam Ludwig Lewenhaupt surrendered at Perevolochna to Russian Empire General Aleksandr Menshikov near Perevolochna. King Charles XII of Sweden, hetman Ivan Mazepa and Kost Hordiienko with 3,000 Swedes and Cossacks managed to cross the Dnieper river and take refuge into Turkish-held Moldavia.

On maps of 1730s Perevolochna fortress is shown on Dnieper river just north of the Ukrainian fortification line.

After the loss of Russia at the Pruth River Campaign, the fortress again became the key place of Southern frontier. It also played great role during the Russo-Turkish War of 1735–1739. In 1760s Perevolochna lost its city status, while in 1785 Perevolochna fortress was liquidated.

Since 1802 it was a town within Kobeliaky county, Poltava Governorate. Since 1919 Perevolochna was a village.

During the World War II at the end of September 1943 the Soviet army stormed Dnieper near Perevolochna establishing the bridgehead ("foothold") of Auly.

Until being flooded by the Soviet government with creation of the Dniprodzerzhynsk reservoir (today Kamianske Reservoir) in the middle of the 1960s, it belonged to Kobeliaky Raion (district) of Poltava Oblast (province) of Ukraine. On 6 December 1963 population of Perevolochna and Kyshenky was moved to the newly established village of Svitlohirske, while the submerged settlements were excluded from record.

Natives

 * Birthplace of Yppolit Fedorovych Bohdanovich (1743–1803)
 * Birthplace of Ivan Ivanovich Martinov (1771–1833)

title: Perevolochna


text:
User:Thereverendeg/authors

Yes, this will be added eventually.

title: User:Thereverendeg/authors


text:
Grove Press

Grove Press is an American publishing imprint that was founded in 1947. Imprints include: Black Cat, Evergreen, Venus Library, and Zebra. Barney Rosset purchased the company in 1951 and turned it into an alternative book press in the United States. He partnered with Richard Seaver to bring French literature to the United States. The Atlantic Monthly Press, under the aegis of its publisher, Morgan Entrekin, merged with Grove Press in 1993. Grove later became an imprint of the publisher Grove/Atlantic, Inc.

Early years
Grove Press was founded in 1947 in Greenwich Village, Manhattan, on Grove Street. The original owners only published three books in three years and so sold it to Barney Rosset in 1951 for three thousand dollars.

Literary avant-garde
Under Rosset's leadership, Grove introduced American readers to European avant-garde literature and theatre, including French authors Alain Robbe-Grillet, Jean Genet, and Eugène Ionesco.

In 1954, Grove published Samuel Beckett's play Waiting for Godot after it had been refused by more mainstream publishers. Since then Grove has been Beckett's U.S. publisher. Grove is also the U.S. publisher of the works of Harold Pinter; in 2006, the company published a collection called The Essential Pinter, which includes Pinter's Nobel Lecture, entitled "Art, Truth and Politics". In 2006, Grove published an anniversary bilingual edition of Waiting for Godot and a special four-volume edition of Beckett's works, with commissioned introductions by Edward Albee, J. M. Coetzee, Salman Rushdie, and Colm Tóibín, to commemorate the centenary of his birth in April 1906). Grove was the first American house to publish the unabridged complete works of the Marquis de Sade, translated by Seaver and Austryn Wainhouse.  Grove also had an interest in Japanese literature, publishing several anthologies as well as works by Kenzaburō Ōe and others.

Grove published most of the American Beats of the 1950s (Jack Kerouac, William Burroughs, and Allen Ginsberg), in addition to such poets as Frank O'Hara of the New York School and poets associated with Black Mountain and the San Francisco Renaissance, including Robert Duncan. In 1963, Grove published My Life and Loves: Five Volumes in One/Complete and Unexpurgated, with annotations, collecting Frank Harris' work in one volume for the first time.

From 1957 to 1973 Grove published Evergreen Review, a literary magazine whose contributors included Edward Albee, Bertolt Brecht, William S. Burroughs, Albert Camus, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Nat Hentoff, LeRoi Jones, John Lahr, and Timothy Leary.

Grove has also from time to time published mainstream works. For example, in 1978 it published the script from the George Lucas film American Graffiti under its Black Cat paperback imprint.

In 1956, Rosset hired Fred Jordan as Grove's business manager. Jordan spent most of the next 30 years at Grove. Later an editor with the press, Jordan oversaw the company's First Amendment lawsuits.

Political works
The defining movements of the 1960s in America—the antiwar, civil rights, black power, counterculture, and student movements in the United States—along with revolutions across the globe, were debated, exposed, and discussed in Grove’s publications, as was the sexual revolution. Grove's books challenged prevailing attitudes about sex through dozens of erotic books, many by "anonymous" authors; introduced the layperson to new directions in psychology through Eric Berne's Games People Play (1964); and gave voice to revolutionaries around the world, among them Che Guevara and Malcolm X. Grove published works by Frantz Fanon and Régis Debray, and numerous books opposing the Vietnam War and the draft, including information on G.I. rights.

Censorship and obscenity battles
Rejecting conventional notions of obscenity and morality, Grove gained a reputation as a controversial publisher committed to fighting censorship as it published some of the best-known banned books.

In 1959, Grove Press published an unexpurgated version of D. H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover. The U.S. Post Office Department confiscated copies sent through the mail. Rosset sued the New York city postmaster and his lawyer Charles Rembar won in New York, and then on federal appeal.

Grove's success in publishing Lady Chatterley’s Lover paved the way for Rosset to publish another contested work that was ultimately cleared by the courts, Henry Miller's 1934 novel, Tropic of Cancer. The book contained explicit sexual passages and therefore could not be published in the United States. In 1961, Grove Press issued a copy of the work and lawsuits were brought against dozens of individual booksellers in many states for selling it. The issue was ultimately settled by the U. S. Supreme Court's 1973 decision in Miller v. California. (The Miller of the Miller case was unrelated to Henry Miller.)

The William S. Burroughs novel Naked Lunch was banned in some parts of the world for approximately ten years. Its first American publisher was Grove Press. The book was banned by Boston courts in 1962 on the grounds of obscenity, but that decision was reversed in a landmark 1966 opinion by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. This was the last major literary censorship battle in the US. Upon publication, Grove Press added to the book supplementary material regarding the censorship battle as well as an article written by Burroughs on the topic of drug addiction. Grove would publish several editions of the novel over the next four decades, including a "Restored Text" version in 2002. Grove also published the first American paperback editions of other Burroughs works, including The Soft Machine, Nova Express and The Ticket That Exploded. Grove would also publish the final collection of the author's writings, the posthumously published Last Words: The Final Journals of William S. Burroughs, and in 2008 published the American first edition of And the Hippos Were Boiled in Their Tanks, the first release of a novel that Burroughs and Jack Kerouac had collaborated on in the mid-1940s.

Grove had to defend its Evergreen Review on several occasions due to what was deemed objectionable content. Issues were occasionally seized by the authorities.

After winning several battles over the printed page, Grove built on these victories and successfully defended the screening of Vilgot Sjöman’s Swedish film I Am Curious (Yellow).

Film
Grove Press acquired Cinema 16 in 1966. The division was closed in 1985.

Union conflicts
In 1962, Grove had sales of $2 million, but after legal bills, lost $400,000. By 1964, however, they were profitable, and by 1967, Grove went public and built its own headquarters. In 1970, the staff of 150 began organizing a union. Rosset fired some of the organizers (and later re-hired them in arbitration). The organizers responded with a picket line and an occupation of the building. Rosset called the police, and the occupiers were arrested. His editor, Richard Seaver, talked to the pickets and convinced them to disperse. Grove distributed an anti-union information sheet, and the union vote failed, 86–34. After the vote, Grove fired half its workers.

1980s
In 1985, Rosset sold Grove Press to Ann Getty and Sir George Weidenfeld, a British publisher. Rosset was fired a year later.

Notable authors

 * Kathy Acker
 * Samuel Beckett
 * Jorge Luis Borges
 * William S. Burroughs
 * Frantz Fanon
 * Eugene Ionesco
 * Ismail Kadare
 * Henry Miller.
 * Jean Genet
 * Marguerite Duras
 * Octavio Paz
 * Hubert Selby Jr.
 * Kenzaburō Ōe
 * Jack Kerouac
 * Allen Ginsberg

In film
Obscene, a documentary feature about Rosset and Grove Press by Neil Ortenberg and Daniel O’Connor, was released September 26, 2008. The film was a selection of the 2007 Toronto International Film Festival. Featured in the film are Amiri Baraka, Lenny Bruce, William S. Burroughs, Jim Carroll, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Allen Ginsberg, Al Goldstein, Erica Jong, Ray Manzarek, Michael McClure, Henry Miller, John Rechy, Ed Sanders, Floyd Salas, John Sayles, Gore Vidal, John Waters, and Malcolm X.

In popular culture
Grove Press is referenced several times in the AMC series Mad Men, directly or indirectly. In Season 1, Episode 3, Joan Holloway returns a borrowed copy of D. H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover; the book's first U.S. publisher was Grove Press, which fought numerous court battles over it. Season 2, Episode 13 is titled "Meditations in an Emergency", after a book of poetry by Frank O'Hara published by Grove Press in 1957; later in the episode, Don Draper is seen reading the book, after being challenged by a colleague ("You wouldn't like it."). The episode reportedly boosted sales of the book by 218%. Season 4, Episode 11 features Eric Berne's Games People Play, another best-seller published by Grove Press. In Season 5, Episode 9, Don is seen at the theater holding an issue of Evergreen Showcard, Grove's short-lived off-Broadway theatrical magazine. In Season 7, Episode 6, Don mentions to Peggy that he and Megan had seen the film I Am Curious (Yellow) the previous evening (Don: "[I'm] still scandalized." Peggy: "Of course Megan would want to see a dirty movie."); the 1967 film's U.S. distributor was Grove Press.

In addition to the references in the show, in 2010, the real Grove/Atlantic (the successor company to Grove Press) published the memoir of fictional Roger Sterling: Sterling's Gold: Wit and Wisdom of an Ad Man. In Younger (TV series), Zane is referenced as being the new publisher for Grove in Season 7.

Book series

 * Evergreen Black Cat Books
 * Evergreen Books
 * Evergreen Profile Books
 * Venus Library
 * Zebra Books

Novels

 * Gold by the Inch (1998)

title: Grove Press


text:
Batdance

"Batdance" is a song by American musician Prince, from the 1989 Batman soundtrack. Helped by the film's popularity, the song reached number one in the US, becoming Prince's fourth American number-one single and served as his first number-one hit since "Kiss" in 1986.

Song development
"Batdance" was a last-minute replacement for a brooding track titled "Dance with the Devil", which Prince felt was too dark. (Although "Dance with the Devil" remains unreleased, some of the lyrics appear in the album's liner notes.)

"Batdance" is almost two songs in one - a chaotic, mechanical dance beat that changes gears into a slinky, funky groove before changing back for the song's conclusion (except on the single version in which it eliminates the guitar solo before the middle section, then goes straight to the mechanical Joker laughter from the end of the movie and an earlier movie soundbyte of Michael Keaton saying "Stop"). The track is an amalgam of many musical ideas of Prince's at the time. Elements from at least seven songs (some unreleased) were incorporated into "Batdance": "200 Balloons", "We Got the Power", "House in Order", "Rave Unto the Joy Fantastic" (later released on the album Rave Un2 the Joy Fantastic), "The Future", and "Electric Chair". Some of these were mere snippets, and other segments showed up only in remixes of the track. The song was also loaded with dialogue samples from the film, making it one of the earlier songs where Prince dabbled in sampling.

Critical reception
Jerry Smith from Music Week said, "With a mess of samples thrown in, it settles into a delicious funky groove that ends too soon. Sure to be massive and not only in Gotham City, Batfreaks!" Mike Soutar from Smash Hits wrote, "Granted, he sings on a bit of it, but for the most part all you can hear is that jing-jing-ka-jinga-jing guitar noise that Prince has been putting on most of his records since "Kiss". Over and above that there are what presumably are cut-ups of dialogue from the film, mad laughter and some demented screaming. Very odd indeed."

Music video
The song's accompanying music video was filmed on May 27 and 28, 1989 in Culver City, California. It was directed by Albert Magnoli and choreographed by Barry Lather, and featured dancers costumed as multiple Batmen, Jokers and Vicki Vales. Prince appears as a costumed character in face paint known as "Gemini", with one side of his face and costume representing the Joker (evil) and the other, Batman (good). This creation was also likely a nod to one of Batman's classic adversaries, "Two-Face", who also has his face split down the middle (with one side disfigured) and whose alter ego Harvey Dent had originally appeared in the 1989 movie, with the villain himself set to appear in later sequels.

The video starts with Prince receiving a transmission from Gemini where he makes a face. The Batman and Jokers alternate dance sections, while Prince (as both himself and Gemini) sings. The video ends with Gemini hitting a detonator, exploding an electric chair (referenced in the song), and Prince (actually Michael Keaton's voice) saying "Stop" as the video abruptly ends. The video also features one Vicki Vale wearing a black dress with the words "All this and brains too", a reference to The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller, in which a female news presenter wears a top with the same slogan.

Gemini is Prince's astrological sign, and is a reference to the duality in his music. "Gemini" would also make an appearance in the "Partyman" video, but this time the costume would be all-Joker. The video earned Prince a 1990 Soul Train Music Award nomination for Best R&B/Soul Music Video, and nomination for Best Video From a Film from the MTV Video Music Awards of the same year.

B-side
The B-side to the "Batdance" is "200 Balloons", which was recorded for the film and serves as the musical blueprint for the main portion of "Batdance". The song was rejected for the film by Tim Burton and replaced with "Trust". The lyrics of "200 Balloons" reference the scene which it was created for to a greater degree than the replacement track, which is only connected to the scene by the Joker asking "Who do you trust?" after the song ends. Prince did little more than replace the lyrics of "200 Balloons" in its transition into "Batdance". Only musical portions survived the transition, but full lyrics showed up in "The Batmix" (turn your head to the east, I be coming from the west). "200 Balloons" also contains samples of "House in Order" and "Rave Unto the Joy Fantastic"; the latter was another song submitted for inclusion in the movie, but rejected (it was replaced by "Partyman").

Remixes
The 7-inch edit of the song is the album version without the guitar solo and the up-tempo part near the end.

The 12-inch vinyl and CD Maxi versions of the single included two remixes of "Batdance" that were done by Mark Moore and William Orbit, "The Batmix" and "Vicki Vale Mix". "The Batmix" focuses on the chaotic "rock" section of "Batdance", and is supplemented with electronic distortion and sampling of voices, instruments, and larger excerpts of Prince's then-unreleased "Rave Un2 the Joy Fantastic". The "Vicki Vale Mix" is an extension of the middle part of "Batdance", which includes dialogue between Bruce Wayne and Vicki Vale. In addition to "200 Balloons", the CD Maxi single (9-21257-2) features both of these remixes.

In November 2013, an unreleased mix leaked online that featured a rap by Big Daddy Kane. The remix was done by John Luongo, who confirmed its existence. According to Luongo, the reason for the remix being unreleased was that Warner Bros. Records didn't like it because it was "too different" and refused its release, while Prince was pleased with the outcome.

A bootleg copy of an "original version" mix exists, which runs 8 minutes 47 seconds long; this iteration features all of the sections present in the album/12" version, but with extended instrumental sections and added vocal samples throughout, notably reincorporating more samples and cues from "200 Balloons"/"House in Order" and "Rave Unto the Joy Fantastic", as well as an added slowed down funk section between the Joker's "And where is the Batman?" sample and the guitar solo section as they appear on the final track; the "Vicki Vale" section is the only part wholly unaltered from its final iteration.

Track listings

 * 7-inch single
 * 1) "Batdance" (edit) – 4:06
 * 2) "200 Balloons" – 5:05

 * 12-inch / CD single
 * 1) "Batdance" – 6:13
 * 2) "200 Balloons" – 5:05

 * 12-inch / CD maxi single
 * 1) "Batdance" (The Batmix) – 7:15
 * 2) "Batdance" (Vicky Vale mix) – 5:55
 * 3) "200 Balloons" – 5:05

 * 12-inch promo
 * 1) "Batdance" (The Batmix) – 7:15
 * 2) "Batdance" (The Batmix radio edit) – 4:09
 * 3) "Batdance" (Vicky Vale mix) – 5:55
 * 4) "Batdance" (Vicky Vale mix radio edit) – 4:13

 * Unreleased (unofficially leaked)
 * 1) "Batdance" (Extended) – 8:51

Personnel
Credits from Benoît Clerc and Guitarcloud
 * Prince – lead and backing vocals, Fairlight CMI, synthesizers, electric guitars, bass guitar, Dynacord ADD-One, LinnDrum, Simmons SDS-V, Publison IM-90 Infernal Machine
 * Chuck Zwicky – programming

References in popular media

 * Hot Chip's video for their 2008 song "Ready for the Floor" is a homage to Prince's "Batdance" video. The group's founder, Joe Goddard, explained: "'Batdance' was the first video I ever saw. [Prince's Batman music videos] had good visual ideas". This was Hot Chip's second tribute to Prince; in 2003 the band released an EP titled Down with Prince.
 * Sir Mix-a-Lot sampled the "Vicki Vale" part of "Batdance" for the song "Beepers", from his 1989 album Seminar.
 * Comedy Bang Bang host Scott Aukerman has said that "Batdance" is his favorite song, on multiple occasions.
 * The song was used for a dance/fight sequence in Mukul S. Anand's 1991 film Hum.

title: Batdance


text:
Talk:Getting Things Done

Link to author's lecture
I've tried to add this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo7vUdKTlhk But the automatic bot did not allowed it. Should it be added ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Getting_Things_Done&diff=189326401&oldid=189326379

Restrictions on types of links in Software Implementations section
Why the restriction to internal wiki links? I added a link to an implementation that does not have a Wikipedia article, but is reasonably well know and respected. Perhaps more importantly, it is designed specifically for GTD, while many others on the list are note (Remember the Milk, Evernote, etc). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakeparis (talk • contribs) 17:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * If the software is notable I recommend you write the article first to establish that notability, then add it to the list after acceptance. The reason for the high bar is that this article is a honey pot for no end of GTD wannabes trying to promote their stuff. BTW, Evernote is specifically listed as "GTD enabled" by David Allen. hth. SageGreenRider (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * While I understand and don't disagree with SageGreenRider's concern (i.e., "this article is a honey pot for no end of GTD wannabes trying to promote their stuff"), I must point out that having a dedicated Wikipedia article is not a prerequisite for establishing that a GTD system is sufficiently notable to include in this article, as SageGreenRider suggests and wants to require (i.e., "If the software is notable I recommend you write the article first to establish that notability, then add it to the list after acceptance"). Rather, as per Notability and Stand-alone_lists and Notability and Notability, a GTD system that lacks a dedicated Wikipedia article may nonetheless be sufficiently notable and appropriate for inclusion in this article. If that is the case, as established by the references provided, then reverting the inclusion of said system would constitute inappropriate and overzealous censorship, and - some might say - inadvertent vandalism, despite its having been enacted in good faith. Froid (talk) 23:06, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... several points here... If you believe B-folders by JointLogic is notable then why not WP:WRITEITFIRST? I agree that a blue link isn't the only way of establishing B-folders by JointLogic as worthy. A reference relating it to GTD in an independent source would do it. Your comment about my contributions as "inadvertent vandalism, despite its having been enacted in good faith" is self-contradictory, see WP:NOT VANDALISM. Removing spam is not the same as censorship. As for your editing I'd says that masking an irrelevant blue link ("Password manager") with the name of commercial software ("B-folders by JointLogic") with B-folders by JointLogic here is less than helpful to say the least. SageGreenRider talk 00:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Glancing at the list, it's not clear that each entry is even verified at this point. It might be better removing the section completely if there are no independent, reliable sources demonstrating that it's encyclopedic in some manner. Minimally, the inclusion criteria needs to clearer, every entry verified, and we need to be sure that the list remains maintainable. --Ronz (talk) 17:22, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree. Maybe the simplest thing is to delete the list and to write "There is a list of tools on David Allen's "tools" page. There are many other claimants, too many to mention here." Thoughts? Talk to SageGreenRider 18:42, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * What's encyclopedic about that though? If there are secondary sources that mention there are a great number of tools, or something similar, we should follow those sources. (I haven't looked at the article and sources in detail yet). --Ronz (talk) 19:04, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The more I think about it, the more I think the article needs a major re-write but it's not clear to me how to approach it. On the issue of secondary sources, I seem to recall there are a great many articles of the kind "Five Great Tools to Use in GTD" but I don't remember if they are just bloggers or more reliable sources. Talk to SageGreenRider 03:03, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I looked around the listings of featured articles and good articles to try to find a model for this one. The closest I found was Requiem for a Species which has a simple Lede/Themes/Reception/end matter structure. Maybe that is a good model? Talk to SageGreenRider 03:35, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * An additional complication is that I just noticed there is a second edition, claimed to be a complete re-write. So we should cover the 2001 and 2015 editions somehow. Talk to SageGreenRider 03:55, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Following the examples of related GA articles is always good in my opinion. --Ronz (talk) 17:12, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * OK Boldly, I did complete rewrite. I still need to add some page numbers for each part of the "Themes" section but basically the source is the book itself. Feel free to edit or even completely revert if not worthy. Talk to SageGreenRider 16:03, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Asterisk for software on GTD webpage
I added an asterisk for software that is both notable (i.e. having an article on Wikipedia) and mentioned on in the gtd webpage http://gettingthingsdone.com/common-tools-software/ namely OmniFocus and Evernote (4th and 5th in the list manager list) and eProductivity for Lotus Notes and NetCentrics GTD Outlook Add-In and (#1 and #2 on the List Manager Add-ons list). Please discuss here what you think about this addition. SageGreenRider (talk) 00:31, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

 * SageGreenRider, it makes sense to add an asterisk to software tools that are both notable and mentioned on the GTD webpage; however, I think there ought to be an additional denotation for software tools designated on the GTD webpage as "GTD Enabled." This is a designation given by the David Allen Company to software solutions that Mr. Allen was personally involved in testing and approving (source: excerpt from an interview with David Allen). Nathan.Paul.ICA (talk) 19:25, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. Maybe one asterisk for a mention and two for "GTD Enabled" designation? SageGreenRider (talk) 14:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Software section removed
I've removed it, given editors are ignoring the edit warning and apparently unconcerned with grammar. --Ronz (talk) 22:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * For the best, I think. — fox 01:12, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I went back to the page history and the section looked ify (are those sites really tailored for GTD?). It would be nice if there was a section with software/apps, though. I came here via a link claiming the info was on this page. Danski14(talk) 20:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Page notice
What is the purpose of the "page notice" (Warning) at the top of the editing page? There are a host of reasons why this possibly has well intentions, but there are more as to why it shouldn't be used, and this needs attention. Otr500 (talk) 13:27, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , Some editor in 2017 thought the article was written like an advertisement. if you and I think it does not, and others agree. it can be removed. —¿philoserf? (talk) 06:42, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I have not looked at the article in depth and it seems you may be referring to the "advertisement" tag on the main page. My comments are concerning a template on the editing page. I performed a cursory glance at the article because of the tag, deciding to clicked on the edit button to remove puff wording, but was confronted with a "warning" IF YOU DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THIS MESSAGE, YOUR EDIT WILL BE ROLLED BACK WITHOUT WARNING that seems it can be interpreted to be a warning of intimidation  (See : WP:BITE).
 * I am sure it was directed to slow or stop vandalism or spam, but my concern is that it is against many community supported reasons NOT to be on the page. It redirected my attention because I took exception to the tag being there and decided I did not need to edit the article. See the opening paragraph at: Harassment that includes: Usually (but not always), the purpose is to make the target feel threatened or intimidated, and the outcome may be to make editing Wikipedia unpleasant for the target, to undermine, frighten, or discourage them from editing. If a page needs protecting there are many tools provided to facilitate this without some warning that looks (even if not the intent) to show some form of ownership.  There needs to be a balance with the purpose: Wikipedia has an important policy: roughly stated, you should write articles without bias, representing all views fairly.—Larry Sanger. As encyclopedia anyone can edit: You do ... Yes, anyone can be bold and edit an existing article or create a new one, and volunteers do not need to have any formal training. (See: Contributing to Wikipedia). The warning  (banner of harassment) seems to exhibit possessiveness rather than an attempt to create a better article (thus encyclopedia), by possible restricting collaboration. That is my concern regardless of the intent of the warning. Otr500 (talk) 16:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , Ah. The edit notice. See Editnotice. —¿philoserf? (talk) 16:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I went to "See" the page but the first step it gave was to discuss the issue on this page which I have started. As I stated, I do not have an issue with the page notice but the wording of the subject title. --  Otr500 (talk) 12:32, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Article concerns

 * I saw that several editors, and those leaving comments, used the system or were fans. There is apparently a "GTD community". I was using a form of this system over 40 years ago. I made it through high school by taking notes and prioritizing. I hardly ever took books home and maintained a B average. Imagine if I had studied as well?.
 * I do have some concerns. The article is supposedly about a management system "based on a book by the same name". A small amount of constructive consideration will lead to a conclusion that there may be no difference if not clearly shown. This means that the entire article should rely heavily on secondary sources or it could seem to be an advertisement or promotional. It seems I read somewhere that "Wikipedia" may not be supportive (I will have to look) of a "Criticism" section, and I saw where an editor removed an NPOV tag reportedly because there was no criticism. Think about it? If a subject, or system, receives any media attention it would almost be impossible for there to be no criticism no matter how good it was. I don't think I am a fan of "not" having a criticism section but would have to explore it more.  I do know that when there is "nothing but praise of good" on a subject it can be bad editing or a notability red flag as it is non-neutral. The absence of criticism is one thing. An article can still show to need a WP:NPOV tag (a non-negotiable policy) because of seemingly biaed writing when words to watch are used.  Otr500 (talk)

Example

 * In the Perspective section it states, "By developing and using the trusted system that deals with day-to-day inputs, an individual can free up mental space to begin moving up to the next level."', that is tagged as needing a source. There are clearly "words to watch" (using the trusted system) **Red flag alert'** in the sentence, and identified as puffery because it is subjective so generally not acceptable. There have been 1,668 revisions involving 907 editors since 2005 and yet it is in the article.  Otr500 (talk)

Criticism

 * Involved editors (a good thing) have to be careful because Wikipedia is not an advertising platform and "fans" have to be aware that even a notable subject can be subjected to AFD (or a repeated listing) if the article cannot be written to conform to policies and guidelines. WP:What Wikipedia is not has become a strong policy and at a point, at the very least, an article may have to be considered for cutting back (TNT tipping point argument) to stub-class as a starting point to create something acceptable.
 * In just a few clicks I found criticism with things like "WHY I DON’T USE GETTING THINGS DONE" and I am not attempting to suggest some "trashing of the book, the system, or the person but if the article is about a book it inherently should have a "review" section and will just as inherently include negative aspects. Forbes has referred to the book as the "Entrepreneur's Bible".  If a majority of reviews are positive then we (Wikipedia editors) strive for neutrality through "balance": Neutrality assigns weight to viewpoints in proportion to their prominence. If there is only a small amount of negativity we include it: This involves describing the opposing views clearly, drawing on secondary or tertiary sources that describe the disagreement from a disinterested viewpoint.  --  Otr500 (talk)
 * I personally could use some help understanding just how the text is advertising. Mind like water, i.e. Wu wei (Chinese: 無為; pinyin: wúwéi) is GTD's biggest message; and to me the text shows me how to deal with obstacles (water in fact being a force of nature, hence a resource which is capable of overcoming obstacles to understanding some problem). The 1st edition's text shows me in what context obstacles might be understood (his '50,000-foot view' is one such technique). Yet my take could be understood as OR, so I forbear from inserting just how GTD has been helpful to me. --Ancheta Wis   (talk  | contribs) 13:37, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

My take

 * Does the article have issues? Sure it does. The world does not need to be presented with a Wikipedia view that the "system" (from the book) is the best thing since toilet paper, just present facts fairly and with balance. That should not be an insurmountable and unobtainable goal, possibly with the exceptions of someone that is a paid editor or such a big fan that any controversy is not acceptable. It is my opinion that a designation for that type of editing is WP:NOTHERE. --  Otr500 (talk) 16:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Getting Things Done


text:
Gauss's lemma

Gauss's lemma can mean any of several mathematical lemmas named after Carl Friedrich Gauss:

 * Gauss's lemma (polynomials), the greatest common divisor of the coefficients is a multiplicative function
 * Gauss's lemma (number theory), condition under which an integer is a quadratic residue
 * Gauss's lemma (Riemannian geometry), theorem in manifold theory
 * A generalization of Euclid's lemma is sometimes called Gauss's lemma

title: Gauss's lemma