User talk:Modest Genius
If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages by four tildes, like this: ~~~~
Attention: We, Wikipedians, dislike fragmented discussions. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page, my talk page, as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.
Thank you!
|
|||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing—Rubicon —has been proposed for merging with Crossing the Rubicon. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Everything for deletion
[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everything (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Chris Troutman (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think I've ever edited that page, so am puzzled why you notified me about it. Modest Genius talk 11:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Your oddly passionate refusal to allow Starship "in the news"
[edit]The last several times Starship got in the news section it was in a negative sense and now the first time that a massive success has been achieved you seem very passionate about making sure it doesn't make it into the news section. What exactly is your beef with Starship's soft-landing ocean touchdown success? Ergzay (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- I have nothing against Starship per se. What annoys me is SpaceX and their fans promoting every incremental test as if it's a revolution in spaceflight. If/when Starship successfully launches a real payload (not a tech demonstrator or a car) into orbit, I'll be happy to support posting that in ITN. Until that happens, it's not a operating launch vehicle. To me, gradually improving test flights don't cross the threshold for a blurb. Modest Genius talk 10:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Except it _was_ a revolution in spaceflight. And this one wasn't a gradual improvement. It was a massive leap that exceeded most expectations for what was possible. Most SpaceX fans I knew expected it to fail long before it did, and that was the expectation set by SpaceX before the launch as well as they only wanted to "get deeper into the atmosphere" or "make it through peak heating". Ergzay (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, clearly we disagree substantially. But that's OK, ITN operates by WP:CONSENSUS. My opinion is unchanged though. Modest Genius talk 10:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
ITN recognition for 2024 Stanley Cup Finals
[edit]
On 26 June 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2024 Stanley Cup Finals, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Kip (contribs) 05:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, though I made only minor tweaks to the article two weeks ago, not the detailed game summaries that led to ITN posting. Modest Genius talk 10:33, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Really, capital p for Palaearctic also when used adjectively
[edit]Thanks for responding to my comment at errors yesterday. I think you were mistaken, but I am not sure whether you saw my reply (sorry, I should have pinged). It is all off the Main Page now of course, but, in the hope that this might be useful to you in future, I copy the full interaction here.
- Capital p for Palaearctic please; the same as for continents, countries, etc. Thanks. JMCHutchinson (talk) 11:25, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the lowercase version is correct in this instance: it's being used as an adjective, not a proper noun. Equivalent to the Alps vs an alpine habitat. Modest Genius talk 13:37, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's wrong. In English (unlike German and French) we use a capital for adjectives to do with geography: for instance, French fries, not french fries. If you are describing the location of a village in the Swiss Alps, it would be Alpine. The small-a alpine is a description of the environment, so you might apply it to a ski resort in the Rockies as well as to one in the Alps. The same goes for Mediterranean (to do with that specific sea) and mediterranean (to do with a climate, anywhere in the world). Palaearctic only has one meaning, referring to the northern part of the Western Hemisphere Eurasia and Africa, so always with a capital, whether used as a noun or an adjective. For instance, our article Palaearctic realm has "The Palaearctic realm" in the second paragraph. JMCHutchinson (talk) 15:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think UC is technically correct (I can find no hits on Google Books for the LC form), but would advise "it is distributed throughout Palearctic" as more natural phrasing. We wouldn't naturally say "it has an American distribution", for example. UndercoverClassicist T·C 20:43, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's wrong. In English (unlike German and French) we use a capital for adjectives to do with geography: for instance, French fries, not french fries. If you are describing the location of a village in the Swiss Alps, it would be Alpine. The small-a alpine is a description of the environment, so you might apply it to a ski resort in the Rockies as well as to one in the Alps. The same goes for Mediterranean (to do with that specific sea) and mediterranean (to do with a climate, anywhere in the world). Palaearctic only has one meaning, referring to the northern part of the Western Hemisphere Eurasia and Africa, so always with a capital, whether used as a noun or an adjective. For instance, our article Palaearctic realm has "The Palaearctic realm" in the second paragraph. JMCHutchinson (talk) 15:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Cheers, JMCHutchinson (talk) 06:14, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmchutchinson: I think this is a subtle point that may well differ between style guides / dictionaries. The Palaearctic is a proper noun so capitalised, that's fine. The issue is whether the adjective form is specifically referring to the same proper noun, or a related concept that is derived from it but not identical. Taking my original example, something specifically from the Alps would be Alpine, but the associated type of climate is alpine because it's describing a broader concept and occurs in other places beyond the Alps. The question is then whether the spider's distribution exactly coincides with the Palaearctic, in which case capitalise, or if it is similar but not identical (e.g. extending into other areas), in which case lowercase. Regardless, it's a very minor point that I doubt many readers would notice, and I agree that it's better to simply rephrase to something like 'widely distributed throughout the Palaearctic'. Modest Genius talk 10:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think that your criterion of matching the exact distribution is a red herring. We talk of a European species or European culture regardless of whether its distribution matches the precise boundaries of Europe; do you ever read "european"? Palaearctic has no broader meaning that the geographical one. Anyway, yes, it's a minor thing for most people; only prominent to me because I edit a biological journal! Thanks for responding, and for all the other contributions that you make here. JMCHutchinson (talk) 11:26, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Jmchutchinson: I think this is a subtle point that may well differ between style guides / dictionaries. The Palaearctic is a proper noun so capitalised, that's fine. The issue is whether the adjective form is specifically referring to the same proper noun, or a related concept that is derived from it but not identical. Taking my original example, something specifically from the Alps would be Alpine, but the associated type of climate is alpine because it's describing a broader concept and occurs in other places beyond the Alps. The question is then whether the spider's distribution exactly coincides with the Palaearctic, in which case capitalise, or if it is similar but not identical (e.g. extending into other areas), in which case lowercase. Regardless, it's a very minor point that I doubt many readers would notice, and I agree that it's better to simply rephrase to something like 'widely distributed throughout the Palaearctic'. Modest Genius talk 10:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)