User talk:OlEnglish/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions with User:OlEnglish, for the period February 2010 - March 2010.
Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Jung / Influences

I have placed in the declared influences in the Jung article page, as stated. However, someone has removed: "The AA". In the talk page of the article I have shown clearly that this is so, quoting from the article page. I propose to replace it. He clearly had an indirect but very real influence on The AA, as stated in the paragraph named "Alcoholism", in Jung's article page.

MacOfJesus (talk) 21:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The writer has owned-up. And mentioned "The AA" was ambiguous, hence, removed it! I have since placed in: "Alcoholics Anonymous", hopefully that will stay. Also, the "Father Victor White", is reduced to "Victor White", which can be ambiguous to Victor White (flying ace), who lived at the same time! Hence, I suggest to keep in "The Father", at least at this entry as ambiguity and confusion exists without it.

MacOfJesus (talk) 01:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I have been told that we do not put in titles! But the title is still there i.e.: "Victor White (Ace flyer)" & "Victor White (Dominican). "Ace Flyer" is a title and so is: "Dominican". So the position is alogical. It should be: "Victor White OP," & "Victor White, RAF". I feel there is only one conclusion that there is a bias. Any student studying the Jung page would be less confused with: "Victor White, OP" not just meeting: "Victor White", even though it does link up. Could you help clean up these inconsistencies. We the article page writers feel discouraged to write again by them!

Thank you OIEnglish!

MacOfJesus (talk) 14:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Answered at Talk:Carl Jung. -- œ ^™ 10:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Lehmann discontinuity

You placed some templates on Lehmann discontinuity disputing the accuracy of this article. No Talk page discussion was made to explain what was in dispute. I have added several sources that support the presentation , and have removed this template. Brews ohare (talk) 23:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Yup that's fine, I have no problem with that. I believe the disputed tag was because of the message left on the talk page that mentioned a contradiction with an image, but that image is no longer being used. Thanks for the note. -- œ ^™ 10:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

good idea, but I do not know how to accomplish. Mugginsx (talk) 07:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

It's quite simple really.. just go to the user's talk page, start a new message, and paste the code for the barnstar in the message. In this case, you'll want to paste this code:

{{subst:The Admin's Barnstar|message ~~~~}}

replacing the word "message" with whatever you want to say to the user. -- œ ^™ 12:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the information Mugginsx (talk) 22:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, OIEnglish, I hope it looks the way it should! Mugginsx (talk) 10:21, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank You.

Thank you for talking to me on the Jung talk page re. the article page titles: Victor White. I still feel that Victor White (Dominican) should be: "Victor White,OP". & Victor White (flying ace) should be: "Victor White, RAF".

You answered the question properly, the other person did not. Their attitude and manner was in question.

MacOfJesus (talk) 10:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. If you wish to effect a change in how Wikipedia titles articles you can bring it up at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) and explain what you think should change. Also, try not to take it personally if another user disagrees with your edits, they're just trying to improve Wikipedia. And remember it's not that easy to really discern a person's attitude and manner online when all you have is letters on a screen! ;) -- œ ^™ 10:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The reason why I was forced to take it personal was the other person just deleated from The Jung article page "The AA" referring to "the Alcoholic Anononimus Soc.", instead of changing the entry. My personal moto is never to change or delete another's work, without going through the channels.

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

(I corrected the entry sited here, as it was tied-up with the entry above)

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, too, for the Editing of The Article page: Saint Athanasius. This is now a page that is one to be proud of. I am still awaiting from Rome for the transcripts/report of the Council of Sardica! But as soon as I get them then that Article page will have some corrections!

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Left a comment on the same talk page, as it still is not right:talk: Carl Jung. MacOfJesus (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience

I have placed in a quotation that was highlighted in Christian Order, Jan 2010, and attempted to put in the citation references to it, following the page you referred to for me to follow. Sorry if I messed-up!

MacOfJesus (talk) 18:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I fixed it for you. Note, you do not have to enter in the citation numbers.. the references are numbered automatically by the software.. all you have to do is enclose your reference in the ref tags: <ref>...</ref> and it will automatically appear at the bottom list numbered sequentially. -- œ ^™ 09:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Again thank you OIEnglish! Have you signed it?? (Sorry: My Humour).

MacOfJesus (talk) 10:37, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your RfA Support

OlEnglish/Archive 7 - Thanks for your participation and support in my recent successful RfA. Your confidence and trust in me is much appreciated. As a new admin I will try hard to keep from wading in too deep over the tops of my waders, nor shall I let the Buffalo intimidate me.--Mike Cline (talk) 09:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Np, glad to have you on board. -- œ ^™ 10:01, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Cultural Property of Great Importance :)

Hello, OI! I just wanted to ask you something. I am founder of WikiProject Cultural Property of Great Importance. Cultural Property of Great Importance is the cultural property list in Republic of Serbia that have the highest level of the State protection. I love writing about Monuments of Culture in my country. As you can see, there are 5 members for now, but i am expanding all of that, so i would love to ask you to check WikiProject page, and to see if all is ok. I would love to include my WikiProject in all official lists, as this one. Can you please help me, and explain how that should be done! :) All best to you! --Tadija (talk) 21:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. I think maybe you should post a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Serbia and see if you can't make this a task force of that project.. -- œ ^™ 10:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

The Council of Sardica

This article page is in need of correction. I was awaiting the transcripts from Rome. However, I am still waiting! I did find a very good account of the Council. Is there a trial page where I could begin the page again? The article page, as it stands, is in need of complete overhaul!

MacOfJesus (talk) 10:56, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, the article page has been revised, and very well. However, some links to article pages could be entered. Where the Council failed, and in what, is not clear. May I put in these improvements? And I have a very good study (in front of me), that is not in the references.

MacOfJesus (talk) 15:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, by all means, be bold. You don't have to ask me when you want to improve a page, just go ahead and do it! -- œ ^™ 18:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again OIEnglish, I have. Placed in the references from the two great Historians: Cornelius Clifford & Patrick J. Healy. I even managed the citing! A really good page now and one to be proud of!

MacOfJesus (talk) 22:29, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:ER

After taking a look at the reward board, I've tried to review 3 editors. They aren't really of good quality though. I have little experience of reverting vandalism so I only commented on content creation. What can I do to improve the reviews so it's OK for your 'special ward'? (Actually I find it quite fun. Being a WikiSloth, maybe I'll join WP:ER as a regular editor there.) Kayau Voting IS evil 05:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC) P.S. Could you please put a talkback on my userpage if you reply to this message? Thanks a million, Kayau Voting IS evil 05:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, sorry it took me a little bit to get back to you. Could you please link me to the 3 reviews? -- œ ^™ 01:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editor review/Singlish speaker, Wikipedia:Editor review/RadManCF, Wikipedia:Editor review/MMS2013 (BTW I met 2 of them at the MOTD). Kayau Voting IS evil 01:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Answering Editor Review requests

Hi,

Recently, I did the review of 3 users asking for it on the Editor Review request page.

User:Kayau, User:MMS2013 and User:RoadieRich. I left a copy of the review on their talk page also.

Do you consider my reviews as good and satisfying the criteria of your offer on the Reward board ?

Have a nice day,

Heracles31 (talk) 16:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for responding to my offer, I've left the reward on your talk page. :) -- œ ^™ 01:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Christian Order, 2010 Jan.

dear OIEnglish,

Someone has removed the quotation from Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience.

This highlighted a terse summary of the paper, it is not "Cherrypicking", but an essential summary of the Declaration that aids our understanding of the Declaration. I request that it be reversed or indeed the person who removed it might enclose a better quotation that summarises the Document, as this is needed. The summary that the Declaration has is not as clear as this, that was picked out by the Christian Order.

To outline at this stage may be seen and taken as taking liberties

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The Catholic Encyclopedias

It has been said in the talk page of Saint Augustine that there are too much leanings on the Catholic Encyclopedias and can give rise to objections.

I have pointed out, and point out, that the Catholic Encyclopedias did not write anything, but rather were a vehicle to carry articles of excellence written by professors who were tops in that field.

Hence, the references in the Saint Augustine article page should be written as I have in the Saint Athanasius page and in others, thus:

Catholic Encyclopedia, 1930, Cornelius Clifford, Athanasius. &

Catholic Encyclopedia, 1930, Patrick J. Healy, Sardica.

Both Cornelius Clifford and Patrick J. Healy were professors of excellence in their particular fields.

One could draw a parallel to "The Readers Digest", although they were more Editors & Synopsisers.

MacOfJesus (talk) 14:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Or, indeed, put the cites as you have done it:

Cornelius Clifford, Catholic Encyclopedia 1930, Athanasius.

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Report of Vandalism

On the Saint Athanasius article page there is a vandalism entry: "I like cheese!!!!!..". It is located at the end of Biography.

I attempted to leave my report at the appropriate page but I don't think my entry was succesful. Being relatively new to Wikipedia, I am a little scared to go further.

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:09, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you,

NBeal has done it! Good, and thank you.

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Online References

For some of what the user was trying to post, like that the station was on the air and running certain programming, it would have been nice to have any reference (perferably online), but the user was doing one of those "trust me, I know what I am talking about routes" and we can't trust on things. Unless we can see it, look it up, it just doesn't get added. You could include me in the camp that perfers online references over book references. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 08:50, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

See User_talk:Neutralhomer/Archive6#Offline_references for context of above post.

Greenwich

You may be interested in following a discussion in Humanities, (March 1st, 1.2). Someone asked about a protected view in London. The first, I think, is the view to and from Greenwich Park hill because of the Maratime clock. The article page Greenwich Park has a panaramic view.

MacOfJesus (talk) 00:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Link is Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2010 March 1#Article about a London park with a "protected" view. Interesting. Chzz ► 11:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Chezz, A lot of "palaver" is spoken about these things (my opinion). The reality is that a lot of disused buildings are in the panaramic view. The history, too, of King Henry V111, is very tied up here. The Painted Hall, is not mentioned. Hopefully when the Olympic Games comes in '12 a more revival (well needed) will happen. The panaramic view has now a large ferrus wheel to help substitue for the missing attraction, The Cutty Sark. In the panoramic view a number of new buildings have grown up, that are not in the "panoramic view" in the article page. "The Gurken", is not in the article page, panoramic view.

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Ya, aren't the reference desks great? For me it's been the source of many tidbits of fascinating information, great to browse through and read if you're bored. -- œ ^™ 09:04, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

OIEnglish, why not come to London, and Greenwich and maybe see the sights and join the traffic jams, and see "the origins of the species". The Cutty Zark is out of bounds, though, as it is being mended. At times I would prefer Canada and the bears!

MacOfJesus (talk) 16:15, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh I definitely intend to, at some point in the future, visit London. Of course Canada will always be my home though.. the "True North Strong and Free"! I'm so proud of Canada and our athlete's performance at the 2010 Winter Olympics. Especially considering I live in Metro Vancouver just made it that much more special for me. -- œ ^™ 17:06, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you OIEnglish, want to swap? I can give you the unabridged history, warts and all, if you come. I can bring you to a hall whose floor is made of Canadian sprung maple leaf wood, bring your dancing shoes!

MacOfJesus (talk) 22:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

My reversion at Hacker (computer security)

Hey. For edification, my edit summary was intended for this edit. I had made the the reversion before your edits, but didn't save them for about twenty minutes, hence I accidentally reverted you too. Sorry 'bout that. I'll restore your other changes too. Mind matrix 17:17, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, ok. No worries. :) -- œ ^™ 20:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Propsoal To Promote wp:quote

Hello, this is a friendly notification.

In the past, you supported promoting wp:quote into protocol. Currently, there is a discussion in an attempt to gather consensus to this ratification.

If you are interested, you can show your support there.

Thank you.174.3.110.108 (talk) 02:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

I appreciate the assist! :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:43, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Please Help!

Hi OlEnglish! I am User:Capybara123 and am relatively new. I was wondering how you got/made those interesting userboxes on your User Page. Could you please explain the process? --Capybara123 (talk) 20:22, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Start here :). Happy editing, —Airplane man ✈— 20:31, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Biblical Nameless

Dear OIEnglish,

A minor war has broken out on the talk page of: List of names for the Biblical nameless, in which basically we cannot agree on what a Bible is. For me The Bible is bigger than just the Hebrew Bible, incorporates other Books and literature we call Deutroconical.

Is it possible and safe to start a new article page entitled; The List of Biblical Nameless (Catholic Bible)?

The Eastern Orthodox agree with me, the Calvinists and Presbyterian don't. And no common ground could be found.

Starting a new Article page would have to be OK with Wikipedia's policy and what Article pages are already in place.

Fitting in the data would be rather easy, it is the page name and the agreements that are difficult! But with this there may be dublication!

Help!

MacOfJesus (talk) 21:45, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately in this case, because I'm too unfamiliar with the subject matter, I don't think there's much I can do to help here. I think you're best bet would be to ask at that same talk page you referred to, or someone more familiar with this subject who would likely know what articles on this subject are already in place. As for it being OK with policies, I don't know if it qualifies but if there's any guideline this new article you propose violates then it would be Wikipedia:Content forking, however, you could always just start the article and see how it turns out. I personally wouldn't have a problem with List of Biblical Nameless (Catholic Bible) but someone else might deem it to be a content or POV fork. Or even someone may decide that it should be merged into List of names for the Biblical Nameless, which in that case your problem would be solved (although achieved in a roundabout way). I'd say go ahead and create it and see what happens, but do leave a note at the prior article's talk page saying that you did this. -- œ ^™ 01:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Dear OIEnglish,

Thank you sincerely for this. The merging of the two (opinions) was contentious, leaving no other option. Also, the original has a lot of lacunae, as well. I will set about this soon, when I've all the necessary sources.

How are the Wint. Gms.? Greenwich as mad as can be!

Category:Wikipedia:Book tool

As you commented at Category talk:Wikipedia:Book tool about the category name, I thought you might be interested in this CfD discussion. Cheers, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 17:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Flag-templates

Hello, OlEnglish …

I took your advice, i.e., "the title IS the shortcut" on WP:FLAG-BIO & WP:FLAG-INC, and changed the other Flag-templates to remove the shortcut tags … BTW, have you (or would you) use them?

Happy Editing! — 71.166.147.78 (talk · contribs) _{19:43, 31 March 2010 (UTC)}

If I was a new user I would, and I do recall using them a couple times in the past when I was new. I think these templates come in handy for new editors, they do a good job of AGF, and are great for new page patrol. -- œ ^™ 23:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Editor review

I noticed your ad on the reward board. I just popped by to tell you I reviewed an editor. You can find proof of the review here. The Utahraptor (talk) 01:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

That's great Utahraptor. However I do believe my post said, "Give good reviews to at least 3 editors at WP:ER". If you're looking to get a barnstar you've got two more to go! ;) -- œ ^™ 01:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

You can find the other two reviews here and here. The Utahraptor (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Why delete my page?

Hello

I am writing the page about a company called Moveandstay. This company services is the number 1 provider in the world for serviced apartments and serviced offices It is used by 400,000 persons every months and is growing

Isn't it worth an article to inform people about the legitimacy of this company and let them know in details what it is about?

In case of a negative answer, why asiarooms got an article? See http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/AsiaRooms

Thank you in advance —Preceding unsigned comment added by Efauvel (talk • contribs) 04:05, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Unfortunately the article you started violated several of our policies. It was written in a blatantly promotional non-neutral tone, was unreferenced from reliable third-party sources, and was quite clearly an attempt at advertising (read #5). Please understand that Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, meant for learning, not a means for getting your business known on the internet. As for Asiarooms, I removed the blatantly promotional material from that article, and I'm not sure how much longer that article will stay on Wikipedia either. I'm sorry if I'm coming off a little harsh, if you wish, you can recreate your article, I won't delete it a second time, but please make sure that it's written neutrally, and is supported by reliable third-party sources. Otherwise someone else will catch it and it could be deleted again. Regards, œ ^™ 04:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for your fast answer, it is really appreciated. I made the mistake of saving the page before actually finalizing the content (I was editing and saving the page multiple times to see the final result) Thank you for your advice, I have re-created the page and used a neutral tone. Please let me know if it is suitable for Wikipedia.

Thanks again for your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by Efauvel (talk • contribs) 04:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

No, I'm sorry it's not suitable. Look.. if you truly are here to actually contribute to the encyclopedia, and not just to create an advertisement and scoot away never to return to edit anything else, then I'll give you a tip: Using similar articles for comparison may help. Take a look at the article for Adventure Life, especially the references section, or even TravBuddy.com, a smaller article for a smaller company, yet still written neutrally, asserts notability, and has references. Now tell me honestly, how does the article you wrote compare to either of those? Sorry for my impatience, but Wikipedia has a steep learning curve and it takes a little more work than that to learn our policies and guidelines and what constitutes a valid article. -- œ ^™ 04:55, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello Oe OK, it is understood. Neutral and references. I have edited the page... as simple as it can be. Could you tell me if it is a good start? if yes I will continue otherwise I will alter it again —Preceding unsigned comment added by Efauvel (talk • contribs) 05:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Well.. you're making progress.. I still don't see any references though.. btw, remember to sign your messages with four tilde's (~~~~) -- œ ^™ 05:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I do not understand... the page is changing constantly I try to put the following only and the old content comes back

Text removed

It's because you keep removing the speedy deletion tag that someone placed on the article, you can't remove that tag, try reading the notice it displayed when you placed the {{hangon}} tag. -- œ ^™ 05:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

This speedy deletion tag was added by you? The problem is that it was added before I totally re-edit the page... If I well understand, this page will be deleted automatically? How can I prevent that? I think the article now is suitable (I will make it richer suitable for Wikipedia later on once I know it will not be automatically deleted) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Efauvel (talk • contribs) 05:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

No it was not added by me. It's ok now, your changes are there and visible, just don't remove the tag, do your best to add some citations, and another administrator will come along and review it. -- œ ^™ 05:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I have added some citations and try to find as much valued content for wikipedia users Thank you very much for your help I hope the red warning sign will be removed soon! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Efauvel (talk • contribs) 07:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:OlEnglish. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.