Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:04, 2 July 2009

DO NOT TALK TO ME ABOUT:

Picayune little details about why I used a twelve hour clock instead of military time or why I used American spelling (because I am an American!) and not British for color. Anything trivial along those lines will be ignored and probably erased from this page. If you don't like that I wrote "Such and such happened at 2:43PM", don't ask me why I did it. If it bothers you enough to leave me a message about it, then make the effort to change it to 14:43. If it doesn't bother you enough to change it, then it isn't worth the effort to leave me a message.

Save your efforts for things that are more important like whether or not an article should be deleted or "Hey, the article you wrote said that Sam's Bar & Grill owned by Celebrity A is in My Town, CA when I really thought it was in Your Town, CA. Can you help me figure out which it really is?"Postcard Cathy (talk) 06:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

PS As Unschool writes about below, get used to the idea that not everyone does things the same way you do. You say to may to, I say to mah to type of thing. Sweat the big stuff, not the small stuff - bottom line. Postcard Cathy (talk) 06:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hugh O'Neills

I've proposed Hugh O'Neills, an article you edited but didn't create, for deletion. --I dream of horses (talk) 02:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

I dream of horses (talk) 21:06, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Question re: article tagged as Orphan

Hi. There was an article that I believe you tagged as an orphan, and it now has been linked to from at least three other articles. I'm wondering if it would now be OK to delete the orphan warning.

The article in question is A Translation Guide to 19th-Century Polish-Language Civil-Registration Documents, referenced now within the following articles:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/Polish_name#Polonia
• http://en.wikipedia.org/Genealogy#Place_names
• http://en.wikipedia.org/Polish_language#See_also

MervynP1972 (talk) 03:26, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Orphan tags

Please, do not call removing a useless tag that does nothing "vandalism". It's not vandalism at all, and care to tell me what purpose the orphan tags serve other than being useless and doing nothing.--Giants27 (c|s) 01:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Did you really have to file that report, when you avoided discussion with me about this?--Giants27 (c|s) 12:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Orphan tags

i`ve linked the anti-crime association to the various universities listed accordingly, therefore, I`ve removed the orphan tag. Please message me back if this was done correctly. Thanks Jenn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennstarfish (talk • contribs) 02:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you please explain further...

Could you please explain why you europeanized the sort keys for Ezatullah Zawab? Geo Swan (talk) 16:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I got your reply. Arabic names, with very few exceptions, should not have Europeanized sorting keys. They are not like Chinese names, where the surname comes first. There are two parallel Arabic naming styles. Neither one use European style inherited lastname-surnames. Ezatullah Zawab is an Afghan. But names there follow the Arabic style, even though they are not Arabic speakers.

You have probably heard the old aphorism, "to err is human, to really screw things up requires a computer"?

There are a bunch of robots which (used to?) blithely insert calculated Europeanized sort keys. There are a bunch of robot assisted editing tools which also blithely suggest Europeanized sort keys. I am afraid I have found those responsible for these robots unhelpful and resentful. I am trying to determine when a good faith quality control volunteers added Europeanized sort keys based on the misplaced advice of a bad robot.

Do you think a robot suggested this changes?

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 22:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll change this one. Unfortunately those who make these changes based on the advice of robot assisted editing tools don't read the notes I leave on the talk page, or in the edit summary, or in html comments right by the category section. Some articles I have had to un-Europeanize half a dozen times. Geo Swan (talk) 23:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I fixed the {{DEFAULTSORT}} value for Ezatullah Zawab, with a note explaining the change, and put the same value as the |listas= parameter on the talk page. Although Afghans are not Arabs, I was told that what appears to be a surname is the name of the person's tribe. I have not bothered to point out the similarity of tribe. All should be well.

Arabic names do not have surnames as we understand them. They have a record of lineage, often quite extensive. Icelandic names do not have surnames either. What appears to be a surname for an Icelander is merely the first name of the person's father. However, in general practice outside Iceland the patronym serves as a surname. Although people from Pakistan and Bangladesh may have names that appear to be derived from Arabic they generally have surnames such as to their distant relatives in India.

There are a number of articles on the naming conventions of verious cultures. Depending on how much you care about the subject the articles can be interesting, confusing or dull as dirt.

JimCubb (talk) 19:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

AN thread

I have started a thread over at AN regarding your blatant disregard to other peoples comments. Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:Postcard_Cathy Jenuk1985 | Talk 07:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Maintenance tags

I suspect people have told you before but maintenance tags go on the top of the article page, not the bottom. Edits like this, creating more work for others, can be considered disruptive enough to get you blocked. It's not a difficult thing to do. Also, your lack of edit summaries are not helpful. There's further discussion at the noticeboard if you wish to comment. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)