Revision as of 14:38, 20 April 2006 edit60.240.88.48 (talk) →Possible violation of 3RR← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:18, 18 November 2023 edit undoDonner60 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers236,028 edits November > June | ||
(517 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{not around|3=19 June 2010}} | |||
'''Welcome!''' | |||
{{notice|'''Welcome''' to Jack's talk page! If Jack left a message on ''your'' talk page, please reply '''there'''; don't reply here.}} | |||
{| style="position:absolute; top:0; width:100%; height: 40px; background:#f8fcff;" valign="middle" | |||
Hello, {{PAGENAME}}, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: | |||
|- | |||
*] | |||
|<h1 style="margin:0; border-bottom:0; color:DarkBlue;"><span style="font-size:large; font-family:Courier New;"><b>'''The user talk formerly known as User talk:JackLumber''' <span style="color:Black;">'''presents'''</span></span></b></font> | |||
*] | |||
</h1> | |||
*] | |||
|} | |||
*] | |||
<sup>] ] ] ]</sup> | |||
*] | |||
<br> | |||
*] | |||
<br> | |||
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or place '''<code>{{helpme}}</code>''' on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! ] 20:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
__TOC__ | |||
<br> | |||
== ] == | |||
Hello, I just thought you'd like to know that I de-PRODed this article and sent it to ] instead. I agree that the article is unencyclopedic and doesn't belong, but due to the articles extensive history I felt it should go through the AfD process. Please feel free to comment at ]. | |||
==To The Power That Be== | |||
Sorry if I offended. You mistook my ham-handed humor as annoyance. Far from it. Typing lacks a good deal of nuance. I assumed that an arch phrase such as "Powers That Be" on WP would be so obviously hyperbolic and out of place as to be funny, but then I also club baby seals for fun. Pax. -- ] 18:05, 9 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
Thanks, ] (]) 21:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
: LOL. ] --] 19:22, 9 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
:As you probably know, following AfD discussion the consensus was to '''keep''' and clean up ]. This will require adding references where possible, and removing large amounts of unreferenced material. I have begun this process; your help would be greatly appreciated. ] (]) 15:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
== List of words mainly used in American English == | |||
Hello JackLumber - could I suggest that the artcle ] is '''renamed''' to ], rather than the move you are doing, as the move loses the edit history, which is normally regarded as a Bad Thing. Instructions on moves can be found here: ] Regards ] 14:09, 15 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
== "Beat It" is a hard rock song == | |||
:Well, I didn't want to impose myself on the guys fidgeting around with that page and reverting changes back and forth (I explained the reasons for the rewrite on the talk page thereof at "To ProhibitOnions and the Like of Him."), but if you think we can do it... The same thing is to be done with the ]. | |||
Hi,I am the main author of "Black or White" article. | |||
::'Be Bold' and 'Just Do It'. A rename of the article with a #REDIRECT at the old article name should be fine - I think your proposed title makes more sense - even for almost exactly the same content. If you want to be nice about it, then create a /rewrite article under the new one. If people *really* don't like the new name, then the rename can always be reverted back, still preserving the edit history. Doing a copy/paste of the article text really isn't the recommended way. If you are doing a detailed job, it is also polite to look at 'What links here', and edit all the linking articles to point to the new name as well. I woud imagine the same would need doing for the proposed ] - or maybe we need: | |||
READ THIS RELIABLE SOURCES: | |||
::* ] | |||
http://books.google.com/books?q=%22Christopher+P.+Andersen%22+%221994%22+%22Michael+Jackson%22+%22Beat+It%22+%22hard+rock%22&btnG=Search+Books | |||
::* ] | |||
::* ] | |||
::* ] | |||
::* ] | |||
::* ] | |||
:: ] 16:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
http://books.google.com/books?lr=&id=yb_ghov9uEMC&dq=%22black+or+white%22+michael+jackson&q=%22Beat+It%22+%22hard+rock%22 | |||
==Watershed== | |||
I've thought for a few days now that it might be sensible to submit this contentious issue to some external group of WP admins, or something, because the disambiguation approach is a WP thing. To get a judgement from people outside the debate. Yay/nay? I just want it settled so I can put content in the right page. ] 20:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
--] (]) 03:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
==North American English== | |||
I couldn't at first figure out why you were making the revisions to the North American English article to remove the links to the Commonwealth English article. The first concern I had was removing the link to the helpful discussion in the Commonwealth article to Cdn. v. Br. English (which you agreed to restore - thanks). The other reason (which I didn't have space to mention in the edit summary) was the fact that the Commonwealth article dealt with Carribean English, which I thought was a completely logical link in an article on NA English. Only afterwards did I notice that the NA English article deals only with Canada and the US, and does not address the Carribean. So, despite my earlier edit, I do now agree with your edit removing those references, esp. that last paragraph. I ought to have paid closer attention. ] 18:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
==Quotation marks== | |||
Regarding your recent edits to several articles "correcting" their comma usage from '"A", "B", "C",' to "A," "B," "C,"', I strongly recommend that you read the ] section of the Misplaced Pages Manual of Style. You may also be interested to know that the actual correct formatting for the quotation marks on ] 'as diverse as "agent," "essay," "purge," "stratagem," "ambassador," "axiom," and "pellagra,"' is, in fact, to not use quotation marks ''at all'', but instead to use italics, to make it clear that the words themselves are being discussed, not their meaning. -] 22:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
Dear Mr. Lumber, (aka, He Who Knows All!), | |||
:You are right, I apologize, I went a tad overboard. Sometimes I forget we are on the Internet, and I don't even realize what I actually am doing, as regarding that ''italicization'' thing—yes, I even knew it goes the way you correctly pointed out. Thanks for the heads-up, --] 18:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
Long time no ! I have a query for you, which is as follows: | |||
::Not a problem. Misplaced Pages's style conventions aren't all easy to get used to; to tell the truth, the first few dozen Misplaced Pages articles I copyedited, I went around putting the commas back into the quotation marks too! That, and overusing ]s, ignoring the italicizing rules, deleting British English variants willy-nilly, etc. Misplaced Pages editing is always a learning process, so I'm just glad to have helped you with that today. Next time, you can point out to me when I've screwed up some grammatical oddity, and then we'll be even. ;D -] 20:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:*We all know that the British use quotes differently than do you and I, namely, | |||
==]== | |||
::*they use single quotation marks (i.e., “inverted commas,” as they call ’em!) where we use double ones; | |||
::*they use double quotation marks (i.e., “double inverted commas,” as they call ’em!) where we use single ones; | |||
::*we place our punctuation (e.g., periods/fullstops, commas, etc.) within the quotation marks, while they place them without; | |||
::*etc., etc. (See ].) | |||
'''<u>QUERY</u>: When did this start?''' | |||
]You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the ]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. <!-- Template:3RR3 --> ] has also been blocked. The dispute was not simple vandalism, and being "right" in a content dispute does not make you exempt from 3RR. The best thing to do is to just report the violation, wait for the wrongheaded editor to be blocked and let someone else revert it rather than violate 3RR yourself. The sky won't fall if ] is up for a few hours. --]<sup>]</sup> 14:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
I ask this because I have been reading some first edition Agatha Christies from ], ], ], ] (times ]!), and ] that do ''not'' follow this pattern. All are U.K. first editions, published and printed in the U.K., for sale in the U.K.. Throughout each of these books, the use of single/double quotations and the placement of punctuation is the same as we currently do here on this side of the pond. Conversely, a that I read, and that was published and printed in the U.K., uses the current idiosyncratic U.K. method that we have come to know and “love.” But, these early- to mid-1920s publications are as ours are here. One caveat, Christie switched publishers in ] and I have not read that one yet — starting it this weekend! — and so cannot comment on which “system” was followed by that publisher. — I am ] (]) 21:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC) and I hope you approve this! :) | |||
=="vandalism"== | |||
---- | |||
Disagreements between editors are not vandalism. Please stop calling your changes reversions of vandalism, because that is not what you are doing. Please see ]. ]|] 22:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:There's always been a lot of confusion about quotation marks. For example, the following paraphrase could be styled in several different ways: | |||
:Please see the dispute between me and that Australian user and then you'll figure out what I meant by "vandalism." Maybe not "vandalism," strictly speaking, but something pretty close to it. ] 14:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
::] made it absolutely clear, "I didn't say, 'I didn't say it.' I said, 'I didn't say, "I said it."'" | |||
::I did see them, that was why I made my comment. ]|] 16:33, 11 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:In Continental Europe, the picture is even more complicated. The French and the Germans have two different quotation systems, both of which are different from either British or American English; but French and German users in Switzerland have their own system, which is different from both. | |||
:::Who am I? I'm an admin, one of many who might find your failure to follow ] and may wind up having to block you if you continue. Look, I've been very polite. I said "please", I suggested that you follow dispute resolution, and you respond by attacking me, as well. You might want to tone down your rhetoric. ]|] 20:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:Most of the differences involving quotation marks are indeed the result of changes in British rather than American practice; apparently, played a key role in the switch from double to single quotes as well as from "typesetters' quotes" to "logical quotes." (rather, "logical quotes".) Back in the early days of printing presses, commas and periods (the smallest pieces of type) were more easily damaged if placed outside of the quotation marks. | |||
:JackLumber, ] here. It's as well to be as polite as a cowboy in a saloon full of gunmen round here. I'll make the same (verbatim) suggestion to you as to ] - Might I suggest you both back off, take a few deep breaths, count to ten, then aim to achieve mutual understanding, possible consensus, assume good faith on both parts, make no personal attacks (expressly or by implication) and simply make Misplaced Pages a friendly place to produce ever-improving articles? (fx:Head popping back under parapet) ] 08:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:I actually don't know why the " " themselves have two different names in British usage. The phrase ''inverted comma'' dates as far back as 1789 according to Merriam-Webster; ''quotation mark'' was first recorded circa 1859, but it doesn't appear to be an Americanism. Then again, many if not most punctuation marks go by different names in Britain and U.S.! ''Period'' and ''full stop'', for instance, were both in use in the UK at the time of Fowler, with different shades of meaning (I don't remember the details). | |||
:''Convo'' must of course be an Australianism. | |||
:I'm </span>]] and I approve this message. 22:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
---- | |||
Thanks for your answer! It was very informative. I especially ''love'' the Romney quote: What a politician! I found some discussion along the lines of your comments ] at Misplaced Pages. You might want to peruse it for its accuracy. I had never read ''Fowler’s'' before following your link: It’s rather flippant, isn’t it?! Finally, I don’t know that ''convo'' is exclusively Australian. It may be. I’ll have to check my Aussie dictionary! Don’t they also use it in the U.K.? Of course, we can always be retro and use ''confab''! — ] (]) 18:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Well, up until 60 years ago or so, the authors of usage handbooks and the like loved to be so damn ], and their readers were pretty happy with that--on both sides of the pond. Which is why, for instance, Webster's 3rd was basically regarded as heretical upon its release back in 1961. | |||
:Many Australianisms are now used in colloquial British English too, for example ''uni'' for "university" (used in much the same way as ''college'' in the U.S.), which has replaced ''varsity'' in the UK and elsewhere. (Not to be confused with ''varsity'' as in a sports team, which of course is a US-ism.) A few other colloquialisms ending in ''-o'' or ''-ie'', formed by shortening and alteration like ''arvo'' (for "afternoon") or ''carbie'' (for "carburetor") are still, I believe, characteristically Australian. | |||
:I'm </span>]] and I approve this message. 00:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
---- | |||
I cannot get over how much those two cultures love using short forms! I am constantly hearing them on our nightly ] broadcasts of '']''. I notice that the female characters seem to do it more often, which may not be an odd observation since a ] I used to know told me — in discussing the female Appalachian accent versus the male — that it is not unusual for women to have accents, vocabulary, and general speech that is recognizably distinct from their male counterparts … but I digress. In any event, I notice the female characters using words like ''leccy'' for the supply of electricty as in “the ''leccy'' bill.” Or, ''bessie'' for ''best'' as in “my ''bessie'' mate.” Or, ''prezzie'' for ''present'' as in, “I gave her a ''prezzie'' for her birthday.” I notice the short forms every bit as much when watching Australian programming, hence why I bought a great big ol’ Aussie dictionary. Oddly, Canadians hardly ever use short forms. H*ll, they won’t even use them with people’s names: Robert is always Robert, never Rob, Bob, Robbie, or Bobbie; Michael is always Michael, never Mike, Mikey, or Mickey; etc. Now, Canadians do say ''university'' where Americans say ''college'', but only because what a Canadian calls a ''college'' is a ''community'' or ''junior'' college in the American sense, whereas any degree-granting insitution is a university. | |||
Now, back to our original topic: I have started Christie’s ] work and it is punctuated exactly as are the earlier works. That is to say, they are puncuated in what we might call the American style. Just thought I’d update you on that! Oh yeah, and something else you might find interesting, when a quoted phrase ends in a period, it is placed immediately after the word at the end of the sentence, as one might expect. But, when a quoted phrase ends in a question mark or an exclamation mark, those punctuation marks are placed with a space between the last word and the quotation marks. For instance: “Is it cold outside ? ” Odd, eh? | |||
== Immediately == | |||
— ] (]) 21:00, 7 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
Hi Jack. That use of 'immediately' that you recently added to the US/British page makes me cringe too, and I'm British. In fact, I thought it was an Americanism! It's not correct usage on this side of the pond, so I doubt that it needs to be listed. However, it may just be that I have failed to notice it. --] 10:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
---- | |||
== You’re Back! <yeah!> == | |||
== Re: ] == | |||
You’re back! ] Was about to write you an e-mail to enquire as to your whereabouts, if I could get my ''Outlook'' up and running, that is. Glad you’re back! Silly edits on the pages to which you contribute have been proceeding apace. ] Go get ’em! ]— ] (]) 18:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
It will do. | |||
:Well, sooner or later, vacations/holidays (including those of the Wiki- kind) must come to an end. This Monday is Labo(u)r Day; after that, the whole continent will be up and running again--until, of course, the H1N1 virus destroys us all and wipes out civilization. But first, I hope to find some more time to edit Misplaced Pages, given that I've got a lot of catching up to do. If you want to e-mail me, use the "E-mail this user" link on my userpage; the Yahoo account I once had no longer exists--it got corrupted or something somewhere along the line, in April or May 2008 I guess. I'm </span>]] and I approve this message. 01:56, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
Regards,<br> Mark (''IP: ]'') 07:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
::It’s going to take you forever and a day to review all the changes made to ] by ] (]). I have never seen such a feverish editor! He’s done more rewrites/additions to the article than I thought possible. ''And'', he never uses an ]. By the way, there’s no email link on either your User page or your Talk page … unless I’m blind. So glad to have you back! Were did you go on your holidays, by the way, if I may be so bold as to ask? — ] (]) 04:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Re: American and British English differences == | |||
:::Conn. My parents' home. Not a bonafide vacation, not a stay-cation either. Some of those edits do have a point, but some are just annoying and unneeded paraphrases. Anyway, I'm gonna have to take yet another wikibreak--I'm currently experiencing some technical issues, so my long weekend is going to be even longer, at least wiki-wise. I'll be back sometime next week. Happy Labor Day! I'm </span>]] and I approve this message. 14:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC) Oh, and I fixed the e-mail link on my userpage. I had forgotten to (US)check/(UK)tick the "enable e-mail from other users" box! | |||
Becareful what you revert, you reverted some of the changes I made. I beg to differ with your view, that's why you should bring it up as a concensus on the discussion page, before making major changes that some may not agree with, that's how edit wars begin. ] 13:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
Well yes I did delete some of your changes, but then read through some of them and restored some of your changes ] 13:14, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
== {{tl|Reference necessary}} == | |||
I protest your accusation, I'm not reverting but making content changes you obviously do not like, It is you who is braking the 3 Revert Rule, by keep on reverting my content changes. ] 13:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
Since you brought the wonderful {{tl|Reference necessary}} template over from either the French or Italian Wikipedias, would you please weigh in on the conversation over at ]? Thanks! — ] (]) 20:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
And you reverted some my minor changes, and I didn't agree with some of your major changes. ] 13:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:Just in time, I guess. I didn't create the template myself, but I saw it in action at both fr.wikipedia.org and it.wikipedia.org, and I thought it could come in handy. Thanks for the heads-up anyways! I'm </span>]] and I approve this message. 00:48, 26 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
WHY? Because "commoner" reads very badly, it was not the right word to use, bad grammar in other words. I felt "mostly" is also a better word to use and the sentence reads better with this change. ] 13:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:: I ''love'' this template! I think your comment was spot on and only hope that it helps. Although, the deletionists always seem to carry the day. Thanks! — ] (]) 02:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
What? Please explain? ] 13:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
::: Thank you for your efforts to save this template in its TfD debate! At least it seems to have been given a reprieve. I like the direction you’re going in with the gray font. I tried it in my sandbox and think it might be a wee bit too pale, though. Would you consider a darker gray from ''']''', ''']''', or ''']'''? Thanks again for your efforts. Would you like me to work on the ''']''', or would you like to do that also? Thanks again! — ] (]) 03:10, 27 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
No, it is not standard to use the word "commoner" in the sense you used it for British English, and Australia English takes its cue from mostly British English, but sometimes from American English. ] 14:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
::::Um, I just used a garden-variety shade of gray, but apparently there are many more out there than I would have guessed. It has to be clearly different from the regular black font, not too distracting, and of course readable. Not an easy trade-off. | |||
Jeez, do you not watch BBC World, British television programs, read British publications (such as books, magazines), that's how I know "more common" is better to use. ] 14:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
::::I was also thinking about a different issue, however. The reference necessary template should be functionally equivalent to the citation needed template. That is, it should (1) automatically place the articles containing it into appropriate categories of "Articles with unsourced statements" and (2) allow for a date of the form "Month yyyy" as an optional parameter. I don't know how to do that, though. I'm </span>]] and I approve this message. 04:14, 27 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
That’s absolutely brilliant! I just always assumed it made the category adds and put the dates in. In fact, when I use the {{tl|Fact}} template, I never put the date in knowing that some bot will come along and add it. I’m basically a lazy bugger … I think the category thing would not be too difficult. I might be able to figure that out it you wouldn’t mind me stepping on your toes in the template coding. As for the bot adding the date afterwards, that is ]. I think, when we’re ready, we just go to that user page and ask its master to add the template to its list | |||
Doesn't make it right either. ] 14:20, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
Finally, as for the color, I agree with you one hundred percent that it “has to be clearly different from the regular black font, not too distracting, and of course readable.” But, I found that some wikieditors, once that other editor made it bright yellow, were merely deleting it without adding a citation, simply because they couldn’t stand looking at it. Thus, when I noticed how pale plain gray is, I was afraid of more of the same. So, I was thinking that we should try for a gray that is a little darker, while still being clearly not black. I think that wikieditors should notice the words, “citation needed,” and then have their eye discover the slightly different hue of the font indicating the sentences needing citation(s). Thanks for all your efforts. — ] (]) 04:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
Now your starting to get personal. ] 14:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:'''P.S.''' How do you want to proceed with the ]? — ] (]) | |||
== Possible violation of 3RR == | |||
:'''P.P.S.''' Let me know what you want me to do! (Be nice …) — ] (]) | |||
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be ] from editing Misplaced Pages under the ], which states that nobody may ] an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the ''effect'' of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.<!-- Template:3RR --> ] 13:17, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
:I've read though it, I know it well enough, do you? ] 14:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
== Curriculum vitae == | |||
Now you are getting very personnel, but you also don't seem to know the English language all that well either. Also I have counted three of your reverts as one :) ] 14:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
I have started a ] about CV, Curriculum vitae and Résumé. You have previously participated in this topic, and I would like your input in this discussion if you are still interested. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">] <sup>'''(])'''</sup></span> 01:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
== American and British English differences == | |||
Back in June 2008 you made . Does the reference you supplied cover all the points that you made including "some (but not most) British writers prefer"? --] (]) 19:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
== == | |||
Hi Jack! I thought that you might be interested in from a recent issue of '']'':<blockquote>McKean, Erin. “,” '']''. December 20, 2009, p. 16.</blockquote> You might find it of interest, if not of use, with the many language articles that you edit on Misplaced Pages. Enjoy! — ''']]''' 18:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Templates ] & ] == | |||
Hi Jack. I do not know if you are very active any more, but I wanted to bring to your attention a merge debate that might interest you. You may recall that you participated in a ] for the template, {{tl|Reference necessary}}. At the time, there was no consensus so the template was given a reprieve. It has since been dramatically improved.<p>In any event, an editor has suggested that it be merged with {{tl|Citation needed}}. That discussion is ''']'''. While the merger will essentially achieve a deletion of the {{tl|Reference necessary}} template without putting it to a TfD, there is a logic to the merge since it would make such inline templates easier to maintain and administer. Once merged, to achieve the same {{tl|Reference necessary}} result, you would use {{tl|Citation needed}} exactly as you once used {{tl|Reference necessary}}, with the same resultant wrapper effect.<p>Unfortunately, the editor who proposed the merger, hived off to ] the discussion of how the template uses <span class="referencenecessary" style="border-bottom: 1px #CCC dotted;">a very subtle line under wrapped text</span>. That discussion is ''']'''. ] is an area concerned mainly with the esthetics of wikiarticles. I personally feel that that is the wrong jurisdiction as it will spell the end of the <span class="referencenecessary" style="border-bottom: 1px #CCC dotted;">subtle underlining</span>, which is the essence of {{tl|Reference necessary}}. Thus, through the two simultaneous discussions, the editor making the proposal will, in my opinion, have achieved what the deletion discussion did not. It is either very clever, or a completely inadvertent, unanticipated coup. I think that if the <span class="referencenecessary" style="border-bottom: 1px #CCC dotted;">subtle underlining</span> is to be debated separately from the merge debate, such debate should not occur at ]. Rather it should occur at ] because these are not ''style'' templates; these are ''verifiability'' and ''citation'' templates.<p>I am not suggesting how you should weigh in on this matter, if at all. That would be ]. I am merely bringing the debates to your attention so that you may consider your own response, if any. Relevant discussions are at the following locations: | |||
*] → The discussion is marked ''resolved'' inasmuch as the debates have been moved elsewhere; however, the discussion may be relevant to you because not all of it is repeated elsewhere. | |||
*] → Scroll down past the struck out text, there is relevant discussion before the reproposal. | |||
*] → This is the debate whose purpose is to render the wrapper function useless and will most likely succeed because this is the home of the esthetics “police”. | |||
*] → This is where I have most recently raised some of my concerns with the drafter of the two proposals. | |||
Have fun! — ''']]''' 08:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
] Hi {{PAGENAME}}! An article you have contributed to may need your expertise. It has been tagged for a very long time as being in need of attention to avoid possible deletion of unsourced sections according to Misplaced Pages policies. If you have a moment, please see ] and address these issues if you can help in any way. ] (]) 04:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> ] (]) 20:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2015/MassMessage}} ] (]) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692007949 --> | |||
== List of terms not found in American English listed at ] == | |||
] | |||
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''List of terms not found in American English'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] if you have not already done so. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 00:05, 22 August 2017 (UTC) | |||
== List of words used mainly in American English listed at ] == | |||
] | |||
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''List of words used mainly in American English'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] if you have not already done so. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 00:09, 22 August 2017 (UTC) | |||
== List of words mainly used in Commonwealth English listed at ] == | |||
] | |||
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''List of words mainly used in Commonwealth English'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] if you have not already done so. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 00:09, 22 August 2017 (UTC) | |||
== List of words mainly used in American English listed at ] == | |||
] | |||
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect ]. Since you had some involvement with the ''List of words mainly used in American English'' redirect, you might want to participate in ] if you have not already done so. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 00:10, 22 August 2017 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 02:18, 18 November 2023
This user may have left Misplaced Pages. JackLumber has not edited Misplaced Pages since 19 June 2010. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Welcome to Jack's talk page! If Jack left a message on your talk page, please reply there; don't reply here. |
The user talk formerly known as User talk:JackLumber presents |
Regional vocabularies of American English
Hello, I just thought you'd like to know that I de-PRODed this article and sent it to WP:AfD instead. I agree that the article is unencyclopedic and doesn't belong, but due to the articles extensive history I felt it should go through the AfD process. Please feel free to comment at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Regional vocabularies of American English.
Thanks, ThaddeusB (talk) 21:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- As you probably know, following AfD discussion the consensus was to keep and clean up Regional vocabularies of American English. This will require adding references where possible, and removing large amounts of unreferenced material. I have begun this process; your help would be greatly appreciated. Cnilep (talk) 15:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
"Beat It" is a hard rock song
Hi,I am the main author of "Black or White" article. READ THIS RELIABLE SOURCES: http://books.google.com/books?q=%22Christopher+P.+Andersen%22+%221994%22+%22Michael+Jackson%22+%22Beat+It%22+%22hard+rock%22&btnG=Search+Books
--Alexanderfriend (talk) 03:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Single/Double Quotes & Punctuation
Dear Mr. Lumber, (aka, He Who Knows All!),
Long time no convo! I have a query for you, which is as follows:
- We all know that the British use quotes differently than do you and I, namely,
- they use single quotation marks (i.e., “inverted commas,” as they call ’em!) where we use double ones;
- they use double quotation marks (i.e., “double inverted commas,” as they call ’em!) where we use single ones;
- we place our punctuation (e.g., periods/fullstops, commas, etc.) within the quotation marks, while they place them without;
- etc., etc. (See here.)
QUERY: When did this start?
I ask this because I have been reading some first edition Agatha Christies from 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924 (times 2!), and 1925 that do not follow this pattern. All are U.K. first editions, published and printed in the U.K., for sale in the U.K.. Throughout each of these books, the use of single/double quotations and the placement of punctuation is the same as we currently do here on this side of the pond. Conversely, a recent U.K. publication that I read, and that was published and printed in the U.K., uses the current idiosyncratic U.K. method that we have come to know and “love.” But, these early- to mid-1920s publications are as ours are here. One caveat, Christie switched publishers in 1926 and I have not read that one yet — starting it this weekend! — and so cannot comment on which “system” was followed by that publisher. — I am SpikeToronto (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC) and I hope you approve this! :)
- There's always been a lot of confusion about quotation marks. For example, the following paraphrase could be styled in several different ways:
- George W. Romney made it absolutely clear, "I didn't say, 'I didn't say it.' I said, 'I didn't say, "I said it."'"
- In Continental Europe, the picture is even more complicated. The French and the Germans have two different quotation systems, both of which are different from either British or American English; but French and German users in Switzerland have their own system, which is different from both.
- Most of the differences involving quotation marks are indeed the result of changes in British rather than American practice; apparently, The King's English by Fowler & Fowler played a key role in the switch from double to single quotes as well as from "typesetters' quotes" to "logical quotes." (rather, "logical quotes".) Back in the early days of printing presses, commas and periods (the smallest pieces of type) were more easily damaged if placed outside of the quotation marks.
- I actually don't know why the " " themselves have two different names in British usage. The phrase inverted comma dates as far back as 1789 according to Merriam-Webster; quotation mark was first recorded circa 1859, but it doesn't appear to be an Americanism. Then again, many if not most punctuation marks go by different names in Britain and U.S.! Period and full stop, for instance, were both in use in the UK at the time of Fowler, with different shades of meaning (I don't remember the details).
- Convo must of course be an Australianism.
- I'm and I approve this message. 22:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer! It was very informative. I especially love the Romney quote: What a politician! I found some discussion along the lines of your comments here at Misplaced Pages. You might want to peruse it for its accuracy. I had never read Fowler’s before following your link: It’s rather flippant, isn’t it?! Finally, I don’t know that convo is exclusively Australian. It may be. I’ll have to check my Aussie dictionary! Don’t they also use it in the U.K.? Of course, we can always be retro and use confab! — SpikeToronto (talk) 18:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- Well, up until 60 years ago or so, the authors of usage handbooks and the like loved to be so damn prescriptive, and their readers were pretty happy with that--on both sides of the pond. Which is why, for instance, Webster's 3rd was basically regarded as heretical upon its release back in 1961.
- Many Australianisms are now used in colloquial British English too, for example uni for "university" (used in much the same way as college in the U.S.), which has replaced varsity in the UK and elsewhere. (Not to be confused with varsity as in a sports team, which of course is a US-ism.) A few other colloquialisms ending in -o or -ie, formed by shortening and alteration like arvo (for "afternoon") or carbie (for "carburetor") are still, I believe, characteristically Australian.
- I'm and I approve this message. 00:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
I cannot get over how much those two cultures love using short forms! I am constantly hearing them on our nightly CBC broadcasts of Coronation Street. I notice that the female characters seem to do it more often, which may not be an odd observation since a psycholinguist I used to know told me — in discussing the female Appalachian accent versus the male — that it is not unusual for women to have accents, vocabulary, and general speech that is recognizably distinct from their male counterparts … but I digress. In any event, I notice the female characters using words like leccy for the supply of electricty as in “the leccy bill.” Or, bessie for best as in “my bessie mate.” Or, prezzie for present as in, “I gave her a prezzie for her birthday.” I notice the short forms every bit as much when watching Australian programming, hence why I bought a great big ol’ Aussie dictionary. Oddly, Canadians hardly ever use short forms. H*ll, they won’t even use them with people’s names: Robert is always Robert, never Rob, Bob, Robbie, or Bobbie; Michael is always Michael, never Mike, Mikey, or Mickey; etc. Now, Canadians do say university where Americans say college, but only because what a Canadian calls a college is a community or junior college in the American sense, whereas any degree-granting insitution is a university.
Now, back to our original topic: I have started Christie’s 1926 work and it is punctuated exactly as are the earlier works. That is to say, they are puncuated in what we might call the American style. Just thought I’d update you on that! Oh yeah, and something else you might find interesting, when a quoted phrase ends in a period, it is placed immediately after the word at the end of the sentence, as one might expect. But, when a quoted phrase ends in a question mark or an exclamation mark, those punctuation marks are placed with a space between the last word and the quotation marks. For instance: “Is it cold outside ? ” Odd, eh?
— SpikeToronto (talk) 21:00, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
You’re Back! <yeah!>-The_user_talk_formerly_known_as_User_talk:JackLumber_presents-2009-09-02T18:43:00.000Z">
You’re back! Was about to write you an e-mail to enquire as to your whereabouts, if I could get my Outlook up and running, that is. Glad you’re back! Silly edits on the pages to which you contribute have been proceeding apace. Go get ’em! — SpikeToronto (talk) 18:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)"> ">
- Well, sooner or later, vacations/holidays (including those of the Wiki- kind) must come to an end. This Monday is Labo(u)r Day; after that, the whole continent will be up and running again--until, of course, the H1N1 virus destroys us all and wipes out civilization. But first, I hope to find some more time to edit Misplaced Pages, given that I've got a lot of catching up to do. If you want to e-mail me, use the "E-mail this user" link on my userpage; the Yahoo account I once had no longer exists--it got corrupted or something somewhere along the line, in April or May 2008 I guess. I'm and I approve this message. 01:56, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- It’s going to take you forever and a day to review all the changes made to American and British English spelling differences by 98.67.109.232 (talk). I have never seen such a feverish editor! He’s done more rewrites/additions to the article than I thought possible. And, he never uses an edit summary. By the way, there’s no email link on either your User page or your Talk page … unless I’m blind. So glad to have you back! Were did you go on your holidays, by the way, if I may be so bold as to ask? — SpikeToronto (talk) 04:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Conn. My parents' home. Not a bonafide vacation, not a stay-cation either. Some of those edits do have a point, but some are just annoying and unneeded paraphrases. Anyway, I'm gonna have to take yet another wikibreak--I'm currently experiencing some technical issues, so my long weekend is going to be even longer, at least wiki-wise. I'll be back sometime next week. Happy Labor Day! I'm and I approve this message. 14:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC) Oh, and I fixed the e-mail link on my userpage. I had forgotten to (US)check/(UK)tick the "enable e-mail from other users" box!
{{Reference necessary}}
Since you brought the wonderful {{Reference necessary}} template over from either the French or Italian Wikipedias, would you please weigh in on the conversation over at WP:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Reference_necessary? Thanks! — Spike (talk) 20:56, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
- Just in time, I guess. I didn't create the template myself, but I saw it in action at both fr.wikipedia.org and it.wikipedia.org, and I thought it could come in handy. Thanks for the heads-up anyways! I'm and I approve this message. 00:48, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- I love this template! I think your comment was spot on and only hope that it helps. Although, the deletionists always seem to carry the day. Thanks! — Spike (talk) 02:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for your efforts to save this template in its TfD debate! At least it seems to have been given a reprieve. I like the direction you’re going in with the gray font. I tried it in my sandbox and think it might be a wee bit too pale, though. Would you consider a darker gray from here, here, or here? Thanks again for your efforts. Would you like me to work on the documentation, or would you like to do that also? Thanks again! — SpikeToronto (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- Um, I just used a garden-variety shade of gray, but apparently there are many more out there than I would have guessed. It has to be clearly different from the regular black font, not too distracting, and of course readable. Not an easy trade-off.
- I was also thinking about a different issue, however. The reference necessary template should be functionally equivalent to the citation needed template. That is, it should (1) automatically place the articles containing it into appropriate categories of "Articles with unsourced statements" and (2) allow for a date of the form "Month yyyy" as an optional parameter. I don't know how to do that, though. I'm and I approve this message. 04:14, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
That’s absolutely brilliant! I just always assumed it made the category adds and put the dates in. In fact, when I use the {{Fact}} template, I never put the date in knowing that some bot will come along and add it. I’m basically a lazy bugger … I think the category thing would not be too difficult. I might be able to figure that out it you wouldn’t mind me stepping on your toes in the template coding. As for the bot adding the date afterwards, that is SmackBot. I think, when we’re ready, we just go to that user page and ask its master to add the template to its list
Finally, as for the color, I agree with you one hundred percent that it “has to be clearly different from the regular black font, not too distracting, and of course readable.” But, I found that some wikieditors, once that other editor made it bright yellow, were merely deleting it without adding a citation, simply because they couldn’t stand looking at it. Thus, when I noticed how pale plain gray is, I was afraid of more of the same. So, I was thinking that we should try for a gray that is a little darker, while still being clearly not black. I think that wikieditors should notice the words, “citation needed,” and then have their eye discover the slightly different hue of the font indicating the sentences needing citation(s). Thanks for all your efforts. — SpikeToronto (talk) 04:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
- P.S. How do you want to proceed with the documentation? — SpikeToronto (talk)
- P.P.S. Let me know what you want me to do! (Be nice …) — SpikeToronto (talk)
Curriculum vitae
I have started a move discussion about CV, Curriculum vitae and Résumé. You have previously participated in this topic, and I would like your input in this discussion if you are still interested. John Vandenberg 01:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
American and British English differences
Back in June 2008 you made this edit. Does the reference you supplied cover all the points that you made including "some (but not most) British writers prefer"? --PBS (talk) 19:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Article of Interest for You
Hi Jack! I thought that you might be interested in this article from a recent issue of The New York Times Magazine:
McKean, Erin. “Redfining Definition,” The New York Times Magazine. December 20, 2009, p. 16.
You might find it of interest, if not of use, with the many language articles that you edit on Misplaced Pages. Enjoy! — SpikeToronto 18:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Templates Reference necessary & Citation needed
Hi Jack. I do not know if you are very active any more, but I wanted to bring to your attention a merge debate that might interest you. You may recall that you participated in a deletion discussion for the template, {{Reference necessary}}. At the time, there was no consensus so the template was given a reprieve. It has since been dramatically improved.
In any event, an editor has suggested that it be merged with {{Citation needed}}. That discussion is here. While the merger will essentially achieve a deletion of the {{Reference necessary}} template without putting it to a TfD, there is a logic to the merge since it would make such inline templates easier to maintain and administer. Once merged, to achieve the same {{Reference necessary}} result, you would use {{Citation needed}} exactly as you once used {{Reference necessary}}, with the same resultant wrapper effect.
Unfortunately, the editor who proposed the merger, hived off to WT:MOS the discussion of how the template uses a very subtle line under wrapped text. That discussion is here. WT:MOS is an area concerned mainly with the esthetics of wikiarticles. I personally feel that that is the wrong jurisdiction as it will spell the end of the subtle underlining, which is the essence of {{Reference necessary}}. Thus, through the two simultaneous discussions, the editor making the proposal will, in my opinion, have achieved what the deletion discussion did not. It is either very clever, or a completely inadvertent, unanticipated coup. I think that if the subtle underlining is to be debated separately from the merge debate, such debate should not occur at WT:MOS. Rather it should occur at WT:V because these are not style templates; these are verifiability and citation templates.
I am not suggesting how you should weigh in on this matter, if at all. That would be canvassing. I am merely bringing the debates to your attention so that you may consider your own response, if any. Relevant discussions are at the following locations:
- Template talk:Reference necessary#Overhaul → The discussion is marked resolved inasmuch as the debates have been moved elsewhere; however, the discussion may be relevant to you because not all of it is repeated elsewhere.
- Template talk:Citation needed#Merge from Template:Reference necessary → Scroll down past the struck out text, there is relevant discussion before the reproposal.
- Misplaced Pages talk:MOS#An issue returns: Underlining/highlighting as a cleanup signal → This is the debate whose purpose is to render the wrapper function useless and will most likely succeed because this is the home of the esthetics “police”.
- User talk:SMcCandlish#Templates Reference necessary & Citation needed → This is where I have most recently raised some of my concerns with the drafter of the two proposals.
Have fun! — SpikeToronto 08:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Malaysian English
Hi JackLumber! An article you have contributed to may need your expertise. It has been tagged for a very long time as being in need of attention to avoid possible deletion of unsourced sections according to Misplaced Pages policies. If you have a moment, please see talk:Malaysian English and address these issues if you can help in any way. Kudpung (talk) 04:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Nomination of Usage of the terms railroad and railway for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Usage of the terms railroad and railway is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Usage of the terms railroad and railway until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Mathglot (talk) 20:39, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
List of terms not found in American English listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of terms not found in American English. Since you had some involvement with the List of terms not found in American English redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:05, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
List of words used mainly in American English listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of words used mainly in American English. Since you had some involvement with the List of words used mainly in American English redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:09, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
List of words mainly used in Commonwealth English listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of words mainly used in Commonwealth English. Since you had some involvement with the List of words mainly used in Commonwealth English redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:09, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
List of words mainly used in American English listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of words mainly used in American English. Since you had some involvement with the List of words mainly used in American English redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:10, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Categories: