Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 17:17, 4 November 2013 (Archiving 1 discussion(s) from User talk:Polemarchus) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Polemarchus. 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.

Welcome!

Hello, Polemarchus, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Not that you need the official welcome since you've been doing fine without it... ;) - BanyanTree 01:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

People detained by the International Criminal Court

On 12 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article People detained by the International Criminal Court, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 03:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Dates

Hi, Polemarchus. I've just had a quick look at the MOS, and I can't see why you think I'm going against it by linking individual months.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 11:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't find your quotes in the MOS. If I left 17 April 2008 intact, it was probably because I had already linked April 2008, the most relevant link, and saw no good reason to link it twice. Your contention that May 2007 "is of no use to the reader" will be a great disappointment to the contributors to that article. If you have a problem with that article, or you believe it shouldn't exist, I suggest you take it up with them. Red links often become blue links; "pointless" they most certainly are not. If you genuinely thought I was in error, you could easily have tried to thrash this out with me beforehand. You chose not to, as well as blanking mention of Ramos-Horta's frequent trips on behalf of his cause, and reinserting a category made redundant by its being a parent category of two others already present. Take it easier.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 13:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Despite being asked specifically, you still haven't given me the slightest clue as to where in the article I might find your quotes. I've been familiar with our guidelines for quite some time now, and if you want to characterise my reversion of your blanking and redundant categorisation as "edit-warring", knock yourself out.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 14:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't care what you believe, and I definitely don't care for your provocative tone. Putting "I don't understand" and "I don't know how to read a webpage" in quotes, as if you were quoting me, is childish beyond belief. Do you expect me to heed even part of your excuses, when you are obviously trying so hard to provoke (and with far less than even 900 edits under your belt)? Edit-warring? Give me a break.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 16:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I hadn't spotted the underlined text previously: "Date elements that do not contain both a day number and a month should not generally be linked; for example, solitary months, solitary days of the week, solitary years, decades, centuries, and month and year combinations.", and for that I apologise also. The blanking I referred to concerns a sentence you droppped from my version. Categorisation works like this: if someone fits both and , then only the first category should appear on the page, as the subject is automatically in the second by virtue of the first being a subcategory of the second, i.e. all Prime Ministers of East Timor are automatically East Timorese politicians.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 18:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

DYK 23/7

On 23 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bogoro attack, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 09:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Size of graphics in articles

You're the only person to have raised this issue, but I can see the point. Having prepared and uploaded about 40 photographs onto Commons, mostly from the period 1840-1940, I'm keen to see they get the best showing. When reduced to postage stamps they do lose a lot of impact. However, I'm going to shift gear and reduce px-ing to the minimum. And change my preference!

On the question of breaks, I think I'm on better ground. I use breaks sometimes in conjuction with center, and it works perfectly as long as the number of words on each line is few. I've tested this at various sizes, and it's come out just fine. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

ITN

On 30 July, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article(s) Navanethem Pillay, which you created or substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--BanyanTree 22:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Donald Payne (soldier)

See Talk:Donald Payne (soldier)#First for a reply. -Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 17:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)